rdriley

@Jeff and the rest ... I don't think the Earwolf "brand" has suffered, even a little bit, over this kerfuffle. I certainly don't think less of anyone involved because of it, not Scott or Jeff or Besser or Belknap or Dave. Shit happens. The internet reacts. Angrily. Always. That's what the internet does. Complaints will always outnumber compliments, because most people only feel motivated to expend the time and energy to respond to something when their expectations aren't met. . Hell, it's not even like the internet invented this. I worked in newspapers for almost 20 years, and 90 percent of the letters to the editor were just angry screeds about how terrible we all were at our jobs. Of course, print media is damn near dead now, so maybe we all were terrible ... . I don't feel like anything is fundamentally broken here. The vast majority are still listening and still enjoying, because we recognize that even the greatest entertainment isn't always perfect. I won't stop watching "Curb Your Enthusiasm" just because Larry has an off-week. So, some people got mad and yelled at the internet. Must be Wednesday.

@Jeff and the rest ... I don't think the Earwolf "brand" has suffered, even a little bit, over this kerfuffle. I certainly don't think less of anyone involved because of it, not Scott or Jeff or Besser or Belknap or Dave. Shit happens. The internet reacts. Angrily. Always. That's what the internet does. Complaints will always outnumber compliments, because most people only feel motivated to expend the time and energy to respond to something when their expectations aren't met. . Hell, it's not even like the internet invented this. I worked in newspapers for almost 20 years, and 90 percent of the letters to the editor were just angry screeds about how terrible we all were at our jobs. Of course, print media is damn near dead now, so maybe we all were terrible ... . I don't feel like anything is fundamentally broken here. The vast majority are still listening and still enjoying, because we recognize that even the greatest entertainment isn't always perfect. I won't stop watching "Curb Your Enthusiasm" just because Larry has an off-week. So, some people got mad and yelled at the internet. Must be Wednesday.

@Chester - Well, I think you're wrong. I laughed four or five times during LHR's two minute bit. I laughed five or six times during LDDC.'s five minutes. I laughed once or twice at TL. . But, of course, you're not wrong. "Funny" is subjective. It is probably the most subjective thing humans experience. There are a damn lot of people who think Dane Cook is "funny." I don't know that I've ever laughed at a Dane Cook bit. There are a shit-ton of people who think "Napoleon Dynamite" is a terrible, unfunny mess. I laughed my ass off in the theater watching that movie. . Which is why a lot of people are so ticked off about this. A lot of people posting here didn't find this TL submission "funny." And, if the fine folks at Earwolf are honest about it, neither did the judges, as many people have already pointed out. . And so, for me, I'd like to see the challenges actually matter more. I'd like some objective criteria laid out that judges can take into consideration. I'd like LHR to be rewarded for taking on really difficult tasks two weeks in a row and absolutely crushing them. Whether you found their Nick Thune bit or this week's sketch "funny" is subjective. The fact that they were wildly creative and super-professional and produced solid bits under ridiculous circumstances is NOT subjective.

@Chester - Well, I think you're wrong. I laughed four or five times during LHR's two minute bit. I laughed five or six times during LDDC.'s five minutes. I laughed once or twice at TL. . But, of course, you're not wrong. "Funny" is subjective. It is probably the most subjective thing humans experience. There are a damn lot of people who think Dane Cook is "funny." I don't know that I've ever laughed at a Dane Cook bit. There are a shit-ton of people who think "Napoleon Dynamite" is a terrible, unfunny mess. I laughed my ass off in the theater watching that movie. . Which is why a lot of people are so ticked off about this. A lot of people posting here didn't find this TL submission "funny." And, if the fine folks at Earwolf are honest about it, neither did the judges, as many people have already pointed out. . And so, for me, I'd like to see the challenges actually matter more. I'd like some objective criteria laid out that judges can take into consideration. I'd like LHR to be rewarded for taking on really difficult tasks two weeks in a row and absolutely crushing them. Whether you found their Nick Thune bit or this week's sketch "funny" is subjective. The fact that they were wildly creative and super-professional and produced solid bits under ridiculous circumstances is NOT subjective.

Wow. Things have really gotten harsh since I last checked in. Plenty of hating on Besser ... guess I opened the floodgates on that one. Except I was only joking. Some of you folks are REALLY pissed. . So, I'm not real happy with the turn things are taking this week, either, but let me be a voice in the wilderness for a moment. "Walking The Room" and "Never Not Funny" are both top-notch podcasts. WTR is actually a lot like LDDC, with less Aussie accents and more swearing. And hobotangs. And NNF ... well, there's a reason that the same people you love on "Comedy Bang Bang" show up just as frequently on NNF. Because it's goddamned fantastic. Matt Belknap is great. Dave Anthony is great. They are terrible fucking judges on this challenge, for some reason, but it's not because they're terrible people. , So, to wrap it up, yes, there are some serious problems emerging as we near the end and look back on the season as a whole, but there's really no reason to be all super-angry and intensely personal about it. Nothing like this has ever been done before. There were bound to be issues and problems, but at the end of the day, the experience has resulted in increased exposure for all the podcasts, and I don't think any of them are going to be unhappy that they participated. I could be wrong, since there's a level of increased work and a lot of stress involved, but I don't think so.

Wow. Things have really gotten harsh since I last checked in. Plenty of hating on Besser ... guess I opened the floodgates on that one. Except I was only joking. Some of you folks are REALLY pissed. . So, I'm not real happy with the turn things are taking this week, either, but let me be a voice in the wilderness for a moment. "Walking The Room" and "Never Not Funny" are both top-notch podcasts. WTR is actually a lot like LDDC, with less Aussie accents and more swearing. And hobotangs. And NNF ... well, there's a reason that the same people you love on "Comedy Bang Bang" show up just as frequently on NNF. Because it's goddamned fantastic. Matt Belknap is great. Dave Anthony is great. They are terrible fucking judges on this challenge, for some reason, but it's not because they're terrible people. , So, to wrap it up, yes, there are some serious problems emerging as we near the end and look back on the season as a whole, but there's really no reason to be all super-angry and intensely personal about it. Nothing like this has ever been done before. There were bound to be issues and problems, but at the end of the day, the experience has resulted in increased exposure for all the podcasts, and I don't think any of them are going to be unhappy that they participated. I could be wrong, since there's a level of increased work and a lot of stress involved, but I don't think so.

I love Dave and Matt Belknap, but boy did I hate them as judges this week. Leaving aside entirely issues like whether this challenge even made any sense, I think LHR just got crapped on for all the wrong reasons. As KC pointed out, LHR did more with their time than either of the other two shows. LDDC and TL just sat down, turned on the mikes, and talked for five minutes. Nitpicking about the "robot voice" and whether it was funny or "meta" that they referenced "Borat" is just pointless. They wrote, performed and produced a freaking sketch in 30 minutes! It wasn't the greatest sketch of all time, but it was a hell of a lot more inventive and funny than Elizabeth and Andy rehashing a couple of old-ass stories about losing their virginity. . I like TL. I subscribe and listen to the podcast. But I thought that submission was just lazy and pointless. If the point of this challenge (and I could be wrong here, because it sure seems like no one knows what the point of this challenge really was) was to see how creative and nimble the podcasters could be when faced with a crisis, then LHR was a clear winner. . But, as was made pretty damned obvious by the judges' reactions, LHR is going to be the loser this week. Which is a damned shame. I don't know whether to blame the judges, or the format of the stupid challenge itself, or maybe I'll just blame Besser. No one's hated on Besser in a while. He probably misses it.

I love Dave and Matt Belknap, but boy did I hate them as judges this week. Leaving aside entirely issues like whether this challenge even made any sense, I think LHR just got crapped on for all the wrong reasons. As KC pointed out, LHR did more with their time than either of the other two shows. LDDC and TL just sat down, turned on the mikes, and talked for five minutes. Nitpicking about the "robot voice" and whether it was funny or "meta" that they referenced "Borat" is just pointless. They wrote, performed and produced a freaking sketch in 30 minutes! It wasn't the greatest sketch of all time, but it was a hell of a lot more inventive and funny than Elizabeth and Andy rehashing a couple of old-ass stories about losing their virginity. . I like TL. I subscribe and listen to the podcast. But I thought that submission was just lazy and pointless. If the point of this challenge (and I could be wrong here, because it sure seems like no one knows what the point of this challenge really was) was to see how creative and nimble the podcasters could be when faced with a crisis, then LHR was a clear winner. . But, as was made pretty damned obvious by the judges' reactions, LHR is going to be the loser this week. Which is a damned shame. I don't know whether to blame the judges, or the format of the stupid challenge itself, or maybe I'll just blame Besser. No one's hated on Besser in a while. He probably misses it.

Jimmy Pardo is a dream wrapped in a miracle topped with awesome sauce. I pay gladly to have that goodness delivered every week. Also, cool people still say "awesome sauce," right?

Jimmy Pardo is a dream wrapped in a miracle topped with awesome sauce. I pay gladly to have that goodness delivered every week. Also, cool people still say "awesome sauce," right?

I wish, instead of listening to three fake coaching sessions, they'd spent their time with the podcasters on this episode by letting us hear the actual reveal that Zach's not showing up. Maybe we'll hear that part tomorrow?

I wish, instead of listening to three fake coaching sessions, they'd spent their time with the podcasters on this episode by letting us hear the actual reveal that Zach's not showing up. Maybe we'll hear that part tomorrow?

Too bad for F+ ... I guess I can understand why some people like the podcast, but from the beginning, I just couldn't get into it. As some fans said yesterday, it may be easier to keep up and differentiate among all the different voices and nicknames and all that if you listen regularly. Having said that, there's a pretty high barrier to entry there that honestly keeps me out. It was made even more difficult for me to get into because of the audio quality. That weird, warbly "Skype-ness" makes it even harder to tell who's talking, and makes the inevitable "overtalking" all the more confusing. They did have a great attitude the whole time, and I have to say I really did appreciate all the work they did for the challenge. . TL better step it up and soon. The Dum Dums are really killing the "chat with guest" category right now, and TL would be hard-pressed to beat them one-on-one if it came down to that. . Bob and Dan are almost certain to be eliminated next week, unless they really kill the challenge. I personally love those guys, and they're one of two challenge entrants that I've added to my regular podcast rotation. I can understand why they're not for everyone, though. That rapid-fire pop culture reference and riff action could be a turn-off to people who don't share the same sensibilities. . Finally, I just love Jordan Morris. He was a great judge, bringing the funny but also being thoughtful and working through the notes and ideas for each contestant. He needs his own podcast, right now. Get rid of that dead Jesse weight, Jordan! Fly! Be free!

I guess I must be in on the fix, too, because I correctly picked the bottom three and said the Fort would be eliminated in my comment on yesterday's episode. Clearly, I had advance knowledge of the outcome. I'm not sure exactly HOW I'm in on it, since I live in flyover country and have never even seen any of these people, let alone met clandestinely with them. It could be that Jeff is such an evil mastermind that he's built some kind of mind-ray into the new Earwolf studios and has taken over my brain. . Also, I have to agree with Cliff that without these unique challenges, things would get boring really quickly. Plus, more than one of the contestants has said that the challenges have given them new ideas for ways to improve/liven up their podcasts.

Have to give a nod of appreciation to the F+ for producing a sketch that was consistent, sounded professional and just worked, even if it wasn't the funniest bit of the day. Given their past problems, and the fact that they never do sketches, they really stepped up to the challenge. . Too bad for Totally Laime. Swing and a miss. For me, they're in the bottom 3 with Bob and Dan and The Fort. But, because Laime never does sketches, I think they should be safe. Bob and Dan were actually not that bad, I just liked the other three more. But, damn ... The Fort is a sketch show, and I thought their entry just stunk. I would honestly be shocked if The Fort isn't eliminated tomorrow.

Oh, crap ... whois lookup for earwolf.com Registrant: Cyberdyne Systems Los Angeles, California 90026 United States Registered through: Network Solutions Domain Name: EARWOLF.COM Created on: 28-Apr-10 Expires on: 28-Apr-16 Last Updated on: 31-May-11 Administrative Contact: Myles Bennett Dyson (mdyson@cyberdyne.com) Cyberdyne Systems Los Angeles, California 90026 United States

Whatever else I've learned from this discussion, I now have a new "greatest music video" contender to think about. I especially like the cameo from Andy Dick in the blue robe. And the hot dogs.

Caroline, you make an interesting point that I hadn't thought of. It takes the discussion in a sort of more philosophical direction than I'd been considering, but that may be just the thing I'm missing. I don't think I've completely changed my mind on the matter, but I'm certainly more ambivalent about it than I was before. On a contrary note, let me ask this: You mention how you hate "musicians writing songs about being musicians," and I get that. But ... is it possible for such a thing to work, if only it's done right? I'm thinking, right off the top of my head, about "Lose Yourself," by Eminem, which I think most people would agree is a pretty fantastic song. (I say "most" knowing that there is a 99.95 percent chance that someone will post within about 10 minutes that they hate that song.)

I'm on board with 99 percent of that Matt had to say about the use of post-modernism and meta sketches. The one thing that kinda bugs me is the idea that you can't make fun of something unless it's something you're good at. If you make that a criteria for comedy, you're pretty much eliminating every subject that exists. To say that you can't make fun of bad improv or bad sketch comedy unless you have done good improv or written a good sketch seems to me to be the same as saying you can't make fun of bad musicians or stupid marketing campaigns unless you're a good musician or the creator of a smart marketing campaign. Like producer Frank, I think it comes down to making it funny. Lord knows we've all seen and heard a lot of lazy, crappy riffs on bad music and stupid commercials. But I don't think these are ever bad because the comic/writer in question isn't good at music or marketing. And crappy riffs on bad improv and sketch aren't bad because the comic/writer doesn't do good improv or sketch work.

I actually kind of love the fact that Matt and the producers and judges are feeling out the parameters of each challenge on the fly. The podcast challenge is certainly a unique set-up, and by its very nature, it's going to encounter problematic issues. Having those issues discussed and out in the open is absolutely the best way to deal with them, I think.