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

Hot - Slunch

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    519

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    7

Posts posted by Hot - Slunch

  5. Posted

    This one was from a while back. I would bet 2010, but can't say for sure.

     

    It's not either of the Christmas episodes... That leaves 12 episodes. I really want to say it was his Bakery For Dogs character and not Ducca, but I'm not 100%. Check out the episode with Bobby Moynihan, and the one with Jon Heder (although that's not the Bakery For Dogs character).

  6. Posted

    Prob best to have the segment kept within Star Trek minutia territory, that way we can hear a heated discussion w/o having to hear some everyman earwolf listener get chewed out for being on the wrong side of the culture wars.

     

    They don't have to get 'chewed out' if they just decline the offer to be on the show... And they've been pretty gentle most of the time. They're not trying to alienate listeners, just get different opinions from which scenes could develop.

    • Like 1

  7. Posted

    I'd say this was the best live stream episode thus far (I watched all of the Sundance shows and both in-studio CBBs). There were no streaming issues, the audio was good, the graphics are getting better, the headset mics are better than those on stands, and the 2 (or 3) camera set up works well.

     

    A+ on the technical stuff, and A+ on the improv. You can't go wrong with a Lennon, Gemberling, Wengert show.

    • Like 4

  8. Posted

    Jesus, a lot of hate on this episode. I'm not a Steve-O fan or anything, but he was just sharing his opinion and talking about his life. That's not a bad thing.

     

    I guarantee he'd never heard the show, hadn't met Kulap or Howard before, and went in like it was just a conversational interview (albeit mainly one sided).

     

    He's clearly a decent guy who's changed his life around.

     

    - About hypocrisy, he admitted that he's done things he's not proud of that are hypocritical.

     

    - About the Osama conspiracy, he has every right to question that. There really isn't proof, other than a bunch of people saying it happened.

     

    I think this is exactly how I feel, honestly. I mean, I'm all for people spilling their deepest feelings and beliefs on shows like WTF or YMIW, but that's not what Who Charted? is about.

     

    Come on. Do you really think Steve-O listens to or will be on a lot of podcasts? There's not a chance in hell he'd seek out an appearance on WTF or something.

    • Like 5

  9. Posted

    I'm on board with the Kobe hate. To the other two commenters, he said nothing irrational. He had examples for every reason he disliked Kobe. That's fine.

     

    1. Kohan was not complaining that Kobe took someone to a dance, he used that as a personality gauge. Someone takes a celebrity instead of their girlfriend to a dance for publicity.

     

    2. He didn't claim Kobe's game was inauthentic, it was his persona. His stupid gerbil 'I'm mad at you' face didn't appear until the Nuggets/Lakers WCF in 2009. He constantly brings up injuries but claims he won't talk about them, which makes his fans act like he's some sort of warrior. His scarves and piano picture is totally legitimate to lambast. That Kurt Thomas interaction is exactly what happens. Kobe hams it up when he's mic'd or a camera is on him, putting on a good guy facade. When the cameras caught him calling a ref a 'fucking faggot', that's his real personality.

     

    3. Kobe's game is inauthentic. He's a mimic and an amalgamation of Jordan and a few other players, that he's consciously emulating.

     

    4. He's not a good leader. A good leader takes the responsibility on himself, he doesn't throw his teammates under the bus after every game.

     

    5. He's dirty. The amount of revenge shots and elbows he throws is absurd. Battier was playing him really well in the playoffs and Kobe maliciously kneed and elbowed him in the head multiple times.

     

    6. His fans are why most people hate him. They overrate him. He's a great player and one of the best, but he's never been the best player in the league. They act like he's a God, when he even had a better player on his damn team for half of his career.

     

    7. Rape trial. Feud with Shaq, and snitching on other players.

     

    8. Arguably carried to rings. Out of his five championships, he was only the clear cut best on the team once (2009). Shaq was unstoppable in the first three-peat, and Pau Gasol was their best player in 2010. Kobe chucked them out of the title in 2004 and 2008 was defended by Ray Allen.

     

    9. His man defense is overrated. He gambles for steals and benefits from having massively dominant big men behind him.

     

    10. The German knee surgery is beyond fishy. I've done a lot of research on it and I wouldn't be surprised if it was banned in a few years. It doesn't just heal an injury, it literally rejuvenates the knee. It rewinds the clock on these guys' knees and gives them an unfair advantage over someone who's aging naturally. It's kind of similar to blood doping which everyone is upset at Lance Armstrong for doing.

     

    Did I mention the rape trial? RAPE TRIAL.

    • Like 2

  10. Posted

    I really respect the UCB and everything it does. There just isn't that kind of institution or support structure around the country.

     

    For example, I started doing stand up back in September, and I have to drive an hour each way just to do 5-10 minutes at a free open mic once a week. The only comedy club shut down because of health code violations, and they didn't even do an open mic for young comedians. There is absolutely no infrastructure for comedy, and virtually no opportunity for performers unless you're in one of the large metropolitan areas. The only chance I've had at a decent sized and attentive audience was at a private function someone set up.

     

    I plan on moving out to LA sometime in the next year and attending classes at UCB... Whether or not improv is my thing, it seems like a beneficial atmosphere for any young performer to be a part of.

  11. Posted

    He said "Japan" in practically all the jokes, and all the punchlines to the jokes had to do with the fact that there was a tsunami in Japan, a tsunami that ruined and ended lives. How isn't that specific enough? Sure he could've changed them to be about New Orleans, but what does that prove other than that he could've mocked a similar tragedy? Whether or not they're funny based on being jokes? I don't understand what you mean. It's not like there was another level to the jokes to evaluate, a flooded Japan was the butt of every single one of the jokes. If I was the big boss at Aflac I would've fired him too honestly.

     

    Would jokes about a flood be okay if it was the Great Mississippi Flood? It 'ruined and ended lives' 80 years ago.

     

    Judging his jokes 'based on being jokes' means take them out of context. If you didn't know about that tsunami, are they funny? I think one was chuckle worthy. They weren't well crafted jokes, just quick twitter jokes.

     

    Unless he had some morality clause in his contract, he shouldn't have been fired for tweeting jokes. You can't be fired from an office job for comments you make on youtube. Most people wouldn't even put the name and voice together if the company didn't make a stink about it. I guarantee it was all about money, they were going to pay out a fuckload of insurance money for the tsunami and figured good press in the States would help them out. It's all business.

  13. Posted

    In my mind what makes comedy offensive or not is the perspective not the subject matter or when it was said. For instance, when Gilbert Gottfried was making jokes about the tsunami in Japan, I thought that was fucked up, because he was making fun of the victims, and I just don't see the merit or humor of sitting at home making light of a tragedy that didn't affect you.

     

    He didn't really make fun of anything specific. All of those tweets could've been changed from Japan to New Orleans and they would've been the same... Whether the jokes were funny or not based on being jokes, that's up to you and your sense of humor.

     

    Regardless of being funny or not, that was blown way out of proportion and not was not worth being fired over. I mean, Aflac fires him, gets headlines, and then went out and hired an impersonator to be the duck. They must've really cared about their character since they hired a cheap imitation! Aflac couldn't give a fuck about the Tsunami, they just wanted to be seen as righteous, grab headlines, and save money by paying a fraction of Gottfried's salary to some other guy.

     

    I don't understand Matt's point when he said "If I was a writer for SNL, I might say 'too soon' [to the sketch]." If "too soon bugs the crap out of [Matt]" and "is dangerous," how can that be said? That doesn't jive with me. Does that mean that, for wider audiences, "too soon" makes sense? I honestly don't understand that. I would like to hear Matt clarify that point.

     

    Even though Matt addressed this I still want to chime in.

     

    SNL thing boils down to two main things in my opinion.

     

    1. The audience. A nationally broadcast, live, network show, with a reputation, can be seen by anyone with a tv. Anybody that happens to go past NBC could see the thing, whether they are comedy fans or not. A lot more people could see it and misinterpret what was being said. That would lead to a lot of negative feedback and loss in revenue for a show that doesn't really push boundaries anymore. A podcast's listeners are going to be hardcore comedy fans, or fans of the performers... Plus the odds are that they share many of the same viewpoints, or would give the benefit of the doubt to someone they're a fan of.

     

    2. It's a lot tougher to express a complex topic in a condensed sketch form, which makes it easier to misinterpret. Doing an improv scene on a podcast where a kid has a gun in a school (I don't even think that was in the Gold Star skit, but I don't remember) is a lot easier to pull off than actually having to SHOW a kid with a gun in a school. It's the audio of someone mentioning they have a gun versus the image of an actor brandishing a gun around. That would vastly change people's opinion and become a lightning rod, whether or not it was in jest. The visual is important. A podcast is in your mind and a skit is in front of your face. Totally different mediums.

     

    ---

     

    Matt, that was really cool information about the Throwing Star Killing Spree skit. Thanks for sharing that. I'd love to see the original cut because the 'toned down' one is still edgier than a sketch show would want to put out right now.

  15. Posted

    I have one bit of constructive criticism for the video version of the podcast. I wasn't thrilled with the closeups, I found it much funnier when the wide angle was showing all of the guests simultaneously... The old phrase, 'comedy lives in the wide shot' springs to mind.

     

    I understand that the mic stands cause a bit of an issue obstructing people and causing shadows, but the wide shot was more interesting to me. That let you see everybody's reactions, how they played off of each other, when they dug each other's joke, etc.

     

    Very cool stuff no matter what. Good episode.

    • Like 5

  16. Posted

    Leonard is the fucking best. Have you heard Roberts do him on Walsh's podcast?

     

    Nah I haven't listened to any Bear Down yet. I'd like to run through it all, but I haven't gotten around to it. Which episodes?

     

    Leonard is hilarious. I love the first episode of UCB with Lunatic and Leonard. "I'm going to play wiffle ball with my friend Tommy. I'm going to be Ken Griffey Jr."

     

    There's still a weird realmedia file of Leonard interviewing people on the street (in what I believe is Chicago) on one of the UCB sites. You can download it and it's like 6 minutes long.

  19. Posted

    I get the feeling IMHO that recent Disney films as well as family films from other film companies are being written with complex morals ( Things are just not simply good or bad anymore ) as a revenge ( or "middle finger" if you will ) to the parents in the audience, so that the little kids get the funny/silly slapstick physical comedy parts and the parents get the message:

     

    I think what you wrote is pretty accurate, but I hate the fact that it's like that now. You don't need multiple moral threads in a movie. Just write a solid story with one main moral. Don't lie, fucking great. Beauty is inside, fucking great. These are kids movies you don't want diametrically opposing themes of over parenting and listening to your parents, because that could easily lead to a kid listening more but the parent saying less. Don't complicate it, just make it entertaining.

     

    Plus, the whole death thing... Bambi's mom or Simba's dad crushed generations of kids, introduced death to youngsters, and kept it at least a bit separated. Newsflash, don't show kids dying to to kids.

    • Like 2

  20. Posted

     

    It shows you didn't watch the movie. The point of that plotline is to show that the plant is somehow going to convert from wood-based pencils to leaf-based pencils. It's crazy, but it's not as bad as you make it out to be.

     

    Well, I admitted not watching the movie... But he's clearly part nature, if not a tree. He's got leaves growing out of him, came from the ground near a garden and tree, and died after his leaves changed colors.

     

    You really think a factory is going to just wholeheartedly adopt a leaf pencil thing? The logistics of that are ridiculous, and they'd be nothing more than a gimmick. No way they'd switch production to just leaf pencils, it would cost too much and they aren't sure anyone would buy them. So yeah, I'm sticking with my original thought even though I may have mislabeled the kid.

  21. Posted

    This is a terrible opinion.

     

    Please, tell me why it deserves such a reputation. Chappelle didn't even stick around for the whole thing, it started the terrible trend of having someone host their own sketch show, most people are only able to recall 3-5 skits, and they got musical guests which cut down on the comedy. There's probably 13-14 minutes of sketch and the rest is host segments and music.

     

    Chappelle's Show can't hold a candle to Python, Mr. Show, Kids in the Hall, SNL, or UCB...

     

    I'm not trying to change anyone's opinion, and I won't argue about it. Just dropped my opinion and that's that.

  24. Posted

    I saw this movie on a plane a few months back. I wasn't even listening to it because I had my ipod, but I watched and hated it. I wish they would've torn it apart a lot more but it's understandable that they didn't, since 2/4 people enjoyed it.

     

    I mean there were genuinely fucked up moments in this movie, like the dodgeball scene... There was horrendous parenting and just terrible people populating this world. Maybe these people shouldn't have kids if they are that awful? They really needed a practice, magical kid to learn how to not be assholes?

     

    What the hell was going on with the kid saving the factory? Dude, you came from a tree and you're actively supporting deforestation to make pencils.

     

    I'm all for the original ideas and weirdness, but it just felt imbalanced. It got dark while trying to keep a fairy tale facade. I've forgotten most of it, but I did not enjoy a second of it.

    • Like 2
×