On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 4:18 PM, Mark Jeffries <[email protected]>wrote:
> Dave Berg, who is writing a book about his stint as a producer for Big > Jaw, claims that the net by its budget cut is not giving Leno a vote of > confidence and would like to see him gone for the cheaper Fallon, even if > they supposedly wreck the "Tonight Show" franchise (remember, this is a > former Leno producer): > > > http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dave-berg/jay-leno-tonight-show-cutbacks_b_1825286.html > It reads like it was written by Leno himself, not just his former longtime producer. The argument that the cutback guts the Tonight Show, which will not have to be satisfied with cut-rate comedy production, does not pass the smell test. He does not explain why Leno needs $25M more dollars in his budget than Dave, or than what he had himself before his primetime show. I will have to leave it to those who actually watch the show to answer the question, but is it really true, as the piece seems to imply, that since he returned the Tonight Show is now full of "Slick, produced, high-profile comedy bits" funded by those extra $25M (except, of course, $5M-$10M of that is from Leno's salary, not the production budget), while back in I guess what were the bad old days when the budget was $25M less the comedy sucked? Is it really true that big named guests will not want to go on the Tonight Show now that it's budget has been cut $25M? Do big named guests even give a damn about something like that? If they do, where are they going to go, since no other late night show has a larger budget? As we noted when this story broke, I think it is now clear that Comcast just got tired of paying Leno and his show the $25M dollar/year bonus that the GE crew got stuck with when they tried to extricate themselves from the Jay Leno Show debacle. Presumably they could not unilaterally cut Leno's salary, but they could cut the budget of the show, and tell Leno that if he did not give back the extra $5M-10M he was personally soaking them for per year they would fire as many staffers as it took to make up the difference, which would not only make Leno look like an asshole, but actually result in fewer employees than he had on the old Tonight Show, which presumably would hurt the quality of the show. Leno did the only thing he could, giving up the extra millions in salary and trying to take credit for being a sacrificial humanitarian. I think the piece is most useful for what it illuminates about how comedy is produced in the Leno factory. Berg provides the following as one of the jokes Leno told the first day back after the cuts: "As you may have heard, our company has downsized 'The Tonight Show.' And we've consistently been number one in the ratings. And if you know anything about our network, that kind of thing is frowned upon." Then Berg writes: "Not a particularly funny punch line, but it wasn't meant to be." I thought that was a pretty good punchline, and a funnier joke than the one Berg presents as Leno's first, and apparently in Berg's view, better joke: "Welcome to 'The Tonight Show,' or as Comcast calls us, 'The Expendables.'" The Expendables joke is not horrid, it is just obvious and safe. The second joke seems to me to be sharper and more biting, and in context much funnier. But then, I don't watch Leno, and I guess that's why/ -- TV or Not TV .... The Smartest (TV) People! You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TV or Not TV" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en
