Jump to content

Live! with Kelly and Michael


  • Please log in to reply

20125 replies to this topic

#18481

pennben

pennben

    Fanatic

Posted Feb 7, 2013 @ 6:30 AM

Don't know why this show has not yet been obliterated.


Good ratings.
  • 0

#18482

ByaNose

ByaNose

    Fanatic

Posted Feb 7, 2013 @ 9:46 AM

Apparently, the good ratings are true & this show (and, Kelly's lifestyle) are going to be around a long time:

http://tvbythenumber...-season/168148/
  • 0

#18483

Kodiboku

Kodiboku

    Fanatic

Posted Feb 7, 2013 @ 11:56 AM

They want or need to keep their kids' lives to what they know and are used to I guess.


Isn't that part of the point when you choose guardians? Your children will already be losing so much, so you want to ensure their lives remain the same as much as possible. In Kelly and Mark's case, they chose someone so that their children would continue to live in the same building, and presumably attend the same schools. Keep things as familiar as possible. It would be terrible to have children - after losing their parents - to have to lose their home, their neighbourhood, their school, their friends, everything.


I agree with you.
  • 0

#18484

oldandbrown

oldandbrown

    Video Archivist

Posted Feb 7, 2013 @ 12:56 PM

I am also not surprised that Kelly and Mark who have young siblings go can raise their children picked another rich celebrity.


A good family attorney or family therapist will strongly suggest that you do not name a family member as a guardian. Following the loss of parents children need family members to remain that: family members and not guardians. When tough times arise for children, it most helpful to have supportive grandparents and aunts and uncles in addition to guardians.
  • 1

#18485

andyllina

andyllina

    Couch Potato

Posted Feb 7, 2013 @ 1:32 PM

I am also not surprised that Kelly and Mark who have young siblings go can raise their children picked another rich celebrity.

I have no opinion one way or the other about who Kelly chooses to be guardians of her children. I find it odd that she felt the need to share what is essentially a private matter/decision with her audience.
  • 1

#18486

sunnysyde

sunnysyde

    Video Archivist

Posted Feb 7, 2013 @ 2:44 PM

I don't think that the Randolfs live in Kelly's building, so no matter what, they will need to be out of their home. And if they do live in Kelly's building, are they going to follow them everytime they move because they are possible guardians?

I also don't see the logic of worrying about physical space over who would be the best to care for your child. No matter what, Kelly's kids would be multi-millionares, and heaven forbid, if they needed a guardian, that money would go with them. My brother picked his brother in law and sister in law, since they were a stable married couple, and they also were family. I can understand not picking a relative out of town, but I would pick my sister over some friend and his family.

Whatever the reason Kelly and Mark chose the Randolfs, I think it was a very weird time to announce this to the audience and to Michael. First of all, it's very personal and no one's business. Second, it came at a time when Michael was talking about something else, like his charity, and how the Randolfs did something very nice to help his charity during the SuperBowl.

Kelly had to interrupt and barely let Michael get his story out, and IMO it seemed like she acted like a little child who had to prove she was better friends with Michael's friend.
  • 2

#18487

finnzup

finnzup

    Couch Potato

Posted Feb 7, 2013 @ 4:58 PM

Whatever the reason Kelly and Mark chose the Randolfs, I think it was a very weird time to announce this to the audience and to Michael. First of all, it's very personal and no one's business. Second, it came at a time when Michael was talking about something else, like his charity, and how the Randolfs did something very nice to help his charity during the SuperBowl.


That's my point as well. I could give a flying fig who these two twits chose for their kids' guardians. I'm speaking for myself when I say that although I have some very dear friends, they would never even be on the radar of someone I would entrust my kids' lives with. No offense against any of them, but family is family and family is who is listed in my Will.

With that said, it was her timing and the fact that she shared that very personal decision. She's a camera-hogging nitwit that has to make everything about her. She does it all day, everyday and I guess as long as Michael keeps pulling in the big bucks, it will make no nevermind to him.

Today's nipple talk was not quite as off-putting as her pole dance yesterday, but she really cannot get her pea-brain out of the gutter.

As far as their high ratings, they may be at a 2.7/2.8 and I'm sure they're very pleased with that but when you look at the history of Live! when it was in it's heyday with Reege and KL....those 2.8's would've been disastrous! They were in the 3.9 territory and no one could touch them.

Guess it's all relative, but 20 years ago, a 2.7 would've meant pink slips for everyone! lol
  • 0

#18488

junemeatcleaver

junemeatcleaver

    Fanatic

Posted Feb 7, 2013 @ 6:54 PM

As far as their high ratings, they may be at a 2.7/2.8 and I'm sure they're very pleased with that but when you look at the history of Live! when it was in it's heyday with Reege and KL....those 2.8's would've been disastrous! They were in the 3.9 territory and no one could touch them.

Guess it's all relative, but 20 years ago, a 2.7 would've meant pink slips for everyone!


There are a lot more options, including ten thousand more daytime talk shows, than there were 20 years ago during Kathie Lee and Regis's heyday. Unless your show is called Judge Judy, no show is going to come close to the ratings that daytime shows were getting during the old Live days. It's impossible to compare the ratings from 1995 to 2013's because the TV landscape has completely changed.

Edited by junemeatcleaver, Feb 7, 2013 @ 6:58 PM.

  • 2

#18489

goldnpuppy

goldnpuppy

    Couch Potato

Posted Feb 7, 2013 @ 8:02 PM

Actually, 20 years ago there was actually many talk shows with big ratings. It was the era of Jenny Jones, Jerry Springer, and many trashy talk shows. At that time Live was very different from the top rated shows. Right now, many news shows have just extended their shows to past the 9am hour, but there are not as many crazy shows. So sad that Live used to be the show that rose above trash and showed us NY, and great conversation, and many tried to copy tis show.
Now I feel line I'm watching two oversexed middle aged people trying to appear young and cool, while they hang on each other and read ridiculous clippings, and then conduct horrid interviewed..
  • 0

#18490

junemeatcleaver

junemeatcleaver

    Fanatic

Posted Feb 7, 2013 @ 8:30 PM

Actually, 20 years ago there was actually many talk shows with big ratings.


But there weren't 500 cable channels, high speed Internet, DVR and other distractions back then either. No daytime show, besides one or two exceptions, is ever going to get blockbuster ratings like they did in the 1980s and 90s again. Things are different now, period. Why watch Live! live every day when you can go to their site or YouTube page to check out host chat or the interviews you missed?

Edited by junemeatcleaver, Feb 7, 2013 @ 8:31 PM.

  • 1

#18491

gambrelli

gambrelli

    Loyal Viewer

Posted Feb 7, 2013 @ 8:48 PM

I'd just like to know what IS appealing about this show?

The host chat is abysmal and relies mostly on newspaper items that the producers have dug up.

The humor, if you could call it that, is juvenile and sleazy and very rarely based on any kind of wit or intelligence.

The interviews are crap and instead of finding out more about the guests - we find out how Kelly can make every interview about herself and as another commenter mentioned here Kelly uses the show as her personal networking opportunity to further her own self-interest through excessive and fake flattery.

This show was once original. Host chat was original.....an entirely original concept in the show's beginning days. Regis's idea to base conversation on daily life's real and natural moments.

Now this show just blatantly copies other shows - and there is very little that is real or natural or truthful in it. It's all hyped up OhMyGoshes ....trumped up phony enthusiasm....and feigned interest in guests. Still it continues to arrogantly bleat every morning that it is the Emmy Award winning 'Live'.


But it isn't.

Completely false advertising. This is a whole other show.....and it's not the name written on that Emmy Award.

Edited by gambrelli, Feb 7, 2013 @ 9:14 PM.

  • 6

#18492

High Tea

High Tea

    Couch Potato

Posted Feb 7, 2013 @ 9:25 PM

What was that stupid comment KellMe made today about going up the stairs? She has her life back or something like that. Sorry the twenty million you get for sitting there like an idiot wasn't enough to fulfill you KellMe.

I'd just like to know what IS appealing about this show?

The host chat is abysmal and relies mostly on newspaper items that the producers have dug up.

The humor, if you could call it that, is juvenile and sleazy and very rarely based on any kind of wit or intelligence.

The interviews are crap and instead of finding out more about the guests - we find out how Kelly can make every interview about herself and as another commenter mentioned here Kelly uses the show as her personal networking opportunity to further her own self-interest through excessive and fake flattery.

This show was once original. Host chat was original.....an entirely original concept in the show's beginning days. Regis's idea to base conversation on daily life's real and natural moments.

Now this show just blatantly copies other shows - and there is very little that is real or natural or truthful in it. It's all hyped up OhMyGoshes ....trumped up phony enthusiasm....and feigned interest in guests. Still it continues to arrogantly bleat every morning that it is the Emmy Award winning 'Live'.


But it isn't.

Completely false advertising. This is a whole other show.....and it's not the name written on that Emmy Award.


I clicked it off today as soon as she started with her stupid ass speech about going up the stairs. I'm wondering if those free vacations keep this crap fest going, because I agree...it's one miserable, unoriginal hour of nothingness.
  • 1

#18493

CathyB55

CathyB55

    Video Archivist

Posted Feb 7, 2013 @ 10:25 PM

Just saw Kelly in an ad for Colgate toothpaste. And she worries how she is going to put her children through college. Isn't the 20 million she makes on live enough or is it just plain greed. There she was grinning holding a tube of toothpaste with her commercially whitened chicklet teeth. What a phony.
  • 0

#18494

CathyB55

CathyB55

    Video Archivist

Posted Feb 7, 2013 @ 10:25 PM

Just saw Kelly in an ad for Colgate toothpaste. And she worries how she is going to put her children through college. Isn't the 20 million she makes on live enough or is it just plain greed. There she was grinning holding a tube of toothpaste with her commercially whitened chicklet teeth. What a phony.
  • 0

#18495

King Cat Sam

King Cat Sam

    Fanatic

Posted Feb 7, 2013 @ 10:36 PM

Did Kelly say how long it took her to do the stairs of the Empire State building ? I'm curious how long it took her.
  • 0

#18496

braggtastic

braggtastic

    Stalker

Posted Feb 7, 2013 @ 10:39 PM

Pat Kiernan tweeted it took him 21 minutes & change and Kelly 18 minutes & change
  • 0

#18497

maggie010

maggie010

    Fanatic

Posted Feb 7, 2013 @ 11:07 PM

I am confused - it took Kelly 18 minutes and change and according to Michael the first celebrity to win?

Yet Natalie Morales did it in 17 minutes and change (17.5) and wasn't included in the top 5 finalists?
  • 0

#18498

goldnpuppy

goldnpuppy

    Couch Potato

Posted Feb 8, 2013 @ 5:11 AM

I am confused - it took Kelly 18 minutes and change and according to Michael the first celebrity to win?

Yet Natalie Morales did it in 17 minutes and change (17.5) and wasn't included in the top 5 finalists?


Looks like Kelly isn't the only one who lies or exaggerates stories at Live. Runners World reported that Ripa was 6th, not 5th. Natalie was first place of the media runners. Ripa was second, placing a her in 6th place overall. There also were two other woman - not in he media who were in the top 5 besides Natalie who all were ahead of Kelly. I don't get why they would leave out Natalie and pretend there was only 1 other woman who was in the top 5, besides Kelly, who actually placed 6th. Do they think they exist in a bubble and people can't see the real results? Then again, they also kept lie going that Kelly never ate a chicken wing when there are pictures of her with one in her mouth that she ate on Live!
  • 0

#18499

itsmejessica

itsmejessica

    Fanatic

Posted Feb 8, 2013 @ 5:41 AM

I'd just like to know what IS appealing about this show?

The host chat is abysmal and relies mostly on newspaper items that the producers have dug up.

The humor, if you could call it that, is juvenile and sleazy and very rarely based on any kind of wit or intelligence.

The interviews are crap and instead of finding out more about the guests - we find out how Kelly can make every interview about herself and as another commenter mentioned here Kelly uses the show as her personal networking opportunity to further her own self-interest through excessive and fake flattery.

This show was once original. Host chat was original.....an entirely original concept in the show's beginning days. Regis's idea to base conversation on daily life's real and natural moments.

Now this show just blatantly copies other shows - and there is very little that is real or natural or truthful in it. It's all hyped up OhMyGoshes ....trumped up phony enthusiasm....and feigned interest in guests. Still it continues to arrogantly bleat every morning that it is the Emmy Award winning 'Live'.


But it isn't.

Completely false advertising. This is a whole other show.....and it's not the name written on that Emmy Award.

I might be the wrong person to reply to this. I don't watch as much as I used to. Just kind busy and my dvr is full all the time. When I finally get a chance to sit and watch shows I like I have other shows that get top priority. Not that I hate Kelly or think she is evil or a lying liar who lies about every thing. Just have limited tv time. When I do watch I still like the show. It's just fluff to me I don't make it more than that. So I guess like I said not really the right person to answer but I did anyway;).
I think the people who hate,sorry dislike Kelly and might agree with all those things you said and still watch the show everyday and her online segment are the ones who might be able to answer. I don't agree with those things but hey we all like diffrent things. If I found the show as dreadful as you describe I too would wonder what was the appeal,and why people tuned in to watch?

Edited by itsmejessica, Feb 8, 2013 @ 6:01 AM.

  • 1

#18500

fl2dc

fl2dc

    Fanatic

Posted Feb 8, 2013 @ 6:25 AM

I'm assuming Natalie was not mentioned because she's on the "competing" morning TV show (and they are loyal to GMA). I assumed she was the one woman that was ahead of Kelly in the top 5, that Michael mentioned. I don't think there is any conspiracy or lying going on here.
  • 1

#18501

finnzup

finnzup

    Couch Potato

Posted Feb 8, 2013 @ 6:32 AM

I don't think there is any conspiracy or lying going on here.


As I'm remembering the conversation, I thought Michael mentioned that Kellmee was 5th in media and said something else then Kellmee mentioned something about "oh, so they were all men" or words to that effect but the implication was that she was the first woman in the media that crossed the finish line.

The implication was there, imo.

Good job Natalie!
  • 0

#18502

Kodiboku

Kodiboku

    Fanatic

Posted Feb 8, 2013 @ 7:28 AM

17-18 minutes...sounds great to me. Congrats to all of them.

I just wonder how she had so much trouble(according to her) a couple of days ago doing only 3 flights when she took the kids' to the doctor's. She really is superwoman. LOL.
  • 1

#18503

Cementhead

Cementhead

    Couch Potato

Posted Feb 8, 2013 @ 8:02 AM

Just saw Kelly in an ad for Colgate toothpaste. And she worries how she is going to put her children through college. Isn't the 20 million she makes on live enough or is it just plain greed. There she was grinning holding a tube of toothpaste with her commercially whitened chicklet teeth. What a phony.


Phony is right! Doesn't she have veneers? As in, NOT even real teeth?
  • 1

#18504

junemeatcleaver

junemeatcleaver

    Fanatic

Posted Feb 8, 2013 @ 9:34 AM

When I do watch I still like the show. It's just fluff to me I don't make it more than that.


When I tune in, the show is just fun, mindless fluff to me. I know what to expect from Live, and when I'm in the mood for it, I watch.
  • 2

#18505

gambrelli

gambrelli

    Loyal Viewer

Posted Feb 8, 2013 @ 11:54 AM

You see, that's the whole point, this show used to be one of those rare shows that took the "fun mindless fluff" of the day and made great and interesting conversation of it....often witty and funny with a unique NY take.....and rooted in the truth of everyday life. Now it really is just brainless, mindless crap of no interest and with no original NY take.....but with a definite sleazy and highly juvenile tone.

To each his own, I guess.

Edited by gambrelli, Feb 8, 2013 @ 11:55 AM.

  • 1

#18506

junemeatcleaver

junemeatcleaver

    Fanatic

Posted Feb 8, 2013 @ 12:09 PM

.often witty and funny with a unique NY take.....and rooted in the truth of everyday life. Now it really is just brainless, mindless crap of no interest and with no original NY take.


I don't tune into Live for NY stuff (if you called talking about the same 3 restaurants and hanging out with ones geriatric friends an "interesting NY take"), I tune in because I find it enjoyable on occasion. I'm sure there are local NY shows that still talk about the NYC metropolitan area happenings.

I know Live can be stupid, I know Kelly can be annoying at times, but I don't care. The show, and the hosts, are there to provide harmless, mindless fun bullshit, and I like that at times.

Edited by junemeatcleaver, Feb 8, 2013 @ 12:10 PM.

  • 2

#18507

King Cat Sam

King Cat Sam

    Fanatic

Posted Feb 8, 2013 @ 12:23 PM

17-18 minutes...sounds great to me. Congrats to all of them.

I just wonder how she had so much trouble(according to her) a couple of days ago doing only 3 flights when she took the kids' to the doctor's. She really is superwoman. LOL.


I heard NBCToday host Natalie Morales say that it was very difficult. Especially, the lung power, as she stated her lungs were aching for such a long time after the event. I think Natalie competes in marathons but probably not used to that type of short bursts of training.
  • 0

#18508

braggtastic

braggtastic

    Stalker

Posted Feb 8, 2013 @ 12:32 PM

Also Pat Kiernan said the air in the stairwell was really stale and grimy.
  • 0

#18509

High Tea

High Tea

    Couch Potato

Posted Feb 8, 2013 @ 1:27 PM

There was a clip of the show on something and it was KellMe talking about dress code at The Grammy's. Of course she had to blurt out "gentials". Isn't is sad when a grown woman and mother of three gets off on blurtng out a word like "genitals" as though she's a fourteen year old boy who likes to talk dirty. I don't think it's too much for viewers to at least expect a host who is capable of being witty, interviewing guests and sharing interesting stories and experiences. Yet ABC allows this idiot to convulse and gyrate her way to her high chair day after day where she offers nothing more than goofy faces, hand waving, potty talk, sexual gestures and stories that sound more like they come from a young girl with lots of insecurity. I would rather pay for my own vacation than sit through her crap every day to win a trip. No way.
  • 1

#18510

CathyB55

CathyB55

    Video Archivist

Posted Feb 8, 2013 @ 2:37 PM

I found that Regis's stories about NYC, the restaurants and as you call them JuneM.Cleaver his geriatric friends very interesting. His stories were colorful and funny. Regis is well respected in the entertainment community not only by his "geriatric" friends but also by very noted actors and entertainers.
Kelly on the other hand drools all over NPH, Anderson Cooper and of course Andy Cohen. She would like to be best friends with Snookie and Madonna and SJP. After she talked about how much food SJP (as Kelly refers to her) consumes maybe SJP won't want to be friends.
She needs to get rid of whoever put that bun on the back of her head and the person who is putting her in those short skirts that look like she is in a Catholic school uniform.
  • 2