You're right. I recently saw Jon Stewart interview Harrison Ford on "The Daily Show," and the first thing he said was, "This show is beneath you." And Harrison Ford said, "Yeah, I know." And Stewart came back with such a great "yes, and" response, and suddenly the two of them had created this joke together.

Jon Stewart is really good at that. That phrase you used, "yes, and"? It's funny, because Wil Wheaton, my sidekick, that's something he's always saying. That's why he and I -- if I can say, with complete modesty -- that's why we do well together, because we come from improv backgrounds and we're always yes-anding each other. While it's fun to get in a good dig or a good line every now and then, it's all about elevating it to that level of surprise.

Wil is great because he's ready to take the fall if necessary.

It's a tough line, though, because while it's great to be self-deprecating, the audience looks to you, the host, to know how to feel about stuff. If you make it OK for them to laugh at you, that's great, but if you get to the point where you're berating yourself ... There are so many hosts who come out on their first night of having a show and the first thing they say is, "Do you believe they gave me a show?" That's when I'm thinking, "If you don't believe you're any good, why should we?" That's that irony thing. It would be so different if somebody came out on their first night, and just behaved as if they'd been doing this for years.

That's interesting, because the first few times I saw your show, I had this feeling of, "Is this irony? Is there a trick here?" You're in a bad position because if you say, "Oh Jesus, I'm just a loser!" people are gonna look around and go, "Yeah, there are no cameras here! You are a loser!" I remember feeling like, "Uh oh, this better go well." And then, when things really did go well, it was a higher high than you'd get if you weren't as invested.

It's a tough balance. One of the things I learned from improv is that you always have to state the obvious. A lot of the best humor comes from saying something that the audience is thinking. If something is tanking, you have to acknowledge it in some way, because everyone knows what's going on. If it gets to the point of "I wish I were dead, I wish I were dead!" -- that's bad. If you're uncomfortable, they're gonna be uncomfortable. So it's a thin line. There are times when I feel like the audience is kind of rooting for me, just because it is so silly.

Even though we do want the show to be on TV, right now we state the obvious, we do bits where we make fun of ourselves. So if we go via satellite to somebody, it's not going to be on TV via satellite, it's going to be through a window in the theater, but we pretend like we're talking to someone a million miles away.

That stuff is fun.

I think there are still ways to do that kind of thing on TV, but the point is, the audience is smart enough to recognize what's going on, so you have to say, "I know you're seeing what you're seeing, I'm seeing it as well. Here's how we're gonna make it OK."

To walk that line must take a lot of energy.

I can remember after one bit we did that just went on long or didn't go as well as I thought it would, I just said cheerfully, "Well, there's a bit we'll be seeing again and again and again! Coming up next ..." You've got to let them know that we know it didn't go well, but we're gonna have fun with it.

Did you ever go to a play in a theater and some prop had fallen on the floor from the scene before? You're gonna keep staring at it until it's gone. If somebody finds a way to justify picking up that prop and making it work in their scene, the audience goes crazy. It's so simple, but it's some acknowledgment that we're all having the same experience. Which, in a very primal way, is what theater is about, or what entertainment is about at its base level.

It's interesting, though, because the fun doesn't really start until you cover the bread-and-butter stuff. You can't cut straight to weird, random interactions and expect them to have any weight. Tom Green has that problem.

I agree. I mean, I'm not here to slam a fellow artist. I don't want to shoot spitballs from the sidelines. I mean, who the hell am I to say something?

Well, you're doing it, and doing it well, without the benefit of a big staff and a lot of financial resources. But like you, one thing Green has going for him is that audiences seem to like him a lot, and they want him to do well.

God knows I would not want to be judged by my first few shows. My observation is that Tom Green seems to ask questions well enough, but he doesn't have much reaction to the answers. I mean, you can get those answers from a magazine. What makes it entertaining is: What's your reaction gonna be? You've got to speak for the audience. That's my favorite part. That's where moments of -- knock on wood -- wit come out. That's what makes it entertaining. Because this isn't "Inside the Actor's Studio" or some kind of seminar, this is supposed to be an entertaining show. It's more than just: Here's some information that will answer your question.

It seems like Green is really preoccupied with the pace of the show, keeping things rolling.

I didn't get a sense of what he was bringing to the party, other than the sensibility of his skits. As far as the interview, as far as the meat of the talk show, I didn't get a sense of what he was bringing. He has that gross-out, vulgar stuff, which is fine. It's not my style, but the crowd reaction was good.

He does the man-on-the-street stuff.

That's one of the things I hated about his other show.

Really? I think some of the stuff works, particularly when he's messing with his parents.

I think that gets old. It's outrageous, but personally, it's not the kind of entertainment that I'm a big fan of. It's not a snobbery thing, it's just not my cup of tea.

I think it's strange to see him interviewing people. In some cases it seems like he's completely out of control of the interview. As a host, how do you stay in control of what's going on?

A lot of it is letting go of control. I've found that the times when things are the most uncomfortable are when a guest is going off on something and I get mad because I'm so proud of myself that I had a good question or because I had done research and found out some interesting facts. So a lot of times it's a matter of letting them take control. Once we had this band Save Ferris on, and it was getting so rowdy that I actually jumped off the stage and sat in the audience and watched them for a few minutes.

That's pretty bold.

It's different, just to see what happens. If somebody is going on and on with a long story, you've just got to use it. But it's bad when guests take control and they're not doing any better than they would if I were still involved. With my show, I don't have a producer off-camera showing me how many minutes are left or giving me a "wrap it up" sign or the band striking up. It's just a matter of knowing when to let go and when to rein it in.

You should probably get someone to pretend they're a producer.

We used to take pretend commercial breaks. The lights would go dim, and I'd pretend to talk to the guests and take a drink out of a flask, that kind of stuff. We've also done man-on-the-street stuff. Steve Allen is the guy who really invented that. It's fun to do those. But I don't do mean, really.

Recent Stories