Jump to content
🔒 The Earwolf Forums are closed Read more... ×

Mike Q.

Members
  • Content count

    63
  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never

Everything posted by Mike Q.

  1. In terms of the 3 1/2 minute content challenge, it's clear that LHR knocked it out of the park, but I guess I'm a little concerned how that energy is sustained over a full show. Admittedly I haven't listened to one of their full shows, so I will do that this week. . Obviously one of the advantages of the "gabfests" is that listening to conversations is much more natural; the listener doesn't have to work to get the conceit of a sketch - to pick up on the game, as Matt would say. The disadvantage is that, with a loose, unwritten structure, the strength of a chat podcast would stand on the host's ability to carry and direct the conversation. I think that was what the judges noted as the weakness of Totally Laime's submission. Personality and charm go a long way, as evidenced by Bob & Dan, LDDC, and TL all making the final five, but what's going to separate the top podcast is the ability to hold the listener's attention, find the interesting thread that arises from the conversation, and steer the conversation towards that on the fly. Not sure who does that the best out of the 3 chat shows left. . I think the F+ kicks the bucket this week. Almost every week, it's remarked that they have an intriguing premise, but, with a couple of exceptions, the content has never been as good as their concept. Part of the problem is that they have so many participants that it's often hard to discern individual voices, often devolving to a a chaotic talking over one another. I think when there are so many personalities at play, the show's voice/direction gets lost. A lot of times the F Plussers seem content to make each other laugh; they have such a shorthand and know each other so well, which is enjoyable to hear, but they often fail to make sure the audience is in on it as well. And I wish they would riff off of the reading material more, not just laugh at sheer incredulity at the weirdness they find. Maybe if they started sharing personal anecdotes (e.g. "oh this guy wants to go back to wetting the bed as an adult... well, I wet the bed until I was 12" - now expound on that).
  2. Mike Q.

    "Boing" - Lame or Laime

    @Adam, For what my two cents are worth (given today's exchange rates), I think the radio static works well in your show, given that your podcast's name is Left Handed Radio. It may be a too-often used crutch, but I think you guys use it in a proper context. . I listen to TLP regularly, and part of the charm of the show is that it has a warm, homey feel for a podcast that has some famous comedians coming through. It feels like eavesdropping on a chat between friends. It doesn't feel overproduced, and so the audio drops that Elizabeth uses are definitely more of a gag. Often there's a lag between a punchline and the sound effect, as you practically hear Elizabeth frantically search for the right button. Sometimes you even hear the volume indicator as she turns the audio up or down. Some people might think it's lame, even or especially because it's meant to be (Matt Besser himself said he would stay away from intentionally bad as a comedy tool), but I think it contributes to the charm of the show.
  3. @Rutabaga - I thought part of the sketch challenge was for the contestants to show their writing ability. Since sketch differs from improv by virtue of being written (among other things), I thought it was important that each podcast write and perform their own material. Granted, I did like F+'s ability to incorporate their original show conceit within the sketch challenge, but I understand JW's point, which is one that Seth brought up as a judge, that perhaps the F+ could have done more original writing while still using the Yahoo! Answers setup. . Let me give a real world example: At the LA UCB, Casey Wilson, June Diane Raphael and friends do a staged reading/reenactment of scenes from the Real Housewives reality shows. I'm sure they have to write an intro, perhaps transitonal interstitials, or other pre-written stuff, but for the most part, they're taking pre-existing material and performing them in order to spotlight its ridiculousness, much like the F+ does with internet miscellany they find. That doesn't necessarily make it a sketch show - nor does it make it any less funny. Point being, can it be a sketch if you're just reading internet comments? I think F+ skirted that line, but it was a good submission regardless. Who knows, maybe they DID write all the questions and answers and just presented it in their style, and we're arguing a moot point. That would be even more impressive I think.
  4. I was a little trepidatious of this week's sketch challenge but I was mostly impressed with the results. . The F+ was probably the most surprising for me. They usually have problems with audio/production and establishing clear voices, but those weaknesses were shored up this week. I did agree that there should have been more original writing; the Yahoo! Answers premise was great but probably should have been used more as jumping off point to show off their own writing chops. . Bob & Dan Cast - Nice, tight sketch with a specific, interesting premise. More a "heh" chuckle-inducer than a guffaw-sidesplitter, but well-done nonetheless. Only downside was the dialogue was a little muffled/unclear at times. . Totally Laime - oof. I'm really fond of this podcast but this challenge was their worst misstep in the competition thus far. I want to excuse their submission because it's just not what they do, but everybody's saddled with the same challenge and even the other non-sketch podcasts did better, I'm sorry to say. Though sounding cute as ever, Elizabeth sounded like a nervous inexperienced performer, which is weird considering she's done comedy shows and has even done voice work. Also, their production quality was not up to everybody else's standards, which shouldn't be a problem consider "Psychic" Andy's day job is a music producer. Lastly, using the sketch time for an additional intro was a bit off-putting, the transition wasn't smooth. I think instead of a verbal "well here's the sketch!" I think, as cliched as it may be, they could've used an audio drop (harps or whatever) to signal, here's a fantasy sequence/sketch that jumps off of the conversation we were just having. . Left-Handed Radio - deservingly lauded for their submission. This is the first time I've actually thought their stuff was really funny, so it's great timing to prove themselves during the sketch challenge. From premise to writing to performance to production, they nailed it this week. . The Fort - for a sketch show, they just did not show their chops. Delivery was flat, premise was interesting but ultimately went nowhere, writing was not that funny to me. It just didn't hit for me. . LDDC - the dreaded meta sketch! I'm glad we had at least one this week after Matt's hemming and hawing about it. Unfortunately it did not disprove Matt's fears, because I just didn't think it was that funny. However, as with most other commenters except Bucho and his Aussie resentment, I still enjoyed the performance because Tommy and Karl are so likable and have such an easygoing rapport. . I think The Fort, LDDC, and TLP are bottom three. LDDC should be safe. Now, how to judge the loser properly? Does past performance have any weight with the weekly dismissal? The Fort hasn't been strong in any challenge, whereas Totally Laime previously were riding high. Should the fact that The Fort regularly incorporates sketches into their show be a mark against them because they still submitted a bad one? Should TLP's poor performance be mitigated by the fact that their podcast has no sketch component? I hope Totally Laime survives to move on, no offense to The Fort boys.
  5. But... what if I wrote a parodical song making fun of crappy comedy, while at the same time being crappy music? . . . Boom; nailed it, methinks.
  6. @Caroline - Huzzah! I knew years of painstakingly-crafted internet commentary would some day be acknowledged for the genius that it is. I'm calling Mother to tell her to unbox all the answering machine tapes full of my early recorded work. Volume 1: 1994-1999 is on its way to Earwolf Manor as we speak.
  7. I bet one of the submissions is a sketch about Matt getting angry about meta sketches, then throwing a chair, with F+ then reading and making fun of one of our forum posts.
  8. Mike Q.

    What would your entry theme song be?

    Jay-Z's "Big Pimpin'" - I actually had my softball team choose at-bat songs that we played off of an ipod boombox whenever we went up to bat. The novelty only lasted a couple of games because we quickly got too lazy to cue up each song properly.
  9. @Jeff Ullrich, Please know that most of us appreciate the fact that not only do you guys put out show after show of great content for free, but also take the time to interact with us on these forums. It is amazingly generous and inclusive. . The fact that a competition podcast arouses such passionate responses is awesome, but not surprising. People will have their favorites, obviously, but people will also have opinions on how the competition is run. We as an audience can only give input based on what we hear and read, but I'm sure there are a lot of other considerations behind the scenes, some of which Jeff, Matt, Caroline, et al. have pointed out. I think we are just excited to participate and perhaps improve this new and wonderful show. Frankly, most of us know nothing about podcasting, but audience reaction can be helpful in illuminating possible areas of improvement the producers may not have thought of because they are too close to the product. It just goes to show that we care. Too much at times. So much that it hurts. (Not really that dramatically. . Anyway, thanks, and keep it up! Looking forward to the rest of the season.
  10. @Swirly Bear: Matt wrote in a previous post that he's taking a Socratic approach to hosting, so even when he knows an answer, he frames a question for the guest judges or the podcasts (during coaching) in such a way that the responses may be more illuminating even for him. It's an interesting stance, because I think most listeners were expecting a more didactic "this is how it is, I know the rules, I will set them out clearly" approach. Coming from the world of improv, I think Matt may be trying for a more collaborative, "let's find our way together" style of hosting, which as your response shows, can sometimes rub listeners the wrong way.
  11. I can only surmise that Totally Laime chose that clip because an innocuous question about sleeping in the nude led to several amusing tangents, culminating in the balls/divorce story. I think they were trying to show that their hook of "asking the least important questions" can yield funny and surprising results, but I agree with most opinions on here that this wasn't Elizabeth and Psychic Andy at their best. . As far as "fit" with Earwolf, I think Totally Laime's lack of a hook beyond "chat show" with guests that come from the same comedy circles that populate other Earwolf shows may be both an advantage and impediment. Tonally they fit right in, but does Earwolf need more of the same, or do they want to branch out in newer directions as with the sketch shows? I personally have become a fan of both TLP and LDDC because, as one of the judges pointed out, listening to their easy, comfortable (and often funny) conversations makes me want to "hang out" with them more, whereas I can't say the same for Left-Handed Radio or The Fort, whose sketch presentations have been more hit-and-miss. The F+ has a unique premise out of the remaining contestants, but their execution (not to mention their sound quality) has been iffy. TV Zombies seems to have the least thematic and comedic fit with Earwolf, so I wouldn't be surprised if they get cut soon.
  12. __It's too late for this season, but I think the competition would be better served with two permanent judges and a rotating 3rd guest judge. I enjoy hearing the input of guest judges who are also experienced podcasters, and I can see the attraction of bringing in as many diverse pov's as possible. However, as @robstraws pointed out above, there would be a benefit to looking at the competition overall and how the contestants have progressed week to week. __In terms of the actual competition, I assume the judges are eliminating a podcast solely on that week's submission, but in terms of overall feedback and constructive criticism, I think having a second permanent judge would really help all the contestants in improving their podcasts.
  13. --I am really enjoying this competition and podcast, because as I suspect with most of you who've bothered to post on here, I get really nerdy and obsessive with the pop culture entertainment that I enjoy. --What I think is fun from a comedy nerdery perspective is that podcasting is such a relatively new art form that rules and conventions have really yet to be codified. In some instances Matt & Co. are doing it before our very ears, e.g. when judges had that discussion over "well what IS a recurring segment?" This makes for interesting listening to those of us who crave the inside-baseball aspect of this competition. --At the same time, the lack of consensus on podcasting concepts can make for a confusing rubric on which to judge the contestants. I think there's definitely a learning curve not just for the competition contestants, but for the Earwolf team of producers who are creating the framework for this competition for the very first time.
×