LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
My theory about why they have dedicated so much time to those that lost this year is that..................... many, many, many people were upset last year when Dave Mordal lost the head to head to Dat Phan. I still believe, and I always will believe had Dave been in the finals that he would have won. I'm sure that if they would have had a wildcard spot last year that Dave would have been voted back in. Some may disagree with me, but that's what I think anyway.
I think Jay's one-liners are usually very funny. But I like word play, and I also like clever groaners, both of which he uses a lot. You'll notice that often he gets a laugh from part of the audience immediately, then a second laugh as the rest of them get it. I don't know if this is considered to be good or bad in comedy clubs and so on, because I confess I've never been to one.
I'm someone who doesn't go to comedy clubs and doesn't have cable tv, so I don't watch Comedy Central or any of the other venues. I have a somewhat different view from a lot of people here as a result. (For example: the material that Ant uses is all new to me.) And I'll tell you something that will really shock you: I thought that Dat Phan was much funnier than Dave Mordal in their head-to-head last year. If you'd never heard either of them before, Dat was high energy and edgy, and Dave was telling a bunch of tired old stories about being a drunk. I'm not surprised the audience voted for Dat. Now, in the long run, especially if Dat keeps repeating the same stuff, as you say he does, then I might prefer Dave. But not on the basis of that performance. Oh, and I thought Dat's sit com idea was very promising. Maybe you have to be a female who's patronized the classic Asian nail parlor to get it?
To clarify, IMO, the real comedy of Jay's act IS his persona, NOT the jokes.Originally Posted by heidi0813
If you remember Andy Kaufman's act, he used to have this "foreign man" persona who would do hack impressions. For example, he would say, in his "Latka Gravis" voice: "Okay...now I do the impression of the Meester Archie Bunker." Then he would turn around like impressionists used to do, and turn back to the audience and speak in the very same "Latka" voice: "Okay, you...you dingbat. You go get me the beer. Okay, you meathead you....You get up from out of the chair." The CHARACTER is the joke, NOT the so-called joke the character is telling.
That's how it is with Jay London. He has created a character, which is this sloppy, paunchy, cro-magnon-looking shlub who thinks stand-up is doing a bad Henny Youngman act. The fact that some of the audience actually laugh at the one-liners is merely a fluke. I'm not saying he's got the act down yet. I'm just saying that's what it is, and now that I realize what it is he's going for, I wish I could coach him on it because I really like the concept.
One reason it's not working as well as it could is that many of his one-liners are more than "groaners" and are actually funny. I think they all need to be groaners, and his reactions to each groan -- the REAL punch, BTW -- need to be hilariously self-depracating.
So, to sum up... don't judge Jay on his one-liner material, but on his "character" and how comedic you find that to be.
One-liners and clever groaners can be funny, yes. In small doses. I, personally wouldn't pay to sit and listen to Jay London pose his one-liners and clever groaners for more than five minutes at a club. To me, that means he isn't that funny.
The way LCS is set up makes it a bad idea for a reality show. Allowing America to vote from the final six ruins it. America doesn't vote for who is funny. They vote for who they like as a person. So what if Jay London is nice? He's not funny.
Well, admittedly, I was not a big fan of Jay's at first. I originally thought he was a "Steven Wright wannabe," and felt his one-liner material was average at best.
But now I realize the one-liners aren't supposed to be funny. It's his self-depracating reactions that encompass the real comedy in his act. However, I have to say that he's got lots of fine-tuning and tweaking ahead of him before this character of his really begins to click.
My agents says to me, 'Who do you think's gonna play O.J. in the movie?' I said, 'I'll take a stab at it.'
Please forgive me. I wouldn't even be here, but I lost a bet. Let me make you a sandwich.
missamyh... you are exactly right. I believe that Dave Mordal is the whole reason they started the wildcard thing this year. Unfortunately, there was no one like that this year (voted out or still in the house) who is as far ahead of everyone else in terms of wit and humor (on or off-stage) as Dave was. So Mordal fans are left to tolerate the mediocrity of LCS2 until we can finally see more of Dave on LCS3. It will be great for those who didn't watch the first season to finally get to experience him!
Dave is the first to admit that you just can't beat high-energy. He says that he knew within 2 minutes that Dat had won. Even though Dave is undeniably funnier and an amazing writer, Dat used the energy thing to his advantage. Unfortunately that's all Dat has - energy.. and a mocked accent of his mother. Dave's wit is such that he constantly introduces new material, much of which he makes up on the spot as the audience gives him a topic. In my opinion, you really can't compare the irritating moonotony of Dat (energetic or not) with the intelligent, 'wet-your-pants' humor of Dave.
The most endearing of the wildcard comics were Jay and Todd. Unfortunately, Todd didn't make the 6th spot. He is the most deserving for a 2nd chance only because he wasn't massacred in the votes on the head-to-head, in fact, it was very close. He should have been in the top 5 instead of Tammy. He is also the funniest in the house. Jay is a novelty and if you watch him every week, his act really gets very old. Todd came very close but it turned out that Jay has developed more fans than him. Hopefully, Todd gets his own sitcom. I think him and John will make good in a sitcom.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote