HOME / television: What you're watching.

The Colbert-O'Reilly ClashA worthy stunt?

By Troy PattersonPosted Friday, Jan. 19, 2007, at 4:16 PM ET

Share this article on Digg

Share this article on Buzz

Stephen Colbert"O'Reilly vs. Colbert"—a crossover media stunt that transpired Thursday night on two cable networks and at least as many planes of reality—was an unsatisfying trudge down a hall of mirrors. Last week, the two talk-show hosts announced that comedian Stephen Colbert, who parodies Bill O'Reilly, would make an appearance on The O'Reilly Factor (Fox News), and that O'Reilly, who parodies himself, would deign to appear on The Colbert Report (Comedy Central), and the anticipation had been sweet. Might Colbert assemble something as scathing as his speech at last year's White House Correspondents' Association dinner? Would O'Reilly, so often the epitome of restraint, lose his cool? Those of us with shoddy knowledge of particle physics and Star Trek excitedly asked for a reminder: What happens when matter meets antimatter?

RSS

The thing fizzled. The first problem is that something's off with O'Reilly of late. There were days not long ago when a fun-loving godless liberal might turn on the "traditionalist" Factor—a "no-spin zone" as the slogan goes—and get good entertainment value. You admired the showmanship, chuckled as the host shredded some college-newspaper editor or sundry other featherweight, and maybe got some bile flowing. But O'Reilly has lost panache. Even by the indulgent standards of TV news—an arena in which Katie Couric is unashamed to say, via blog, "OK, I'm a loser ... but when the red light on my BlackBerry is flashing, I get pretty happy"—he devotes disproportionate effort to reinforcing the bunker of his own persona. The day before Colbert's appearance, for instance, he exulted in a clash with the Barre-Montpelier Times Argus (circulation: 10,500). "They're on the attack in Vermont!" With raised pitchforks, perhaps? The following segment consisted of O'Reilly's reminding the faithful that he'd correctly predicted a position taken by the junior senator from New York: "Well, this morning Mrs. Clinton proved me an oracle. …"

On Thursday, O'Reilly showed that he gets the joke of Colbert but didn't seem keen to play along with it, perhaps because he expected the comedian—or at least his comedic character—to demonstrate something like fealty. O'Reilly referred to The Colbert Report as "a very successful program that owes everything to me." Later, teasing and yet not, he asked his guest, "Don't you owe me an enormous amount of money?" and, later yet, ventured that Colbert "owes his whole life" to the Factor. He refused to drop his self-seriousness and submit to the inherent absurdity of the situation. He couldn't, actually; to do so would offend his constituents. To wit: O'Reilly ran video from the debut of the Report, a bit in which Colbert, establishing his mock-populist thing, woos the audience: "You're not the elite. You're not the country-club crowd. …" But O'Reilly cut the clip before the punch line: "I know for a fact that my country club would never let you in." Meanwhile, Colbert, being the guest, wasn't in a position to press hard, so what we got was the light amusement of Colbert's usual shtick—the grandiosity, the wackiness, the seething hatred of bears. The best part of the show was the off-camera laughter of the crew.

When the second course was served, hours later, on Comedy Central, we were left to lap at more of the same bland porridge. Colbert, uncharacteristically, did not make his triumphal trot from the anchor desk to greet O'Reilly, but met the man right at his interview table. The host made quick stabs at humiliating his guest—flashing a photograph that merged O'Reilly's head with the oiled-up body of a go-go boy, for instance—and the guest, grudging, just grudging, went along with things. Ho-hum. I don't get it. Just the night before, Colbert had told Jon Stewart that the prospect of having O'Reilly on the Report was making his nipples erect ("Thank God for duct tape"). Maybe a more pointed approach would have wrenched the Colbert character out of the delicate proportions necessary for his ongoing success. Or maybe, simply, you cannot no-spin a no-spinner.

E-MAIL

RECOMMEND... Get Slate RSS Feeds

Troy Patterson is Slate's television critic.

Still of Stephen Colbert by Martin Crook. Courtesy Comedy Central Press.

COMMENTS

Remarks from the Fray:

Why would Colbert go blatantly out of his way, breaking character, to stick it to O'Reilly? Why would that make any sense at all?

When Colbert was at the White House, he had a chance and he took it. Good for him. But, O'Reilly is a guest on par with all of the other guests on his show. Colbert, like all good talk show hosts, never thinks to himself, "Oh, great, Rob Schneider (or whoever) is gonna be on my show -- I'm gonna tear him a new one." He plays devil's advocate, he takes a few playful swipes, and he might even call the guy a name or two, but the show always ends civilly and tastefully. The same went for O'Reilly.

What this article fails to mention is the subtlety that went into Colbert's performance on O'Reilly, especially the last quip where he goes, "Thanks for not bringing up what I asked you not to mention before the interview," basically revealing that not only is he a complete farce, but O'Reilly as well... or the not-so-subtle jabs he made at O'Reilly on his show when O'Reilly almost immediately insulted Jon Stewart, and Colbert responded, "Jon Stewart is a sexual pervert! And believe me, Bill... you have no idea what that's like."

Maybe it wouldn't be disappointing if people weren't expecting something ridiculous that quite obviously would never happen. If you kept a level head, you'd probably find it just as good as any of their other episodes. So blame Comedy Central's advertising, not Colbert.

--Izak

(To reply, click here.)

This article captured an aspect of the disappointment I felt watching Colbert on O'Reilly, and spoke a bit to the only slightly lesser disappointment I felt watching the second round, but I've got a couple of points I'd like to add.

One, never discount the advantage of a studio audience. O'Reilly's only audience is his crew, and the fact that they were laughing is telling, but the show...without an audience along to help folks know when to laugh, fell flat.

Two, it seems there are two types of guests that work well on Colbert's show. The first type is the sympathetic (often liberal) guest who is clearly "in" on the joke. Tim Robbins or Stone Phillips are great examples, and in that case, the joke is on folks like O'Reilly. The second is the clueless (usually right wing) guest who clearly does not get the joke, and as such the joke is on them. Dinesh Disouza (sp?) hit that ball out of the park a few days ago.

O'Reilly is neither. He obviously gets the joke, but pretty much refused to play along. Had he done so, both shows would have been better, but he didn't, so the joke's really not on anybody.

--Oldergeezer

(To reply, click here.)

(1/21)