Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Dave Chappelle triggers the Woke Left..

Options
1…6791112…17

Comments

  • Options
    #242
    James Brown
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,013 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    debok wrote: »
    Iv found chappelle tries to make sense of situations in a funny way. Christ the trailer told people you were goin to be offended so don't watch. Like the michael Jackson yoke the two lads were laughed out of court but nowadays public opinion is more important than winning in court.

    No one is outraged. I think the OP was jumping the gun.


  • Options
    #243
    James Brown
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,013 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    Diceicle wrote: »
    Watched it. Thought it was great. Certainly one of the best stand-ups I've watched recently. Not everything hit the mark but a solid 8.5 from me. Not as good as Killing Them Softly or For What Its Worth but definitely worth watching.
    In relation to the heat he's getting for the content of his set, I think its great he was brave enough to do it. Other stand-ups wouldn't do any bits on LGBT / MeToo etc (and even his own audience) and it has usually been comedians that push the bounderies of what is acceptable to say / who it is acceptable to say it about in society.
    Well done Dave Chappelle.

    Don't think he was standing up to them. He was treating them like any other group which is commendable. There should be no untouchables. I'm all for equality ;)


  • Options
    #244
    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    Outlaw Pete wrote: »
    Seen it last night, it was mostly stuff from his recent tour (aside from the Juicy Smulea bit). If anything I think he sanitized some of it. I'll give the gig a relisten later.

    For me Dave's a genius and I love that he neither panders to the right or left and is not afraid to offend either side either. Often he will set the crowd up by pretending to have an opinion, which invariably will be met with cheers and whoops, only for him to then say something which will totally infruiate the same people.

    Nobody has a right not to be offended but they do have the right to choose what to watch or not and so I guess they can just no longer view his stuff if they feel so strongly about it.

    Bill Burr also did that to great effect last year in the Three by saying he liked Trump - then a beat to allow a bit of cheering from the Trump supporters in the audience - then being like “Psyche! LOL, no, he’s awful.”. I’m paraphrasing but it was a beautiful moment. I enjoyed it muchly.


  • Options
    #245
    Ash.J.Williams
    Registered Users Posts: 21,050 ✭✭✭✭Ash.J.Williams


    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »
    Bill Burr also did that to great effect last year in the Three by saying he liked Trump - then a beat to allow a bit of cheering from the Trump supporters in the audience - then being like “Psyche! LOL, no, he’s awful.”. I’m paraphrasing but it was a beautiful moment. I enjoyed it muchly.
    Not only trump supporters but half the crowd got on board out of politeness:)


  • Options
    #246
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 83,355 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Someone did that at a graduation coronation by attributing a quote to Donald Trump - the crowd roared then the girl corrected herself that the quote was from Barack Obama.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #247
    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    Ash.J.Williams wrote: »
    Not only trump supporters but half the crow6got on board out of politeness:)

    Probably. :D I didn’t get on board. *smug* :pac:


  • Options
    #248
    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    Anyhoo, Chappelle. Ashamed to say I don’t know much of his work as he seems very highly regarded but my husband is a fan. He thought this latest special was only alright. He said it was more just a load of statements and he didn’t rate the joke construction. It just didn’t give him many belly laughs basically.

    As for the Jackson stuff, he’s as entitled to his opinion as anyone else. His opinion on the topic doesn’t hold any more weight than any other outsider though.


  • Options
    #249
    pq0n1ct4ve8zf5
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,070 ✭✭✭✭pq0n1ct4ve8zf5


    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »
    Anyhoo, Chappelle. Ashamed to say I don’t know much of his work as he seems very highly regarded but my husband is a fan. He thought this latest special was only alright. He said it was more just a load of statements and he didn’t rate the joke construction. It just didn’t give him many belly laughs basically.

    The waning of his talent has been apparent and progressive in each of his comeback specials, he was spectacular in his day. There was some good stuff in the first special and a couple of giggles apiece in the rest, and I agree, it's the structure and set ups that are letting it all down.

    He had some riff in one of them about how he just picks a punchline at random from a bowl and makes up the joke to go with it, and how he was going to use this punchline in this set and we wouldn't see it coming.

    Twenty minutes later rambling story with a couple of mildly amusing bits of wordplay, could see it would be that punchline from miles away and it was all pretty tedious. AND he then leapt around punching the air saying how great he was and he knew we wouldn't see it coming.

    The guy I was watching with was one and a half films into the Star Wars franchise before he realised stormtroopers were the bad guys, and HE saw it coming.

    He was amazing, he's now not great. I'd say the only people insisting he's as good as ever are people who've just run out of comedy specials called 'Triggered' to watch. They like him having a go at people and pretend he's still funny to legitimise that liking. Or I dunno, they just have a bad appreciation for comedy.


  • Options
    #250
    Penn
    Registered Users Posts: 33,811 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    I've mostly enjoyed Chappelle's stand-up shows, but this one was pretty bland. The Jussie Smollett bit was decent, and there were a few lines here and there that raised a smile, but it was pretty forgettable for the most part.

    The encore bit after the main show, where he spoke extemporaneously to people asking questions was much better. It was funny, interesting, witty and still had the same bite his standup usually has. I could easily have watched an hour of that.


  • Options
    #251
    sbsquarepants
    Registered Users Posts: 11,812 ✭✭✭✭sbsquarepants


    Penn wrote: »
    I've mostly enjoyed Chappelle's stand-up shows, but this one was pretty bland. The Jussie Smollett bit was decent, and there were a few lines here and there that raised a smile, but it was pretty forgettable for the most part.

    .

    I agree - watched it last night and it was very disappointing. It's a far cry from Chappelles show!


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #252
    drunkmonkey
    Registered Users Posts: 28,212 ✭✭✭✭drunkmonkey


    It's a far cry from Buttercup.


  • Options
    #253
    Chris_Heilong
    Registered Users Posts: 4,974 ✭✭✭Chris_Heilong


    The WOKE SJW left very much do exist and they tend to fall into areas where they can have influence, like media and journalism. These people are activists and in the case of American film critics will score some thing on weather it agrees with them politically/ideologically and not on the merits of if it(film, game, book) was actually well made or had a good story. I have started to ignore the critics score completely on Rotten tomatoes now and judge things on the audience score instead. My point is illustrated below where a documentary about the Democratic congress women can get a score of 100% from critics and the Dave Chappelle stand up can score so low.
    489945.jpg


  • Options
    #254
    Penn
    Registered Users Posts: 33,811 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    Chris_Heilong wrote: »
    I have started to ignore the critics score completely on Rotten tomatoes now and judge things on the audience score instead. My point is illustrated below where a documentary about the Democratic congress women can get a score of 100% from critics and the Dave Chappelle stand up can score so low.

    You don't think the audience score is just as susceptible to manipulation as the critics? I mean as stated above, I like Chappelle and most of his stuff is fantastic, but 99% for this new special is ridiculous. It was fairly bland and boring for the most part imo.

    Not to mention organised review-bombing by groups (likely both right and left) means the audience score is just as open to targeted manipulation to the point where it can't really be trusted either, only perhaps for things which are so generally apolitical that neither the right nor the left would see any need to try and skew the results.


  • Options
    #255
    CrankyHaus
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,281 ✭✭✭CrankyHaus


    Penn wrote: »
    You don't think the audience score is just as susceptible to manipulation as the critics? I mean as stated above, I like Chappelle and most of his stuff is fantastic, but 99% for this new special is ridiculous. It was fairly bland and boring for the most part imo.

    Not to mention organised review-bombing by groups (likely both right and left) means the audience score is just as open to targeted manipulation to the point where it can't really be trusted either, only perhaps for things which are so generally apolitical that neither the right nor the left would see any need to try and skew the results.


    I agree with this. However critics have a greater responsibility for balanced and unbiased review of artistic work than some random person on the internet (or a bot). If they cannot provide any higher a standard that what members of the public will give for free online then they have no value.


  • Options
    #256
    James Brown
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,013 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    Chris_Heilong wrote: »
    The WOKE SJW left very much do exist and they tend to fall into areas where they can have influence, like media and journalism. These people are activists and in the case of American film critics will score some thing on weather it agrees with them politically/ideologically and not on the merits of if it(film, game, book) was actually well made or had a good story. I have started to ignore the critics score completely on Rotten tomatoes now and judge things on the audience score instead. My point is illustrated below where a documentary about the Democratic congress women can get a score of 100% from critics and the Dave Chappelle stand up can score so low.
    489945.jpg

    I think you'll strain yourself trying to make something out of this. Chappelle isn't as know or popular as Jerry Seinfeld or Eddie Murphy etc. It's not a conspiracy. And Sticks and Stones has it's moments but it falls flat in places and just comes across as him ranting a little, and I'm a fan.
    That site is just a website. They published the findings didn't they?
    CrankyHaus wrote: »
    I agree with this. However critics have a greater responsibility for balanced and unbiased review of artistic work than some random person on the internet (or a bot). If they cannot provide any higher a standard that what members of the public will give for free online then they have no value.

    No they don't. How it works is they give something a good review and if you like it, you'll take future reviews into consideration. You are actually talking about them pretending they like something because they should. That's not honest.


  • Options
    #257
    Roger Hassenforder
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,555 ✭✭✭Roger Hassenforder


    Some laugh out loud bits, some flat bits that could be better, and some very lame bits.
    Some bits youre "Jesus, i dont think I should be laughing here'.

    Not brilliant tho.


  • Options
    #258
    Turquoise Hexagon Sun
    Registered Users Posts: 532 ✭✭✭Turquoise Hexagon Sun


    I enjoyed this special but I think it was bit loose. A lot of the bits were going for shock value over good craftmanship. Which is fine. I think this special came off raw and bit unrefined. I would like to hear what that special would have sounded like if more time was spent on it. I think Chappelle may feel that he singed the deal for multiple specials. That means he gets paid either way. And this one was like a throwaway one. Like he's just going for shock, because he can.

    And, going for shock is grand. I think it's much needed. I just think Ricky Gervais does the same schtick a little bit smarter.


  • Options
    #259
    Gregor Samsa
    Registered Users Posts: 9,029 ✭✭✭Gregor Samsa


    Watched it last night. Didn't find any of it laugh out loud funny, but it was entertaining enough to be able to watch all the way though. I think he tried to hard to push the whole "What i'm saying is so edgy, I could get cancelled at any moment, but I don't care" thing far too much. It's a Netflix exclusive special with top billing, not some underground gig that everyone is scared to touch. It couldn't be any more mainstream if it tried. He knows full well he's in no danger - it's exaggerated to sell to a particular audience, and that seems to be working.

    The wooping, thigh slapping, convulsions, fist pumping and cheering of the audience was over the top. If it wasn't for the fact that we all know Americans are just like that (I went to a very mediocre comedy club night with work colleagues in Minneapolis one night, and the whole audience were pissing themselves laughing at the safest, most mundane jokes), you'd think they were a rent-a-crowd on nitrous oxide. But I suppose that's to be expected with US productions.

    Didn't agree with most of his positions on the subject matters, but then I don't watch comedy for a reasoned analysis of the intricacies of social or political issues. OP would probably consider my political positions (as a reasonable centre-left secular European liberal) as a Woke SWJ snowflake libtard. But, no, I wasn't triggered, offended or outraged in the slightest. Pushing the boundaries of free speech it certainly was not.

    No question that he'll live to make another massive paycheck on his next special.


  • Options
    #260
    hetuzozaho
    Registered Users Posts: 2,840 ✭✭✭hetuzozaho


    Gregor Samsa wrote: »
    . It's a Netflix exclusive special with top billing, not some underground gig that everyone is scared to touch. It couldn't be any more mainstream if it tried. He knows full well he's in no danger - it's exaggerated to sell to a particular audience, and that seems to be working.

    Yeah and people in this thread seem to be of this opinion, like they can't believe what he said. Are they just throwing it on after the soaps or what.

    Something like most important comedy of our time was said in this thread. People need to get out more I think!


  • Options
    #261
    MOR316
    Registered Users Posts: 2,227 ✭✭✭MOR316


    Ifevera wiztherewas wrote: »
    They're not guaranteed fake stories though. You choose to disbelieve them but somehow find Kelly's accusers believable ( I'd like to know your gauge for this, as in what constitutes a credible accusation ) whereas I believe Jackson's accusers.

    Just because someone is cleared in a court of law doesn't mean they didn't commit the crime. I wonder if Kelly was found innocent would you then disbelieve his accusers?

    Well, there's a video of R Kelly. Actual evidence.

    You believe Jackson's accusers but, did you believe them the last 20 odd years when they came out numerous times and said he never done anything wrong to them? They were laughed out of court two years ago, with the judge saying, "no trier of fact could ever take your stories seriously"
    Up to you, I'm not going to tell you what to believe or what to watch or read but, there's more evidence out there to suggest he actually didn't do it as opposed to saying he did. LN is an insult to child abuse victims. Especially when compared to Untouchable. I did not see any of the victims in that laughing

    But, it's what people and their emotions choose to believe these days. That's how a person is judged and trialed now.

    R Kelly will certainly not be found innocent in a court of law. Not that it matters.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #262
    Gregor Samsa
    Registered Users Posts: 9,029 ✭✭✭Gregor Samsa


    MOR316 wrote: »
    Well, there's a video of R Kelly. Actual evidence.

    [...]

    R Kelly will certainly not be found innocent in a court of law. Not that it matters.

    Eh, R Kelly was already found not guilty in a court of law, despite the video evidence. He used the Shaggy defence, and claim it wasn't him in the video. The jury decided that they couldn't determine that it was him, and found him not guilty on all 14 counts.

    https://www.eonline.com/uk/news/1956/r-kelly-found-not-guilty


  • Options
    #263
    MOR316
    Registered Users Posts: 2,227 ✭✭✭MOR316


    Gregor Samsa wrote: »
    Eh, R Kelly was already found not guilty in a court of law, despite the video evidence. He used the Shaggy defence, and claim it wasn't him in the video. The jury decided that they couldn't determine that it was him, and found him not guilty on all 14 counts.

    https://www.eonline.com/uk/news/1956/r-kelly-found-not-guilty

    Jesus...

    Well, not this time around. I'd imagine

    Either way, there's stacks upon stacks of actual evidence against him


  • Options
    #264
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Ha, that "rotten tomatoes score" point is absolutely ridiculous.

    Which is more likely:

    1) 70% of a sample of size of 10 critics (so 7) didn't like the message so rated the show negatively, irrespective of whether or not they found it funny

    Or

    2) 99% of 21,500 people (so 21,285) gave it a thumbs up to try to get one over on the woke, liberal, SJW film critics?


  • Options
    #265
    Chris_Heilong
    Registered Users Posts: 4,974 ✭✭✭Chris_Heilong


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Ha, that "rotten tomatoes score" point is absolutely ridiculous.

    Which is more likely:

    1) 70% of a sample of size of 10 critics (so 7) didn't like the message so rated the show negatively, irrespective of whether or not they found it funny

    Or

    2) 99% of 21,500 people (so 21,285) gave it a thumbs up to try to get one over on the woke, liberal, SJW film critics?

    Media bias is real, I do not think that is a controversial opinion at this stage it is fact. Also just look at how few reviews there are, This is because the people that enjoyed the special are connected to the outrage/SJW infected industry that is modern journalism and fear for there livelihoods if they print what they really feel and so choose not to write anything at all on the subject.


  • Options
    #266
    CrankyHaus
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,281 ✭✭✭CrankyHaus


    Matt Barrett wrote: »
    No they don't. How it works is they give something a good review and if you like it, you'll take future reviews into consideration. You are actually talking about them pretending they like something because they should. That's not honest.

    You misunderstand me. A critic has a responsibility to judge something on its own merits rather than whose side they think the artist is on. Otherwise you just end up with sterile art of dubious value from hacks that play to their respective galleries. The dishonesty is in substituting ideological purity for artistic value.


  • Options
    #267
    JohnnyFlash
    Registered Users Posts: 7,055 ✭✭✭JohnnyFlash


    The show wasn't that funny. That's the problem with most comedy these days. Too preachy, and not enough jokes.


  • Options
    #268
    Venom
    Registered Users Posts: 6,984 ✭✭✭Venom


    Overheal wrote: »
    Someone did that at a graduation coronation by attributing a quote to Donald Trump - the crowd roared then the girl corrected herself that the quote was from Barack Obama.


    Meh, that's pretty old hat tbh as it was done to Taylor Swift fans back in 2013 when someone on Pinterest mixed pictures of Swift with various parts of Hilter speeches.


  • Options
    #269
    Textra_vision
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13 ✭Textra_vision


    Laughed a lot more at this than Bill Burr's newest Netflix


  • Options
    #270
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Textra_vision wrote: »
    Laughed a lot more at this than Bill Burr's newest Netflix


    Yeah its vastly superior and he spends half the special slagging off the metoo movement yet he does it with taste.

    Sorry I got that backwards. Bill Burr's latest special is far, far better than Chappelle's.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #271
    Penn
    Registered Users Posts: 33,811 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    Textra_vision wrote: »
    Laughed a lot more at this than Bill Burr's newest Netflix

    Really? Damn, I was really looking forward to that. I'll still watch when I get a chance, but I guess I should lower my expectations for it.


Advertisement