Cindy Sheehan’s cross country shooting spree had a little humor to it. So out of 25ish forced laugh tracks, there’s one with merit.
It’s worth noting again that the Daily Show is first and foremost not a satire of politics, but a satire of the MEDIA. I don’t think the producers of this show get that, and it seems like a lot of other people don’t get that. Many of the best bits of the daily show have nothing at all to do with politics, but rather just pure absurdist genius, like when Stephen Colbert tried to pitch his idea of delivering chocolate cake through the internet to a bunch of investors as part of his The Jobbing of America segment. A huge portion of the funniest clips are not of politicians saying stupid things, but of PUNDITS and REPORTERS saying stupid things.
I think Apos is right that the Daily Show is a satire of the media. But I don’t know whether this new show was intended to be that or not. Maybe it was intended to mock leftist politics. I still question the premise that it’s a Daily Show knockoff. I also agree that the cast is weak, but that takes time to work itself out sometimes.
True, indeed. In my unscientific recall, CNN and MSNBC (especially CNN, especially Wolf Blitzer) get bashed about evenly with Fox, which is not what you would expect from a show with a political focus.
I think also that the Daily Show will tend to bash media figures that they feel “ought to know better”.
The clip the other day with Lou Dobbs’ sidelong chiding of Blitzer for the wall-to-wall Anna Nicole Smith coverage, coming back to Blitzer standing lamely in front of the big board with four huge Anna Nicole tabloid shots on it, was priceless. And the contribution of the TDS writing staff? Basically nothing.
Any guesses as to when they’ll get Dennis Miller on to do his own regular segment?
-Joe
[QUOTE=DoctorJ]
What did the gay penguins do to you?
[/QUOTE]
I don’t often talk about it but . . . ever see Deliverance? It’s even worse when you’re getting your faced shoved in the snow . . .
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton]
I don’t often talk about it but . . . ever see Deliverance? It’s even worse when you’re getting your faced shoved in the snow . . .
[/QUOTE]
Squeeal like a puffin! Squeeeeal like a puffin!
[QUOTE=Dead Badger]
Don’t believe me? Check out the front page of the Onion. It’s got a story gently mocking a gay man, one mocking Hillary Clinton, and one taking the piss out of student activism. Hey, look at this; a spoof magazine cover with Barack Obama - clearly stolen from HHNH back in October last year. Oh hey, and Oprah for good measure. And of course there’s a whole bunch of stories about Bush too, but you know what the real connection is? They chose stuff they thought was funny, and wrote about it. They didn’t think “who do we want to offend” and work from there, because that’s sheer hackery.
But then, nobody finds the Onion funny, right?
[/QUOTE]
Spot on. The articles I laugh the hardest at in the Onion tend to be the ones sending up the liberals. Real comedy can get a laugh out of anything, from anyone, with 360 degrees of ox-goring going on.
Well, anyone except a stick-up-the-ass curmudgeon who’s decided beforehand that his/her idea of what’s properly funny is the only proper definition.
[QUOTE=stolichnaya]
The clip the other day with Lou Dobbs’ sidelong chiding of Blitzer for the wall-to-wall Anna Nicole Smith coverage, coming back to Blitzer standing lamely in front of the big board with four huge Anna Nicole tabloid shots on it, was priceless. And the contribution of the TDS writing staff? Basically nothing.
[/QUOTE]
nitpick: Wasn’t that Cafferty, not Dobbs?
A review from a blog whose entire purpose is to mock leftists:
[QUOTE=DUmmie FUnnies]
This marks a DUmmie FUnnies first. I am actually agreeing with the basic premise of a leftwing loon… I now have to agree with the loony Cesca in his assessment of the new Fox News “comedy” show that he correctly panned in this HUffington Post THREAD titled, “Step Away From The Jokes, Fox News, Before You Hurt Yourself.” It flat out STINKS. I mean it is sooooo bad that I am now suspecting that the writers are liberals deliberately trying to sabotage that show. Should you think I am exaggerating, take a look at this VIDEO clip of the show. One can only conclude that the writers are either purposely undermining the show or are so lacking in comedic talent that they need to be terminated faster than Amanda Marcotte was removed from the John Edwards campaign…
[/QUOTE]
Boy, Ann Coulter sure can act, can’t she? I mean, when she comes in and says “Mr. President” it just SELLS the scene: I TOTALLY buy that she’s the Vice-President!
[QUOTE=Apos]
nitpick: Wasn’t that Cafferty, not Dobbs?
[/QUOTE]
Nope- it was Dobbs - although I wasn’t completely sure so I had to look it up.
Everything is on the internet these days.
I was surprised to discover that The Half Hour News Hour was created by Joel Surnow, co-creator of 24. Perhaps in the next season, Jack Bauer realizes the president is doing a heck of a job after all and decides not to interfere with his war on terror.
[QUOTE=Steve MB]
A review from a blog whose entire purpose is to mock leftists:
[/QUOTE]
Interesting. That is a rather compelling refutation of my hypothesis. I stand corrected.
So, spewing random shit doesn’t exactly equate to philosophy?
-Joe
[QUOTE=Merijeek]
So, spewing random shit doesn’t exactly equate to philosophy?
-Joe
[/QUOTE]
Only in the Logorrheac School (hypothesized to have developed when some early Stoics got a dose of ergot poisoning).
[QUOTE=Cervaise]
That was an edited-in clip of The Daily Show. Didn’t just look like the same set, it was the same set. Very weird …
[/QUOTE]
Is it? I put it on pause and looked at some images on Google.. I can’t really tell. (though it does cut off VERY abruptly.. so maybe it is..)
There was something in the clip that made me smile a little bit. But now I don’t remember what it was. The laugh track was weird. The female anchor was really weird.
On the other hand, I’ve seen worse.
[QUOTE=Liberal]
Interesting. That is a rather compelling refutation of my hypothesis. I stand corrected.
[/QUOTE]
What, the “hypothesis” whereby you unreasonably asserted that liberals won’t find right-wing humour funny, and thereby fallaciously reasoned that if liberals dislike something right-wing, it must be funny?
Yeah, now that looks foolish.
[QUOTE=Dead Badger]
What, the “hypothesis” whereby you unreasonably asserted that liberals won’t find right-wing humour funny, and thereby fallaciously reasoned that if liberals dislike something right-wing, it must be funny?
[/QUOTE]
Yes, that one. Also the one whereby I unreasonably assumed that leftists are gracious, and thereby fallaciously reasoned that they would appreciate an admission of error.