Television

Subterms

    More stories

    • 88 Shares119 Views

      in Television

      Late Night Awaits Donald Trump’s Perp Walk

      by

      Jimmy Kimmel joked that a grand jury “decided to push the hearing to tomorrow to give Trump supporters time to iron their Confederate flags.”Welcome to Best of Late Night, a rundown of the previous night’s highlights that lets you sleep — and lets us get paid to watch comedy. Here are the 50 best movies on Netflix right now.Still WaitingDespite his preparation, former President Donald Trump was not indicted on Wednesday.Jimmy Kimmel joked that the grand jury “decided to push the hearing to tomorrow to give Trump supporters time to iron their Confederate flags.”“He’s been telling people he’s excited about the idea of getting paraded in front of cameras, like it’s a red carpet at some kind of Guilty People’s Choice Awards or something.” — JIMMY KIMMEL“He’s also saying he specifically wants to get handcuffed behind his back, which, weirdly, is the same request he had for Stormy Daniels when he got into this mess.” — JIMMY KIMMEL“Why he would make a spectacle out of being arrested, I don’t know. He’s been even asking friends if he should smile when he gets arrested. He’s been asking friends if he should smile — Melania’s been debating whether she should play ‘Party in the U.S.A.,’ or ‘Celebration’ by Kool & the Gang.” — JIMMY KIMMEL“Yep, Trump’s loving the attention from possibly being arrested. What a difference a day makes. It went from ‘lock her up’ to ‘lock me up.’” — JIMMY FALLON“Trump’s even putting thought into his perp walk. He is planning this out like it is a reality show or something.” — JIMMY KIMMEL“Wasn’t this meant to happen yesterday? Like, seriously, they’re — they’re stretching this out like it’s the, you know, the end of — the final of ‘American Idol’: ‘It’s time to find out whether or not Trump is getting arrested. Trump is — going to find out after this break. Don’t go anywhere!’” — JAMES CORDENThe Punchiest Punchlines (Spoiler Alert Edition)“The D.C. Court of Appeals today upheld the ruling of a federal judge who found that there is compelling evidence to suggest Trump deliberately misled his own attorneys about whether he had classified documents at Mar-a-Lago. Of course he misled his attorneys. He’s the lied piper. He’s Ms. Led Zeppelin. This is what he does!” — JIMMY KIMMEL“So just to be clear: Trump was already in trouble for stealing classified documents from the White House, and now he may have broken the law again by tricking his own lawyers into lying to the government. So Trump’s original crimes are now having their own little baby crimes. You know, they grow up and implicate you so fast, don’t they?” — AL FRANKEN“Can you imagine being a lawyer for Donald Trump and finding out he set you up? That would make you question whether it was even worth buying a degree from Barbados in the first place.” — AL FRANKEN“So look, I know there are a lot of different cases going on, and this all seems very complicated, but there is a simple explanation: Trump is a, um, a criminal. I hope that clears that up.” — AL FRANKEN“Yeah, everyone’s still waiting to see if and when former President Trump will be indicted for hush money payments to Stormy Daniels. After all of the hype and buildup about Trump, Stormy Daniels was like, ‘Spoiler alert: Get ready to be disappointed.’” — JIMMY FALLONThe Bits Worth WatchingThe actor Kerry Washington shared the story of meeting the director Spike Lee while she was a teenager on Wednesday’s “Late Late Show.”What We’re Excited About on Thursday NightThe drag queen BenDeLaCreme will talk about the anti-trans legislation and bans on drag shows being proposed around the country on Thursday’s “Daily Show.”Also, Check This OutMegan Hilty soaring as Ivy Lynn in the television series “Smash,” which is being developed into a Broadway musical years after it was canceled.Will Hart/NBCThe producers behind the long-awaited stage adaptation of “Smash” announced it will premiere on Broadway during the 2024-25 season. More

    • 113 Shares179 Views

      in Television

      Aaron Sorkin Battled a Stroke as He Reimagined ‘Camelot’

      by

      “Camelot” opened on Broadway 63 years ago, an eagerly anticipated new musical from the makers of “My Fair Lady.” But happily-ever-aftering took a while.Out-of-town, while trying to trim the overlong production, one writer was hospitalized with an ulcer, and the director collapsed of a heart attack. In New York, despite starring Julie Andrews and Richard Burton, “Camelot” took months to find its footing, and only did so following a televised segment on “The Ed Sullivan Show.”Today the musical, written by Alan Jay Lerner and Frederick Loewe, is remembered as one of the last of Broadway’s Golden Age shows, but its traditional narrative — Arthurian legend with all of its romance, politics, swordplay and sorcery — has never quite clicked.“Unfortunately, ‘Camelot’ is weighed down by the burden of its book,” the New York Times critic Howard Taubman wrote of the opening. That assessment has persisted. “It has one of the great scores of all time,” said Theodore S. Chapin, the former president of the Rodgers & Hammerstein Organization, “but the plot starts to go haywire.”On April 13, a new version of “Camelot” is scheduled to open on Broadway, with its book rewritten by Aaron Sorkin. The Hollywood screenwriter is familiar to many as the creator of the television series “The West Wing,” and he won an Oscar for writing the movie “The Social Network.” He is also an accomplished playwright, whose first Broadway drama, “A Few Good Men,” became a hit film, and whose most recent Broadway outing, an adaptation of “To Kill a Mockingbird,” was a critical and commercial success.Clockwise from top left: Aaron Sorkin, Phillipa Soo, Jordan Donica and Andrew Burnap.Photographs by Jingyu Lin for The New York TimesBut musicals have not been part of his repertoire, until now. He earned a B.F.A. in musical theater from Syracuse University, but this, in his slightly overstated words, is “the first time I’m putting it to use.” (He tried writing a musical once before, partnering with Stephen Schwartz on a show about Houdini. It didn’t work out.)This rewritten “Camelot,” starring Phillipa Soo of “Hamilton” fame as Guenevere, alongside Andrew Burnap (“The Inheritance”) as Arthur and Jordan Donica (“My Fair Lady”) as Lancelot, is now in previews at Lincoln Center Theater. By contemporary standards, it’s a large production, with a 27-person cast and a 30-piece orchestra.Sorkin is not the first to revise the musical — even Lerner and Loewe reworked it post-opening, and others have tried, too — but his deft hand with witty, fast-paced dialogue and audience nostalgia for “Camelot,” which is adapted from T.H. White’s fantasy novel, “The Once and Future King,” has made the production one of the most anticipated on Broadway this year, with theater mavens eager to see how Sorkin puts his stamp on it.“People think the show is about a love triangle, which of course it is,” said Alan Paul, the artistic director of Barrington Stage Company and director of his own production of “Camelot” a few years back, “but I really think it’s about the birth of democracy, and when you look back at ‘The West Wing,’ which is one of my favorite shows, that is a TV show that believes government can work for the people.”‘You’re supposed to be dead.’Just getting to this point is an unexpected relief for Sorkin.In November, two months before rehearsals were set to begin, he woke in the middle of the night and noticed that, while walking to the kitchen, he was crashing into walls and corners. He thought nothing of it until the next morning, when the orange juice he was carrying to his home office kept spilling.Sorkin called his doctor, who told him to come in immediately; his blood pressure was so high, Sorkin said, “You’re supposed to be dead.” The diagnosis: Sorkin, 61, had had a stroke.For about a month afterward, he was slurring words. He had trouble typing; he was discouraged from flying for a few weeks; and until recently, he couldn’t sign his name (he has just discovered, thanks to “Camelot” autograph seekers, that that’s improving). Those issues are now behind him, and the main lingering effect is that he still can’t really taste food.“Mostly it was a loud wake-up call,” he said during one of several interviews for this article. “I thought I was one of those people who could eat whatever he wanted, smoke as much as he wanted, and it’s not going to affect me. Boy, was I wrong.”Sorkin had been a heavy smoker since high school — two packs a day of Merits — and the habit had long been inextricable from his writing process. “It was just part of it, the way a pen was part of it,” he said. “I don’t want to talk about it too much, because I’ll start to salivate.”After the stroke, he quit cold turkey, cleaned up his diet and started working out twice a day. And, he said, “I take a lot of medicine. You can hear the pills rattling around in me.”“If you write the book to a musical with a score written by Lerner and Loewe, and they have this cast, and Bart Sher is directing it, and it doesn’t work, it was definitely your fault,” Sorkin said.Jingyu Lin for The New York TimesSorkin told me about the stroke almost in passing, when we were having a get-acquainted cup of tea in a hotel lobby (he loves writing in hotels) earlier this year. Trying to understand his creative process, I asked whether he prefers to write longhand or on a device. That’s when he said writing by hand had become difficult.At first he told me about his stroke only off the record; we agreed we’d revisit the subject the next time we met, so he could think through the implications of going public. By then, he had decided he was ready to describe what he had been through, in the hopes that his experience might be a cautionary tale. “If it’ll get one person to stop smoking,” he said, “then it’ll be helpful.”He is aware how lucky he is to have recovered, and to be able to continue to do the work he loves. “There was a minute when I was concerned that I was never going to be able to write again,” he said, “and I was concerned in the short-term that I wasn’t going to be able to continue writing ‘Camelot.’”Now he’s commuting between Los Angeles, where he lives, and New York, where he’s trimming the script, offering pointers to actors, refining word choices that don’t strike him quite right. “Let me make this very, very clear,” he said. “I’m fine. I wouldn’t want anyone to think I can’t work. I’m fine.”‘Now with no magic!’For many people, “Camelot” is more familiar as a metaphor than as a musical — it depicts a noble effort to create a just society, often associated with the Kennedy administration, because Jacqueline Kennedy, in an interview shortly after President John F. Kennedy’s assassination, mentioned her husband’s fondness for the show, and quoted a final lyric: “Don’t let it be forgot, that once there was a spot, for one brief shining moment, that was known as Camelot.”Four years ago, Lincoln Center Theater, which is a nonprofit, staged a fund-raising concert performance of the show, starring Lin-Manuel Miranda as Arthur. It went so well that the creative team began talking about a full-scale production.“The music is so good, and it’s incredibly fun, and I don’t know of any other pieces set in the Middle Ages with knights,” said Bartlett Sher, a veteran of Golden Age revivals (“South Pacific,” “The King and I,” “My Fair Lady”) who directed the concert and is now directing this revival. “I realized how extraordinary the score was,” he said, “and how complicated the experience of the book was.”Julie Andrews and Richard Burton, center, starred in the 1960 production of “Camelot.”Pictorial Press Ltd./AlamySher was debriefing with Miranda when Sorkin’s name came up. “I knew Sorkin was a fan of ‘Camelot,’ because he quotes it in ‘The West Wing’,” said Miranda, who grew up hearing songs from the musical, a favorite of his mother’s, and memorized them while a passenger in her car.Sher and Sorkin already knew each other because they had collaborated on “Mockingbird,” and they were eager to work together again.“You would think we would have sat and talked for hours about the problems we had with the existing book, or what we were hoping for, but we didn’t,” Sorkin said. “I just got to work.”He made one key early decision that has guided his approach to the show: no supernatural elements. That means Merlyn, who in the original is a magician who can remember the future and can turn Arthur into a hawk, is now a wise tutor; Morgan Le Fey, who in the original can build invisible walls, is now a scientist; and the nymph Nimue is gone. Even Arthur’s sword-in-the-stone origin story is questioned.“It wasn’t that I don’t like magic — I do,” Sorkin said. “Nor were there commercial reasons — no producer wants to put on a marquee, ‘Now With No Magic!’ It was because I feel that this story, in particular, had a chance of landing more powerfully, more emotionally, if people felt real. If a problem can be solved by waving a magic wand, it doesn’t feel like much of a problem.”‘Musicals can get tangled with.’“Camelot,” like many older musicals, has its complications for a modern audience. “From a contemporary perspective, it’s very problematic,” said Stacy Wolf, director of the music theater program at Princeton University. “The musical is about heterosexual adultery ruining a visionary government, and the woman is ultimately blamed for it.”Nonetheless, Wolf is eager to see the revival. “The music that Lerner and Loewe wrote is just incredible,” she said, “and in the same way that Shakespeare gets tangled with, and operas get tangled with, musicals can get tangled with.”Sorkin quickly realized that two songs, in particular, posed problems: the sexist-sounding “How to Handle a Woman” and the classist-sounding “What Do the Simple Folk Do?”“When I first started writing it, I thought, there’s an easy way to solve this: Don’t sing the songs,” Sorkin said.But Sher asked Sorkin to reconsider, given fan fondness for the score. “There’s a reason we see ‘Camelot’,” Sorkin acknowledged, “and the reason isn’t me.”So he came up with an alternative solution: humor. The songs are back, preceded by dialogue in which Guenevere preemptively defuses their sting with Sorkin-esque wit.“When I joined, ‘How to a Handle a Woman’ wasn’t there in the script, but then one day it was,” Soo said. “But there was also a beautifully written scene — and this is another reason why Aaron Sorkin is brilliant at what he does — that explores the song in a new way.”The revival has been extensively nurtured — there were four developmental workshops along the way, and Sorkin estimates that he has written about 10 drafts of the script. Lancelot “went from being a buffoon, like Gaston in ‘Beauty and the Beast,’ to a three-dimensional person.” Arthur struggles to define his feelings for Guenevere, whom he marries as part of a peace treaty. And Guenevere is now a strategic helpmate, periodically outthinking her husband.“The ideas of democracy that are discussed in this show are the ones that are discussed in this country,” said Donica, left foreground, who plays Lancelot.Sara Krulwich/The New York Times“There have been rewrites at each stage of workshop, and there are even more rewrites still going on,” said the actor Dakin Matthews, who is playing Merlyn and another character.A case study: Morgan Le Fey, who in the original is a sorceress with a sweet tooth, and a threat to Arthur’s reign. At first, Sorkin simply cut the character — as Lerner had done for some post-Broadway productions — but, Sorkin said, “she found her way in, and she got better.”In an early workshop, the actress Daphne Rubin-Vega (the original Mimi in “Rent”), read the role, when Le Fey was little more than a spurned ex-girlfriend. “She, in a very nice but direct way, said I could do better,” Sorkin said. “She was right.”He made Le Fey a scientist, an unmarried mother, and, for a time, an opium addict. (Sorkin has been clean for 23 years after battling his own addictions.) Now she makes and sells brandy. “People coming in and auditioning — they were just leaning into being high on opium, and it wasn’t working,” Sorkin said.Marilee Talkington, who plays Le Fey, has embraced the character’s evolution.“The old version of ‘Camelot’ felt distant, but also fun and entertaining,” she said. “This version is inviting the audience to ask themselves who they are, what they want, and where there’s hope.”How much “West Wing” is there in “Camelot”? Sorkin said the screenwriting device for which he is most famous — the so-called walk and talk, in which characters converse while in motion, is a.) “probably exaggerated” and b.) a screen technique that “has no implications for the stage.” Having said that: Arthur has his best ideas while pacing.One trick Sorkin did transfer from filmdom: He intercut three scenes together, as in a movie, held together with scoring, and challenged Sher to figure out the staging. “Give Bart something like that,” Sorkin said, “and he’s a happy guy.”And there are lines that can clearly be heard as allusions to our contemporary challenges.“All of his films are about game-changers, and ‘Camelot’ is no different, because Arthur is a game-changer,” said Donica, the actor playing Lancelot. “And the ideas of democracy that are discussed in this show are the ones that are discussed in this country.”‘I worry that if I stop worrying then I won’t do it.’I sat down with Sorkin the morning after the first preview performance, and he was obviously pleased. It struck me that this was the first time he had seemed happy with his work. “That’s not an illusion,” he said. “It’s the most positive I’ve been during the process. I feel ashamed I didn’t have more confidence in everybody.”There was still work to be done over the five-week preview period — the show was running too long (“I’m sure I’ll be called upon to make some cuts, and I’m not looking forward to that”), and Sorkin was still wrestling with various bits of language (Would it be exciting or distracting if he changed an “or” to a “like,” with the effect of implying that Guenevere might be agnostic?).But until that first performance before an audience, Sorkin had repeatedly fretted about what might go wrong, remembering that at one point he told a group of young librettists, “If you write the book to a musical with a score written by Lerner and Loewe, and they have this cast, and Bart Sher is directing it, and it doesn’t work, it was definitely your fault.”I found it hard to understand how someone as successful as Aaron Sorkin could be so worried, so I asked him about it.“I have had some success, and I’ve also had plenty of experience feeling anxiety about what I’m doing,” he said. “Am I going to have an idea? Am I going to be able to write this?”One startling example: “I wrote 86 episodes of ‘The West Wing,’ and every single time I finished one, I’d be happy for five minutes before it just meant that I haven’t started the next one yet, and I never thought I would be able to write the next one. Ever.”Is that kind of worrying a liability, or a strength, for an artist like Sorkin? “I hope it wasn’t a waste,” he said. “And I do think to myself, as I try to relax myself a little bit, I worry that if I stop worrying then I won’t do it. That it’s the worrying that’s driving me to do it.”Sorkin, who has already begun having meetings about possible next musicals, even while dreaming up a Jan. 6 movie he is contemplating writing and directing, said he has come to see “Camelot” as a narrative about narrative.“Ultimately, the show is a valentine to storytelling,” he said.“I like that Arthur thinks if we can just keep telling these stories, then people will be inspired and they’ll believe that we do have greatness in our grasp, and that you have to keep trying,” he added. “The greatest delivery system for an idea ever invented is a story.” More

    • 138 Shares149 Views

      in Television

      ‘The Mandalorian’ Season 3, Episode 4 Recap: Out of the Nest

      by

      This week filled in some of Baby Yoda’s back story and offered yet another thrilling aerial chase. Then another.Season 3, Episode 4: ‘The Foundling’One aspect of the Baby Yoda special effect that has been hard to get used to is how weightless the character often seems. Granted, the little guy is … well, a little guy. But whenever Grogu jumps around or Din picks him up, it feels a bit like one of those TV scenes where someone pretends to drink out of an empty coffee cup. It disrupts the suspension of disbelief, if only for a moment.I mention this only because aside from Grogu flipping around like a thumb toy, this week’s “Mandalorian” episode is a fine showcase for how the character’s overall design works a rare kind of magic. “Realism” has never been the goal with characters like Grogu. Instead, watching slick-looking science-fiction characters interact with tiny puppets or actors in big, bulky costumes recaptures the spellbound feeling of watching old children’s shows, like “Sesame Street” or the work of Sid and Marty Krofft.The big set-piece in the middle of this episode plays like an technologically advanced version of classic kiddie television. The sound of pounding metal at the Armorer’s forge reminds Grogu of when he was forced to flee Coruscant during the violent purge of the Jedi Temple. Escorted by Master Kelleran Beq (played by Ahmed Best, best-known in “Star Wars” circles for his controversial voice and motion-capture performance as Jar Jar Binks), Grogu zips through Coruscant’s traffic-ways and train tunnels, past Monument Plaza to a rescue ship, all while being chased by relentless hordes of Stormtroopers.The sequence is thrillingly reminiscent of one of the best scenes in “Star Wars: Episode II — Attack of the Clones,” where Anakin Skywalker and Obi-Wan Kenobi thwart an assassination attempt and pursue the killer through Coruscant’s vehicle-packed airborne roads, moving in multiple spatial dimensions, through the x-, y- and z-axes. The action is heightened by Grogu’s scrunched, saucer-eyed face, filled with awe and fear.Grogu’s physical presence also functions superbly well in a smaller, more comic sequence at the episode’s start, when Din encourages him to plunge into the Mandalorian training program by challenging the foundling Ragnar Vizsla (Wesley Kimmel) to combat. Ragnar chooses to battle with darts, so Grogu gets fitted with a ridiculously cute little cuff, containing three projectiles. He then proceeds to humiliate Ragnar, thanks to one of those fake-looking weightless leaps.As has been the way so far this season, “The Foundling” tells two stories, with the Coruscant flashback holding down the middle of the chapter, flanked by a daring rescue mission. After Grogu defeats Ragnar, the boy is snatched away by a giant flying creature, very similar to one of Earth’s prehistoric pterosaurs. He is then taken to its home to be fed to three hatchlings.Ragnar’s ward/father Paz Vizsla (voiced by Jon Favreau and embodied by Tait Fletcher) is distraught; but Bo-Katan reassures him that they can reach the peaks where the creature has its lair. Echoing Luke Skywalker when he compared blowing up the Death Star to shooting womp rats on Tatooine, Bo-Katan says, “These are no higher than the peaks of Kyrimorut. I used to climb them in basic training.”And so they climb, in heavy armor, arriving just when the mother bird is regurgitating Ragnar. What follows is another exciting aerial chase and battle, which ends when the big bird gets eaten by a dinosaur turtle — the same beast that interrupted Ragnar’s creed ceremony in the season premiere.This episode’s director, Carl Weathers, and the “Mandalorian” team of designers and effects artists effectively emphasize the size disparity of all these animals, aliens and humanoids. The large flying monster is felled by an even larger water monster. The hatchlings are brought back to the Mandalorian covert, where they dwarf their captors. At the start of the episode, Grogu is fascinated by what looks to be small moving rocks, which turn out to be scuttling crabs. Who is big, who is small, who is friendly and who is a threat … It is all a matter of perspective.Still, before it becomes clear that Grogu is playing with crabs, it appears briefly that he is using the Force to move these objects around in the sand. This serves as a reminder that the Mandalorian’s new trainee just left another training program, with the Jedi. As the Armorer gifts him with a new chest-plate, she says, “You will grow into this rondel as you grow into your station.” Part of the whole Grogu mystique is that we never fully know what he is thinking. But I do wonder: Does the kid ever get tired of devout spiritual/military organizations telling him what’s what?This is the wayIt is always nice to see Best, who had a rough time with “Star Wars” fans during the Jar Jar days. He also plays Kelleran Beq in the children’s game show “Star Wars: Jedi Temple Challenge.”There was a fair amount of confusion and frustration on social media after last week’s episode. To some extent this is understandable, given that the long detour through Coruscant’s current political situation was so unlike “The Mandalorian” norm. Nevertheless, I was surprised to see so many people dismiss “The Convert” as pointless. It seems clear to me that Dr. Pershing and Elia Kane are going to be important players later this season, at which point understanding what they have been through may matter a great deal. We will see.On the other hand, for the past few weeks I have been certain that a major story line this season will involve Din — swayed by Bo-Katan’s skepticism — questioning the Mandalorian lore and codes. Instead, this week Bo-Katan embraces the imagery of the Mythosaur when the Armorer replaces her broken shoulder-piece; and she seems open to the Armorer’s theory that she merely saw a vision of the great beast in the Living Waters. Maybe I was wrong. Maybe Bo-Katan is walking the path toward become a true believer.How do the Mandalorians eat without removing their helmets? We have an answer: They do remove their helmets, just when they are totally alone. (The next question we need answered: How long before a Mandalorian takes a ride on one of those giant baby birds?) More

    • 113 Shares189 Views

      in Television

      What if ‘The Daily Show’ Used Guest Hosts Permanently?

      by

      Fill-ins for Trevor Noah have shown how exciting the lack of a permanent replacement could be. It’s an option with an illustrious history in television.For two months, Comedy Central has conducted something of a public audition. Nine different guest hosts have each taken over “The Daily Show” for a week, including Chelsea Handler, Wanda Sykes, Leslie Jones, Hasan Minhaj, Sarah Silverman and, currently, the former Democratic Senator Al Franken. Who should get the job?I’m a mere critic, not a network pinhead, as David Letterman referred to executives who made these kinds of decisions, but that doesn’t mean I can’t dream up cockamamie ideas. My original preference was for a veteran correspondent like Roy Wood Jr. to fill the shoes of former hosts like Trevor Noah, who stepped down in December, or Jon Stewart before him. But after watching this lively parade of hosts, and surveying the shrinking late-night landscape, a more radical rethinking seems worth considering: Why not make temporary guest hosts permanent?My proposal rests in part on the reality that the success of “The Daily Show” has already made it less unique. “Late Night With Seth Meyers” has shrewdly filled the role that Stewart’s desk pieces once played by providing funny, progressive-leaning deadline comedy on the big news of the day. As for the prickly interviews that Stewart made famous on Comedy Central, you can now see them on his Apple TV+ series or, more likely, social media, where they go viral.“The Daily Show” remains a beloved institution with strong comedic bones primed for exploitation. It has always featured one of the best supporting casts in comedy, with its team of correspondents, many of them stalwarts of the New York standup scene, and nimble writers, whose skill and professionalism has only become more evident from watching these guest hosts.Even though each fill-in brought a distinct style, what stands out is the consistency of their desk monologues. Handler spits out jokes with a sneaky swagger, deftly skewering the machismo of President Biden announcing he shot down the Chinese balloon and offering a setup that you would never hear from a veteran host. “I’m going to be honest,” she said. “I have never watched the State of the Union before because I have a life.”Sykes dug deeper into wonky policy, offering a surgical breakdown of how over-ticketing by police punish the poor before suggesting we learn from Finland, which adjusts fines according to wealth: “$30 for a rich person is not a punishment,” she said. “Rich people don’t even know money goes that low.”Of the guest hosts so far, Hasan Minhaj turned in the most impressive week.Matt Wilson/Comedy Central’s The Daily ShowMinhaj brought a more flamboyant theatrical streak, turning a bit on giving up Twitter into a virtuoso and hilarious one-man show. Jones, who added elevated lewdness to analyzing a new Martin Luther King Jr. statue, may not have had the precision delivery of Silverman. Kal Penn was more likely to gush, while D.L. Hughley adopted a skeptical eye. The most impressive accomplishment is how everyone, with the benefit of typical “Daily Show” video and script, is, at least, fine.It’s evidence that this vehicle, more than a quarter century old, has become a smooth-running, user-friendly machine, a strength and a weakness. You saw both sides in the Trevor Noah era, which was competent, charming if a little dull. The current guest-host shows are not that. They display passion, unpredictability and the looming possibility of disaster, particularly in the interviews.As you might expect, these hosts, some of whom have publicly lobbied for the job, are trying to impress, calling in favors. Penn, who has called “Daily Show” host his dream job in the press, got a (mostly wasted) interview with Biden, and Marlon Wayans not only talked to Mayor Eric Adams, but also did it in the character of a kid name Quan. Was it a little cringey? Sure, but that made for fun TV.Not surprisingly, considering his experience as a correspondent and a host of his own show, Minhaj has put on the most impressive week so far, staging a confrontational interview about FTX with the businessman Kevin O’Leary from “Shark Tank” that was bracing in its tension. Franken also tried to introduce some much-needed tension into the talk-show interview by booking Republican Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina. It didn’t generate sparks but it was a worthy idea. Stewart once decried “Crossfire”-style talking-heads debate shows, but the relative dearth of debate that we have now is worse.A full-time guest host might seem like a desperate move, but in fact it celebrates one of the most venerable television traditions. David Letterman, Jay Leno and Joan Rivers earned full-time talk show jobs by guest hosting for Johnny Carson, who was a fill-in on Jack Paar’s “Tonight” show. John Oliver got his current job, on HBO’s “Last Week Tonight,” based on a “Daily Show” guest-host stint replacing Stewart, who himself was one of many guest hosts of the longtime NBC show “Later.” That program pioneered the permanent guest host in the late 1990s, using everyone from Martin Mull to Cindy Crawford and even Joe Rogan (who interviewed a UFC fighter on network television long before he did on a podcast). Since “Later” aired in the early-morning hours, no one noticed, which The Onion giddily mocked with an article headlined, “Police Seek Suspect in Series of Random ‘Later’ Hostings.”There’s a long tradition of guest hosts in late-night talk shows. Joan Rivers, here interviewing Oprah Winfrey, filled in for Johnny Carson. Paul Drinkwater/NBCUniversal, via Getty ImagesAfter Leno took over “The Tonight Show” and Letterman started “The Late Show,” these major combatants in the late-night wars of the 1990s stopped using guest hosts. (Conan O’Brien never used one either.) “Our attitude and Letterman’s was to ‘never give up the chair,’” the longtime Letterman producer Robert Morton told me in an email. Among the few times they did, in 2003, “The Late Show” offered Jimmy Fallon his first late-night hosting gig. Watching it now reveals an altogether different Fallon, more sarcastic wiseacre than chipper enthusiast. It’s clear he loved and was influenced by Letterman’s early comedy, and one of the fun aspects of guest hosts is seeing comics working out their personas.Jimmy Kimmel has done more than anyone to bring back guest hosts, using them during his vacations. Some of the comics who substituted for him, like Handler, Franken and Sykes, have gone on to weeks on “The Daily Show,” creating something of a modern guest-host circuit.The most successful model with a permanent guest host is of course “Saturday Night Live.” There are many decisions Lorne Michaels made that have resulted in a singularly enduring show, but this foundational idea is at the top of the list. It keeps the comedy staple in the news, builds anticipation and injects star power. In style and cadence, “Saturday Night Live” and “The Daily Show” are very different machines, but both have an experienced staff, well-honed style and a deep bench of talent.Imagine monthly stints with alumni Samantha Bee or Larry Wilmore. Give Josh Gad some time to plan a musical version with former “Daily Show” producer and musical maker David Javerbaum. If Eric André wants to promote a movie, let him smash up the set for a week.If there is one conspicuous absence in the lineup of guest hosts so far, it’s youth. Many hungry young stand-ups would surely love the opportunity. The 24-year-old Leo Reich, the self-described “youngest comedian ever,” just finished a very funny downtown show about Generation Z called “Literally Who Cares?!” and represents the opposite of the engaged righteousness of Iraq war-era Jon Stewart. What mess would Reich make?“The Daily Show” producers are probably cursing my name right now. Getting new talent up to speed is not easy. And sacrificing the advantages of consistency and experience should not be underestimated. But considering the dwindling ratings of late-night talk shows, their future is not secure. That James Corden’s show is not being replaced with a talk program is an ominous sign.The late-night talk show is one of the most illustrious, essential genres in television history, one that many of us hope remains artistically vital. But that will require risk and reinvention.The current plan is to keep rotating guest hosts through the spring and then restart “The Daily Show” in the fall. Every great late-night talk show starts with excitement and experimentation before settling into routine, but the utopian goal of a permanent guest host would be to build innovation into the DNA, to make it the point.Could it produce train wrecks? For sure. But people like to gawk at those. More important: Better to fail interestingly than slowly fade into irrelevance. More

    • 113 Shares189 Views

      in Television

      ‘Ted Lasso,’ Season 3, Episode 2 Recap: Origin Stories

      by

      Also: Can AFC Richmond acquire one of the greatest footballers alive?Season 3, Episode 2: ‘(I Don’t Want to Go to) Chelsea’“Trent Crimm! Are you kidding me?”If you did not share Ted’s joy — and mine! — at the reappearance of the erstwhile writer for “The Independent” (played by James Lance) in Rebecca’s office, well … I think you’re watching “Ted Lasso” wrong. But that’s just one person’s opinion. (And this is despite the psychologically bizarre and wildly unethical series of events that led him to leave “The Independent” in the first place.)But he’s back, with a role that looks as though it may be considerably larger, and I believe the world to be a better place for it. Welcome back, Trent Crimm.One more Trent note before I move on. I know the show doesn’t do leitmotifs. But “A Well Respected Man” by the Kinks is so perfectly suited to Trent — not the lyrics particularly, but the mood — that I desperately want it to be his regular theme music.Instead, it looks like we may have to settle for Ted’s new nickname for Trent, “Sport.” It’s not perfect, but we could do worse.OK, moving on (although you have not seen the last of Trent in this recap).Roy’s very bad dayLast week, obviously, we suffered the gut punch — plenty hinted at in Season 2, but a bit out of nowhere in the Season 3 premiere — that Roy (Brett Goldstein) and Keeley (Juno Temple) have broken up. I don’t mean to dwell on this, but it would have been so much more powerful if it had taken place at the end of last season. Here it felt a little bit thrown in, a move-the-narrative-forward tactic rather than an opportunity for one or more genuinely heartbreaking scenes.But this week we get a bit more, starting with Isaac’s delightful disquisition on the study of kinesics that enables him to instantly interpret what has happened. And then, the whole team knows. Which, of course, infuriates Roy.But angry Roy Kent is almost always the best Roy Kent. OK, fine: He’s essentially the only Roy Kent. (I was him for a Halloween party last year — the beard was tricky — in part because it gave me such an elegant excuse to shout “Oy!” and utter various expletives all night.)But then, the cards and balloons? The sighs and well wishes from the entire team? The fact that even the security guy for Chelsea knows and offers his condolences? It’s a miracle that no one was violently murdered this episode.And at the end, after the famous-but-unprintable “He’s here, he’s there, etc.” chants at Richmond’s opening game against Chelsea, where Roy was once captain and superstar, a rare moment of vulnerability: “It just felt sad, or something.” After a lousy game against Arsenal years earlier, he felt, “for the first time ever,” that he was fading as a player and could no longer keep up. So he left and came to Richmond. But as he explains, “There’s a part of me that thinks I should have stayed, and just [expletive] enjoyed myself. But that is not who I am, I guess.”Followed by Ted at his very best: “Not yet.”And no, I’m not yet done with Roy, either.It was an emotional week for Roy (Brett Goldstein).Apple TV+Origin storiesHow did Rebecca and Rupert initially hook up and eventually marry? Well, now we know. He went with his wife to a club where Rebecca — presumably 20-plus years his junior — served drinks. And then he came back, sans wife, and asked Rebecca out. She wisely said no. So he came back every night for weeks and just chatted with her. He told her it was fine that she wouldn’t date him; he just enjoyed her company. And then, finally, he asked her out again, and she said yes. “He made me feel special,” she confesses to Keeley. “Chosen.”Given the man — and the husband — he turned out to be, this is genuinely heartbreaking. And then, in a scene minutes later, he twists the knife: “I guess I’m just like any man. Got bored with the same old, same old.” So, just as he had with the previous wife, he traded Rebecca in for a newer, younger model. So brutal. Men like him make me feel like Roy Kent on a particularly furious day.A side note: I mentioned last week that Anthony Head’s turn as the kind, decent, always concerned “watcher” in “Buffy the Vampire Slayer” is among my favorite TV roles ever. (“There is no spell.” You’ll know precisely the moment I mean if you watched the show.)But Rebecca’s description of Anthony Head’s superhuman charm reaches back still further, to the “Gold Blend”/“Taster’s Choice” commercials he did with Sharon Maughan for Nescafé between 1987 and 1993. They formed a serialized romantic story line that is considered among the best ad campaigns of all time. (Gold Blend sales went up over 50 percent in the U.K.) They were one of the greatest will-they-or-won’t-they romances on American and British TV in the 1980s and 1990s, even if they were doled out only in occasional episodes, months apart, and each lasted less than a minute. That’s the Rupert that Rebecca met in the bar: suave, self-confident and very, very persistent (without, I should add, ever being later revealed as a selfish, cheating scumbag, which probably wouldn’t have helped sell much coffee).But that’s not the only origin story this week. There is also the question of why Roy hates Trent so much that he threatens that anyone who talks to him will get “my forehead through their [expletive] skulls,” which is extreme even for Roy. And the answer is that, when Roy was a 17-year-old rookie prodigy, Trent wrote a withering critique of his very first game. Roy — we don’t know his precise age, but I have it on excellent authority that he is “pushing 40” — has carried that newspaper clipping in his wallet for two decades. Again, another moment of profound vulnerability and perhaps regret — for both men. Great stuff, nicely executed.ZavaThe episode’s central story line was, for me at least, perhaps its least interesting. Rebecca wants to sign superstar striker Zava (Maximilian Osinski) explicitly because Rupert wants him for his own team, West Ham. But Zava is planning to go to Chelsea. Except we already know he won’t go there because the title of the episode is “(I Don’t Want to Go to) Chelsea.” It’s a reference to the first single from Elvis Costello’s second album, “This Year’s Model.” (Personally, I prefer the songs “Radio Radio” and “Pump It Up.”)While I self-evidently enjoy this show’s wealth of pop-culture references as much as anyone, this one doesn’t really have any connection apart from the title, which, again, pretty much gives away the whole game. Zava’s not going to Chelsea, and he obviously can’t wind up at West Ham, because that would remove any tension from the entire Premier League season. So he’ll obviously wind up at Richmond.That he decides to do so because Rebecca accosts and “sour yells” at him while he’s at a urinal requires a higher-than-usual suspension of disbelief. Yet her diatribe — essentially, you’re already fading and can no longer carry a team — does have a nice pre-echo of Roy’s later confession about why he left Chelsea. That’s the downside of being a professional athlete: You know that your years of greatest fame and accomplishment are probably over by your early 30s.Odds and endsI am ashamed to confess this, but last week I failed to notice a “Jesus Christ Superstar” reference — Ted’s “What’s the buzz? Tell me what’s happening” — until it was too late to get it in before publication. I say this because I wore the original album to a nub at least twice as a boy. My wife took me to a production at the Kennedy Center for my birthday last year. But to make up for my omission last week, I will offer the tidbit that on that original album, the part of Judas — really the central figure of the musical — was sung by Murray Head, elder brother of Anthony (i.e. Rupert).I should also say thank you to the numerous readers who pointed out that Ted’s son, Henry, is almost certainly not a “teenager,” as I described him last week. I was thinking he was 13-ish, but on reflection 10-ish seems more likely. If anyone can point to his exact age as described on the show, please do.I don’t know much about soccer — and what I do know is mostly gleaned from my son — but something about Zava seemed awfully familiar. For those who follow the sport as little as I do (or less), he is a lightly fictionalized version of the real-life Swedish star Zlatan Ibrahimovic: also a world-class striker; also quite tall (6’ 5), with similar facial hair and a man-bun; also famed for goals both long distance and exceptionally athletic; also a famously difficult teammate who has changed teams many times.I don’t have much to say yet about Keeley’s PR firm, her cranky C.F.O. — which, no, does not stand for “Corporate Fine Object” — or her longtime friend and new hire, Shandy (Ambreen Razia). We’ll see where this story line goes.The scene with Jamie and Roy was a pleasure, most of all when Jamie goes in for a hug “too fast” and Roy responds as if he is being attacked. It is of course a callback to their iconic hug in Episode 8 of last season.Ted’s semi-faint when he heard the news of Keeley and Roy’s breakup was a lot like his delight at seeing Trent Crimm again. You speak for all of us, Ted.It was wonderful to see the great Harriet Walter again as Rebecca’s mom (she was so good last season), but blink and you’d have missed it. I assume this brief scene was a setup for things to come.The joke about “The Office,” in which Ted explains that it’s set in Scranton, PA, not England and, when reminded of the original, describes it as a “pre-make” — spot on. (Sorry Ricky Gervais!)More Dani Rojas (Cristo Fernández) is always better than less Dani Rojas. And his line about Richmond landing Zava, “I just wished for that 30 seconds ago”? Well, I think we can all agree that if anyone on Richmond has a direct connection to a higher power, it’s Dani. More

    • 113 Shares129 Views

      in Television

      Late Night Is Getting Antsy for a Trump Indictment

      by

      The former president was not charged Tuesday, as he predicted. “Right now in Times Square, Anderson Cooper and Andy Cohen are hosting the indictment countdown,” Jimmy Fallon said.Welcome to Best of Late Night, a rundown of the previous night’s highlights that lets you sleep — and lets us get paid to watch comedy. Here are the 50 best movies on Netflix right now.Book him!Former President Donald Trump was not arrested on Tuesday, as he previously suggested would happen. A Manhattan grand jury could indict him as early as Wednesday over a secret payment to a porn star to cover up a tryst.Jimmy Fallon said that people were excited to see Trump officially charged. “Right now in Times Square, Anderson Cooper and Andy Cohen are hosting the indictment countdown,” Fallon said.“I read that former President Trump is expected to be formally charged tomorrow but will not surrender until next week. Yeah, apparently Trump signed up for the government’s ‘charge now, pay later’ option.” — JIMMY FALLON“They’re actually delaying it a bit so the courtroom sketch artist has enough time to load up on orange pencils.” — JIMMY FALLONThe Punchiest Punchlines (‘Jail to the Chief’ Edition)“We should have known he wasn’t getting arrested the minute he said he was getting arrested.” — JIMMY KIMMEL“And I have to say, it’s really a shame he wasn’t arrested today, because what better day for Trump to get arrested than on Rosie O’Donnell’s birthday?” — JIMMY KIMMEL“That’s the last time I believe something that guy says.” — AL FRANKEN, guest host of “The Daily Show”“Here’s a question: If Trump goes to prison, does the Secret Service go with him? Like, do they have to be in? Do they have to serve? It sounds like the premise for a Mark Wahlberg/Kevin Hart movie, right? ‘Jail to the Chief.’” — JIMMY KIMMEL“Tell you what: I bet Trump’s ready to defund the police now.” — JAMES CORDEN“Melania is at Mar-a-logo like, ‘Please don’t put him under house arrest, please don’t put him under house arrest. Anything but house arrest!’” — JAMES CORDENThe Bits Worth WatchingThe comedian Nicole Byer talked about the difficulty of pulling off D.I.Y. projects on Tuesday’s “Late Late Show.”What We’re Excited About on Wednesday NightThe singer-songwriter Caroline Polachek will perform a track from her new album “Desire, I Want to Turn Into You” on Wednesday’s “Tonight Show.”Also, Check This Out“It was a really lovely bunch of actors,” Matthew Macfadyen said about his “Succession” colleagues. “It’s a weird thing, the grief when you finish a job.”Mark Sommerfeld for The New York TimesThe “Succession” star Matthew Macfadyen is experiencing “a complicated mélange of feelings” about the end of the hit HBO series. More

    • 125 Shares149 Views

      in Television

      Why There Is Talk of a Writers’ Strike in Hollywood

      by

      TV and movie writers want more money, but Hollywood companies say the demands ignore economic realities. The deadline to sort out those differences is approaching.Television and movie writers want raises, saying that Hollywood companies have taken unfair advantage of the shift to streaming to devalue their work and create worsening working conditions.The companies bristle at the accusation and say that, while they are willing to negotiate a new “mutually beneficial” deal with writers, the demands for an entirely new compensation structure ignore economic realities.Whether the sides can settle their differences will determine if the entertainment industry can avoid its first writers’ strike in 15 years.Unions representing more than 11,000 television and movie writers and the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers, which bargains on behalf of Hollywood’s nine largest studios, including Amazon and Apple, began talks on March 20 for a new three-year contract. The current agreement expires on May 1.The Writers Guild of America, West, and the Writers Guild of America, East, have the strength to bring Hollywood to a halt if they do not get a deal to their liking. Chris Keyser, a co-chair of the W.G.A. negotiating committee, said in an interview that this moment for writers was “existential.”“The industry is almost always unfair to labor,” Mr. Keyser said. “This time it’s broken — it’s actually broken.”Here is what you need to know:Will there be a strike?No outcome is certain, but little in the posturing so far suggests an easy resolution. Producers have begun to stockpile scripts by asking writers to complete as many ahead of the May 1 deadline as possible.The negotiations will likely be acrimonious given the seismic changes in the industry. The rapid transition to streaming entertainment has upended nearly every corner of Hollywood, and writers believe they have been left behind.Unlike directors and actors, writers have historically been willing to strike. The most recent strike stretched from 2007 into 2008, lasting 100 days. One in 1988 dragged on for five months. A walkout must first be authorized by union members; the W.G.A. has signaled that it could conduct a vote as early as the first week in April.Authorization gives the union leverage, but it does not mean a strike is inevitable. In 2017, writers overwhelmingly gave the go-ahead for a strike (with 96 percent of the vote). The sides ultimately reached an agreement a few hours before the first pickets hit studio sidewalks.The entrance to NBC Studios in Manhattan.Vincent Tullo for The New York TimesHow would a strike affect audiences?There will be a gradual halt in the production of many television shows, except for reality and news programs, which would be mostly unaffected.Viewers will notice the fallout first among entertainment talk shows, including “The Late Show With Stephen Colbert” and “The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon.” If a strike lasts several weeks, “Saturday Night Live” would not be able complete its season. Soap operas, already on viewership life support, would run out of new episodes after about a month.Plenty of high-profile TV series have coming seasons that are already finished. But premieres for fall series like “Abbott Elementary” would be delayed by a monthslong strike, and viewers would begin to notice fewer scripted TV series by the end of the year. Reality and international shows will start to run in heavy rotation.Moviegoers would not experience immediate effects; movie studios work about a year ahead, meaning that almost everything planned for 2023 has already been shot. The risk involves 2024, especially if studios rush to beat a strike by putting films into production with scripts that aren’t quite ready.The offices of the Writers Guild of America West in Los Angeles.Andrew Cullen for The New York TimesWhat are the writers’ complaints?Every three years, the writers’ union negotiates a contract with the major studios that establishes pay minimums and addresses matters such as health care and residuals (a type of royalty), which are paid out based on a maze of formulas.And though there has been a boom in television production in recent years (known within the industry as “Peak TV”), the W.G.A. said that the median weekly pay for a writer-producer had declined 4 percent over the last decade.Because of streaming, the former network norms of 22, 24 or even 26 episodes per season have mostly disappeared. Many series are now eight to 12 episodes long. At the same time, episodes are taking longer to produce, so series writers who are paid per episode often make less while working more. Some showrunners are likewise making less despite working longer hours.“The streaming model has created an environment where there’s been enormous downward pressure on writer income across the board,” David Goodman, a co-chair of the guild negotiating committee, said in an interview.Screenwriters have been hurt by a decline in theatrical releases and the collapse of the DVD market, union leaders said.Between 2012 and 2021, the number of films rated annually by the Motion Picture Association fell by 31 percent. Streaming services picked up some slack, but companies like Netflix and Warner Bros. Discovery, which owns HBO Max, have been cutting back on film production to reduce costs amid slowing subscriber growth.Warner Bros. Studios in Burbank, Calif.Philip Cheung for The New York TimesAre the companies in a position to pay more?They would argue this isn’t the best time for it.Disney said in February that it would cut $5.5 billion in costs and eliminate 7,000 jobs to address streaming losses, an atrophying cable television business and steep corporate debt. Warner Bros. Discovery has already cut thousands of jobs as part of a $4 billion retrenchment. NBCUniversal is also tightening its belt as it contends with cable cord-cutting and a troublesome advertising market.The writers are unmoved by this. Mr. Keyser noted that Netflix is already profitable (to the tune of $4.5 billion last year), and that rival companies have said their streaming services will be profitable in the next year or two. “We don’t get to negotiate again until 2026,” Mr. Keyser said. “We’re not waiting around until they’re profitable.”Who’s doing the negotiating?In a rarity for Hollywood, the chief negotiators are both women. Carol Lombardini, 68, leads the studio effort; she has worked at the producers’ alliance for 41 years. Ellen Stutzman, 40, leads the W.G.A. effort. She was appointed only about a month ago, after David Young, who has served as the ferocious negotiator for writers since 2007, stepped aside, citing an unspecified medical problem.Ms. Stutzman, who has been with the W.G.A. for 17 years, said in an interview that Mr. Young would play no part in these negotiations. She called him “a wonderful mentor.”Are the studios aligned?Absolutely, according to the producers’ alliance. “The A.M.P.T.P. companies approach this negotiation and the ones to follow with the long-term health and stability of the industry as our priority,” the alliance said in a statement, referring to impending contract renewal talks with directors and actors. “We are all partners in charting the future of our business together and fully committed to reaching a mutually beneficial deal.”But differences start to appear when you talk to senior executives on a company-by-company basis. In private conversations, they point out that the group is much less monolithic than in the past. It now includes tech companies like Amazon and Apple, for example, whose primary business is not entertainment.Striking members of the Writers Guild of America passed out leaflets in Rockefeller Center in 2007.Librado Romero/The New York TimesIs the W.G.A. united?For generations, ever since the end of the silent film era, Hollywood writers have complained that studios treat them as second-class citizens — that their artistic contributions are underappreciated (and undercompensated), especially compared with those of actors and directors. This sentiment runs deep among writers and has historically resulted in extraordinary unity.In 2019, when film and TV writers fired their agents in a campaign over what they saw as conflicts of interest, many agency leaders figured that the W.G.A. would eventually fracture. That never happened: After a 22-month standoff, the big agencies effectively gave writers what they wanted.What about collateral damage?Tens of thousands of entertainment workers were idled during the 2007 strike, and the action cost the Los Angeles economy more than $2 billion, according to the Milken Institute. This time around, many of the small businesses that service Hollywood (florists, caterers, chauffeurs, stylists, lumber yard workers) have only started to regain their footing after pandemic shutdowns, increasing the stakes of a strike and potentially leading to community fissures. More

    • 100 Shares99 Views

      in Television

      The Problem With Celebrity Travel Shows? The Celebrities.

      by

      What used to be meaningfully informative programming, delivered by personable but only tangentially notable hosts, is gradually being swallowed up.In the resplendent green of Costa Rica, a peak reaches toward the clouds. Eugene Levy gazes up at it in awe. “That’s a volcano,” his host explains, adding that it last erupted about 10 years ago. Levy looks unsettled. “I was hoping it would be more dormant,” he says. The understated delivery is classic Levy, but it feels different, less endearing, in this context. The premise of Apple TV+’s “The Reluctant Traveler” is that the celebrity actor hasn’t liked to travel in the past, but is now pushing himself out of his comfort zone with televised trips to places like Finland, Italy and Japan. With that, he joins an increasingly established subgenre: the celebrity travel show. Netflix has “Down to Earth With Zac Efron.” TBS had Conan O’Brien’s “Conan Without Borders.” CNN had “Stanley Tucci: Searching for Italy,” which was both a celebrity travel show and a celebrity food show — another thriving subgenre, with entries from Selena Gomez, Amy Schumer, Jon Favreau and Paris Hilton.The idea behind these programs is the same as ever: You settle in and watch your host learn about new places. It’s just that, in these shows, it’s the host’s very celebrity that inevitably becomes the star around which everything revolves. Consider Levy and that Costa Rican peak: You’re offered one moment to admire a beautiful scene before the active volcano becomes the setup for celebrity quipping. The shows’ stars can rarely help drawing attention this way, whether it’s with solemn head-nodding or relentless cleverness. O’Brien, traveling in Armenia, is so shameless in his pursuit of laughs that he almost seems to embarrass his Armenian-American assistant. Stanley Tucci, eating cantucci in Florence, has to remark that “anything that ends in ‘tucci,’ I like.” The celebrity travelogue doubles as proof of just how hard it is for performers to subordinate themselves to their surroundings.The point of featuring celebrities seems obvious enough; in a crowded TV market, a familiar host can lure people to watch a new show. The trade-off, of course, is that the format and subject matter — whether travel or food or, say, home renovation — will find itself drifting toward the formal demands of a reality show, sacrificing its capacity to inform to its host’s own shtick or charisma. The things we see must serve the narratives and characters of the stars, providing opportunities to play to or against their images, drawing out their particular moods or charms. A result is a suffocating and often superficial take on how fascinating or delicious everything is. Eventually you come to suspect that each show would feel functionally identical no matter where you sent the celebrity — that Stanley Tucci could tour America’s bowling alleys, or Zac Efron could sample Midwestern diners, or vice versa, without much changing. This is happening across the TV world: What used to be meaningfully informative programming, delivered by personable but only tangentially notable hosts, is gradually being swallowed up by celebrity.I still remember the first time I traveled abroad, and the feeling I had emerging from the Paris-Nord train station to behold one of the world’s most beautiful cities. It made me feel alien and bracingly helpless. I was an outsider. That was the whole point of my being there. That decentered feeling never really went away, neither on that trip nor on later ones. I wouldn’t want it to.Celebrity travel shows tend to evoke something close to the opposite of that feeling. This is not to say that you can’t learn anything from them. It’s just that the celebrity at the center will generally steal the spotlight from the locale itself. Levy, interestingly enough, seems to exhibit some self-awareness about this phenomenon; per his show’s premise, he seems, at times, to progress from fear of travel to an embrace of travel’s helplessness. In southern Utah, he spends time with his guide in the quiet of night, discussing the stars and the spirituality of the desert. It’s a striking contrast to your typical celebrity fare, in that it seems to capture Levy giving himself over to the unfamiliar in a strikingly vulnerable way.But it’s fleeting. The show has Levy spending a lot of time at luxury hotels, where fame affords him deferential treatment. Earlier in the Utah episode, he spends breakfast chatting with a chef (who is making one very elevated pancake) about whether he’s ever cooked for Brad Pitt or George Clooney. Much of the series revolves around this kind of celebrity-centric riffing. The show’s entire premise, after all, revolves around Levy’s own experiences and hang-ups, not the curiosities of a viewer or a would-be traveler. Offered “crocodile schnitzel” at Kruger National Park in South Africa, Levy tells his guide, “I’m going to enjoy watching you eat that,” and quips that he’ll just take a vodka-tonic. In Lisbon, his guide tells him the Portuguese people like to explore the world, and asks if Levy does, too. The actor says that “adventure is my middle name,” and that world exploration is “in my nature,” but he’s then seen confessing his deceit to the camera: “That’s where acting comes in. You know, when you can hide ineptitude on a scale like that, give me an Oscar.” He is traveling as a character in his own travel series, all while ostensibly trying to break free from that character’s limitations and experience new places — which he can never quite do, because the show is ultimately about the character, not the places.Travel stories have often benefited from a guide, from Matsuo Bashō’s “The Narrow Road to the Deep North” in the 17th century to Peter Matthiessen’s “The Snow Leopard” or Pico Iyer’s “The Lady and the Monk” in the 20th to Anthony Bourdain’s “No Reservations” and “Parts Unknown” in the 21st. (Bourdain became a celebrity, but he had a curiosity and humility, an authenticity in his travels that could make him feel like he wasn’t.) These figures serve as proxies and narrators and cultural synthesizers, both standing in for us and offering us their impressions. When we come to trust them, it’s often precisely because they know how to step out of the way and help us engage with the places they’re exploring. The same goes for any other topic. We know names like “Julia Child” and “Bob Ross” because of how compellingly those people served their subjects, not because of their pre-existing star power. And, I suppose, because nobody at the time thought to develop “Learning to Paint With Mr. T.”I’m inclined to say the ideal travel show would merely be a video montage with someone reading a guidebook over it. The less narrative basis, the better. “Rick Steves’ Europe” and “Big City, Little Budget,” with Oneika Raymond, may be two series that come closest to that ideal, in that they’re basically video guidebooks. The hosts subordinate themselves to the places they visit. They aim to show people why to travel, and what it’s like — not to entertain them along the way.Not so today. In one episode of “The Reluctant Traveler,” Levy visits the Maldives, where he meets a local who seems eager to dispense some wisdom. “You really need to connect — remove your shoes, feel the sand,” he tells Levy, as the camera shows his bare feet and Levy’s footwear. You get the distinct feeling he’s saying this, in part, because it’s what Levy wants to hear. Still: Point taken. To center the place, you must decenter yourself. In travel, as in all things, fame is a distraction.Source photograph (Levy): Maarten De Boer/Contour by Getty Images.Nicholas Cannariato is a writer living in Chicago. He last wrote about common birds for the magazine. More