I watched it. It all sounded shockingly similar to… a stand-up comedy routine.
The “controversial” stuff didn’t bother me. The Michael Jackson comment was just setting up the next like 10 minutes of material.
The man is telling jokes, people, he’s not running for Jesus.
People tend to have this idea that comedians are exactly the person they present themselves as on stage. This is incorrect. They are playing a character. Sam Kinison and Andrew Dice Clay are not really that guy in real life. Comedians, for the most part, as convincing as they might be, are not actually telling you real stories from their lives. Some comedians are harder to divorce their on-stage persona from the real person, and in most cases that is intentional, but it doesn’t mean they’re not still playing a character.
I haven’t finished watching it. It’s taking me time to get through it because I’m not really finding it funny.
The letters thing didn’t make me laugh once. Not having any insight into interrelationships in LGBTQ factions, I have no idea whether the things he said were accurate, not to mention accurate and also funny.
His comments about Louis CK were just dumb.
His Michael Jackson bit was confusing and bizarre. I can’t tell what exactly he was trying to say.
I loved his last three Netflix specials. This one, I’m not enjoying so far.
I don’t think that’s especially relevant. If someone is making a buck off mocking molested children or transgender people, etc and you’re offended by that, whether or not the guy mocking them is “really” that person doesn’t seem important. The paychecks are all going to the same guy.
And, before anyone makes the comparison, I don’t think it’s equivalent to acting where there’s hopefully some greater narrative purpose in the context of the film. It sounds more like the line right-wing radio hosts use when they get in hot water for going too far – “Hey, it’s all just an act for the radio!”
Yes, but so what? Dave Chapelle’s stage persona may or may not be much like the actual person, but he’s still the guy who wrote the material people are objecting to, and staged it in a way that the “character” saying this material is completely unchallenged in their viewpoints.
Just a friendly reminder that when Dave hosted SNL two years ago…there was a strong sentiment of “Save us Dave!! Help us make sense of a world that no longer makes sense!!”
There were a few really hilarious jokes, a couple of good insights … and a lot of absolute crap.
I liked the “letters” routine, too, although it took me an embarrassingly long time to catch on. His bit about Tony Bourdain and that loser guy he knows was pretty on the nose. Bashing the #MeToo was low, though; it came across as incredibly mean spirited. Ditto the trans jokes.
I thought it was great. The tsk tsking going on in this thread kind of demonstrates his point about what the audience is like nowadays.
EDIT: Actually, I think he may have made that point in the one after Sticks and Stones. It was his impression, and when he asked who it was much of the audience said Trump, Dave said “It’s you!”
Way to miss the point. Audiences have always tantrumed about “shitty jokes” like you’re doing here, that’s fine, that’s the job.
What’s new, and what his point was, is that the easily offended snowflakes now try to destroy careers instead of just not buying tickets to any more shows like a sane person.
It doesn’t demonstrate his point. It just shows that he’s another celebrity whining about being criticized when he says something dumb. He wants the freedom to say whatever he wants, but he resents it when people exercise their freedom to say what they want about what he said.
No, see, that’s very clearly not what his point was at all. You’ve already said that you didn’t understand his Michael Jackson routine; isn’t it possible you didn’t understand this point either?
LHOD arguing about this based on what “he’s heard” as opposed to actually watching the show so he can comment on it intelligently is pretty perfect for this, though.
Calling some rather tame forum posts a “tantrum” makes the issue sound less like audience “victim mentality” and more like martyrdom complex from people who can’t even take mild criticism.
He talked about Michael Jackson and Louis C.K. Which one of those had a career that was destroyed by “snowflakes” for nothing more than telling a bad joke?
Wait, are you saying that we’re trying to destroy Dave Chappelle’s career? Us, here, a couple of Dopers chatting on a message board, giving mixed reviews about a comedian’s routine, we are destroying his career?
Ten years ago the narrative was “Dave is amazing to just walk away from all that money, and we should be worried for his mental health.”…now its “He was a cry baby”?
Also thats pretty disgusting of them to characterize Aziz like that.
Right, just by having an opinion about an act and expressing that opinion we are snowflakes engaged in an oppressive conspiracy to ruin the life of someone merely for exercising es free speech rights. Ironic, huh?