Jon Stewart, Director?

It was announced yesterday that Jon Stewart, current host of "The Daily Show," is planning to direct his first feature film, "Rosewater." It will dramatize the arrest and detention of reporter Maziar Bahari by Iranian authorities in 2009 after Bahari participated in a "Daily Show" sketch. This means that Stewart will be taking some time off from the "Daily Show," about twelve weeks over the summer. British correspondent John Oliver will be filling in for him as host.

First gut reaction is, good for Stewart. An actor making the jump to directing is nothing new, but Jon Stewart is part of the late night comedy crowd, where these kind of extracurricular projects are much rarer. Having chosen subject matter that is clearly near and dear to his heart, I hope his directorial debut turns out well. "Rosewater" sounds like it has a lot of potential as a feature, and Stewart has been such an insightful and valuable voice in the political sphere, I'd love to see if that can translate to this kind of straight dramatic project. And it's always exciting to see any artist breaking out of whatever little box they've been pigeonholed in. Sure, Jon Stewart has worn many hats during his career and reinvented himself a few times already, but after over a decade at "The Daily Show," maybe it's time for him to remind us that late night satire isn't all he can do.

Of course the second gut reaction is the panic. Oh god, oh god, what if this movie is successful and he wants to do more of them? What if he's really successful and decides to quit "The Daily Show" entirely to become the next Terrence Malick? Can "The Daily Show" survive without him? I concluded in a previous post that the media landscape would be much poorer if Jon Stewart even decided to become a real political pundit or politician, because we would lose his vital outsider perspective. No one else has ever come close to replicating what he does, though former "Daily Show" correspondent Stephen Colbert found his own absurdist angle on political commentary with "The Colbert Report." "The Daily Show" without Jon Stewart is difficult to get my head around, and getting through future election brouhaha and political scandals without the "The Daily Show" is not an appealing thought.

Then again, "The Daily Show" should be able to go on without Stewart, and maybe it's time they started looking into a succession plan, and get the audience used to another guy behind the fake news anchor's desk. I mean, "The Daily Show" existed prior to John Stewart, originally hosted by Craig Kilborn, who set up a lot of the show's format that we often take for granted. I like John Oliver a lot, and even though I wouldn't choose him as a permanent replacement, the prospect of three months of a John Oliver hosted "Daily Show" during the off season sounds okay. I'd still watch, the same way I did when Colbert occasionally filled in for Stewart, before he left for his own show. In fact there have been several correspondents and contributors over the years who could have fit the bill, like Steve Carrell, Ed Helms, John Hodgman, Lewis Black, and Larry Wilmore. Samantha Bee and Jason Jones together would make a fantastic hosting team.

You know, I think a summer break is going to be a good thing for everybody. Stewart can go expand his horizons and stretch some creative muscles, and we'll see how Oliver handles himself as a host. And if he doesn't work out, then they can give someone else a shot the next time Stewart wants to make a movie or write a book or just take a long vacation. Stewart has indicated many times in interviews over the years that he's deeply invested in his work at "The Daily Show," so the chances of him running off to make prestige pics without his house in order is very unlikely. So, I can stop panicking and start wondering about Jon Stewart's filmmaking chops. Was Paul Thomas Anderson's recent appearance on the show so Stewart could grill him for advice?

And finally, of course, there's the Hollywood angle. How is everyone going to react to Jon Stewart, director? Well, considering the kind of small budget, small-scale, and at least partially foreign-language drama that he's making, he's probably not going to make too big of a splash unless his film is exceptionally good (or exceptionally bad, but let's try to stay optimistic). I'm not so sure marketing "Rosewood" based on his name would be all that helpful either, since Stewart's reputation is as a funnyman first. Oh, it'll certainly attract attention, but I highly doubt that most of Stewart's regular "Daily Show" audience would turn out to see it. "Rosewood" will most likely end up being another little specialty release, or picked up by one of the premium cable channels.

And that's perfectly fine for someone just testing the waters and is not giving up his day job. Not yet, anyway.
---