Jump to content

John Oliver's Last Week Tonight - Brilliant.


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 50
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I think he might be the funniest person on television.

Alot of people apparently agree... To me it's probably more about the subject matter than the guy. I couldn't give two ***** less about politics in general so any sort of political satire is inherently lost on me. The Daily Show and The Colbert Report are the same way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fair enough. I actually like him best when he's doing goofy, wildly creative stuff. He had Right Said Fred on the show a few weeks ago simply to mock a dictator who had mentioned he loved the song I'm Too Sexy. Who does that?

He also had a bit last night that I cannot even explain that has led to the hashtag of #GOGETTHOSEGECKOS. To me, he's got that rare, mercurial genius that George Carlin and Richard Pryor had.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally think the guys hilarious.Very few comics are able to make you think while simultaneously making you laugh.He tackles real issues but addresses them in ways which people from both sides can laugh.Thats a very hard line to tow but he does it in my opinion.

Edited by Jpowers
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's great and he is hysterical. Unlike Stewart and Colbert, he gets the luxury of a full week to write his jokes and edit clips, but he's putting forth strong effort each week. The 12 year old boy in me appreciates he is allowed unfettered and un-bleeped use of the F word.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 7 months later...

I just don't like most of "what he does." Like I said, the political satire just gets lost on me; I have no use for it. I'm gonna watch this video when I get home tonight as NCAA basketball is my jam so we'll see if my opinion on him changes due to my interest in the subject matter...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, so I watched the whole thing. And there's nothing "brilliant" about it. Every single take that he had has been brought up countless times before by Jay Bilas and others; "brilliant" would be offering some sort of a solution. He brought up 3 incidents to help make his points; the Jamal Fenton case was 3 years ago, the O'Bannon case was about 3 years prior to that, and the Kyle Hendrick case was 4-5 years ago, can't exactly remember. So from the past 6 years of college athletics he was able to pinpoint 3 isolated cases from specific athletes to harp on. Jalen Rose complainig about his mom not being able to keep her lights on? How is that an NCAA problem? What makes him and his mom more special than Joe Schmo sitting in a Calculus class trying to study hard to become an engineer so that he can help his struggling parents with their bills?

Look, you won't find anyone who thinks the NCAA is more corrupt organization in need of regulation and change than I do, but you can't just say "Oh they make tons of money so they need to pay the athletes!" and be done with it. Where do you start? Where does it end? Do the backups on the rifle squad get to be paid as much as the starting quarterback? What about the cheerleading squads? The band? Can't leave out the chamber choir!

And again, I'm not his target audience here. I know about this stuff. He's pandering to the general public who are unaware and/or uninformed on this issue, and to them I'm sure he comes across as a ******* genius. He did make me chuckle with his "**** you, February" line at the beginning and he makes a good point about the relatively low number of self-sustaining athletic departments being so low because they can generally find anything to spend money on, but brilliance would be coming up with a viable solution.

Something definintely needs to change, and it's good that he's increasing awareness of the issue, but until he can figure out a way to actually do something about it he's no better than anyone else, in my opinion...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, so I watched the whole thing. And there's nothing "brilliant" about it. Every single take that he had has been brought up countless times before by Jay Bilas and others; "brilliant" would be offering some sort of a solution. He brought up 3 incidents to help make his points; the Jamal Fenton case was 3 years ago, the O'Bannon case was about 3 years prior to that, and the Kyle Hendrick case was 4-5 years ago, can't exactly remember. So from the past 6 years of college athletics he was able to pinpoint 3 isolated cases from specific athletes to harp on. Jalen Rose complainig about his mom not being able to keep her lights on? How is that an NCAA problem? What makes him and his mom more special than Joe Schmo sitting in a Calculus class trying to study hard to become an engineer so that he can help his struggling parents with their bills?

Look, you won't find anyone who thinks the NCAA is more corrupt organization in need of regulation and change than I do, but you can't just say "Oh they make tons of money so they need to pay the athletes!" and be done with it. Where do you start? Where does it end? Do the backups on the rifle squad get to be paid as much as the starting quarterback? What about the cheerleading squads? The band? Can't leave out the chamber choir!

And again, I'm not his target audience here. I know about this stuff. He's pandering to the general public who are unaware and/or uninformed on this issue, and to them I'm sure he comes across as a ******* genius. He did make me chuckle with his "**** you, February" line at the beginning and he makes a good point about the relatively low number of self-sustaining athletic departments being so low because they can generally find anything to spend money on, but brilliance would be coming up with a viable solution.

Something definintely needs to change, and it's good that he's increasing awareness of the issue, but until he can figure out a way to actually do something about it he's no better than anyone else, in my opinion...

Joe Schmo can get a job in addition to his school. If he's really good at that job, he can go pro without any stupid *** restrictions.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Joe Schmo can get a job in addition to his school. If he's really good at that job, he can go pro without any stupid *** restrictions.

This is a valid point, but I wonder how many athletes, especially ones of Rose's caliber, would go out and get a job even if allowed by the NCAA? And I'm not 100% against some sort of stipend or "pay" for college athletes, but until someone can come up with a better solution than just not paying anyone, rants like the one Oliver made aren't going to be of any help whatsoever...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...