Late Night - The Tom Shales Saga

 In an interview with Howard Stern, Conan talks about the rough experience of his early Late Night days and identifies the specific moment when he was at his lowest:

"The one that comes to mind is... we were just on the air for 2 or 3 months and things weren't going well and then I did Charlie Rose's show when he went, 'Well, you're probably aware of what came out in the Washington Post today... The top TV critic in the world just wrote this piece and here's what it says- and it goes...' It was a brutal take down of me, Andy, everything..."

This is a story Conan had told before, though the way it was told and the location in which it was told obscured its gravity. In 2003, Conan recounted the Charlie Rose episode to Charlie Rose:

Rose: I remember at one point you, early, were on my show--

Conan: Yes.

Rose: And it was during the difficult time.

Conan: It was the beginning of the difficult time, I think, you- you informed me of one of my worst reviews when I was first here.  It was about 2 months into the show--

Rose: I read it to you?

Conan: And you said I don't know if you're aware of this and you started reading and it had just come out that morning... 

Now, through the magic of Youtube, we can watch the original 'offensive' interview from 1993:

Here is what Charlie Rose actually said:

"If in fact you're doing the show you want to do and critics - I just saw a piece by Tom Shales, I think, saying, 'Look...', you know, it's not working for him as a critic - does it bother you or do you say to those critics, 'I'm doing the show I want to do. If you don't like the show I want to do, then sorry. I can't please everybody but this is what I want to do, I found my voice, it's the show I want, it's the combination I want, we are approaching what I want to be."

Quite a difference. Quite a difference. It isn't Rose reading the hit piece to a horrified Conan on national TV. It's briefly mentioning the review and using a phrase - "it's not working for him" - is arguably the kindest and most sanitized summary of the article possible. 

It's amazing how wrong Conan's memory of it is. But this isn't uncommon - memory is not as reliable as people think. It's quite a problem of History. If you were writing the story of Conan, who would you take as more reliable to talk about his own experience than Conan himself? And if a person recounting the major events of their own life are unreliable, how do we trust the things passed down through indirect accounts?

That aside, I accept Conan's answer to the "lowest point' question, outside of Charlie Rose. Conan got a bad Tom Shales review during a critical point in the show, it was devastating to him and that was his lowest moment doing Late Night. And I suppose, some time after that, Charlie Rose's part grew from announcing the review to reading it.

One point that I can pretty much confirm from Conan's story is where he stresses the importance of critics back then. It does seem silly now, but they did have a great deal of power in shaping public perception, for whatever reason. 

Here is that Shales review, by the way, if you'd like to revisit it. And it's worth noting that 3 years later, Shales did another review that reassessed the show and was much kinder to Conan. Shales noted that the late night landscape had shifted drastically and essentially called Conan "The New Dave".

10 years after the original review, Tom appeared on Conan to promote his new book. Conan confronts Shales about the bad review (though within the bounds of the playful interview shtick).

Another aside about memory and history. In this interview, we have both Conan and Shales agreeing that the phrase "white Irish shark coming at you" was used in the review when it doesn't appear at all. 10 years after an event that directly affected them, they agree on a hallucination.

A final aside. I always found it creepy how Shales sounded so similar to Roger Ebert. It was disconcerting. How is it that the top film critic in the world and the top television critic in the world are both fat men with glasses and similar voices? I don't know but I also never heard anyone mention it.

To Conan's great credit, he seems to have handled the whole thing with great grace and, of course, seems to have a great sense of humor about it all. Shales passed away in 2024.

Why Are You Laughing? - The Life and Times of Tim

"Why Are You Laughing" the history of comedy podcast, talks about the HBO animated series "The Life and Times of Tim."

And since you, and I, have never seen or heard of the show, it becomes a case of "Eh? You want to check it out, right?"

And I do want to check it out because he uses the magical phrase "the most underrated show of all time." Any show with that descriptor is a show I want to see. Of course, I think the most underrated show of all time is the Canadian show "The Newsroom" - which nobody has seen and when you suggest it people think you're talking about a different show and dismiss your opinion, and even if they don't, and in the 1-in-a-million chance that try to check out the show, they won't find it anywhere; but even if they did find it and watched it, they'd shrug and say "meh, it was just 'ok'" and not see where I was coming from at all, maybe you just had to be there, man - but that's neither here nor there.

Or maybe my pick for most underrated show of all time is "Hogan's Heroes."

Oye Listen AIDS is a Killer

This PSA aired in my area so often, it's not ingrained in my mind and gets stuck in my head often. This, despite the fact that I don't know 90% of the lyrics and never have.

For whatever it's worth, I think this youtube version is sped up and the proper playback speed is 0.90.

Oye! Listen! AIDS is a killer!

Watching Every Episode of MST3K

Somewhere around 2000-2003 (college) I resolved to watch every episode of "Mystery Science Theater 3000." It was the heyday of file-sharing, in those days, and such a thing was just, at that precise moment, theoretically possible. Big, special shout-out to eDonkey and eMule. "Possible" but not necessarily easy.

To illustrate the effort of watching every MST3K episode, I used to say that it was harder than watching every episode of "The Simpsons" (or basically pick any long running series you want). The reasoning is simple: there were (at that time) about 200 episodes of MST3K and each one was about 1.5 hours long, so that's about 300 hours of viewage. Compared to "The Simpsons", I'll even include all the episodes made since then, the math is: 805 episodes, at 0.3 hours each episode that's about 250 hours of viewage. Note: it's a pretty good metric for comparison because download effort and file availability are generally proportional to the length of material. This metric, of course, doesn't take into account how bad "The Simpsons" has become, though.

Given the disorganized nature of file-sharing, I created a spreadsheet to act as the source of truth, each episode listed, each had a "watched" or "not watched" status. I even added percentage calculation and a countdown to 0 because I had a lot of time on my hands and it seemed cool. But on that spreadsheet there were always 4 blank spots: 4 "lost" episodes that did not exist publicly in any form.

After 1 or 2 years (perhaps more, it was a long time ago), I finished the goal - I had watched every available episode and, by that time, I simply made peace with the idea that there were 4 episodes that just did not exist.

Then, in 2008 the "Pilot Episode" ("The Green Slime") (not really an episode) was shown at a convention and bootlegged on Youtube. Check. Down to 3.

Then, in 2016 two more "lost" episodes ("Invaders From The Deep" and "Revenge of the Mysterions from Mars") were found by the MST3K Producers in their archives and were released to backers of the 11th Season Kickstarter. Check and check.

That left ONE unreleased, "lost" episode.... One episode that no fan has turned up. One episode that even the creators of MST3K confirmed they had no access to.... What are the chances that someone somewhere taped it, kept the tape, held on to it for 38 years and never told anyone?

A few days ago, arthurputie on Reddit posted that his cousin had bought a load of old VHS's at a garage sale in the Minneapolis area and that one of them was labeled with the episode name ("Star Force: Fugitive Alien II"). Arthurputie confirmed it to actually be the lost episode and it has now been uploaded it to Youtube. 

Lost no more.

This is not posted as a recommendation. If you are not a MST3K fan, avoid the early episodes at all costs. If you are a MST3K fan, still avoid this at all costs. This is only posted for Completionists like me with a 25 year old score to settle. That, and it's also a fascinating archeological discovery.

So here's the final word. I have now watched all the episodes of MST3K, it is still difficult and the spreadsheet has not been updated to 0 because it was lost in a hard drive crash 10 years ago. Oh, and new episodes are in the works.

The Cinematic 90s Diner

Cigarettes & Coffee - 1993

Look at the entire aesthetic of "Cigarettes & Coffee" and compare to...

High and Dry - 1996

That's extremely close.

Of course "Cigarettes & Coffee" is Paul Thomas Anderson's short film that was later made into...

Hard Eight - 1996

And there's also...

Pulp Fiction - 1994

and 

The Big Lebowski - 1998

And if you're worried that we've jumped from the booth to the counter, I promise this is the only time. And anyways you can cover that here.

And now that we're in Comedy there's...

Can't Hardly Wait - 1998

And...

Swingers - 1996

And then if we go over to Television...

Seinfeld (1989-1998)

Why, Charlie Brown, Why?

 

One of the things I love discovering and posting about is pop-culture surprises and oddities. A while back I looked at the history of Peanuts TV Specials and noted the oddity of the live-action "It's the Girl in the Red Truck, Charlie Brown." There is another Peanuts oddity that I have been avoiding posting anything about but I may as well just get it over quickly and move on.

I'm just going to say it. The plot of "Why, Charlie Brown, Why?" is: a little girl in Charlie Brown's class gets cancer. And.... that's not what you expect when you want to watch Snoopy.

I can't do a beat-by-beat breakdown of how wacky and crazy it is - it's well executed, I suppose. The noteworthy thing is just the very concept is shocking and unusual. So it exists, I watched it, it doesn't make sense to me but perhaps that's due to the nature of Peanuts - it's watched by kids but wasn't intended to be solely for kids; it's not afraid to get serious among the jokes, and so forth.

Evidently it was well received and was praised for helping educate kids on this subject.

The Complete History of It's Always Sunny

The Blind Mike Project tells the complete history of "It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia."

Fonzie Fights Tom Hanks

 

No, "Fonzie Fights Tom Hanks" is not the latest AI slop, it's the slop from the 80's known as "Happy Days."

In this episode, "A Little Case of Revenge," Fonzie's nemesis from 3rd Grade has been harboring a grudge since then and shows up wanting to fight him using the art of "karate." The karate nemesis is, of course, played by Tom Hanks.

The scene is played for laughs so, unfortunately, it's not as wild and whacky as it sounds. 

This role helped launch Tom Hanks' career. Ron Howard used to be the star of "Happy Days" but had moved on to directing. He saw the episode and that led to him casting Hanks in "Splash." This is also the first time anyone hits Fonzie.

Transformers: The Movie - The Apology Tour

 

Hasbro is apologizing for traumatizing you when you were a child by killing off Optimus Prime in "Transformers: The Movie."

The natural consequence of this is that they'll be re-releasing it to theaters this May for its 40th anniversary.

I was a huge Transformers fan and was at the exact age to get hit by it as a phenomenon. I remember exactly where I was when I first saw the scene where Optimus dies. I have to say, of all the things that traumatized my childhood, this wasn't one of them. I can't explain why, and it did hit me, it just didn't hit me hard.

The Super Bowl Honeymoon

 

The continuing tradition of doing decidedly non-Super-Bowl things instead of watching the Super Bowl... the historical exception being that I'd watch if the Eagles were playing but even that is inconsistent. For my own records, here's the run-down of the previous 30 years...

Pre-2011 - Puppy Bowl I, Muppet Treasure Island, Follow That Bird.

2011 - Bob Ross Marathon

2012 - Family Ties Marathon

2013 - Steel Magnolias

2014 - The Bridges of Madison County

2015 - Various, Poetry

2016 - Best of the Worst, Da BullS

2017 - Cooking, Super Mario Bros. Super Show

2018 - Super Bowl

2019 - I don't know, did I forget?

2020 - How Green Was My Valley?

2021 - Facts of Life Marathon

2022 - Jem Marathon and Film

2023 - Super Bowl (boooo!)

2024 -  Little House on the Prairie Marathon

2025 -  Super Bowl

And I'll repeat, of course, that this recurring tradition jumped the shark in 2021.

So this year, no real idea came to me. No gimmick, no hook, no high concept. Then this week I went a little crazy with work and when the weekend came, I didn't feel like doing anything.

It occurred to me that not watching The Super Bowl gave me a great opportunity to go grocery shopping during the game and have the store to myself. There were still some people around, and I don't usually shop on a Sunday night, but it was basically successful. A "pro tip" if any of you are in the same situation.

Another thing that occurred to me: with today's high being about 18 degrees Fahrenheit, it was a good day to make a fire, which I did.

And now for the main thing...

Some time back, I heard Jean Shepherd recounting a Honeymooners episode and opining that the show was much more sophisticated than it gets credit for - and a show worth remembering. As far as I can tell, the plot he describes was made up by him, for what purpose I don't know, but there's no time for that mystery now. That story, plus the fact that I never saw much of "The Honeymooners," plus the fact that it only lasted one season and "only" had 39 episodes planted the seed that I might, someday, watch the full series.

So tonight's experiment was watching "The Honeymooners." Only 3 episodes, by the way. Here is where I might usually go through the episodes in depth but I don't think I can do it justice. Ralph Kramden and Ed Norton are one of the great duos in comedy history, of course. And at the same time, Ralph Kramden and Alice Kramden are also one of the great duos in comedy history. It's a classic early American sitcom. For a long time I thought it was the earliest sitcom still rerun on TV but here's the trivia on that: "I Love Lucy" premiered in 1951 and "The Honeymooners" didn't go on the air until 1955. It was the cheaper sets and the rougher video quality that fooled me into thinking it must be much older.

A few interesting pieces of trivia from imdb:

• Two episodes were filmed per week instead of the usual one per week for weekly shows.
• Gleason, a veteran live performer, chose to deliberately stage the show as a play using a live audience, something that was still a very new concept in television in 1955. As such, Gleason eschewed rehearsals as he wanted the performances to capture the feel of a live show, even though all episodes were taped and aired later. Due to under-rehearsing, almost all episodes contain a mixture of dropped lines, missed entrances, actors correcting or covering for another's lines, and moments of general confusion. Gleason did not re-shoot or try to conceal these flaws as he wanted the audience to feel like they were watching a live broadcast.
• The show was shot "as live" (filmed before an audience, edited, and shown later). If you ever notice Jackie Gleason patting himself on the stomach, it was a sign that he had forgotten his line.
• CBS and Buick, the show's sponsor, wanted a second season. Jackie Gleason refused because he felt that the quality of the scripts wouldn't sustain it for another season.

The bit about eschewing rehearsals is incredible. The scenes are looonnnnggg and filled with tons of dialogue. How they remembered it all and performed first-time, is beyond my understanding. And then two episodes per week?! What? Amazing.

Having watched the first three episodes, I plan to keep watching. In addition to being a timeless classic, the show has a certain nostalgic feel that defies explanation. I never lived in the time of the show and I didn't grow up watching the show on reruns but somehow it feels cozy and comfortable, like it's from my past, somehow. And no, I'm not making allusion here to "The Flintstones."

Making a 90s Cable Simulator

Just recently I discovered a new site that simulates 90s television. Now, completely unrelated, someone sent me this video where a guy creates a 90s cable television simulator, complete with an actual cable box. It's quite involved.

Growing up, I didn't have cable so I have no nostalgia for the cable box and only some nostalgia for the channels. MTV is a big one, Nickelodeon obviously and then Comedy Central later in the decade.

I Love the 90s

 The website:

https://www.ilovethe90s.app/

Is in Beta. It's meant to simulate watching television in the 1990s using Youtube as its database. Check it out, if that's you're thing.

It's similar to http://www.my80stv.com/ and http://www.my90stv.com/ which appear to be offline or permanently shut down.

Gary Busey Pet Judge

Gary Busey has a new show where he presides, as judge, over real disputes involving pets. And by "new show" I mean it's labelled 2020 but I've never heard anything about it until now. And by "real disputes" I mean "probably fake but it's not worth thinking about."

The following preview gives more context than the trailer, I think:

There are a collection of clips on youtube like the one above. The show itself is on pluto.tv.

The announcer for this show appears to be Shadoe Stevens.

It's the Girl in the Red Truck, Charlie Brown

According to the internet there are over 50 Peanuts TV Specials and movies. Although I'm a big fan of Peanuts, I have made no attempt to watch them all. My impression is that they're mostly cash grabs by TV execs, rather than genuine creations from Charles Schulz.

Having said that, when I heard there was a Peanuts special that tried to blend animation with live-action footage, I had to see it for the bizarre "this can't be real" aspect of it.

I'm not going to say it's terrible... I'm not going to say it's terrible... For some reason it centers on Snoopy's brother Spike - despite the title clearly referring to Charlie Brown as if he's involved - and it's very boring. The key take away is that in this special almost nothing happens at all. I don't know who they thought this was going to appeal to. The main conflict is: a boyfriend signs his girlfriend up for an audition and she's mad because she wasn't consulted. Is that really going to draw in the kids? I'm an adult and can't care less. If you don't want to go to the audition, don't go. Nobody cares, get over yourself.

As I mentioned before, I would like to chalk this up as a cash grab with little input from Charles Schulz but that's not the case. He wrote and produced it. One of the things he most wanted people to know was that it was in production before "Who Framed Roger Rabbit?" came out. In other words, the idea for mixing animation with live-action wasn't lifted. Noted. He also said of this film, "I wanted this to be my Citizen Kane, but it's not."

Mr. Plinkett's What Happened To Star Wars?

 

I largely agree with Mr. Plinkett, aside from the fact that I have no opinions on "Andor" and "The Acolyte" because I haven't seen them. I am an old Star Wars fan who is not passionate enough to continue through the crap and also not passionate enough to complain about the crap. I've made my peace with reality, although this review brings the mourning back to the surface, ironically enough.

I miss the humorous Mr. Plinkett videos. This is solid anal-sis but it's a bit depressing, to be honest.

The Mitch Hedberg Project

 

In 2001, Mitch Hedberg filmed a pilot for MTV which would document the comedy tour of himself and his friends.

The show was not picked up and never aired. The footage has recently re-surfaced and is presented above.

It's quite rare to hear a new Mitch Hedberg joke, these days.

1980s Drug PSA

This is a drug PSA that aired in the mid-80s.

I saw this repeatedly when I was 4 or 5 and it freaked me out and haunted my dreams. I've been looking for it for a while but all I remember is a creepy girl waving a white stick and I remembered it involved climbing stairs, for some reason. Finally found it.

It'll make you feel good, good, good, good.

Cheri Oteri Interview

I don't know if you're in the market for a longform interview with SNL cast member Cheri Oteri but I saw this and said, "Yes, please."

I think it was already pretty known that the Rita Delvecchio character was based on growing up in Upper Darby but it was fun hearing about it. And SNL stories are always fun, especially when Christopher Walken is involved.

Will Vinton's Claymation Christmas Celebration

 

I saw "Claymation Christmas Celebration" once, when it aired for the first time in 1987, and not a single time since then until today. Now I can't figure out why this isn't a Christmas classic that gets aired year after year throughout the generations.

It's colorful, it's whimsical, it's got great music. It's smart without the whiff of being "educational" - it doesn't talk down to its audience. It's playful without being disrespectful - either to the holiday or the traditions. It's the kind of entertainment that kids and adults can enjoy, pretty much, equally. And they were even able to get the California Raisins on to add some celebrity shine (yes, the California Raisins were already stars at this point and came on for a guest spot.)

Special shout-out to the recurring "What is wassail?" segments which were my favorite part, as a kid; and also to the "Carol of the Bells" segment, which is just perfectly executed goofiness.

The special isn't available in its entirety on youtube; you can get see it on archive.org.

And I didn't know how much of a legend Will Vinton was. You can see his work in the music video for "Moonwalker," "Return to Oz," "Captain EO" and invented The Noid and The California Raisins. That's amazing. He died in 2018.

What Was the Deal with Dukes of Hazzard?

 

This might be a question for a non-existent audience - people that remember "Dukes of Hazzard" probably know the deal, and most of the kids today probably have never heard of the show and don't care. But in case this is a public service to at least 1 or 2 people in the world... Let's answer the question, "What was the deal with "Dukes of Hazzard?""

The enigma that needs solving goes like this:

"Dukes of Hazzard" was about outlaws trying to escape the police. But they had a home and the police knew where they lived. So... how? How is this not a contradiction and how does it continue week after week?

This was bothering me for a while so I watched the first few episodes and, while not a thorough exploration, I think I get the picture enough to satisfy the question.

Let's go episode by episode.

Episode 1. In episode 1, we get the backstory: the Duke Family are moonshiners, they were arrested and let out on probation on the condition that they never again run moonshine. In this episode they steal a shipment of slot machines and resell them around town. Daisy Duke is arrested but escapes jail. Through a scheme of chicanery, by the end of the episode, the Dukes are completely let off the hook.

Episode 2. Episode 2 is not relevant to the topic except they do blow up a cop car with no repercussions.

Episode 3. The Duke boys (accidentally) run moonshine and get away from the police. There is no acknowledgement that the police have positively identified them and their license plate, the fact that the car outran the other car means there can be no legal action, apparently.

Episode 4. The Duke Boys buy a car, flee the police, bust through a barn (property damage) and are arrested for supposedly stealing the car they bought. Though being accused of a crime they didn't commit, they still resisted arrest and damaged property. Then things get much more complicated and the end doesn't make sense.

Episode 5. Skipping this one.

Episode 6. The Dukes get caught running guns but they run from the arrest and ditch the truck in a lake. In the end, they can't be charged because there's no evidence... Except for the guns in the truck in the lake... but out of sight, out of mind??? 

Conclusion:

So I think I've seen enough to understand the idea of the show. The Dukes are constantly on thin ice with the law and the reason they can simultaneously be outlaws and have a steady residence is that by the end of each episode they've gotten away with it somehow. The show can be fairly summarized by the phrase "They see me rollin', they hatin', patrollin' and tryna catch me ridin' dirty."

The show is somewhat reminiscent of "Hogan's Heroes" in the way the plot usually revolves around getting a job done while evading the authorities. Except that "Hogan's Heroes" is a smart show and "Dukes of Hazzard" is quite dumb. Don't get me wrong, the show has a lot of charm and I still have great nostalgia for the car, the sweet car chases and the sweet car jumps (yes, those 3 things deserve to be listed individually) but there's no getting around the fact that it's not a show that ever engages the mind. And to the extent that you do engage your mind, it will probably hurt.