Kimmel is the worst late night talk show hosts, this just further supports it.
"I only watched other kids play when I ran out of quarters"
"I watch other people play games because I don't have money to buy them or a computer that can run them"
:toot:
[QUOTE=usaokay;48572131]Yep. I've been to a live taping and he wasn't engaging with the audience. His only interaction was only to do some of the skits for Youtube.
Conan was way better in terms of improv comedy and his interaction with the audience. When the band played a cover song during the commercial break, Conan would rock out to it or lip sync.
The only thing that made Kimmel better was that I get to go to the restroom before taking my seat. That, and the handful of overly famous celebrities.[/QUOTE]
Conebone is the only true talkshow host.
you can tell which american hosts are good or not depending if they have a ben and jerrys ice cream flavor
looking at those comments on YouTube (and the dislike bar) it's clear this video (pretty unfunny but still) struck a nerve.
jesus christ guys, don't let it get to you. it's only jimmy kimmel
Jimmy Kimmel has always seen overly manufactured to me for some reason. Whenever I try to recall a Jimmy Kimmel episode, I never remember Jimmy Kimmel. I remember the other people that are on it for one of his skits. Compare that to Jimmy Fallon, who takes the spotlight very well and is always memorable.
Oh but what he said doesn't at all apply to watching other people play sports. It's the same thing in essence, you're watching someone play a sport and get paid millions to do so. How's that different from watching someone play a video game and get paid millions to do so?
Plus this skit is already a thing, they're called reaction videos and then you get reactions of people watching reaction videos.
Fallon > Kimmel
[QUOTE=usaokay;48572131]Yep. I've been to a live taping and he wasn't engaging with the audience. His only interaction was only to do some of the skits for Youtube.
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=wauterboi;48572603]Jimmy Kimmel has always seen overly manufactured to me for some reason. [/QUOTE]
Kimmel seems like this because he has horrible, horrible anxiety. I've heard him on a couple podcasts with other comedians, and he does so much better when he's talking to a small group of people.
He can seem prickly and uninterested, but it's mostly because of how uncomfortable he feels. This sketch though? It's just bad writing off of a thin joke to start with.
I don't even watch those kinds of videos for the gameplay unless I'm unsure on whether or not I want to buy the game or not. Most of the time, I just watch them for the funny commentary.
I really don't see a fair difference between sports or E-Sports. I don't enjoy watching either of them, but you can appreciate the effort that goes into practicing, the intricacies of each sport (Counter-Strike is pretty complicated, for example, and that goes without mentioning something like DOTA), and finally execution. Execution is awesome.
I would say the only difference between the two is accessibility - it's easy to pick up Counter-Strike: Global Offensive and because it's not physically taxing, it has to deal with the negative connotation associated with general gaming - particularly laziness.
Despite that, Jimmy Kimmel wouldn't be able to protect and detonate a bomb in even casual Counter-Strike, nor would he be able to run a ball all the way down a football field at even a high-school football game. He fails the bare qualifications for criticism and probably shouldn't be arguing the validity of either sport. Besides, the true value of the execution of sport is brainpower. Everything else is merely a tool for success.
I thought it was kinda funny, though what's even funnier was the reaction it caused, god damn the gaming community is sensitive.
Only time I ever watched this show was when they had an exclusive premiere of the Guardians of the Galaxy trailer. All it was ever good for.
[QUOTE=Qwerty Bastard;48573362]I thought it was kinda funny, though what's even funnier was the reaction it caused, god damn the gaming community is sensitive.[/QUOTE]
I'm not going to be one of those guys that tries to convince everyone that "GAMES ARE FOR PEOPLE WHO CHOOSE TO HAVE MANY LIVES", but there's a lot of people that view games and gamers as inherently immature, lazy, fat, and nerdy, yet in the same breath put movies up on the top-shelf as a critically acclaimed form of art. It's kind of annoying to see video games get shot down for absolutely everything. It can't be art, it can't be a sport, it can't be high-brow, and it can't be safe. The only reason why it will ever be reduced to this low-life hobby is because people keep saying it is. Jimmy Kimmel is just a component in that, so I don't really care, but it's the overall shittiness from everyone that personally annoys me. It's lame.
[QUOTE=Qwerty Bastard;48573362]I thought it was kinda funny, though what's even funnier was the reaction it caused, god damn the gaming community is sensitive.[/QUOTE]
Seriously, instead of taking it as a joke they take it to heart.
I'm not a big Kimmel fan either, but c'mon, this was good...
[media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YsczUFjhFWE[/media]
Man he's getting a huge load of hate after this video
I dunno. It's just one of those things that get really old. Video games are hardly ever praised in any way in pop culture and the news.
I wonder if someone will overact on the fact that God says "I made a race of idiots." watching a black guy.
[QUOTE=Killer900;48572113]Kimmel is the worst late night talk show hosts, this just further supports it.[/QUOTE]
Still better than Stewart
[QUOTE=BFG9000;48574020]Still better than Stewart[/QUOTE]Nooo way, aren't you conservative anyway?
[QUOTE=Killer900;48574628]Nooo way, aren't you conservative anyway?[/QUOTE]
This is the guy that said something along the lines of "if you know anything about economics you wouldn't vote Democrat"
Frankly I'm surprised he's still around.
[QUOTE=Killer900;48574628]Nooo way, aren't you conservative anyway?[/QUOTE]
The thing is, I'm not even rating him by his politics (which would be wrong). Last night I sat through a couple of his episodes and compared them to other speakers and honestly, I'm just not impressed.
I watched his episode about the human trafficking bill and the only laugh it gave me was a pun he made about Harry Reid's name. Then I watched some highlights from one of his less politically driven episodes and I didn't really find anything funny about that either.
The thing is, Colbert Report makes me laugh even though I'm conservative, and Jon Stewart was supposedly a co-creator of it. Why can't Jon Stewart be funny, but a spinoff of his show can?
To be fair I'm sure there's a few of his episodes that are at least decent, but I frankly find people like John Oliver (who I think is currently the best comedy talk show host right now) to be funnier. Even Kimmel's video gave me chuckles.
My theory is that the only reason why Jon Stewart is considered such a phenomenal talk show host is just because his viewer base like him for his politics. And frankly, if you leverage the quality of a show by whether or not the host agrees with you all the time, you're honestly not being a good judge. You can't say I'm not being fair here. I don't watch comedy talk shows because I want to have my right-wing conservative dick stroked, I watch them so I can laugh. And Stewart gives me barely any.
Frankly you can tell there's something wrong with an attitude like this:
[quote]Nooo way, aren't you conservative anyway?[/quote]
against anybody who thinks Stewart isn't that great.
[QUOTE=BFG9000;48575738]The thing is, I'm not even rating him by his politics (which would be wrong). Last night I sat through a couple of his episodes and compared them to other speakers and honestly, I'm just not impressed.
I watched his episode about the human trafficking bill and the only laugh it gave me was a pun he made about Harry Reid's name. Then I watched some highlights from one of his less politically driven episodes and I didn't really find anything funny about that either.
The thing is, Colbert Report makes me laugh even though I'm conservative, and Jon Stewart was supposedly a co-creator of it. Why can't Jon Stewart be funny, but a spinoff of his show can?
To be fair I'm sure there's a few of his episodes that are at least decent, but I frankly find people like John Oliver (who I think is currently the best comedy talk show host right now) to be funnier. Even Kimmel's video gave me chuckles.
My theory is that the only reason why Jon Stewart is considered such a phenomenal talk show host is just because his viewer base like him for his politics. And frankly, if you leverage the quality of a show by whether or not the host agrees with you all the time, you're honestly not being a good judge. You can't say I'm not being fair here. I don't watch comedy talk shows because I want to have my right-wing conservative dick stroked, I watch them so I can laugh. And Stewart gives me barely any.
Frankly you can tell there's something wrong with an attitude like this:
against anybody who thinks Stewart isn't that great.[/QUOTE]
I think Jon Stewart's humor isn't for everyone, especially for people who have no interest in his political message whatsoever. Colbert is definitely more over-the-top, whereas Jon Stewart's primary goal is delivering a message to a group of people who would otherwise be uninterested and involved. This is in complete contrast to someone like Jimmy Kimmel, who cracks jokes but ultimately has no goal or ulterior motive. I rated you dumb because you're comparing apples and oranges - different styles of humor and different goals.
[QUOTE=wauterboi;48575867]I think Jon Stewart's humor isn't for everyone, especially for people who have no interest in his political message whatsoever. Colbert is definitely more over-the-top, whereas Jon Stewart's primary goal is delivering a message to a group of people who would otherwise be uninterested and involved. This is in complete contrast to someone like Jimmy Kimmel, who cracks jokes but ultimately has no goal or ulterior motive. I rated you dumb because you're comparing apples and oranges - different styles of humor and different goals.[/QUOTE]
I suppose that's fair enough.
Dick Masterson on The Biggest Problem in the Universe dislikes Jon Stewart for the simple fact that he doesn't like his style of humor and thinks that Stewart should be far more vicious and serious about the issues he brings up. (On top of the fact that he's a libertarian, heh.)
I would probably say that the target demographic for Stewart's show were probably high school and college kids who had no enthusiasm to do things like vote or otherwise be involved in the political process, which is pretty dangerous. I think his goal was to give those people a reason to use their voice by explaining real-world issues in a way that they could understand and listen to. If you're already a part of the political process and get your news/insight through other means, you're probably not within the target audience. (although he has definitely made very personal arguments on the show quite often)
I think it's the one thing that opened my eyes to the political world as early as Middle School - it made me want to watch the news. I used to be a regular watcher of his show from the 6th grade to the 11th. And I even considered it to be a great alternative to news networks like CNN that were overly sensational or didn't tackle the news as strongly or as fairly as I felt Stewart did.
I will say that most of the people I've ever met that have disliked Jon Stewart have been conservatives, though. I've never met a liberal that was against Jon Stewart, so perhaps you have some credence there. But I don't think that Jon Stewart really meant to push a heavily liberal agenda - I think he just wanted to question the fuck out of everything and point out the issues in a way that people could feel involved with.
[QUOTE=wauterboi;48575959]
I will say that most of the people I've ever met that have disliked Jon Stewart have been conservatives, though. I've never met a liberal that was against Jon Stewart, so perhaps you have some credence there. But I don't think that Jon Stewart really meant to push a heavily liberal agenda - I think he just wanted to question the fuck out of everything and point out the issues in a way that people could feel involved with.[/QUOTE]
Well, I feel like John Oliver does a much better job with that at least. Don't get me wrong, I'm sure Stewart wants to get people involved before he wants to push a "heavily liberal agenda" but Oliver I think achieves it more effectively in the end because he reaches out to both sides of the aisle. Like, in response to the beating the Republicans gave to IRS for the anti-republican tax scandal a while back, he fleshed out reasons why the republicans shouldn't have defunded IRS, while at the same time acknowledging that what the IRS did was wrong. And I listened. I don't support the Republicans on what they did to the IRS.
Then again, "reaching out to both sides of the aisle" probably goes back to your point about differing target audiences, so I digress.
Jimmy Kimmel was good when he was on the MAN SHOW on G4(?)
He had a lot of good stuff early on but changed when uncle sal died
Well, the other thing to is that Jon Stewart's been in the game for a while, and I think it has to do with the progression of comedy. I think it's the reason most people would fine the initial episodes of the Simpsons and even Family Guy to be extremely bland. That stuff feels dated enough and irrelevant compared to the up-to-date humor we have now. It's not that it's [I]bad[/I], it's that some may perceive it as dated or not as hard-hitting as the new guys on the block. And it's a good thing.
Generally speaking, humor tends to get stronger and ventures further into places people feel uncomfortable with. I think Jon Stewart has successfully done that throughout his career. There was a time where Jon Stewart was at that pinnacle.
John Oliver is like an updated Jon Stewart and goes further. It's kind of like a metaphorical handing of the baton between someone who's ran a great run, and someone who will progress with the baton even further. The reason why Stephen Colbert and John Oliver are great is because they play off of the success and philosophy that Jon Stewart has set forth as a comedian and as a social critic.
The other problem is that Jon Stewart legitimately has grown tired of many of the Republicans and feels that he can do nothing to fix the problem that has plagued that party. That shouldn't be read as [I]all[/I] Republicans, but specifically Tea Party Republicans and the like that do not listen to reason and do not want to participate in a debate. So perhaps that has rubbed off on his recent episodes. I dunno, because I stopped watching around the time I began college.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
