Yeah, it’s like what jokes exactly have they killed…? Because you can still tell those jokes, it’s just that you probably won’t like the kind of audience it attracts.
Honestly, to me that seems to be evidence that they were never good but just lucky.
They never understood how to play with expectations or culture. How to shock people with the absurd nature of reality. They never understood comedy. They just happened to say stuff that people liked. Maybe because they were famous? And just as fame makes you pretty, it makes you funny?
I don’t know but clearly they never understood their craft. Pure luck got them away.
The irony here is that your comment seems to suggest that you don’t understand comedy. Comedy is not about “saying funny stuff”, it’s the ability to say anything and make it funny, it takes skill, and above all, it especially requires them to “understand expectations and culture”.
Why do people always find it necessary to undermine the success of someone just because you don’t like something they did? It’s perfectly possible, even likely, that these people who are good at something also have flaws. Are you so surprised by that that you suddenly feel the need to question everything they’ve ever done?
Seinfeld became successful because he was good at comedy, Seinfeld is right that a small vocal woke minority has a negative impact on the profession, and yes a 40 year old dating a 17 year old is questionable. These things can all coexist without coming up with some outlandish theory just to convince yourself that the world is not a complex environment that you can’t wrap your head around.
The irony is that you agree with me that they need to understand expectations and culture while dismissing my point about the lack of understanding the culture and expectations, because otherwise they wouldn’t need to complain about struggling with the expectations and culture of today. You can claim that it is a small minority that creates the issue but if they are actually impacted by the minority than that minority might be the minority of people who used to like their stuff.
There is a “minority” of people that don’t like my posts here. I am not complaining about it. Because it isn’t affecting me and why is that? Because they aren’t my customers. Comedians have the same situation, if the minority aren’t their customers, they have no reason to care, but they do because it is their customers.
So in essence, you agree with the fact that you need to understand expectations and culture for comedy, and I am saying through the fact that they complain about culture, shows that they don’t understand their job and got lucky that they happen to be in tune with the culture of the past because they wouldn’t know how to fit in that culture if they aren’t in it already anyway.
because otherwise they wouldn’t need to complain about struggling with the expectations and culture of today
You only make this ridiculous notion because you happen to agree with the side being argued against. “Don’t complain, everything changes” is something you utter until it is something that *you *disagree with, unless you’re suggesting that you’d be making the same statements about rampant racism and bigotry. It’s OK Russia, go ahead and ban homosexuality, it’s just the expectations and culture of our times!
Comedy has always been about issues in society, and it has long been a platform for free speech with very little boundaries, and it is exactly for that reason that many comedians and people in the media in general highlight the fact that the attempt to make their profession offence-free is problematic.
Comedians have the same situation, if the minority aren’t their customers, they have no reason to care, but they do because it is their customers.
You’re contradicting yourself. On one hand you’re arguing that it’s the current expectations and culture, but at the same time you’re saying it is the minority. The problem is that this vocal minority has such an effect because everyone with an internet connection these days has the ability to ruin someone’s career because they feel offended over a joke, so rather than take a stance for free speech (and comedy) they appease those who make a lot of noise, just to avoid a negative backlash. I think it is a bit easy to dismiss everyone who calls this into question as merely thinking about their own bread and butter. This guy in particular is almost a billionaire, perhaps there’s more to it, but that of course would make it harder to argue against.
I am saying through the fact that they complain about culture, shows that they don’t understand their job
No it shows that you don’t understand comedy, which has always complained about culture. And if there is one thing that woke idealism can’t stand is criticism about itself. Which is exceptionally ironic, because it complains about everything in the name of progress, and in turn is the biggest promotor of cultural regression.
I am not saying criticizing the culture and expectations is morally wrong and should be punished. I am saying if you have an entertainment job and your job is comedy then it is your job to understand the culture and expectations to make funny jokes. They are struggling with “hate” because they experience the criticism that they want to cast on the culture. And they get the criticism because they fail at being a comedian. They don’t understand the culture and expectations of their audience. Unless they do and they aren’t actually bothered by being “cancelled” because they just lean into reactionary politics. Do you see how concluding that someone is failing to adapt to a changing market isn’t the same as saying the change is good. I am sure the housing market in east Ukraine isn’t great and buying a house there now is probably a bad idea, isn’t the same as saying it is good that Russia is invading them.
“Comedy is about criticizing culture” no. There are wordplays. Nothing about them is criticizing culture. There is a kind of comedy that is about criticizing. That doesn’t mean that as a professional comedian, you need to do that. So as a professional comedian, you choose that kind of comedy and then you choose what kind of jokes you want to make. There are many, even political, comedians that criticize the Public, and they don’t get “cancelled”. Because they understand what kind of audience they have. Which as a professional is your job. And lastly there are a few things that you can criticize, you can punch down, straight and up. If you are mad that the “woke” don’t like it when you punish down, which you do as a successful comedian, when you criticize “vocal minorities” or make fun of the struggle of the average person. Then maybe realize that if you want to do that comedy, laugh with the average person and punch up or straight. Remember, you want your audience to think it is funny too. If you don’t like that power from the bottom controls the state, then you just don’t like democracy and that is fair but then I would suggest you fight that before trying to specifically and exclusively save “punch down” jokes.
“You are contradicting yourself” I am not. Let’s say I have 50million fans in America. I am touring and make millions. Then a “minority” of people in America are my fans. I was mocking the use of “minority” because if the small vocal minorities have such a influence on the public that I am losing fans then maybe… Just maybe… It isn’t a minority of people. Or at least the overlap of my fans and that “minority” is pretty big. Maybe you are just out of touch with your audience. And in the end, if people don’t like your act, people don’t like your act. Your act sucks in the “getting good reactions” department.
“Woke idealism can’t accept criticism” mhm ok sure buddy. “Woke” person: “I don’t like this comedian because I think his jokes are offensive” comedian: “I am being cancelled😭😭😭 why can’t they take criticism???😭😭😭 Comedy is about freedom of speech 😭😭😭 why are they taking their liberty to speak and use it to criticize my culture???😭😭😭 They can’t take a joke😭😭😭” I mean the comedians really handle the criticism well. You are right. Cringe “woke” people. Ha.
Reactionary can be seen as a more extreme version of conservatism.
Conservatives want to keep things as they are and oppose change.
Reactionaries want to turn back to some previous, supposedly better state.
“Reactionary” means regressive conservative/anti-progressive. It originates from, as much political terminology on the regressive vs. progressive divide does (including the terms “left”, “right”, and “conservative” themselves), the French revolution, where people who favored opposing the revolution (i.e. reacting to the revolution) were called “réactionnaires” in French.
Interesting, but I often see it used not for people who oppose any form of change, but for people who oppose a specific change. And it’s intended to be more slanderous than conservative.
It means he lacks the ability to reinvent his comedy to fit the times. Instead he just complains.
We all need to continue to reinvent ourselves over time. Things change. We need to retool for the times ahead. Reality is Seinfeld doesn’t need to because he already made his money.
So instead of him getting back on the horse he just sits back and complains like the out of touch old turd that he is. He sucks but just can’t accept it or admit it. It’s easier to whine.
I don’t think he was ever funny. Larry David may have been funny, and Seinfeld was fortunate enough to be involved with the show, but Jerry himself has always been a poor comedian and a tool.
It was the supporting cast that even gave that movie a chance at being funny. Mathew Broderick, Rip Torn and Patrick Warburton did a lot of heavy lifting.
The episode where George and Jerry pretend to be the names printed on a limo driver’s placard in order to get a free ride from the airport and end up getting driven to a white supremacist rally was the peak of the show, but after watching Curb Your Enthusiasm it’s pretty obvious whose sense of humor produced that one.
Absolutely. He always came off as an arrogant prick and none of his shit was funny to me. But I might have missed many a point because I’m not from the USA.
I never liked the show because of him specifically. It’s my understanding that they’re all supposed to be bad people, but this is the same case with Always Sunny and I find the gang to be very likable. I didn’t at first, but they grew on me once I realized they were supposed to be degenerates and sociopaths. But with Seinfeld I have never been able to get over the hump.
“The show was great, hilarious even, until Jerry opened his mouth and said something.” - Me imitating Seinfeld
But seriously. I loved a few of the kooky characters, and would always stop channel surfing on a Kramer scene. But Jerry would always say something dumb and I’d move on.
I think Seinfeld was pretty funny in the 80s. His style of observational comedy was fresh back then though. Then there were a million Seinfeld copycats and there wasn’t anything special about him anymore.
The same thing happened with Carlin. So he kept reinventing himself and updating his comedy with the times and that’s why people loved him until the day he died.
Carlin got better as he got older. His shtick was always tight fast well rehearsed dense sets but he went from mostly irreverent to actually saying something. And he was still able to be so funny while clearly getting so angry.
Carlin was an artist. He could tread that line between offense and enlightening. Like I could sometimes feel my hackles go up watching him, even back in the 90s, but like you said, you really got the feeling like he was trying to communicate something real and important to him. That goes a long way to buying good will and keeping people listening, even as they’re feeling slightly defensive.
“It used to be you would go home at the end of the day, most people would go, ‘Oh, Cheers is on,” he said in the interview. “‘Oh, M.A.S.H. is on, oh, Mary Tyler Moore is on. All in the Family is on.’ You just expected, there’ll be some funny stuff we can watch on TV tonight. Well, guess what? Where is it? This is the result of the extreme left and P.C. crap and people worrying so much about offending other people. When you write a script and it goes into four or five different hands, committees, groups - ‘Here’s our thought about this joke’ - well, that’s the end of your comedy.”
So he picks shows that had some racism in them as justification that we should still have racism around for entertainment purposes?
What an idiot. I’ve heard plenty of comedy that’s funny as hell without being a knuckle dragging buffoon and going after low hanging fruit like racism or making fun of women.
The clown admits he’s just not creative or smart enough to make decent comedy that isn’t easy cheap shots.
Also his frame of reference is TV shows that aired at specific times. Few people under 60 watch TV like that anymore. Where is the funny stuff? On the fucking streaming services, YouTube, TikTok, etc.
Where is the funny stuff? On the fucking streaming services, YouTube, TikTok, etc.
You may have just made his argument for him. If Ticktok is what passes for comedy today, loud, obnoxious reaction bits from people who think a bad hair day is literal, all delivered in 10 second disposable bytes, yeah nah.
First of all, that description tells me you’ve never used TikTok. I haven’t either, and fwiw I’m not a fan of TikTok one bit, but from what I hear coworkers listening to and laughing at that is like a telephone game description of it.
But if tens of thousands of people are laughing with something… Yeah, that’s comedy.
You don’t need to use meth to have an informed opinion on it, and dear lord its popularity has no bearing on its value.
but from what I hear coworkers listening to and laughing at that is like a telephone game description of it.
No, it is accurate. The three primary sources of inspiration for TikTok videos seems to be Facebook style outrage bait, black american subculture, and anime, which all rely heavily on zany and sassy and dramatic reactions to shit. Every time someone shows me something, I just have to smile and nod to be polite.
It isn’t by accident, either, every social media platform is designed to appeal to the 14-25 demographic, the rest of us are just stuck along for the ride, and you get exactly the maturity and sophistication you’d expect from that design focus. The short format and pressure to grab people in 0.5 seconds before they scroll past aren’t helping, either.
This isn’t about ‘not letting people enjoy things’, you straight up equated tiktok with the likes of MASH, one of Seinfeld’s examples. But lets just pretend we were arguing about something else.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=XieGJCKk9Ms here’s the new bohemia that has me laughin my ass off. Wrt standups and writing rooms oprev generations? Ive always loved comedy but these punch-down clowns are wearing out their own welcome.
So he picks shows that had some racism in them as justification that we should still have racism around for entertainment purposes?
He also picked shows that were “extreme left” for their time. MAS*H was full of left-wing morals and speeches from the pens of both Larry Gelbart and Alan Alda and was savagely critical of an American war against communists while America was still in Vietnam.
Mary Tyler Moore was about an independent career woman in the 1960s, when women weren’t allowed to have their own credit cards.
All in the Family was about a conservative racist constantly being shown that the world had moved on from his archaic ideas about the way things should be.
So what is his issue with the “extreme left” exactly if those were the shows he picked?
MAS*H had an episode in 1974 about the injustice of a decorated soldier having to fear being dishonorably discharged for being a homosexual. That was way, way ahead of its time.
So what is his issue with the “extreme left” exactly if those were the shows he picked?
You could legit just read the screenshot and answer your own question.
Looks like Jerry is a pretty mainstream liberal who is okay with shows tackling issues of their own volition, but doesn’t appreciate the current production model of everything having to pass through focus groups, committees, and wanker consultants, coming out the other side so impotent and safe that it doesn’t arouse the intellect enough to really make a point or stand for anything specific.
Like if you watch Disney stuff and think that’s normal, you’re part of the problem.
American television was always known for production interference, but it was mostly from advertisers, bored executives, and censors. Not even close to the same thing, widespread use of focus testing and demographic committees and having 12 different sensitivity consultants is all relatively modern, and that’s on top of most of the traditional interference.
And you in all likelihood knew all this, but chose to waste our time anyway.
Ignoring the my-uncle-works-for-microsoft flex for a moment, are you trying to pretend we’re talking about changes that occurred in the last 10 years? Jerry was working in television 35 years ago, and is talking about programmes even prior to that. You probably weren’t even born then.
It didn’t take long for Lemmy to turn into a carbon copy of reddit, I barely post here and you’re like the third dude in the last day to pull the same sleight of hand by trying to change the argument.
Seriously. MASH had episodes around racism, and every time denigrating the racism and the fool perpetuating it. It never pushed a racist message… at least from what my memory can recall all these decades afterwards.
I think the two that come immediately to mind are racist general who is clearly looney toons asking a black soldier to dance cause its in his blood, properly being demonstrated as off his rocker and crazy to believe such racist bullshit and just a downright mockery of those who think like that.
and there was the one where the guy didnt want blood from any black person, and they spend the episode fucking with him with makeup and claiming he got the wrong color blood… and the episode ends with him thanking them for giving him something to think about, then salutes a black woman before leaving.
MASH also had a Black character in the first season whose nickname was “Spearchucker Jones,” which is supposedly justified by him being a former javelin athlete (which strikes me as coming from the “Quiet has to be dressed in clubwear while doing Serious Military Stuff because she breathes through her skin!” school of poorly-justified writing choices). It also suffers from the conceit of Hawkeye being simultaneously the moral center of the show, and a shameless womanizer whose conquests only exist in the context of the show for as long as it takes him to bed them.
I love MASH for what it is, but there are aspects of it that are clearly of its era, which we wouldn’t repeat in modern television. I think you can either accept that society has moved on from where it was in the 70s and 80s, or you can be like Seinfeld and be mad that you’re no longer allowed to play sexism and racism for laughs with the perpetrator framed as the good guy.
Its wild to me that he can’t recognize that the media landscape is a fundamentally different beast than it was in the 1970s or even the 1990s. People don’t sit down to all collectively watch one thing at this point, the family gathering around the TV each night is dead. Hell, I think it was a central theme of a South Park episode, you know, that ribald show with the vulgar jokes that is pretty much the artistic vision of two specific creators doing whatever they want creatively–a show you’d be amazed to find still exists the way people talk about the contemporary state of comedy.
Like buddy, primitime shows have become 60% police procedurals aimed at an aging audience still primarily watching TV. That ain’t because the “PC” crowd has demanded it LOL.
Never even considered the fact that police procedurals are still the dramatized version of cops’n robbers kids games where good guy and bad guy are obvious and no thought is required. Just get the bad guy, throw them in jail. Seems to suit the simplified version of reality a segment of our population prefers, minus the police brutality the shows generally don’t include.
To be fair, many Youtuber and Tiktokers that are watched alternatively by younger people aren’t intellectual powerhouses presenting super complex content. Not that it’s not there, I have a couple of more informative-ish chanels I like to watch, but there is nothing intellectual challenging watching a video about the speedrun history of kings quest IV.
Lol, nobody suggested that the vapid and shallow content on YT or TikTok had any particular value to it. The point is that procedural dramas have an underlying format popular with an age group that might have an affinity for such a format because it aligns with personal narratives they prefer.
Unless of course you are suggesting that the generation viewing TikTok and YT are as vapid and shallow as the content they prefer?
Is this guy actually invoking All in the Family in this discussion? Anyone reading this should find the pilot of All in the Family and watch it right now. That is so much more woke than anything that’s been on TV lately. Yea Archie Bunker used racial slurs, because the era equivalent of a fox news viewer spoke exactly like that at the time and the whole point was to show how backward and ignorant that was. Jerry Seinfeld is ignorant if he is bringing that show up as an example of an era where TV wasnt woke.
Add comment