Talk:The Colbert Report/Archive 1

message: The Comedy Central website doesn't show an 'é' in "Report".  Nor have I seen it in any ads for the program.  Can documented evidence be provided that the 'é' will be permanently shown instead of just plain 'e'? — Stevie is the man! Talk | Work</span> 18:09, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that it should be without the é. I've never seen that on the website or the commercials. - Stoph 03:21, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for your response.  So are there any objections from anyone to moving this article back to The Colbert Report? — Stevie is the man! Talk | Work</span> 20:44, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Stephen pronounced it as "réport" and I think on the opening it had it the same way.  IMDB lists it this way too.  So I think it should stay. Jayc 04:02, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I also agree that it should be moved back to The Colbert Report. The on screen title seen during the show clearly has a normal, unaccented e. (The IMDb title will soon be changed as well, because they go by what is actually shown on screen.) The presence or lack of an accent isn't determined by Stephen's pronunciation. Jason One 00:44, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

text: There's no reason to believe the pronunciation is temporary. It's just a joke -- Stephen can pronounce it the "French" way with or without an accented e. (Why should an accented e determine whether or not the t is silent, anyway? By that reasoning, his last name would have to be spelled Cólbert.) The title of the article should reflect the actual title of the show, and that title (as seen on the show) has a plain, unaccented e. Jason One 19:16, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The accent does not affect the silent t - although 'report' is not a French word, assuming standard French pronunciation rules, it would be pronounced with a silent t regardless.  The accent affects the pronunciation of the e it modifies, making it a softer e than the one usually used for 'report' in English.  At any rate, the accent does not appear to be consistently used in the show, and the article should probably be moved to The Colbert Report. Bbatsell 21:23, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, that was my point. The fact that Colbert says it with a silent t is not a valid argument for keeping the accent in the article title. Also, it's not that the accent is used inconsistently in the show -- it's that it's not used at all. In every occurence, the title is always accent-free. Jason One 22:22, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

text: The accent mark hasn't appeared on the show itself, but a very oversized accent mark - one that is installed by a lightning bolt at one point, in an unsubtle emphasis - was used in the original preview commercial that ran on the daily show and that is available for viewing on the website. And the official gear for the show that has been depicted on the website since several weeks before the show started, shows the accent mark on the "e". That's what made its use inconsistent. Reaverdrop 08:56, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: But it's not inconsistent in the actual show, which has so far not had even a single occurence of the accent. Both of the examples you mention are from outside of the show, and should have no influence on the name of this article. Jason One 19:25, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

text: * The preview, with the huge accent mark that is delivered by a bolt of lightning, is posted for viewing right along with other video segments from the show on the website. This indicates the preview, which had been shown repeatedly during the Daily Show along with one other preview segment for the past year or so, is on par with the post-premiere episodes as part of the "actual" show. So far we have only four episodes of the standalone show to compare with a year or so of frequent showing of the two preview segments, firmly establishing "Réport" as the original spelling, along with the official merchandise which also uses the accent. Many different forms of "Colbert Report" logos have already appeared on the show; and it has introduced a steady stream of new other segments with logoed captions, some also with goofy accent marks (e.g. The Wørd). If you look near the top of this thread, we just proposed to wait a few weeks to see if the accent mark makes another appearance. The Réport is still in the shakeout phase. I'd hate to switch everything to non-accented only to see the accent reappear on the next evening's episode. Just give the show a few weeks to settle in, eh? ~ Reaverdrop 20:20, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Again, the preview is not part of the actual show. TV show and movie titles change all the time from pre-production to the final release. The accent was clearly dropped during this time. The preview carries far less weight than the actual (completely accent-free) show. As for the "official merchandise," note that you can't actually purchase any of those items. They're just a joke. There's no need to wait several weeks -- the accent is not anywhere to be seen in the show, and there's absolutely no reason to believe it will return. Do you really think they're going to redo all the logos throughout the set to add it back? Jason One 19:08, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Réport" or "Report"? The great accent mark controversy 

message: What do people know about Colbert Nation? It says it's unofficial and claims to be written by a man named Avery, but Colbert referenced it twice on tonight's show (Show #2) and it has a letter from him on it and a link to it from comedy central's website. It wouldn't suprise me to know that Colbert does the whole thing himself.
And if your wondering, they are not selling light up pens. At least not when I checked.
:The domain is owned and hosted by Comedy Central.  I simply assumed it was a joking poke at astroturfing and written by TCR writers.  Bbatsell 07:45, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: A few weeks ago, most of the material that's on Colbert Nation now was on the Comedy Central Colbert Réport website - including Colbert's letter naming Avery Gordon as his webmaster, and a blurb from Gordon describing being tapped for the job. So it's safe to say it's official. Reaverdrop 09:02, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

text: Please remember to sign your posts when making a comment.  Also remember the show is tapped, not live.  The "poll" was just used as a setup for the joke.  Can't exactly poll an audience and display the results on a show before the audience sees said show. ;) Jayc 21:38, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

text: My first clue was when the first show aired I went to the comedy central site and it already had a link to the "unofficial" site. Not only that, but the shop had already supposedly ordered paraphernalia. I hope it is for real. I want a shirt with a big ol' yellow ribbon and fanciful bald eagle with the Colbert Réport logo on it. Just to confuse people who think they are only their symbols! Khirad 06:12, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Colbert Nation 

message: We should start a page of quotes from the show. Let's start with: "Put some pants on, America, the Truth is knocking at the door."
             --Carl
:Nice idea. Done. Reaverdrop 08:57, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quotes Page 

message: We have got to get a screenshot of the screaming eagle filling the screen with talons and beak open wide to devour the viewer, from the end of the intro sequence. Any volunteers? Reaverdrop 10:31, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Done! 30 or so at http://al001.blogspot.com/2006/02/colbert-report-title-sequence.html ready to be picked, uploaded, linked! Al001 08:18, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Screenshot request: 

message: Seeing as how it looks like he's going to start each show with a quote involving "Truth", maybe we should have a running list, like his Word and guest. Maybe add it to the chart we have. Also, the one I just added (Truthocution) is just my best memory of what the quote was.
* I went ahead and made your suggested change - I was thinking the same thing. Incidentally I removed the long explanation of "Bring Them Back Or Leave Them Dead" from the highlights column of the episode guide - with the columns more constricted, it took up a lot of lines; and longer explanations should be in the body of the article somewhere instead of in the episode guide.
~ ~ Reaverdrop 07:10, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Truth-y" intro lines 

message: Is it just me, or does anyone else find it ironic that Colbert's galactic-sized ego is a send-up of no one else - not O'Reilly or Scarborough - so much as the original Daily Show host, Craig Kilborn?
: ~ Reaverdrop 07:55, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: We must remember when dealing with Colbert that he is in character during the show. He isn't satirizing the talking points, its the pundits that make them and more specifically, the way they make them.Rokor 19:30, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who is Colbert mocking again? 

message: I dont like the fact that the author points out Stone Phillips comment of pencilneck indicating that he doesnt quite get that Stephen is in character. Stephen Colbert has often said that the way he speaks and and dresses in character is based on Stone Phillips, a fact that Stone Phillips is likely to know.
*Sure, he might have known it, but he was also clearly uncomfortable, and he called Colbert "pencilneck" for no comedic purpose. But he got into the hang of things, certainly by the gravitas-off. He definitely got into the flow of the Colbert interview a lot better than Greg Behrendt did. ~ Reaverdrop 06:26, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps I'm not understanding what you mean, but wasn't Greg Behrendt the studio guest? --bbatsell | « give me a ring » 17:27, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stone Phillips and Greg Behrendt in the hot seat 

message: Um... there was an ongoing discussion on the talk page, and the incorrect way of moving the page leads to incorrect edit histories and NOTHING on this talk page, when there is a fairly substantial one.  Could someone explain to me why the page was moved in this manner?  --bbatsell | « give me a ring » 05:31, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Page move (or lack thereof)

message: Did anyone get a screenshot of the Colbert Pumpkin from the end of the 10/31 episode? We could start a whole page of pictures of Stephen, with two so far. Okay, maybe that's too much. But the pumpkin was good. --Ezradf
Also, unrelated, it looks like the counter on Colbert Nation is set at 3412780. You guys all probably noticed that. -- ezradf
I saw that it was 3412780 before the show had even aired - a pretty good clue.
: ~ Reaverdrop 07:51, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Colbert Pumpkin 

message: OK, which version of the bears quote at the end is right? Thanos6 04:41, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bears 

message: Okay guys...let's settle this once and for all. In formidable opponent, is one side of the debate recorded beforehad or not?
-Facts which point to it being recorded beforehand:
   - Different Background
   - Different Tie Color
-Facts which point towards them both done at once:
 
   - There could just be two cameras at different angles
   - When cutting between the two Colberts, it seems like you can see him changing his expression.
It's the Tie changing color which really bugs me.
So...discuss. 
Ezradf 05:06, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It's done live. The tie is blue (or green) and at least one angle he is standing in front of a blue (or green) screen. That is the red tie part, where the image is flipped and he is standing in front of a generic image with a red oval that is obscured by his body. That makes the blue (or green) become red.Tonight they added some pre-recorded reaction shots to mess you up. It is obvious when he freezes his expression so that they can do the cut. --waffle iron 05:59, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe it's all still done in one shot, but that he freezes his expression deliberately for comedic effect.68.186.144.156 03:38, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

text: I am almost certain they only use one camera.  They simply invert the image (mirrored left to right) to make it seem like the two versions of Colbert are facing each other.  Look at the location of his hair part and his asymmetrical ears (which he referenced in an early episode).  The two Colberts are clearly mirrored images of each other.  Furthermore, at the end of every Formidable Opponent both Colberts turn and face the camera to deliver the last line.  Since both Colberts are looking directly at the camera there must only be one camera.  He is standing in front of a blue/green screen wearing a tie with blue/green stripes.  They add in different tie colors and backdrops for each version of Colbert.--Cspencer 22:55, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Forminadble Opponent 

message: Is Canada still on notice, or no? - RoyBoy 800 06:08, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The entire country was put on notice?  I missed that episode, what was it for?  -Arctic.gnome 06:17, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  On notice? 

message: I moved the two lists from the Recurring Segments subsection to the Running Gags subsection, as it seems to appear more often as a gag than a well-defined segment. I then moved the segments and gags topics under the Show format heading. If anyone feels these were bad switches, go ahead and revert/respond to this post. I also added a small description to the two topics because they wouldn't make any sense to someone not watching the show. Please revise that bit, as the current version is just a hack-up. Nobi 07:46, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  On Notice / Dead to Me / Segments and Gags

message: on the episodes I've seen, the bookshelf seems more like a mantle. I'm not sure if he has more than one
:There is a mantle behind him in the interview set. The painting of a painting hangs above it and there is a flat screen television witha loop of a fire under it. The bookselves are to the left and right sides of the anchor desk (the so called eagle's nest).  On the shelves he has a variety of items that he places there during occasional closing pieces. --waffle iron 06:07, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  bookshelf or mantle? 

message: This article is not "good". Yes, it has every last bit of information humanly known about The Colbert Report. But in fact, it has much of that information multiple times - SIX TIMES it mentions that Cobert hates/is afraid of/includes in the threat down, bears. Six. It includes useless information, such as mentions of segments that they obviously are only doing once, it's cluttered, and it's laid out poorly, with multiple orphaned subsections. It is also longer than the recommended  maximum length. This is NOT a good article; it seems to have been written by someone who snorted 200mg of Adderol. I removed the tag. --CastAStone 08:00, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Tags:Cleanup/Good Article

message: I checked for "truthiness" tonight and noticed it had been deleted after its original creation just after the first episode of the Colbert Report aired. However, now that there are nearly 11,000 instances web-wide via Google search, and it was even profiled as in the Sunday Dec. 25, New York Times "2005: In a Word" article
seeing as the entry was previously deleted, how and when will a "truthiness" entry be reconsidered? Revolute 09:12, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think being named word of the year makes it notable enough for an article.  It certainly helps, and may indicate that it will become more notable, but at this time, I'd vote to delete. Tuf-Kat 08:40, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Time for Truthiness entry?

message: ... I split off most of the "lists" to new miscellania article. I thought it was a necessary but not sufficient step toward getting this article in better shape, though I'm open to further ideas. Comments? I also created a Colbert Report category. - Reaverdrop 18:49, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  To remedy excessive length and need for cleanup... 

message: The listed "References" actually aren't references at all, they're just a separate list of external links that is somehow separate from the External links section.  Either someone needs to go through and make them proper references, referring back up into the text where they are used, or I'm just going to merge them all into External links.  See WP:CITE on how to do proper citations/references.  Thank you.  --Cyde Weys 07:09, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "References" 

message: The following information, moved from The Colbert Report miscellania, should be included somewhere in this article. It doesn't fit anywhere in the miscellania article, and seems significant enough to mention here:
The show's theme music is "Baby Mumbles" (originally titled "Baby Muggles"), recorded by the band Cheap Trick on October 3, 2005. Many fans have noted the similarities between that song and "Dog on Fire", the theme of The Daily Show, due to a similar initial chord structure and use of the same flange effect on the theme when it reprises in the middle of the show.
-Silence 17:51, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Theme song 

message: "Grippy" is already mentioned in The_Colbert_Report_recurring_elements#Taglines_and_catchphrases - how about merging it there instead? That's just the sort of thing the recurring elements page was split off for. - Reaverdrop 20:23, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge "Grippy"? 

message: I've never seen the show, since I no longer watch TV (damned if I let my money go to US cable companies!) However, this lets me criticize this article from the perspective of someone who doesn't know very much about the subject matter. This criticism can be used to improve the article for other Colbert Report virgins. Also, someone please archive the parts of the talk page that no longer have any currency. Clearly, I am too important to do this myself. --RealGrouchy 06:00, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup needed!