Larry King Live

Larry King, this man in the interview business who is often in a bad mood, not only bent forward, but also almost broken forward, wins with the interviewees and loses with them too. The reason? Larry King is obviously not a good interviewer, but an overconfident man who obviously thinks he can handle every topic off the shelf, but is actually not as informed as he thinks. Always with the same sedate and boring way, without tactics or goal in the interview, he speaks to his guests, often without consciously getting anything out of these conversations. If it ever happens, it's out of luck or the open or careless nature of the interviewee. It's not funny either. All in all a show that is not abysmally bad, but seems to be overrated if you look at the end results of the individual episodes and now also the résumé of the entire show.

Post 9/11, I watched Larry King every night. He had a panel of political heavyweights talking about the news everyone was talking about. Over time, however, the show regressed into a mediocre Barbara Walters special with most of the guests being three hundred years old and far out of the spotlight, like Art Linkletter. I agree, King still manages to corner the market on topical guests but his knowledge of the topics is limited at best and as a result the interviews often become trite. Case in point, King recently interviewed the woman Roman Polanski supposedly sexually abused umpteen years ago. Having just seen "The Pianist" and knowing very little about the topic, I tuned in. Larry knew so little about the account (despite having unlimited access to relevant court documents and media accounts) that he basically took every word that woman said as the gospel. C'mon, Larry get with the program. And please, stop asking everyone where they were on 9/11?

As talk-shows go, Larry King Live is not bad, and since he occasionally gets good guests, it's a show to turn on once in awhile, but not compulsively. When Bill Maher, Carl Bernstein, a former president, or other substantive guests sit across from him, it's not too bad. Other times, he tends to host guests involved in the latest celebrity scandal which contributes absolutely no intelligent information to the country and feeds a largely uneducated public that wants to hear the latest gossip about movie and TV stars. During the OJ Simpson trial, it seemed like every other guest on his show was related to the case. But is this really journalism? Or the National Enquirer on the tube? Sometimes, it comes off a little bit like trash television--Jerry Springer in a sit down interview with phone calls instead of a live audience.

On the other side, King's show is definitely much better than Bill O'Reilly whose show is nothing more than a rightest-political platform of the Rush Limbaugh variety. That said, Larry King is not a bad interviewer, but alas, he is not a great one. King does not always come off like he completely comprehends when intellectual material is being presented, especially if it is by a scholar or historian with a new book on subtle aspects of politics. Always seems like the minute King can't quite deal with the issue at hand, that's when he turns to the phone calls, maybe hoping someone out in the country will have a better question than he has. He might interview someone like David Gergen, but may not have read any of his books. Sort of like the movie producer that never bothers to read the script.

When it's an entertainment celebrity, no problem. He can come off like he's thoroughly knowledgeable since the material is not that substantive anyway. Talking to Elizabeth Taylor about her relationship with Richard Burton is not exactly rocket science. And I notice he usually has seen the star's latest movie. Watching a movie takes much less time and contemplation than reading a book. However, if it's the likes of John Dean or Bob Woodward, King comes off a little like he didn't quite finish his homework. So off to the phones.

If you are looking for real in-depth interviewing, Terry Gross of NPR is probably the best interviewer in the United States. She reads and/or researches everything written by or about her guests beforehand and has a working knowledge of those areas. I don't see King quite doing that. Granted, he probably has an audience 1000 times larger than Terry Gross, which may say more about the American audience than King. In short, Larry is better than Bill but not as good as Terry.

I used to watch this show all the time one time he had Ron Popeil on his show to discuss the Showtime Rotisserie and Barbecue. At the beginning of the episode Larry asked Ron to put a chicken in the machine and he wanted to taste the chicken at the end of the show because chickens take about an hour and when he tasted the chicken he said something like This Is The Best Piece Of Chicken You'll Ever Have. And then he asked Ron a question but he interrupted Ron and said I've gotta another piece of chicken and went off for another piece of chicken. Another time he had Bob Barr and Larry Flynt on his show because Bob denied charges of pergniry and condemned Larry for false accusations. Another time he had Brenda Van Dam the mother of Danielle Van Dam on his show and Brenda told Larry how upsetting it was to see David Westerfield kill her daughter they used to end their show with a song they also at times discussed movies.

A very long career . And different guests. The two obvious pieces defining the show and the force of the name of Larry King. But, in essence, you feel be more. In essence, a special form of journalism. Provocative, nuanced, giving to guest the fair position in each edition of the show, proposing the smart way to give soul to the entertainment and to show the other in the right light. Short, unique work, model for many entertainers and great way for define near reality.