6/20 Show Discussion *SPOILERS* - Page 13

Addict4Reality · 07-01-2006, 05:03 PM

While I enjoy PG's comments and perspective, I have to say that Joey's actions almost make me think he's too nice of a guy....and let's face it, in show business to make it any kind of distance as a career choice you have to have a thick skin. I'd like to see Joey as one of the top three....but not if he continues to take these kinds of actions in future competitions. He didn't make himself look any better and he wasn't fair to his partner. She almost "stumbled" a little because the heckling she was expecting didn't come her way.

Step up Joey.......get with the program.

Google · Sponsored Links

pg13 · 07-01-2006, 07:24 PM

Here's one thing that I think I should make clear...

If you appear on Survivor, you want to win Survivor.
If you appear on The Amazing Race, you want your team to win The Amazing Race.
If you appear on American Idol, you want to be the American Idol...

...but the general consensus in the stand-up comedy community is that appearing on Last Comic Standing is good exposure in front of a national tv audience.

I haven't met ANYONE who has told me, "I'd like to be the WINNER of Last Comic Standing."

Winning isn't the main goal--being on the show and increasing your public profile seems to be enough...and I can speak with some authority on this as I know people who HAVE been on the show and people who ARE on the show...as well as plenty of people who have tried out for the show. None of them had the dream of WINNING...their focus was on getting the chance to be seen by a larger audience.

I don't mean to speak for everyone--and maybe the people I know are unusual, maybe they're not telling me their true feelings...but there does seem to be a serious disconnect between the game show aspect of Last Comic Standing and the motivations of those supposedly playing the game...

The very rules of the game seem to be counterproductive to the aims of the participants. To which--comedians are given a challenge...and the "prize" for winning the challenge is the right to NOT BE ABLE TO PERFORM STAND-UP COMEDY ON NATIONAL TELEVISION.

What?

People spend their entire lives for their one chance to perform stand-up comedy on national television--and now, they're expected to work hard to deprive themselves of that opportunity?

Oh, sure, you can argue that the game design suggests that the prize is valuable because you can't be "voted out of the game" and that there's more benefit to being in the game but not doing stand-up comedy...BUT, when this show is over...all of these performers go back to being stand-up comedians...and who cares how long you lasted in the game? All that will matter is "Oh, hey...you were on that show...I saw your stand-up...I thought you were funny...I'll come out and see you if you're performing in my town."

Immunity's got nothing to do with that.

Imagine if the game design was reversed--imagine how much better the show would be... If, instead of competing for the right NOT to perform...instead of voting to determine who the weakest performers are and they get to perform...flip that completely around.

The winners of the challenge get to perform that night on national television. The audience still votes for their favorite comedian, but instead of the loser being eliminated--flip it...and say that the winner gets prizes. Make it a positive-motivation process...and skip the Apprentice-style walk back to the boat...it becomes a celebration of a night of great entertainment, not a brutal cut down of someone doing their best at their chosen profession...

And if you want full participation in your silly challenges--then make THAT the elimination procedure. No one who makes it to the head-to-head gets eliminated--but, if you come in last in the challenge that determines who gets to perform that night--boom!--you're off the show...with no chance to do stand-up to redeem yourself.

Trust me...stand-up comedians would LOVE to do THAT show...and they'd be working their butts off to win those challenges for the chance to perform...

As it is right now--who can get enthused about trying to earn the right to not do what we love to do?

pg--seattle

ShrinkingViolet · 07-01-2006, 08:10 PM

Quote:

Imagine if the game design was reversed--imagine how much better the show would be... If, instead of competing for the right NOT to perform...instead of voting to determine who the weakest performers are and they get to perform...flip that completely around.

That's the show I would love to watch, too. I agree that the comics are not showcasing their talent with the present format. In fact, it's getting downright boring and devoid of comedy.

Lex · 07-02-2006, 11:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pg13

Here's one thing that I think I should make clear...

If you appear on Survivor, you want to win Survivor.
If you appear on The Amazing Race, you want your team to win The Amazing Race.
If you appear on American Idol, you want to be the American Idol...

...but the general consensus in the stand-up comedy community is that appearing on Last Comic Standing is good exposure in front of a national tv audience.

I haven't met ANYONE who has told me, "I'd like to be the WINNER of Last Comic Standing."

Winning isn't the main goal--being on the show and increasing your public profile seems to be enough...and I can speak with some authority on this as I know people who HAVE been on the show and people who ARE on the show...as well as plenty of people who have tried out for the show. None of them had the dream of WINNING...their focus was on getting the chance to be seen by a larger audience.

I agree with you there. As I've watched this season, I've been writing down names of the comedians I found funny, like Josh Blue, Chris Porter, Nikki Payne, Nikki Glaser, Flip Schultz, etc. It helps me keep track of them so if they come to my area (rare since this is South Dakota) or release a comedy album or something, I'll know who they are and want to see them/buy it/whatever.

So, yeah, all of these comedians have succeeded in that regard.

barefootdyke · 07-03-2006, 11:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pg13

I've heard people call it "the heckling challenge." Let's call it by what it truly is... The SHOW RUINING challenge. That's what heckling is. IT DOES NOT MAKE THE SHOW BETTER, PEOPLE! IT RUINS IT...FOR EVERYONE. And now NBC has gone put their big peacocky stamp of approval on heckling for people who might start going to comedy clubs to see comedians now that this show may have whetted their appetite ... Are there going to be drunken idiots who want to call attention to themselves in comedy clubs? Sure. Do all comedians need to know how to handle them? Yes. But, you know the BEST way to handle them? You work at clubs where they have bouncers come and KICK THOSE IDIOTS OUT OF THE SHOW SO THE REST OF THE AUDIENCE CAN ENJOY THEMSELVES!!!

pg13, a short letter appeared today in our local newspaper that reminded me of your well written post.

Quote:

"Raspberries to the woman celebrating her birthday at Gary Field's Comedy Court on June 24. Because of her obnoxious, drunken behavior, I, along with many others, was unable to enjoy the show I had paid to attend. I hope you enjoyed your hangover the next day as much as you enjoyed heckling the performers that night."

07-01-2006, 07:24 PM	#122
pg13 pop culture whore Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Seattle Age: 44 Posts: 569	Here's one thing that I think I should make clear... If you appear on Survivor, you want to win Survivor. If you appear on The Amazing Race, you want your team to win The Amazing Race. If you appear on American Idol, you want to be the American Idol... ...but the general consensus in the stand-up comedy community is that appearing on Last Comic Standing is good exposure in front of a national tv audience. I haven't met ANYONE who has told me, "I'd like to be the WINNER of Last Comic Standing." Winning isn't the main goal--being on the show and increasing your public profile seems to be enough...and I can speak with some authority on this as I know people who HAVE been on the show and people who ARE on the show...as well as plenty of people who have tried out for the show. None of them had the dream of WINNING...their focus was on getting the chance to be seen by a larger audience. I don't mean to speak for everyone--and maybe the people I know are unusual, maybe they're not telling me their true feelings...but there does seem to be a serious disconnect between the game show aspect of Last Comic Standing and the motivations of those supposedly playing the game... The very rules of the game seem to be counterproductive to the aims of the participants. To which--comedians are given a challenge...and the "prize" for winning the challenge is the right to NOT BE ABLE TO PERFORM STAND-UP COMEDY ON NATIONAL TELEVISION. What? People spend their entire lives for their one chance to perform stand-up comedy on national television--and now, they're expected to work hard to deprive themselves of that opportunity? Oh, sure, you can argue that the game design suggests that the prize is valuable because you can't be "voted out of the game" and that there's more benefit to being in the game but not doing stand-up comedy...BUT, when this show is over...all of these performers go back to being stand-up comedians...and who cares how long you lasted in the game? All that will matter is "Oh, hey...you were on that show...I saw your stand-up...I thought you were funny...I'll come out and see you if you're performing in my town." Immunity's got nothing to do with that. Imagine if the game design was reversed--imagine how much better the show would be... If, instead of competing for the right NOT to perform...instead of voting to determine who the weakest performers are and they get to perform...flip that completely around. The winners of the challenge get to perform that night on national television. The audience still votes for their favorite comedian, but instead of the loser being eliminated--flip it...and say that the winner gets prizes. Make it a positive-motivation process...and skip the Apprentice-style walk back to the boat...it becomes a celebration of a night of great entertainment, not a brutal cut down of someone doing their best at their chosen profession... And if you want full participation in your silly challenges--then make THAT the elimination procedure. No one who makes it to the head-to-head gets eliminated--but, if you come in last in the challenge that determines who gets to perform that night--boom!--you're off the show...with no chance to do stand-up to redeem yourself. Trust me...stand-up comedians would LOVE to do THAT show...and they'd be working their butts off to win those challenges for the chance to perform... As it is right now--who can get enthused about trying to earn the right to not do what we love to do? pg--seattle Last edited by pg13; 07-01-2006 at 07:30 PM.

07-01-2006, 05:03 PM	#121
Addict4Reality To my hubby's chagrin... Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Minnesota Posts: 32	While I enjoy PG's comments and perspective, I have to say that Joey's actions almost make me think he's too nice of a guy....and let's face it, in show business to make it any kind of distance as a career choice you have to have a thick skin. I'd like to see Joey as one of the top three....but not if he continues to take these kinds of actions in future competitions. He didn't make himself look any better and he wasn't fair to his partner. She almost "stumbled" a little because the heckling she was expecting didn't come her way. Step up Joey.......get with the program.