LSSC: Season One All Episodes Talk

[bluepiano]

I don't care much for what Michelle Obama was wearing.  The slacks were nice, but the top looked like a little girl dress that shrunk in the wash.

 

I didn't get the top either, but she's a beautiful woman, with a megawatt smile. She's my favorite-ever First Lady, and I'm old enough to even remember (slightly) Jackie Kennedy. The election of Barack Obama obviously was a huge groundbreaker, but so too was having a black First Lady. And I think it's something that certain elements in this country have had a problem with, on top of their problems with the President himself.

 

Politics aside, I think that the whole First Family has conducted themselves with great dignity and put forth a positive image of America to the rest of the world. (Which is why I got so angry at the stupid comment by Marco Rubio during one of the debates about how we have a President with no class. Really?? What a jerk. Define "class.")

 

When Stephen interrupted Michelle to make his joke about Malala's card trick it kind of derailed the interview. I think that's been an issue for Stephen, as he frequently interrupts people a la his Colbert Report right wing blowhard character. I don't want him to be totally passive. But I think he needs to be a little more selective about when he interjects his wise cracks. It's a balancing act, and I don't think he's found that right balance yet.

Edited September 29, 2015 by bluepiano

[Kromm]

Noooo, there's a random announcer guy announcing the guests during the opening theme... why??  Stephen has such a unique voice that works just fine doing voiceovers.  I hope they change it back to him doing it.

This is why the hyper-reactive days of social media suck so hard.  Some folks publicly bitched and moaned and carried on about it being "egotistical" for him to do the announcing and bam... it gets changed (even if a quieter majority might have loved it).

[mariah23]

Me, too (all of the above). I respect that he apparently was totally honest with his MB, choosing INFP answers are not really the ones that show aggressive mastery and domination of the world around you--or something like that--anyway, just starting with "I" made him more attractive than ever to me and it went on from there.

If anyone's interested, this is a short MB test but we took it around here and it pretty much nailed everyone. Took less than 10 minutes and -- best part-- not only free, but they give you the results right away, no email address needed for any future solicitation or contact. http://www.my-personality-test.com/personality-type/?killsession

I just took the MB and I'm a INFP just like Stephen!

[Kromm]

Hilary is going to be on the show? I wonder if Stephen will ask about her height. Maybe they'll actually use a tape measure.

Was that revealed? I'm a bit behind on my Late Show episode viewing (I have them cued up though).

 

Last I heard, Hillary had turned down the show, but BILL was going to appear (on Oct 6).

[Athena]

I so adored his MB skit. These were the kind of segments from TCR that were my absolute favorites. He seemed to be in character for it too, but I didn't mind because it was awesome and funny. I couldn't tell at the end, but it seemed like he was sincerely touched by what the woman was telling him, which tickled me.

 

I really like this "Who am I" skit because it's awesome of Stephen to play around with the media and audience about who he is. I think he was sincere and genuine at the end of that skit. He has a certain kind of adoring smile he does when he use to break out of character in TCR and can be seen in a super way when Mala did her card trick.

 

I switch between INFP and INFJ and from what we know of real Stephen, he did give honest answers. I did like him making fun of those drawings though. Ha.

[peeayebee]

Was that revealed? I'm a bit behind on my Late Show episode viewing (I have them cued up though).

 

Last I heard, Hillary had turned down the show, but BILL was going to appear (on Oct 6).

I think he said something like, The candidate I'm most looking forward to having on the show is Hilary Clinton. It's very possible that I misinterpreted that.

 

I enjoyed last night's show. First off, the one-liners and jokes are as good as they were on TCR. Father Humpday. Release the jazz kraken. I inhaled secondhand incense and got a contact blessing. The Pope Francis plush toy – I think it's kind of sacrilegious but the dog loves it. Misa-Pope-priation.

 

The guy who took the Pope's drinking glass really does have a problem.

 

So funny when Stephen knocked his own glasses off.

 

Ellen Page is so well-spoken. Good guest. Jesse Eisenberg needs to learn how to speak more slowly. He can be pretty funny, but his nervousness is distracting.

 

I loved Dominic Wilcox's inventions. Very childlike and creative. 

Edited September 30, 2015 by peeayebee

[A Boston Gal]

Since they're going the professional announcer route, I hope they rotate candidates for a while. As others have mentioned here, I think I female voice in that slot would be nice.

[Kromm]

Since they're going the professional announcer route, I hope they rotate candidates for a while. As others have mentioned here, I think I female voice in that slot would be nice.

I'm still behind on shows, but if she's the one who sang the "Nationwide" jingle on the Monday show, I'm all for her.

[Milburn Stone]

Re the Michelle Obama episode...When intro-ing the Myers-Brigg hunk, and he indicated with a head nod that Michelle was still sitting there out-of-frame, I really doubt that Michelle was still sitting there out-of-frame. But I forgive him.

[nowandlater]

I knew that somebody else was doing the intros, but I somehow convinced myself that it was actually Stephen.

[bluepiano]

As others have mentioned here, I think I female voice in that slot would be nice.

 

Agreed. I liked Stephen doing his own intro ("tonight my guests are"), but if they're going to use an announcer, having a woman do it would at least be a breakthrough of sorts. The guy they have now is generic and bland. And I did not like the way he drew out the "Stephen" at the end, to try to create excitement. The way the audience goes nuts for Stephen every night, it's really not needed.

 

And speaking of the opening, I'm now officially bored with the whole Stephen dancing with Jon bit. It was cute the first few nights, and an appropriate way for Stephen to show how excited he was about the new show. But now it's gotten old. Especially as most nights it's the same synchronized high kicking bit. If they did it maybe once or twice a week it might still be fun, but not every single show.

 

Also, and I hope I don't alienate anyone with this comment, for me it has an air of "Look how cool I am, dancing with the black guy."

Edited September 30, 2015 by bluepiano

[A Boston Gal]

bluepiano, I agree with almost everything you said.  But IMHO, Steve and Jon's dancing is them trying to come up with some kind of signature opening, not a "look at us (but really me)" kind of moment. That being said, yeah, once or twice a week of Duet Dancing is enough. You have a smart writing staff, Stephen - please come up with some alternatives.

Edited September 30, 2015 by A Boston Gal

[futurechemist]

Seems like last night was a bad day for name-chanting.  It seemed like someone shushed the audience when they started chanting "Stephen!" because only a few people did.  And over on the Nightly Show, barely anyone chanted "Larry!" either.

 

I liked Stephen doing his own announcing.  And I still think the woman doing the sponsor announcement sounds like she was poached from PBS. It's so low-key compared to the rest of the show and announcing.  Well at least until they brought on Captain Boring to do the opening credits.

 

Is the last monologue joke before the opening credits meant to deliberately stink?  Because every time I've watched it's been along the lines of "interrupt the band's intro to tell a joke with a lousy punchline".  Then again, it's easy to bury a bad joke there because a soft audience response gets buried by the opening theme anyway.

Edited September 30, 2015 by futurechemist

[Kromm]

Also, and I hope I don't alienate anyone with this comment, for me it has an air of "Look how cool I am, dancing with the black guy."

I know you don't mean it as offensive, but given that Stephen has shown absolutely no tendency towards that kind of posturing, I do think it's coming totally out of nowhere as a criticism. I think it's totally unremarkable that he's dancing with a black guy, and the idea that anyone would see it as a stunt probably isn't even remotely on his radar (and it's shouldn't be).  Like or hate the dancing as a show opener/energy buildup, that's different than a subtle accusation of "exploiting the black guy" (which would be a form of racism, albeit a "soft" one).

 

As for the whole issue of the kicks and general approach to the opener?  I think he's quickly gotten into a no win position. Already we see gripes by the mile about how people are dissapointed in him that the show is SO "generic" and "like the other shows".  So is it really a good idea to replace a rare bit of branding/uniqueness with a generic opening?  It'll just be one more brick tossed at him and the show.

[possibilities]

I think they should do high kicks on Mondays, ChaCha on Tuesdays, Rhumba on Wednesdays, Waltz on Thursdays, and Tango on Fridays.

[peeayebee]

And speaking of the opening, I'm now officially bored with the whole Stephen dancing with Jon bit. It was cute the first few nights, and an appropriate way for Stephen to show how excited he was about the new show. But now it's gotten old. Especially as most nights it's the same synchronized high kicking bit. If they did it maybe once or twice a week it might still be fun, but not every single show.

It's not every single show. Anyway, seeing it still makes me smile. I actually would prefer it if Stephen danced alone.

 

 

Is the last monologue joke before the opening credits meant to deliberately stink?  Because every time I've watched it's been along the lines of "interrupt the band's intro to tell a joke with a lousy punchline".  Then again, it's easy to bury a bad joke there because a soft audience response gets buried by the opening theme anyway.

 

I don't think the jokes stink. They can't be big guffaw-generators. Last night's wasn't the best they've done -- VWs running on burning glaciers -- but I find them to be an amusing little transition to the title sequence. I guess he did the same thing on TCR, didn't he?

[Padma]

I just took the MB and I'm a INFP just like Stephen!

Lucky you! I have a feeling a lot of us would score similarly--I think mine was INFJ. I love that he took it honestly, even though he joked his way through the explanation of it (and I really liked the "test-giver", whatever her title/position was. She had the difficult task of being the straight man for him and did pretty well, I thought, for someone untrained in the art of being messed with on television by the ever-quick and unexpected remarks of Stephen Colbert!)

 

I read that Hillary wasn't coming on, but didn't know that Bill is scheduled on the 6th. I really hope Stephen doesn't go easy on him. I used to think the whole "slick Willy" thing was unfair, but I've changed since then and hope Stephen gets behind the glibness and (imo fake) charm and insincere earnestness. There are great questions begging to be asked about the accounting of the Clinton Foundation, also more questions about that server-at-home thing, particularly considering the possibilities. I know Stephen isn't Meet the Press but I can't help hoping he'll be able to do what MTP doesn't.

[bmoore4026]

Seems like last night was a bad day for name-chanting.  It seemed like someone shushed the audience when they started chanting "Stephen!" because only a few people did.  And over on the Nightly Show, barely anyone chanted "Larry!" either.

 

Such overenthusiastic chanting eats up time, I believe, and the producers don't like that.

[Kromm]

Such overenthusiastic chanting eats up time, I believe, and the producers don't like that.

That would matter a lot more if they aired it live.

[bmoore4026]

That would matter a lot more if they aired it live.

 

True.  Maybe there are older viewers who don't care for the enthusiasm?

[Clanstarling]

What's age got to do with it? It's not like we have to chant along.

[bluepiano]

There are great questions begging to be asked about the accounting of the Clinton Foundation, also more questions about that server-at-home thing, particularly considering the possibilities. I know Stephen isn't Meet the Press but I can't help hoping he'll be able to do what MTP doesn't.

 

Based on his interviews with Bush, Cruz, and Trump, clearly Stephen does not see his role as pinning politicians down to get hard answers. Add to that, Bill Clinton is the all-time master at taking an interview exactly where he wants to go. And he has he aura of having been President, and a charm that apparently is very real in person.

 

So I would enjoy seeing Stephen interview Bill. I think it would be fun. But I would have zero expectations of hearing anything really substantive. Bill has already stated his view that the Hillary server issue is bogus, something whipped up by her political opponents. And we will hear him say that again.

Edited September 30, 2015 by bluepiano

[bmoore4026]

What's age got to do with it? It's not like we have to chant along.

Yeah, it was a little disingenuous to say older viewers have a problem with it, considering I've always had a problem with it.  Sound like a bunch of drunken bros to me and I find that annoying. 

 

John Oliver is on tonight, so I'm hoping there's some reminiscing.

[Samsnee]

I wish Stephen didn't do a wordless Word every night. Sometimes I wish he would just do small talk with the band or just general talk about his life, a little like Dave used to do. Right now it feels like he's always "on" and so he feels less relatable.

[lookeyloo]

True.  Maybe there are older viewers who don't care for the enthusiasm?

We are older viewers and don't mind it at all, from the comfort of our living room. Old people can appreciate humor and can take some chanting. And leg kicking. Said with a smile on my face!

[bmoore4026]

We are older viewers and don't mind it at all, from the comfort of our living room. Old people can appreciate humor and can take some chanting.

 

Then it must be executives not liking it.  Or maybe everybody in audience got the flu and lacked the energy.  Ed Sullivan Theater is notoriously cold.

[Gemma Violet]

I will be crushed if the chanting is stopped.  It brings back sweet memories of the old show.  

 

And the leg kicking is fun.  As someone said, he doesn't do it every night.  Actually, I'm disappointed when he doesn't do it.

[bmoore4026]

I'm firmly in Dancing Stephen camp.  How could anyone not like that little Irish dance?

[trow125]

Then it must be executives not liking it.  Or maybe everybody in audience got the flu and lacked the energy.  Ed Sullivan Theater is notoriously cold.

I read that Stephen keeps the Ed several degrees warmer than David Letterman.

I fast forwarded through the "Stephen, Stephen" chanting on TCR, and I fast forward through his dancing on the LSSC. I have too much late night TV piling up on my DVR nowadays!

[bmoore4026]

Only way virtual reality debate would work is if it suddenly turned into Affected for the Oculus Rift

 

This is what I mean: https://youtu.be/SM9s5cOKe8c?t=8m34s

 

Loved the Tom Hanks bit.  Took me a while to recognize him what with that hat and the lighting.

 

And anyone else here in the "John Oliver is the cutest Englishman ever" camp?

Edited October 1, 2015 by bmoore4026

[alias1]

I read that Stephen keeps the Ed several degrees warmer than David Letterman.

I fast forwarded through the "Stephen, Stephen" chanting on TCR, and I fast forward through his dancing on the LSSC. I have too much late night TV piling up on my DVR nowadays!

I fast forward through both, as well.  I don't mind the dancing but I hate the chanting.  I fast forwarded through the chanting on his old show, too.     

[brgjoe]

I'm the opposite -- don't necessarily like the dancing, but love the chanting.  Reminds me of the old TCR.

 

I thought most everything worked tonight.  The VR goggles were a bit hit and miss.  But loved the Tom Hanks segment.  And thoroughly enjoyed the interview with Ollie.  It was so cool to see both of them side by side.  I could listen to them banter for hours. 

 

And it was nice they both talked about Jon too.  Really enjoyed tonight's show.

[Milburn Stone]

A small detail, but it bugged a little...

 

Last night, in addition to there being a non-SC announcer over the main titles (most likely a pre-recorded non-SC announcer), it sounded to me like the theme music was also pre-recorded. In the first couple weeks of the show, I'm pretty sure it wasn't. I.e., I'm pretty sure the main titles were accompanied by the live sound of Jon Batiste's band playing in the theater. One might think there is very little difference between the band playing live and being pre-recorded, but if my ears didn't deceive me, there was a loss of immediacy to the sound and the feel. If I'm right about what I heard, I hope they go back to "live."

Edited October 1, 2015 by Milburn Stone

[peeayebee]

I read that Stephen keeps the Ed several degrees warmer than David Letterman.

I first read that as he keeps Ed Sheeran warmer than David Letterman.

 

I thought this was an outstanding show. His whole bit with the virtual reality device was great. Loved all the pantomiming.

 

And then the segment with Tom Hanks was hilarious. I know Hanks is funny, but I'm always astounded at what a great comedian he is, at how fantastic his comic timing is. I could have watched their back-and-forth for a long time. Their rapport was great, and the jokes were creative, funny, and interesting at the same time.

 

John Oliver. What's not to love? 

 

The Snapchat guy was ok. I'm not into that stuff, but he seems nice enough and appreciated Stephen's humor.

 

It was a little painful watching Bill Withers talk about TV judges, but he's earned our attention. Hearing Ed Sheeran talk about his youth was interesting. I don't really know anything about him.

[A Boston Gal]

My head understands that in this new format and network, the opening jokes have to be less pointed, and just more silly in general. But, my heart really misses his sharp political take-downs of The Hypocritical and The Clueless. I know that Larry is out there doing his part, and Trevor Noah is showing promise, but still...no one shot off the pithy, perfectly-worded, logical truth-telling like Stephen did on TCR.

 

I will, however, continue to watch because a sillier, softer Stephen is far better than no Stephen at all. And as others have noted, perhaps when he feels more secure in this new role, he'll start amping up the brain wattage of his monologues.

 

I know this is not a new observation, but for some reason, I'm feeling the loss of the overtly political Stephen more these past couple of days. Perhaps it was the whole Kim-Davis-visits-the-Pope thing; I dunno.

 

Just a note that I don't get to see the latest episode in total until the following night, because there's only so much I can cram in the early morning before I have to leave for work. I'm seriously considering installing a screen in the shower. ;)

Edited October 1, 2015 by A Boston Gal

[Milburn Stone]

Question, Boston Gal: Don't you think the post-monologue bits are doing this? Well, I guess it's a rhetorical question, because if you did feel that way, you wouldn't be missing it, but my own take is that the post-monologue political bits are doing a pretty good job of continuing the trenchant satire of TCR.

[A Boston Gal]

Question, Boston Gal: Don't you think the post-monologue bits are doing this? Well, I guess it's a rhetorical question, because if you did feel that way, you wouldn't be missing it, but my own take is that the post-monologue political bits are doing a pretty good job of continuing the trenchant satire of TCR.

No, I see what you're saying, Milburn. And yes, the political commentary is there; it's just that I get a nagging feeling the writers are purposely dulling down the edges a notch or two.

Edited October 1, 2015 by A Boston Gal

[Kromm]

Stephen really CAN'T win, can he?  I've seen not only comments, but articles, that alternately pan and glow about every single choice he's made.  Including the leg kicks, his current interview technique, how pointed his humor is (IMO the desk bits are where he reserves space for the pointed stuff, vs. the monologue), and just about everything else.

[rujasu]

No, I see what you're saying, Milburn. And yes, the political commentary is there; it's just that I get a nagging feeling the writers are purposely dulling down the edges a notch or two.

 

Probably, but to me that is less of an indication of Stephen "selling out" and more about him doing a show that is first and foremost a comedy show, rather than the Report which was a political satire.  And I can't blame him for that; after a decade of playing that character and never breaking it, I'd want to change things up too.  Stephen seems to enjoy the chance to actually be more of himself on TV for a change, and the "real" Stephen is more of a comedian who happens to have a political side rather than the other way around.  And I think he's putting on a very good comedy show right now.

[mtlchick]

Maybe the dancing is his way to pump himself up before the show starts and get the adrenaline going? 

[VCRTracking]

And then the segment with Tom Hanks was hilarious. I know Hanks is funny, but I'm always astounded at what a great comedian he is, at how fantastic his comic timing is. I could have watched their back-and-forth for a long time. Their rapport was great, and the jokes were creative, funny, and interesting at the same time.

 

The part where Steven asks him "If you could have lunch with anyone living or dead..." and Hanks quickly says "Oh dead of course!" made me LOL.

[bluepiano]

Stephen really CAN'T win, can he?  I've seen not only comments, but articles, that alternately pan and glow about every single choice he's made. 

 

I think that's an indication of how emotionally invested viewers were in The Colbert Report. So in a way, all the fuss is kind of a compliment. If people didn't have such high expectations of Stephen, they would be more easily satisfied by what is, generally, a very good show - certainly far smarter than any other late night talk show.

 

Another factor, which I think is easy to overlook, is that this is not Comedy Central anymore. Over the years, Colbert and Jon Stewart, by virtue of their talents (and sharp writers and producers) really transcended what is in reality a pretty small potatoes cable network. I don't think any other Comedy Central show ever got on the national radar the way those two did.

 

For Stephen, being on CBS is a whole new ball game. I've had my criticisms too, but I guess I should be thankful that we get as much Report-style humor as we do. And looking it another way, we get 5 hours of Stephen a week, instead of 2. (Although I usually don't watch the guest interviews, unless it's someone from politics or science. I'm just not interested in show biz.)

Edited October 1, 2015 by bluepiano

[possibilities]

I think if you don't watch the other late night shows, it's not really fair to say this one is the best. It might be, or it might now, but if you haven't compared, how can you judge? And that's a matter of taste, anyway.

 

I only watch any of the network shows sporadically, mostly based on who the guests are, but last night Seth Meyers did a takedown of the Planned Parenthood hearings in Congress, and that sort of thing is no longer taboo on the networks. It's true that he then went on and did celebrity interviews with no political content, but his Planned Parenthood coverage was at least as hard hitting as anything Colbert has done on Late Night, and more than most of it. I think the only thing that's come even close was his critique of Pope Merchandising, but even that was accompanied by a lot of smiling and playfulness with bobblehead cars and so on, to take away the sting.

 

My sense of things is that Colbert is over-compensating by holding back on commentary because he's trying to overcome the image he got from The Colbert Report. I think he thinks if he does anything remotely as hard hitting as what he used to do, he'll lose the milquetoast audience share, and he's probably right about that. But since his reputation was made and his diehard fans come from a totally different point of view, it sets up a situation where the people who want to see him are disappointed with the new outlook, and the people who will like the new outlook haven't all gotten on board yet.

 

I totally agree with the article that said he seems overly in-character, and thus comes off a little fake, but I didn't think that writer was condemning him, just saying the transition was a work in progress. I personally think the show is boring as hell 90% of the time and have stopped tuning in unless they have a guest I think will be interesting, just like I do with the other network shows. But I wish him all the best and I think he can deliver as good a vanilla program as anyone, if that's what he wants to do. I just think I personally will never think that sort of thing is worth watching barring extreme insomnia or compelling guest. I think you can't change your entire persona without some hiccups, and so the mixed reviews are just a symptom of a natural process of transition. His commentary is mostly too bland for me, and his entertainment segments also lack anything special. I think he's still trying to figure out if he's as good at anything else as he is at satire, and the other hosts all know their strengths and weaknesses inside out so are already adjusted to what their best schtick is going to be, while Colbert is still testing both is own and the audience's limits.

[Clanstarling]

And then the segment with Tom Hanks was hilarious. I know Hanks is funny, but I'm always astounded at what a great comedian he is, at how fantastic his comic timing is. I could have watched their back-and-forth for a long time. Their rapport was great, and the jokes were creative, funny, and interesting at the same time.

Was it Scarlett Johanson Colbert did this with previously? Because I remember kind of shrugging my shoulders and going "meh." Hanks fully committed to it, and he was wonderful with Stephen. I don't know if it was scripted or improv - but I enjoyed it all. I agree with you, VCRTracking, loved the living or dead bit. It was so unexpected and hilarious. But I remember Hanks from his days as a comic actor - and the time he left David Letterman speechless (back when Letterman was younger and meaner). So I've always known he was funny both as an actor and a person.

Edited October 1, 2015 by clanstarling

[Kromm]

I think if you don't watch the other late night shows, it's not really fair to say this one is the best. It might be, or it might now, but if you haven't compared, how can you judge?

I think people commenting have at least dabbled in watching them all. I can't stand much of Fallon, but a certain guest or clip will have me watch. Kimmel I've seen enough over years to have a good sense. Cordon I've seen enough to know he's got a good formula, and a shitty execution. Conan I know back and forth, inside and out. Meyers is probably the one I've seen the least of.

 

I totally agree with the article that said he seems overly in-character, and thus comes off a little fake, but I didn't think that writer was condemning him, just saying the transition was a work in progress.

And there are OTHER articles praising him for being himself so much now, and yet a third set of articles slamming him for being himself. And a FOURTH set of articles (and net tweeters and posters) wishing so hard you can almost see it for him to "do more of his old stuff" (which is code for "be that old character").

So not only can't he win here, he can't even cause a consensus on what he actually IS doing. Every possibility is being said (and complained about, or occasionally praised) all at once.

Edited October 1, 2015 by Kromm

[dusang]

Was it Scarlett Johanson Colbert did this with previously? Because I remember kind of shrugging my shoulders and going "meh." Hanks fully committed to it, and he was wonderful with Stephen. I don't know if it was scripted or improv - but I enjoyed it all. I agree with you, VCRTracking, loved the living or dead bit. It was so unexpected and hilarious. But I remember Hanks from his days as a comic actor - and the time he left David Letterman speechless (back when Letterman was younger and meaner). So I've always known he was funny both as an actor and a person.

 

What?  I've never heard of that and I want to hear more.

[Kromm]

A small detail, but it bugged a little...

 

Last night, in addition to there being a non-SC announcer over the main titles (most likely a pre-recorded non-SC announcer), it sounded to me like the theme music was also pre-recorded. In the first couple weeks of the show, I'm pretty sure it wasn't. I.e., I'm pretty sure the main titles were accompanied by the live sound of Jon Batiste's band playing in the theater. One might think there is very little difference between the band playing live and being pre-recorded, but if my ears didn't deceive me, there was a loss of immediacy to the sound and the feel. If I'm right about what I heard, I hope they go back to "live."

Was this posted about the night John Oliver was on? Because I DEFINITELY heard a new bit in the theme I hadn't heard before (a big Trumpet bit in the last half). That makes me think it WAS live, because I have in fact heard slightly different instrumentation on MOST nights, and this one was no exception, since that Trumpet bit seemed new.

[Kromm]

Only way virtual reality debate would work is if it suddenly turned into Affected for the Oculus Rift

But it wouldn't be 20% as funny as Stephen's version!

[Milburn Stone]

Was this posted about the night John Oliver was on?

 

FWIW, the "pre-recordedness" I thought I detected was for the Ellen Page/Jesse Eisenberg episode.

[Clanstarling]

What?  I've never heard of that and I want to hear more.

It was a long time ago, and my memory is vague - but it's the moment I decided I loved Hanks. Letterman was ragging him about something (sports, I think, dissing his hometown team or something) and Hanks came back with a really sharp and smart retort that surprised Letterman and threw him off his game. There are, however, lots of clips of Hanks on the Letterman show you can find. Maybe it's in there somewhere...

Edited October 1, 2015 by clanstarling