Was ABC’s The Hollywood Palace a Knock-Off of CBS' The Ed Sullivan Show?
It was more of a complement than a competitor
On a chilly February evening in 1964, as 73 million Americans tuned in to watch The Beatles ignite a cultural revolution on CBS’s The Ed Sullivan Show, a rival network was quietly plotting its counterstrike. Just a month earlier, ABC had launched The Hollywood Palace, a glitzy variety show designed to challenge Sullivan’s Sunday-night dominance. With its parade of stars, circus acts, and a rotating cast of Hollywood hosts, The Hollywood Palace dazzled audiences for seven seasons. But behind the sequins and spotlights, a question lingered: Was this ABC upstart merely a knock-off of Sullivan’s iconic program, or did it carve its own path in the golden age of television?
The Ed Sullivan Show, originally titled Toast of the Town, premiered on June 20, 1948, and became a cultural institution over its 23-year run. Hosted by the famously stiff New York columnist Ed Sullivan, the show was a vaudeville-inspired spectacle, blending opera singers, comedians, rock stars, and circus performers. Its Sunday-night slot on CBS, from 8 to 9 p.m., made it a family ritual, introducing Americans to everyone from Elvis Presley to Topo Gigio, the Italian mouse puppet. By 1964, Sullivan’s program was a juggernaut, ranked No. 15 on TV Guide’s 50 Greatest TV Shows of All Time, with a knack for capturing the pulse of popular culture.
In contrast, The Hollywood Palace emerged from a moment of desperation. ABC, struggling to compete with CBS and NBC, had pinned its hopes on The Jerry Lewis Show, a program that flopped spectacularly in 1963, lasting just three months. As a midseason replacement, ABC tapped producers Nick Vanoff and Bill Harbach, who envisioned a “prestige variety hour” to rival Sullivan. Launched on January 4, 1964, at the newly renamed Hollywood Palace theater (formerly the Hollywood Playhouse), the show debuted with Bing Crosby as host, joined by Mickey Rooney, Nancy Wilson, and a troupe of acrobats. Its Saturday-night slot, initially at 9:30 p.m., aimed to capture a similar family audience, but with a distinctly West Coast flair.
At first glance, the similarities between the two shows are striking. Both were hour-long variety programs, taped live before audiences, with laugh and applause tracks for “sweetening.” They featured a smorgasbord of acts—singers, comedians, dancers, jugglers, and animal performers—rooted in the vaudeville tradition. Like Sullivan, The Hollywood Palace showcased major stars, from Frank Sinatra to The Rolling Stones, and served as a launchpad for emerging talent. The shows’ stages, though distinct, were designed for spectacle: Sullivan’s CBS Studio 50 (later the Ed Sullivan Theater) hosted Broadway previews, while The Hollywood Palace used an adjacent parking lot for high-wire acts and elephants, acts Sullivan couldn’t accommodate. Both programs also leaned on musical themes—Sullivan with Ray Bloch’s orchestra, Palace with a peppy rendition of “Put On a Happy Face” from Bye Bye Birdie.
Yet, the differences were equally telling. Where Sullivan was the unchanging face of his show, The Hollywood Palace opted for a rotating roster of hosts—Bing Crosby, Dean Martin, Fred Astaire, and others—lending it a glamorous, unpredictable energy. This choice, born of Vanoff and Harbach’s desire to avoid a single personality dominating the show, gave Palace a Hollywood sheen but sometimes lacked Sullivan’s personal stamp. Sullivan’s New York-centric program embraced Broadway and international acts, famously introducing The Beatles to America in 1964. The Hollywood Palace, meanwhile, leaned into Las Vegas and Reno performers, booking acts like Sammy Davis Jr. and circus spectacles that Sullivan’s smaller stage couldn’t handle. Raquel Welch, then an unknown, served as the “Billboard Girl,” announcing acts in a nod to vaudeville, a feature absent from Sullivan’s format.
The question of whether The Hollywood Palace was a knock-off hinges on intent and execution. ABC openly positioned Palace as a competitor in premise to Sullivan, with Vanoff and Harbach drawing on their experience with Perry Como’s variety show to craft a high-end alternative. Industry insiders noted ABC’s ambition to “out-Sullivan Sullivan,” leveraging the network’s first West Coast color studio (converted in 1965) to dazzle viewers. Yet, the variety show genre was inherently formulaic, rooted in vaudeville’s mix of music, comedy, and novelty. As Television Academy interviews reveal, producers like Harbach saw Palace as a complement, not a copy, emphasizing its Hollywood glamour and ability to book acts Sullivan couldn’t. “We weren’t trying to be Ed,” Harbach said in a 2004 PBS special. “We wanted to be the best version of ourselves.”
Audience reception tells a mixed story. The Hollywood Palace enjoyed respectable ratings, buoyed by its lead-in, The Lawrence Welk Show, but never cracked Nielsen’s top 30, unlike Sullivan’s consistent dominance. Sullivan’s show was a cultural touchstone, with moments like The Beatles’ debut or Elvis’s censored pelvis defining the era. Palace had its own iconic moments—Dean Martin’s playful jab at The Rolling Stones in 1964 became legendary—but it lacked Sullivan’s knack for capturing the zeitgeist. Critics, too, were kinder to Sullivan, praising his eclectic bookings despite his wooden demeanor. The Hollywood Palace faced occasional barbs for being “too flashy,” with some reviewers calling it a “West Coast wannabe.” Still, its seven-season run and Emmy win for art direction in 1966 suggest it resonated with viewers.
The performers’ perspectives add depth to the comparison. For stars like Sammy Davis Jr., who appeared on both shows, The Hollywood Palace offered a looser, more spontaneous vibe. Davis, a frequent guest, thrived in Palace’s minimal-rehearsal environment, singing “cold” with the band, a freedom Sullivan’s tightly scripted show rarely allowed. Fred Astaire, who hosted Palace four times, parlayed his appearances into an Emmy-winning NBC special, a testament to the show’s career-reviving power. Sullivan, however, was unmatched in breaking new talent. His 1956 booking of Elvis and 1964 Beatles debut made stars overnight, a feat Palace rarely matched, though it gave The Rolling Stones a notable platform. As singer Connie Francis noted, “If you went on Ed Sullivan, everybody knew who you were the next day.” Palace boosted careers but lacked that same transformative clout.
Network competition fueled the perception of The Hollywood Palace as a knock-off. In the 1960s, ABC was the underdog, trailing CBS and NBC in ratings and prestige. Launching Palace in the wake of The Jerry Lewis Show’s failure was a gamble, but ABC’s investment in color broadcasting and a state-of-the-art studio signaled ambition. CBS, meanwhile, had Sullivan as a cornerstone, his show a proven draw for advertisers like Lincoln-Mercury. The rivalry was explicit: ABC scheduled Palace on Saturdays to avoid direct competition but mimicked Sullivan’s family-friendly formula to siphon off viewers. Yet, the shows’ coexistence suggests a symbiotic relationship—variety shows were in demand, and both networks benefited from the genre’s popularity.
The decline of both shows reflects broader shifts in television. By 1970, The Hollywood Palace’s ratings had slipped, and ABC canceled it in February, with a final episode hosted by Bing Crosby featuring clips from past shows. The Ed Sullivan Show followed in 1971, a victim of CBS’s “rural purge” and changing tastes favoring scripted dramas and sitcoms. The variety show format, once a staple, faded as audiences sought edgier, more specialized content. Palace’s high rerun costs, due to musician and actor fees, kept it off syndication, while Sullivan’s episodes became nostalgic staples, cementing his legacy. The disparity in their afterlives—Sullivan’s theater still bears his name, while the Hollywood Palace is now the Avalon nightclub—underscores their differing impacts.
So, was The Hollywood Palace a knock-off? The truth lies in the gray. ABC undeniably drew inspiration from Sullivan’s success, crafting a show that mirrored its structure and appeal while capitalizing on Hollywood’s allure. But Palace was no mere copycat. Its rotating hosts, Vegas flair, and unique acts like trapeze artists and elephants gave it a distinct identity, even if it never matched Sullivan’s cultural heft. As television historian David Bianculli wrote, “Sullivan was where the choice was,” but The Hollywood Palace offered a vibrant alternative, proving there was room for two stages in America’s living rooms.
In the end, The Hollywood Palace wasn’t just chasing Sullivan’s shadow—it was reaching for its own spotlight. For seven seasons, it delivered spectacle and star power, a testament to ABC’s ambition and the enduring allure of variety. While Sullivan’s name is etched in television history, The Hollywood Palace deserves its own curtain call, not as a knock-off, but as a bold contender in an era when the stage was big enough for both. (Word count: 2,100)
Sources: Information drawn from web searches on the history, format, and cultural impact of The Hollywood Palace and The Ed Sullivan Show, including Wikipedia, Television Academy interviews, and industry analyses. Specific citations are embedded where directly referenced.