From: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org (fegmaniax-digest) To: fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Subject: fegmaniax-digest V12 #186 Reply-To: fegmaniax@smoe.org Sender: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk fegmaniax-digest Thursday, May 22 2003 Volume 12 : Number 186 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: "a dimension torn free from the future" [Aaron Mandel ] Re: "a dimension torn free from the future" [Miles Goosens ] Re: specific Canadianisms? ["Gene Hopstetter, Jr." ] Re: got funny? ["Gene Hopstetter, Jr." ] Re: got funny? (con't) [Barbara Soutar ] RE: Suckin' Satan's pecker is better than suckin' a Sunset Blvd. tranny's pecker ["Timothy Reed" ] Re: Mighty Superpowers (some boob content) [Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey ] Re: Mighty Superpowers (some boob content) [Jeff Dwarf ] Re: got funny? (con't) [Jeff Dwarf ] Re: Mighty Superpowers ["Sumiko Keay" ] all BUFFY 'n' Chris G., all funny is inadvertent [Miles Goosens ] Re: funny or not [Miles Goosens ] RE: funny or not [Catherine Simpson ] all comedy, no boobs aside from Leno [Miles Goosens Subject: Re: "a dimension torn free from the future" On Thu, 22 May 2003, Natalie Jane wrote: > Donnie Darko... slight spoilers... > The ambiguity didn't bother me so much (I think I figured out what > happened... maybe?), it's that it seems like he just forgot stuff - like > the old lady, she was obviously a big plot point, but somehow she just > faded out of the picture. And as I mentioned, the revelation of who > "Frank" was, was a massive anti-climax. "Frank" was so frightening and > eerie, and when his identity was revealed, I thought, "Is THAT all??" I had assumed that was intentional. It didn't exactly make me happy, but I thought it went with the vibe of the rest of the movie. So a drunk jackass ruins his life -- we expected better. But one of the ways out of being a depressed high-school kid is to stop thinking of your problems as big majestic things that give your life meaning, and to figure out what you can do that transcends them, and Donnie is forced to do that when Frank turns out to be sort of lame and horrible at the same time. It's been a year since I saw it, though, so I'm a bit fuzzy. aaron ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 12:53:20 -0500 From: "Michael Wells" Subject: Money in the Mailbox And sales rank 685? Kim can't be unhappy about that... http://tinyurl.com/cf1k Michael "and I don't mean the inclusion of Bow Wow Wow, either" Wells ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 12:57:55 -0500 From: Miles Goosens Subject: Re: "a dimension torn free from the future" At 08:31 AM 5/22/2003 -0700, Natalie Jane wrote: >The ambiguity didn't bother me so much (I think I figured out what >happened... maybe?), it's that it seems like he just forgot stuff - like the >old lady, she was obviously a big plot point, but somehow she just faded out >of the picture. And as I mentioned, the revelation of who "Frank" was, was >a massive anti-climax. "Frank" was so frightening and eerie, and when his >identity was revealed, I thought, "Is THAT all??" > >p.p.s. Apropros of my Flaming Lips subject line, I am going to see said >Lips tomorrow night and I am VERY VERY EXCITED... a full report will be >forthcoming, of course... Ah, things are back to normal. We're disagreeing about a movie and you're hyped about seeing a band for which I have little use. The portal to the Bizarro Feglist must have gone shut! Maybe it was Robert Stack who was The Gatekeeper... later, Miles p.s.: aside from both being from Oklahoma, I do not get the constant comparisons of the Starlight Mints to the Flaming Lips at all. I mean, could the Starlight Mints sound more Pixies-like? Same sort of dynamics, similar lead vocal style and female counterpoint, even similar lyrical concerns. Yet every goddamn review or story about the Mints can't get past the second sentence without dropping the F-Lips-bomb. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 11:00:34 -0700 From: Glen Uber Subject: Suckin' Satan's pecker is better than suckin' a Sunset Blvd. tranny's pecker On 5/22/03 10:53 AM, Michael Wells was rumored to have said: > And sales rank 685? Kim can't be unhappy about that... > > http://tinyurl.com/cf1k > > Michael "and I don't mean the inclusion of Bow Wow Wow, either" Wells Yeah, but they have the wrong Ramones song. Shouldn't they have used "Beat On The Brat"? My God. I bet this movie is one of the biggest Hollywood trainwrecks in years. - -- Cheers! - -g- "Work is the curse of the drinking class." - --Oscar Wilde ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 11:01:18 -0700 From: Catherine Simpson Subject: RE: Money in the Mailbox Kim or no Kim, "Walking on Sunshine" is one of the most heinous songs ever in my book. - -----Original Message----- From: Michael Wells [mailto:mwells@ImageWorksMfg.com] Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2003 10:53 AM To: fegmaniax@smoe.org Subject: Money in the Mailbox And sales rank 685? Kim can't be unhappy about that... http://tinyurl.com/cf1k Michael "and I don't mean the inclusion of Bow Wow Wow, either" Wells ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 13:02:11 -0500 From: "Gene Hopstetter, Jr." Subject: Re: specific Canadianisms? On Thursday, May 22, 2003, at 12:46 PM, Barbara Soutar wrote in Canadian: > the only specific Canadianism I spotted was the reference to Nanaimo > bars by Catherine O'Hara. How on earth do you pronounce Namaimo? ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 13:05:56 -0500 From: "Gene Hopstetter, Jr." Subject: Re: got funny? > Subject: Re: got funny? Yep: Schizopolis is funny. Just keep watching it. Again and again. Adult Swim (Home Movies is hilarious. So is Sealab 2020, Mission Hill, The Odds, etc.) At least it used to be funny -- I cancelled cable TV months ago. I hope they all come out on DVD. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 11:13:16 -0700 From: Barbara Soutar Subject: Re: got funny? (con't) Stewart said in his Scottish way: >Her accent, along with some of Eugene Levy's lines, occasionally had >glaringly Canadian vowel sounds. > This is totally beyond me to notice... people don't spot their own "accents" apparently. So a Canadianism to you is just normal speech to me. We took my teenage daughter to see A Mighty Wind... she commented that if it hadn't been funny it would have been a really boring movie. Something to with the documentary level of excitement, low-key interviews and the tuning of mandolins, no wild car chases, etc. But she DID see the humour! The fact that her parents are former folkies perhaps added the background. Hey, I even own a dulcimer, though never played it particularly well. Barbara Soutar Victoria, British Columbia ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 14:29:22 -0400 From: "Timothy Reed" Subject: RE: Suckin' Satan's pecker is better than suckin' a Sunset Blvd. tranny's pecker I like the customer review though: An edge of your seat thriller, May 10, 2003 Reviewer: dfghdfghdf from Denver, Colorado this soundtrack has scary music. 8 thumbs up! Was this review helpful to you? no > On 5/22/03 10:53 AM, Michael Wells was rumored to have said: > > > And sales rank 685? Kim can't be unhappy about that... > > > > http://tinyurl.com/cf1k > > > > Yeah, but they have the wrong Ramones song. Shouldn't they > have used "Beat On The Brat"? > > My God. I bet this movie is one of the biggest Hollywood > trainwrecks in years. > > -- > > Cheers! > -g- > > "Work is the curse of the drinking class." > --Oscar Wilde ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 14:34:38 -0400 (EDT) From: "Jonathan Fetter" Subject: Re: Bringing the funny... to its knees! I have a fond spot for the musical Inquisition scene in "History of the World." And for some strange reason, I find funny the line "I will take these balls of cotton and place them in my hand" from the unwatchable "Robin Hood: Men in Tights. But "Space Balls." Egad. Jon > Mel Brooks... The Producers is really unassailable. Young Frankenstein and > Blazing Saddles are both terrific until their respective last thirds. After > that he seems to have settled for hitting the ground sucking. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 13:39:16 -0500 From: Miles Goosens Subject: Re: got funny? (con't) At 11:13 AM 5/22/2003 -0700, Barbara Soutar wrote: >Stewart said in his Scottish way: > >>Her accent, along with some of Eugene Levy's lines, occasionally had >>glaringly Canadian vowel sounds. >> > >This is totally beyond me to notice... people don't spot their own >"accents" apparently. So a Canadianism to you is just normal speech to me. I thought Catherine was very purposely being very Canadian. Tell me if I'm wrong here. later, Miles ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 11:22:26 -0500 (CDT) From: Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey Subject: Re: Mighty Superpowers (some boob content) On Thu, 22 May 2003, Christopher Gross wrote: > On Wed, 21 May 2003, Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey wrote: > > > You'd think by now everyone involved would realize that Buffy just > > doesn't do inspiration speeches very well. Wish they'd shown a > > reaction shot of someone doing something unspeakably boring just to > > occupy themselves - like, say, doing statistics or something. > > Ooh, Jeff is invoking a different sort of Godwin's law.... For what it's > worth, a couple of episodes have poked fun at Buffy's inspirational > speeches. "Storyteller" comes to mind, when Andrew is filming the group, > Buffy starts a speech, and Andrew says "She'll be going for a while, so > let's talk about me instead...." Right...after which, you'd think the writers would realize a large portion of the audience agrees with Andrew (if not on the "let's talk about me" part) and cut those out. The real question is, what'll we obsess over *next* TV season? Me, I think generally _Angel_'s been better than _Buffy_ this season...although the finale was weird, in that no one acted anything like themselves, and it's just plain unbelievable to me that they'd ever imagine any good could possibly come of any affiliation with W&H... - --Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey J e f f r e y N o r m a n The Architectural Dance Society www.uwm.edu/~jenor/ADS.html ::No man is an island. ::But if you take a bunch of dead guys and tie 'em together, ::they make a pretty good raft. __Max Cannon__ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 14:51:06 -0400 From: Steve Talkowski Subject: Re: Use the force On Tuesday, May 20, 2003, at 11:55 PM, steve wrote: > On Tuesday, May 20, 2003, at 10:17 PM, Maximilian Lang wrote: > >> http://www.teamabuse.com/toxic/stuff/swk.htm > > > This was on NPR sometime today. Some of the online geeks have taken > pity and are collecting money to buy him a new computer. They're up > to $3000.00 Now more than $4,000... AND an iPod! (doesn't mention if it's the new, 3rd generation 30GB model though) And for those who've been living under a rock these past few years, a handy definition of "Weblogger" is provided. - -Steve ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 11:54:00 -0700 (PDT) From: Jeff Dwarf Subject: Re: Mighty Superpowers (some boob content) "Stewart C. Russell" wrote: > Jeff Dwarf wrote: > > > > Around the Horn, though it's not on purpose > > eh? Round the Horne couldn't have been anything but, with > Took & Feldman as writers. Yeah, but with Max Kellerman, Woody Paige, and that moron from Chicago.... ===== "Being accused of hating America by people like Ann Coulter or Laura Ingraham is like being accused of hating children by Michael Jackson or (Cardinal) Bernard Law." -- anonymous . __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo. http://search.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 12:11:02 -0700 From: "Rex.Broome" Subject: Comedy debate cont'd, side of Buffy, diminishing boobs Eb: >>What sorts of "gossip" did SCTV yield? My "tone unclear" light is blinking... I think you're trying to be sarcastic, yeah? I was talking primarily about creative conflicts, which were legion, and often quite emotional/potentially embarassing. "Dishing" doesn't always mean "who's schtupping who", does it? If so I'll adjust my useage... >>I didn't interpret it that way, at all. I think Flaherty was >>just a versatile actor portraying two different on-air personalities >>at a crappy TV station. I don't think there was any implication that >>"Floyd Robertson" was hosting Monster Chiller Horror Theater in >>disguise. Floyd Robertson *was* Count Floyd, although he was *not*, for instance, Guy Caballero. Miles got that as well. Plus, didn't I just mention having read Thomas's SCTV BTS book? He's pretty explicit about these intentions in the writing of the show. Robertson was a riff, and a great 'un, on the Guy At a Local Station Who Is Their Only On-Air Talent. In my youth this was Dick "Count Gordival/Captain 10/Chef Combo/Man of 1000 Puppets" Drysell of WDCA-20, and a fat guy named Lou on the Hagerstown station (WHAG). ____ Jeff D: >>Ana Gasteyer ate them both (Oteri & Shannon) for breakfast. Interesting image, and also true, but mostly because of her writing (or the writing done for her). >>So does Tina Fey. Different thing. She's sharp and adorable, but do you ever see her in a sketch? She's like Dennis Miller in that respect. The opposite of the "utility player". >>Greg Proops, though hosting that dating show loses him lots of points As does being one head of the podrace announcer in Star Wars Episode I. _______ Chris: >>Not that it matters, but the heroes of Buffy were the UNpopular kids at >>their school.... Not that it matters, but SHE WAS A CHEERLEADER. It was on the poster art for the film, the ad art when the series started, and strongly implied in the title and by the casting of a blandly gorgeous blonde (twice). I'm just saying. Also, the kids may have been "unpopular", but weren't they also gorgeous? I'm just saying. That said... Miles: >>Rex, if you think this is 90210 with vampires, you couldn't be much more >>wrong. No, I don't think that. I've had so many intelligent people with good taste gush about the show that I now take its actual "quality" as somewhat of an article of faith. And I liked Firefly a lot. The premise of "Buffy" just never grabbed me. Like, say, any number of novels which are no doubt great, but whose premises haven't resonated with me enough to actually crack them open. And as Buffy became more and more "required viewing" among the hip-geek crowd, my impetus to actually watch it waned further. By the end (this week) I didn't have to watch it to know all the character names and half of the plot details. I'll admit that it was more interesting to experince secondhand Buffy than secondhand Survivor, if that redeems me at all. Sometimes I make fun of Buffy fans because they're easy targets-- so evangelistic!-- but it doesn't mean I fundamentally dis the show. It's kind of like the Cure and Cure fans to me. In fact, it's a *lot* like that. ________ Back to "What's Funny at a Glance": - -I also can't see liking Python yet disliking the Kids in the Hall. Unless you just hate Canadians or something. - -Gilmore Girls: funniness aside, not interesting. - -Jackie Mason: never got this one at all; seemed like people were laughing at him as a Jewish stereotype, and that was somewhat discomforting... the Borscht-Belt Jeff Foxworthy - -Three Stooges: From what I can tell no human woman has ever found them funny. I liked them when I was a kid but I doubt I'd get anything from them at all now. - -South Park: This has really been the gold standard in recent years. But did the Simpsons, King of the Hill, etc. come up in this discussion? Those are all great. Family Guy, however was loathesome. - -The Daily Show: I haven't seen it enough in recent years but I was profoundly addicted during the Kilborn and early Stewart years. I sort of lost it after the original support players were purged (A. Whitney Brown/Brian Unger/Beth Littleford/Lizz Winstead) but at least Lewis Black is still around. - -Coen Bros films: Not sure if these go in the "funny" file as a group, but even the "meh" ones are great. - -Peter Cook (& Moore): Not seen much of their duo stuff but the original "Bedazzled" is enough to recommend them highly. - -Nobody's uncorked Douglas Adams yet, have they? Overplayed but still viable, like any number of things. Red Dwarf never quite made it for me. - -Fallon: Seemingly improving, but his acoustic song parodies are *excruciating*; makes Sandler look like Lennon, Weird Al look like Dylan - -Shearer on his own: I occasionally catch his Le Show on the radio. It's admirable and well-done and maybe smarter than most of the other stuff in which he's involved. But I never, ever actually laugh, and that can't be good. More to come as the debate rages on. This is great stuff, although the boobs sadly seem to have been left behind. I'll try to do an all-boobs, no-comedy post later today. Which reminds me, Benny Hill? Not funny. - -Rex ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 12:05:01 -0700 (PDT) From: Jeff Dwarf Subject: Re: Bringing the funny... to its knees! Jonathan Fetter wrote: > I have a fond spot for the musical Inquisition scene in > "History of the World." That, and Gregory Hines's line when he passes Oedipus ("Hey, motherfucker!") are the both great moments. The rest of it, eh. At least "Spaceballs" isn't "Life Stinks" or "Dracula: Dead and Loving It." ===== "Being accused of hating America by people like Ann Coulter or Laura Ingraham is like being accused of hating children by Michael Jackson or (Cardinal) Bernard Law." -- anonymous . __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo. http://search.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 12:06:37 -0700 (PDT) From: Jeff Dwarf Subject: Re: got funny? (con't) Miles Goosens wrote: > At 11:13 AM 5/22/2003 -0700, Barbara Soutar wrote: > >Stewart said in his Scottish way: > >>Her accent, along with some of Eugene Levy's lines, > >>occasionally had glaringly Canadian vowel sounds. > >This is totally beyond me to notice... people don't spot > >their own "accents" apparently. So a Canadianism to you > >is just normal speech to me. > > I thought Catherine was very purposely being very > Canadian. Tell me if I'm wrong here. I think so too. ===== "Being accused of hating America by people like Ann Coulter or Laura Ingraham is like being accused of hating children by Michael Jackson or (Cardinal) Bernard Law." -- anonymous . __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo. http://search.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 14:12:53 -0500 From: "Sumiko Keay" Subject: Re: Mighty Superpowers Well, given that the decision wound up being only Angel's - -I'm hoping that it provides fodder for conflict next season. Sumi - - -- - - The real question is, what'll we obsess over *next* TV season? Me, I think generally _Angel_'s been better than _Buffy_ this season...although the finale was weird, in that no one acted anything like themselves, and it's just plain unbelievable to me that they'd ever imagine any good could possibly come of any affiliation with W&H... - --Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey J e f f r e y N o r m a n The Architectural Dance Society www.uwm.edu/~jenor/ADS.html ::No man is an island. ::But if you take a bunch of dead guys and tie 'em together, ::they make a pretty good raft. __Max Cannon__ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 14:17:19 -0500 From: Miles Goosens Subject: all BUFFY 'n' Chris G., all funny is inadvertent Was the Rex post about pretty popular Buffy sent to the list? I mean, I just replied to Chris' reply to it, but I don't see evidence of it in my "In," "Fegmaniax!," or "Trash" folders. Anyway re: Chris' discussions of BUFFY, both today and a few weeks ago... ... I hadn't responded to Chris' thoughtful and lengthy rejoinder to my feelings about Xander and about BUFFY in general, mostly because I've been in a bit of a time crunch since then, but also because I didn't see much use in responding. I think Chris and I have equal enthusiasm for the show, but I realized pretty quickly that Chris has far more enthusiasm than I do for *debating* about the show. Many of our differences have to do with subjective perceptions of plotlines and characters (the fact that the show even *admits* different interpretations should mark it as a special program in a TV world where most shows are lucky to have a script and a hackneyed plot!), and I don't think either of us is likely to be convinced by the other, so I don't see how we'll get past simply restating our own positions. There's a couple more reasons why I think it's fruitless for me to continue to debate. First, I think Chris' voracious devouring of BUFFY forums creates a far different context for him than for me. I don't know if I'll explain this well, but I'll try: my own BUFFY context usually has to do with discussing the show with my wife Melissa, a few friends (Jeffrey, and some other Loud-Fans stalwarts past and present), and at times on this list and on Loud-Fans. I deliberately avoid BUFFY "fan forum"-type stuff, because unlike Feg and the other friendly music forums I frequent, I find the TV/movie forums to be far more afflicted with obsequious fanboys/fangirls on one extreme and hypercritical jaded nitpickers on the other extreme. Ferreting out the good stuff just isn't worth the effort or my increasingly rare spare time. So when I opine about the show, it's not in growing out of a fan-community context, but out of something more... "pure" isn't the word, but basically it's just my reaction to and thoughts about the show. But when I voice an opinion to Chris, he's interpreting my remarks in the larger context of fandom and endless rancorous debates, and I feel like a lot of his reactions to what I say aren't so much about what I'm actually saying, and are more reactions to larger debates about which I'm blissfully ignorant. To Chris' credit, he said as much about one exchange in our last go-round: >Full disclosure: I have to admit that in the past I've encountered people >who worship Spike to an excessive degree, so my cutting-Spike-down-to-size >reflexes may be over-developed. Which I appreciate. But it makes me loathe to float an opinion, because I feel like when I mention something, I feel like I've fallen through a trap door into a shark-filled moat. Second, I'm ill-equipped for toe-to-toe debating against Chris' well-honed BUFFY arsenal of specific examples, direct quotes, episode titles, and unexplained tazers. Don't get me wrong, I hold my positions just as strongly as before, and I believe that were I equally conversant with the material, I could muster just as many supporting examples for my position! However, getting on an equal footing would require a level of commitment to repeat viewings that I simply cannot make, even for a show I adore. None of this should reflect badly on Chris. In fact, I'm (over)explaining because I didn't want him to feel like I was ignoring him or was offended by his completely wrongheaded pro-Xander, anti-Spike, pro-medicore-finale positions. :-) I love that Chris enjoys one of my favorite programs in such a dedicated fashion, and I think his comments about the show are thoughtful, sophisticated, and usually well-supported, just like his comments about everything else. But I'm the Polish Cavalry vs. the Stukas and Panzer IIs at this point, and unlike the Poles, I'm ceding the field. I fully believe this to be my last Feg post that discusses BUFFY beyond a passing remark or two, so the Fegs of Fegville can now rest easy. later, Miles ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 12:18:57 -0700 (PDT) From: John Barrington Jones Subject: funny or not Mel Brooks' "Life Stinks" should be the measuring stick by which all unfunny films should be judged by. Worst......movie......ever Blackadder, on the other hand, is very very funny. My favorite is the 3rd series, where Hugh Laurie is the Prince, and Black Adder is the butler. Lately I've been renting Britcoms that I had never heard of before. Father Ted is the one I have out right now. I would say that its okay. =jbj= ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 14:36:34 -0500 From: Miles Goosens Subject: Re: funny or not At 12:18 PM 5/22/2003 -0700, John Barrington Jones wrote: >Blackadder, on the other hand, is very very funny. My favorite is the 3rd >series, where Hugh Laurie is the Prince, and Black Adder is the butler. Another very, very funny thing I left out. I even agree about which series is best, though they're all splendid. I was about to mention it in my response to Eb, before I remembered that it had been done in the '80s. I was all about how hip and now I am at the time. YOUNG ONES also funny, also Ben Elton. Very, very scared of Ben Elton projects right now, since they involve Andrew Lloyd-Webber and Queen. >Lately I've been renting Britcoms that I had never heard of before. Father >Ted is the one I have out right now. I would say that its okay. I've seen a few on BBC America, and I liked what I saw OK, though it seemed to me sort of like FRASIER, just in a different setting and generally smarter and meaner. Worth watching, but I didn't flip for it. I really like COUPLING and am dreading the U.S. version that starts that fall, even if it does give me a weekly opportunity to drool over Rena Sofer. later, Miles ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 12:37:30 -0700 From: Catherine Simpson Subject: RE: funny or not John Barrington Jones wrote: Lately I've been renting Britcoms that I had never heard of before. Father Ted is the one I have out right now. I would say that its okay. =jbj= We were talking about what people were going to bring to a Movie Nite where the theme is "Bring your Guilty-Pleasure Movie/Show", and my son, who is 4 1/2 said that his guilty pleasure is "Father Ted" :) I love it, too. Have you watched "Black Books"? It's from the writer/creator of "Father Ted", Graham Linehan (who also did "Big Train" and had a hand in "The Alexei Sayle Show"). If not, you should add it to your list of Britcoms to watch. "Believe Nothing" is also quite good, and stars Rick Mayall (from "The Young Ones") in a much more interesting role. Just a few suggestions from a Britcom fan ;) Catherine ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 15:38:15 -0500 From: Miles Goosens Subject: all comedy, no boobs aside from Leno Jeff D.: >> Robin Williams post-1987 >> Billy Crystal post-1987 > >Amen. Same thing with Whoopi. Call it the curse of Comic >Relief. One of my jokes for years has been that for a "Visual Jeopardy" answer, they could show a picture of Whoopi, Robin, and Billy hosting a Comic Relief show, and the correct question could be "Who are three people who haven't been funny since the late '80s?" >Others that are funny: >Greg Proops, though hosting that dating show loses him lots >of points I liked Greg where I first saw him, on WHOSE LINE IS IT ANYWAY? back when Comedy Central was first airing the UK show, but I haven't liked him much outside of the WHOSE LINE UK/US confines. What's odd to me is though I'm generally a fan of dark, misanthropic humor, there's a downright mean quality to Greg's comedy when he's doing standup or hosting these other TV shows, and that meanness rubs me the wrong way. (This is analogous to how I made it through the "this cartoon series' outrageousness goes too far and will destroy civilization as we know it!" sequence of THE SIMPSONS -> BEAVIS AND BUTT-HEAD -> SOUTH PARK and thoroughly enjoyed each series, but thought FAMILY GUY crossed the line.) Of course, by hosting shows that crappy, Proops has a built-in excuse for being hateful, but still, it puts me off. >Bob Newhart, especially the second show Oooh, glad to see someone not only mention Newhart, but NEWHART. It started out being a very good conventional sitcom, along the lines of THE BOB NEWHART SHOW (even if he was stretching by playing a guy named "Dick" instead of a guy named "Bob") transported from a Chicago high rise to a Vermont inn, but it morphed into something hilariously surreal. Most of the other U.S. shows that have attempted this tone (ex: the 2nd and 3rd seasons of THE JOHN LARROQUETTE SHOW) have, unfortunately, disappeared very quickly. Believe it or not, THE KING OF QUEENS sometimes has looney moments (like a couple of seasons ago when Doug, Arthur, and Deacon formed a street gang!) that remind me of NEWHART. Newhart's next series, the wonderfully-named BOB, was also very promising in its first season (see our discussion of Cynthia Stevenson), but CBS screwed Newhart on the timeslot, then when the show predictably didn't get good ratings, CBS attempted to "fix" it by dumping almost all the supporting players, changing the setting, and bringing on sitcom vets Betty White and Jere Burns, none of which improved the ratings or the show itself. BOB is one of those shows I wish had gotten a full run, particularly in its original configuration. >The Simpsons, though it's significantly below it's own peak Crossed the Rubicon in the Season 10 finale (where they go to Japan) and has been gross and caricature-ridden ever since. Still OK to watch, but the winces now outnumber the laughs for me and Melissa, and this past year we've drifted away from it. But what other show put in 10 quality years like this one? >Around the Horn, though it's not on purpose Don't know it. >>Not Funny: >Martin Short >Jiminy Glick >Martin Short >Jimmy Kimmel >Martin Short >Sarah Silverman >Martin Short Disagree. Disagree. Disagree. Disagree. Disagree. Disagree. Disagree. Clearly a YMMV moment, huh? :-) >And do we even need to say Jay Leno stopped being funny >around the same time Bette Midler finished singing to >Johnny? It's worth saying, and worth remembering that he was once a very able standup -- not groundbreaking, but consistently very funny. And he was a good guest host for THE TONIGHT SHOW. But when it became his full-time gig, he became ultraconservative, ultra-unfunny, and borderline racist. I usually can't suffer through Leno at all, even in the name of getting to a beloved musical guest, so on those occasions I try to tape the show so I can zip right past the host. His unfunniness is becoming such a commonplace that Conan O'Brien (funny!), who has him as *his lead-in* on *the same network,* regularly zings him. Sad, really. later, Miles ------------------------------ End of fegmaniax-digest V12 #186 ********************************