Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it,
follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given
their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!
CNN asks: Is Dane Cook Funny?
Posts
I said that, from the description, the style sounded similar. Rollins tells longish stories that are sometimes familiar and sometimes kind of funny, occasionally insightful, and generally offbeat. But he rarely actually tells joke jokes. Mostly he gets by on presence and delivery, both of which he has in spades.
But - yeah - if they're not the same, then sure. I've not seen or listened to Dane Cook.
tumblr twitter old people with tats
satan, check this wishlist's rims out
If you put in a little more effort, you might be able to sound more pretentious. I doubt it, though.
There's not one, single school of funny, and the peculiar idea some of you seem to have that there's this sort of universal funny joke that's always funny, and he should tell that instead of using his own ideas about how to be on stage, that's fucking retarded. Delivery is comedy - don't you have a friend that can fuck up the best joke in the world? Who isn't funny even with certified fucking comedy gold ROFFLES memorized? Well that guy is the anti-dane.
Too many people on this forum, whenever an artist comes up, seem to think that artist should make art THEIR way.
I asked if anyone here got paid to perform comedy bring some perspective on the matter, and to point out that if any of us really had such fucking insight on the true nature of comedy, we'd be on that stage instead of Dane.
oh wait
Someone get this man a subscription to the New Yorker.
People who disagree with you are not wrong, they just hold different opinions. Lern2live nub
tumblr twitter old people with tats
satan, check this wishlist's rims out
Because 9% think it's too high, and shouldn't be cut! 9% of respondents could not fully
get their arms around the question. There should be another box you can check for, "I
have utterly no idea what you're talking about. Please, God, don't ask for my input."
One to read, one to archive, and one to wipe his ass with because toilet paper is beneath him and is only popular because people got swept-away in a mob-mentality!
tumblr twitter old people with tats
satan, check this wishlist's rims out
OK, first off, there's a huge flaw in all of this - you seem to think people only like ONE standup artist. Someone actually can like Dane Cook and someone who does a totally different style of comedy. Liking Dane Cook does not mean you can't also like, say, Emo Phillips.
You know, this is really, really pretentious. You sound really bitter and out of touch. "WAAAAGH THEY DON'T GET "REAL" HUMOR! I BET THEY DON'T EVEN REALLY GET WHAT THEY ARE LAUGHING AT! THAT MUST BE IT! THEY ARE JUST SHEEPLE! I'M STANDING ON THE OUTSIDE LOOKING IN NOT BECAUSE I AM EXCLUDED BUT BECAUSE I AM SUPERIOR"
It's really fucked up of you to assume that people that like something you don't don't really like it. It's fine to think they're wrong, but to assume EVERYONE IN SQUARE SOCIETY IS A POSER AND I REALLY HAVE MY FINGER ON THE PULSE, I mean, that's the kind of thing that leads you to ICP fandom, or buying a kia.
No, there's not one school of funny, which is where JWFokker missteps. There are many different ways to achieve laughs, but personally I think some are more credible, nuanced, intricate, and relevant than others, much in the same way many people comfortable categorize other departments of arts and humanities into high art and low art. Most people on this board, despite what they may jump into the comedy thread to say, are comfortable with high and low art distinctions (for the most part).
Dane Cook and the Family Guy are low art. I know this because I've listened to them / watched them, and I'm going to bed soon otherwise I might really try to type up some treatises onto why they suck, but trust me my opinion is wrapped around more than just "I don't laugh."
So yes, it's pretentious. There's no reason why we can't expect things from out comedy much in the way we do with any other form of creative output -- videogames, TV, movies, books, music, etc.
Too many people on this forum, whenever an artist comes up, seem to think that artist should make art THEIR way.
I asked if anyone here got paid to perform comedy bring some perspective on the matter, and to point out that if any of us really had such fucking insight on the true nature of comedy, we'd be on that stage instead of Dane.[/quote]
tumblr twitter old people with tats
satan, check this wishlist's rims out
People with ears. Even deaf people with ears.
Because 9% think it's too high, and shouldn't be cut! 9% of respondents could not fully
get their arms around the question. There should be another box you can check for, "I
have utterly no idea what you're talking about. Please, God, don't ask for my input."
tumblr twitter old people with tats
satan, check this wishlist's rims out
Family guy after the Great Comeback is significantly worse than the first three seasons, but those beginning seasons are really funny.
Dane Cook is nothing like Family Guy.
btw,
you will have to live in a volcano
you will have to shout my name to the heavens when I foil you
tumblr twitter old people with tats
satan, check this wishlist's rims out
oh man, I get to live in a volcano?
i'm in
tumblr twitter old people with tats
satan, check this wishlist's rims out
wow what a fantastic point! I now find dane cook funny!
Wrong. I don't watch South Park.
I've not read the New Yorker, but I find many people who are residents of NYC to be inane, vacuous douchebags. They probably like Dane Cook too.
I do see what you're getting at though. Dane Cook fans are not the sort for whom literacy is a high priority?
You might be wrong, but I like your style.
So you're trying to argue that turning off your brain does not render you a moron?
Also, your argument becomes somewhat muddied towards the end where you say that both Family Guy and Dane Cook are stale and incredibly unfunny. How does that differ from what I've already said? Tic Tac Toe is a fun game when you're a little kid, but you don't play it anymore, right? Because you're not a mentally undeveloped person anymore. People who like Family Guy and Dane Cook never progressed past that point. They got stuck on the Tic Tac Toe of humor.
Yes, I'm saying Dane Cook and Family Guy get old fast. Just because someone finds them funny however doesn't mean I debase them. It means I raise my eyebrow incredulously and mind my own business. Your opinions of people are not fact.
Also I still enjoy Tic-Tac-Toe
tumblr twitter old people with tats
satan, check this wishlist's rims out
Which is why we all listen exclusively to Bach, only look at paintings by Picasso and read nothing but ancient Greek literature and Joyce.
They also tend to make the most money.
tumblr twitter old people with tats
satan, check this wishlist's rims out
We are in agreement then.
you are being slightly more harsh than me, but pretty much yea we agree.
I don't hold liking Dane Cook against people though... I think you do
To me, saying Dane Cook isn't a comedian is like saying the Wii isn't a current gen system because it's not high def. They both take different approaches to their respective fields, and it's fucking refreshing. Is Stephen Lynch not a comedian as well? Demetri Martin? All he has is a pad of paper, no actual jokes.
This is stupid pedantic bullshit, and all it does is give people like JWFokker a reason to feel superior because he has an opinion too.
You need to meet more New Yorkers.
Honestly, your usage of the word 'douchebags' following a seething attack at lowbrow humor pretty much takes all the fun out of mocking you.
JWFokker: Still made of pretension and failure after all these years.
It disgusts me to see you using an avatar of a greater man than you will ever be.
Anyways, as has been said before, liking Dane Cook != retarded. It means that you like easy comedy at times. The brain sometimes needs to turn off, needs to relax, because sophistication at all times is boring, and actually harmful.
Look at some of the classics of film, literature, and hell even television and video gaming. These classics are not necessarily deep (Casablanca), enjoyable (Whaling in Moby Dick), thoughtful (I love lucy), or sane (Katamari Damacy). They are all enjoyable.
That's a shame.
Not that I'm defending the Backstreet Boys, but there's plenty of good mainstream and lowbrow music, television, and comedy.
There is nothing left to say on this facet of the subject. Humor is entirely too subjective a notion to be used in passing judgments like that, and they've dragged us away from the actual discussion:
Is Dane Cook Funny?
Not, Are Dane Cook's fans retarded. And not Is Dane Cook Capable of Making A Single Living Soul Laugh; though that's settled, it doesn't end the discussion. It could be argued (and hopefully will be) that while Cook is not funny, he maintains a following and they do laugh and it's all because of his excellent marketing and peer pressure.
I personally call preemptive bullshit on that one, because while I found the material to be in no way profound or even particularly good, I did laugh at him before knowing who he was.
So he's funny. That doesn't make him a good person, or worth the attention he gets, or whatever. Should we argue whether he's overrated?
Maybe a better topic to steer this thread toward would be the importance of delivery vs. content in humor? That could actually be spread to all forms of communication, later, and then we could have a lovely argument with all the people with Aspergers on one side and everyone else peering at them in confusion.
If it makes me laugh then it's funny, FOR ME. I personally found Dumb and Dumber painful, in fact, I never got through it, but if someoone else got a laugh out of it who the hell am I to tell them they're wrong. I don't lean over to the next table at the pizza parlor and tell the folks there that they're all retarded for liking peperoni instead of hawaiian. Is there someone hanging out at Baskin and Robbins belittling the folks who order vanilla?
Comedy is a matter of PERSONAL taste. My dad never has and never will enjoy Monty Python. I hate Ghalleger but I love Family Guy. I have also busted a gut watching a live performance of Henry V. Some forms take more work than others but if it makes people laugh, it's comedy. If some of you want to stick to champange thats fine but that doesn't mean you're somehow better that those who like beer too.
and, getting back to the OP posit, comedy is a wonderous gestalt of timing, intonation, inflection, expression and accident.
but mostly timing
edit: "comic timing is catching the brain mid-stride and causing it to trip"
also Mark Twain had this to say:
http://classiclit.about.com/library/bl-etexts/mtwain/bl-mtwain-howto.htm
not the point. I was only saying that having fans /=/ being good.
edit - you know what? can we stop the people coming in here telling us not to argue personal taste? We are having a fucking discussion. It hasn't (quite) turned into namecalling, so I really don't think we have a problem.
I fucking promise you, no one posting on these boards is unaware that different people have different opinions. If we could just drop the posts where someone I dunno... wisens us up about how opinions and comedy work, it's really make this thread a little more useful. We are not little kids, we can fucking handle it.
What do you mean by "being good?" I think you're using a high-brow definition--humor that is clever, witty, insightful, etc. Those things are certainly important, but there's an important place for more accessible humor that appeals to a wider audience. If something presents itself only as entertainment and is very successful at being mere entertainment, how can it not be "good?" In other words, just because the goals of all humor aren't the same doesn't mean that there isn't inherent value in accomplishing your particular goal.