I've been pretty critical about a lot of aspects of The Hour lately, but I really have to hand out major kudos for the Henry Rollins interview that aired this week.It's in recruiting guests like this, who are intelligent and well-spoken and not afraid to speak their sometimes controversial views, that The Hour truly shines. And by faithfully putting all the best clips on the website, those lovelies at The Hour have ensured that even those of us who can't watch the show on tv, can still watch the best of the clips. And this was certainly one of the best.
If you haven't seen it, and you are interested in watching George interview an American icon, check it out here.
Now if only they could convince William Shatner to come on the show, that would be boffo. Or even better, William Shatner with Henry Rollins. They could even perform
"I Can't Get Behind That"
Barbara B.
30 comments:
Barbara,
I am happy to see that you are enjoying the Hour more.
Henry Rollins was a great interview I agree.
sell out! sell out! haha..
i haven't seen this yet, i'm catching up on two week's worth of the hour.
J, the best interviews are those in which you really want to invite the interviewee to a dinner party. The Rollins interview was one of those.
hahaha, 668 - Henry Rollins and I will never sell out! We just appreciate quality effort when we see it.
Enjoy your catching up.
Barbara!!!
I so agree. If you want to have dinner with them or not want the interview to stop then you know it is good. I love the ones where George is so into it, that he forgets he is interviewing and they just chat... those are great.
J
That is always a good sign, J. That's just what the Rollins one felt like.
LOL at 668 'sell out, sell out!'
I haven't seen it, but if you say its good...well, it better be ;)
hahaha! It was worth every penny, Allison!
Did you know that Henry Rollins has a column in The National Post.
It was in Todays (Tuesdays) paper.
I think George does a WAY better job that Rollins does with his show. If you've ever seen Rollin's show, you'd agree. I think George is one the better interviewers on TV today,
Ian
Well I don't watch much American TV anymore so I don't think I'll have the chance to compare...When my viewing time is limited I want to see Canadian news, issues, and talent. I thought Henry Rollins was an very interesting person though. That was my first time seeing him. Now he's everywhere...
So who couldn't get a good interview from Rollins.
He's a professional speaker. Was even on Bullard.
God, you guys are so easily impressed.
Well, you're really going to flip out when you see the interviews from Sundance.
Imagine, going to a film festival and getting interviews with celebrities.
What an achievement!
Way beyond the capabilities of anyone around here, eh?
Can anyone honestly tell me the point of that excursion, really?
Nothing in Canada worth covering this week?
What an insult.
And you guys are eating it up.
Sad that you should think so little of yourselves and so much of someone with a camera and microphone.
I'm not going to let this one go by (let alone the so-called Blog from the staff of the Hour).
Do any of you really think that going to Sundance is anything of merit?
That's total Ben Mulroney territory.
So the Hour thinks that you will be grateful to them if they chase after any of thousands of celebrities, and offer them time to promote themselves on national TV.
Let's look back at the odd assortment of celebrities that have appeared on the Hour in the past 5 months. Now put them all together in a room and ask yourself - why these people? What purpose did they serve? Why were they offered as relevant to me and my life right now (and my "life" is just like yours).
They are so totally and mindlessly randomly chosen guests who were chosen for one reason only - they have a name someone might recognize and they want to sell something.
So where's the journalism?
What's so special about that?
It's insulting to all of us, though some have no standards at all.
Don't you see that here's a program that doesn't say - what really fascinates and turns me on tonight?
Instead it says - what would impress the audience to think that we know what we're doing, that we're special?
I'm trying to say that the Hour is just going though the motions, and not giving the public a show that even the staff is impressed with.
That's why there's so much apathy about the Hour. It starts at the show itself.
Does it ever occur to anyone here how much you can get away with and how much will come your way without even trying just by virtue of being able to walk up to someone and say "I'm from a national television network."
That opens almost every door. Ask anyone in broadcasting.
And look what the Hour is doing with this "power".
It's a dismal and insincere effort. They really don't know where they're going or why.
It amounts to a promotional vehicle for George, who himself doesn't seem to know where he's going or what he wants.
Why are so few questioning what's going on?
I see they're still afraid of feedback at the Hour site, and don't allow comments on their pretend blog.
Imagine the show or even a brief segment that any of YOU could do if you had a camera and a helper and was able to say you're from the CBC.
And though I'm certain that each of you could come up with a great segment or interview with a "star" there would of course be no chance of it being seen on the Hour, as there's little time left over from George hogging the camera.
LOL!
Allan with rants like that, I can see why they might not want comments...LOL!
Yeah, the truth can make some people uncomfortable.
And preventing a comment from me is real important!
Happy to entertain you, Barb.
As you do me me to some extent when you suggest at the end of your post that someone actually perform a song on the Hour. When was the last time someone did that???
On George's My Space this week someone text if he was going to do a segment on the Oscar nominees. I suppose the show has to appeal to a mixed audience with diverse tastes.
Terri
"the show has to appeal to a mixed audience with diverse tastes "- that's a reasonable observation.
Let's look a bit closer ...
The Hour is a Newsworld show that's merely repeated on both networks.
So how can a Newsworld show be entertaining at the 11 o'clock? Can't.
They're just pretending that it's appropriate when it simply can't work.
Trying to please a diverse audience would mean putting on things that don't really interest you but you think that lots of people will like it.
It's also what's called selling out.
And that's the Hour.
So was going to Sundance something that will benefit a Canadian audience? or something that will benefit George?
This was not my post... but they did do the Tragically Hip special...
Yep - last October!
How many shows since then and how many musicians and singers have been on?
Since you're going in person tonight, how about asking why?
AND asking your friend G if he's doing the show he always hoped to do, or what would the Hour be if he could do anything he wanted?
When I attended the show in person I asked if there would be any live band performances and George responded it "wasn't that type of show" i.e. not a regular 'David Letterman' etc. but he alluded to Specials such as the Tragically Hip.
I thought the timing could have been better though than airing the Special late on the Thanksgiving Monday. Also, how well would the Hip appeal to the 'younger viewership' that CBC are trying to capitalize on ?
Terri
Clearly, in Brooksie's world, every Hour is perfect.
And she makes a couple of good points:
Why wait for actors "not in the news" to come to Toronto?
Just move the show to L.A. and you're set.
And talk about an original approach - let's interview actors NOT in the news rather than the ones that ARE in the news - that's thinking outside the box.
Every time an American is given airtime on our networks we are in effect saying that no Canadian was as interesting.
I totally object to hyping Americans. They certainly don't return the favour.
Is it not in our own best interests, in fact our duty, and that of our broadcasters, to reflect and promote and investigate our own country?
Chasing after American celebrities is the oldest game in town.
It seems the basis of half the shows on the air.
And going to Sundance is like shooting fish in a barrel.
Some accomplishment.
And some loyalty to the citizens who want to support Canadian performers - of which George is one incidentally.
It certainly isn't "that type of show".
How sad.
A host who is over the moon about rock and rock stars and you give him a show that can't play a beat for more than ten seconds.
Is that irony?
I don't get off on the Tragically Hip, but that concert was good.
The interview part was like pulling teeth.
I don't buy Barenaked cd's either or Jann Arden, but I'd be happy and proud to see them and everyone else in concert.
The Foo Fighter guys could have improvised unplugged and given us a preview of new music.
There's nothing wrong with having fun.
So the Hour wants to be all talk, eh?
That's like saying at the outset - "we want to be #3 in the ratings".
Here's an example ..
The Hour's "blog".
Look at that.
A picture of a Panda bear.
What the hell is that all about?
A picture of a Panda bear???
Give me a break.
Are there no standards?
Why are these bits on the blog and not on the show?
If they're not good enough for the show, why are you wasting our time with them here?
When the Hour says it has a blog you'd expect it to be a supplement to the show each night or at least behind the scenes.
Instead we get random bits that someone found interesting.
So what.
Doesn't anyone there know what they're doing?
It's as if no one here questions anything about the show and the choices it makes.
Wow.
No wonder "journalism" and public taste has descended to such a low level of mediocre "entertainment".
You guys will eat up anything they serve you and even say "thanks'.
That's of course what they're counting on at the Hour.
That you'll let them do all the thinking.
No wonder George thinks his audience needs the news "explained" to them.
Think whatever you like, Allan. I need to be with my family right now and have no stomach to get into a debate.
I disagree, Allan. If the Hour was all about performances, I'd never watch. There's actually a whole channel like that, I think it's called Much Music or something.... I did stop watching for a couple of weeks after the Brooke Hogan interview (sooo lame & painful), but found the show fresh and interesting the last few nights (since about last wednesday, not including the Thurs show, looked like repeats of things I wasn't interested in the first time) and found myself reacting to the show the way I used to last season. That being "ungh...can you believe people do/don't do that!" to my husband and enjoying the conversation that followed. That and I'm still laughing at Hillary's appt, and the Regina jokes. That's where I'm at btw. George was muchly right on those, I'm afraid. For my tax dollars, I do say "thank you" to the hour for the conversation they instigate in my house. We had another good go at the Belinda comment "no one can break up a happy marriage" recently, we've got a lot of milage out of that one, and that's why I watch.
a Lauren.
It's interesting that a family would "adopt" a tv show.
It really is.
I wonder why in the midst of all the choices available.
But it's fine.
And maybe rather rare.
barbara
easy on the emotions, eh?
I'd like to untroduce my home video
amateur clip free sex video
amateur free nude pic sex
anal free gallery picture sex
ass free movie sexy
classifieds free sex
asian fr
ee gallery sex
bizarre free kinky mature sex
x.html>free gallery mature pic sex
big big tits
amateur free gay sex video
black cock free gay interracial movie sex shemale woman
access free sex teen
cam free live sex teen web
aallergyreeav.yoll.net free index lesbian link sex videos.html
free gallery hairy sex
free hairy pussy sex pic
Post a Comment