solotrek
-
Posts
868 -
Joined
Content Type
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Discussion
Posts posted by solotrek
-
-
Yes. Today. Ted Cruz also looks very different in tonights show.
-
I'm assuming the Hitler story was the origin of the skit he did on The Larry Sanders show.
-
Ever wonder what the Q&A before the show is like? Here is an example.
-
Sometimes it is a list of places and a word or two that isn't a place.
-
And I assume this is why we eventually ended up with The Nightly Show (originally the Minority Report). Writers' rooms get insanely tense/intense on a good day. On a show that needs a new script everyday? Have fun with that. You cool off, learn, and move on.
-
1
-
-
Oh, I have a feeling TDS is saving the best for last. And just like what Victor the Crab said about Denis Leary, I think Jon deserves better if he wants a very good final week and to be sent off properly by bringing all his friends and alumni
Yes, how lucky for all of us that Jon's good friend Adam Sandler has an awful movie coming out. I suppose we'll see him. Ugh.
Ted Cruz must have one of the smartest publicist of the Republican candidates. Rand Paul already said his goodbye. I'm hoping for Bernie Sanders Jon's last week.
-
1
-
-
Well, Jon's lucky that they at least let him keep using his left hand. My in-laws are firm believers that left handed people who use their left hand are lazy unmotivated people, because when they were growing up in the Soviet Union, everyone had to use their right hand for things. If you're not using your right hand, you're not trying hard enough and should get punished. All in all, the ruler technique doesn't sound as bad.
-
Is there some sort of security device hidden behind that? Are they really worried about protecting legs?
Bulletproof. Secret service all around will dive on Obama or any guest who gets that and push them under there. Jon had mentioned it during a Letterman interview when talking about his Musharraf interview.
-
Tickets weren't released for the taping to the public for the most part. Seems like it was press corp and people with connections (or the connections themselves).
-
But it wasn't Anna, it was the little girl herself. And at that point he knew nothing of her situation.
I guess what I'm saying is, he has no reason to care about her situation because he has no clue who this girl is and even with the "confirmation" had no real reason to believe anything the girl had said. It's easier to wave off. For all intents and purposes, until he had a conversation with Anna that gave it credence, it was a bizarre little kid informing him that he's probably her dad. When he had the somewhat "official confirmation" from Anna, he did everything he could to get involved.
I was dumbfounded at both how well Luke treated Anna given her conduct and how well he apparently thought of her. When Lorelai after dinner with her parents, gently queried him about April's mother he described her as "cool","down to earth" and "nothing bad there". At the time, I began to wonder if he wasn't pining for her.As much as I hate triangles, it would have been a better storyline. The storyline we got basically boiled down to Lorelai being upset that she was being sidelined for Luke blindly wanting to connect with his daughter and make up for 12 years of lost fatherhood, essentially issuing an ultimatum to choose between her and his daughter, and sleeping with Christopher. It was absurd. Had they played more of the Anna card in the show, it would show why Lorelai was so seemingly threatened, why she wanted to "rush" the marriage, and how Luke's relationship with Anna was really affecting her. In fact, it would have been a great parallel between the relationship of Christopher and Lorelai with Rory and Luke and Anna with April.
-
And of all people he sought guidance from as to whether or not he could ignore the situation, it was his flaky sister - not Rev. Skinner, Rabbi Behrens, or some other individual whose advice he could respect - to whom he spoke. A woman whose own parenting skills he had long found wanting. And to the best of my recollection, someone he had never previously consulted on any matters of significance.
Why would someone who wasn't religious go to a religious figure for advice? Just because you respect someone doesn't mean you're going to tell the person your newly discovered personal secret. Especially if you're a private person. The town was a gossip/rumor mill. Luke only had 2 people that he could really talk to in his life, Lorelai and his sister. He already said that he didn't want Lorelai to know because of the Rory thing and the fact that he was freaked out beyond all belief and didn't know how it would impact their relationship. Even though Liz had deplorable parenting skills, she was the only person he could speak candidly to and wouldn't be judged by.
If Luke had looked into the living arrangements and circumstances of April and Anna, found them perfectly adequate and decided against any involvement, I would have thought him perhaps unfeeling. But to do nothing when all he had was the word of a twelve-year-old that all was well in her world, did -and continues to - strike me as both cold and irresponsible. And not something I would have expected of a man who had attended the funeral of a caterpillar for a young girl of similar age that he had just begun to know.This might be cold hearted of me, but why should he care? He was essentially treated like a sperm donor. He had no social or personal responsibility for this child. In fact, he was purposely kept away from the child for 12 years. It'd be a different scenario if Anna came to him, told him April was his child, and it was important that he knew. Instead, he willingly went "all in" based on the science fair project of a 12 year old which is pretty rash IMO. For all he knew, April's uncle did the DNA test and found that none of the 3 guys were her father. Realized this might make his sister look like a whore and would be more traumatizing to his niece than the ridiculous Mama Mia situation and doctored the results. It's not that hard to do.
The relationship he had with Rory was inherently different than the one with April, especially at the beginning. Rory was there everyday or more. He was a provider of food/coffee for them. He fixed their house. He was pretty involved in their lives. April was in another town and he had no relationship or any contact with her.
Edit: Also, Luke treated Anna a lot better than any reasonable person would have after it all settled and he accepted April as his daughter. There's something fundamentally wrong with not even informing someone that they're going to be a father, whether you want them in your life or not. The "you always hated kids" line is blatant BS and a lazy excuse.
-
3
-
-
Yet he makes no effort to determine if his own child is healthy, thriving and well provided for, that her mother is an adequate parent and that that indeed all April wanted was to win a science contest. Because Luke could rely on the word of a twelve-year-old to know what was best for her. I thought it was conduct worthy of Christopher.
I'd say this situation is significantly different from Christopher, and Luke's relationship with Rory.
He had known Rory since she was ~11. She went to the diner everyday, sometimes several times a day. He had a crush on her mother and was basically their handyman. There was a couple of years worth of a relationship. So yes, it makes perfect sense that from what we would see in the show, Luke would act quicker for Rory than for April. Since by the start of the show, he had known Rory for ~5 years and he met April the same time we did (which was ~11 years of knowing Rory by that point).
First off, the bombshell that Luke was a father was dropped on him by a 12 year old and "confirmed" at her science fair. From Luke's perspective at the time, Anna wanted Luke to have no part in Anna or April's life since he knew nothing about Anna being pregnant/April's existence. He was essentially a complete stranger and vice versa. Most strangers wouldn't go out of their way to check on a well being of a child unless there were serious signs of problems. For all intents and purposes he was more sperm donor than a father and that seems to be the way Anna wanted it. Any person would take a bit to get their bearings on that situation. As we've seen repeatedly, he's a guy who takes a bit to process anything.
However, once he processed the fact that he was a dad, he did everything he could to be there for his daughter. He dealt with a woman who seemed as (or even more so) headstrong and stubborn as Lorelai. Did everything in his power to spend time with April and getting to know her, to the detriment to his relationship with Lorelai. He fought hard to have April in his life and did everything he could to make up for lost time.
Even if (as some people in this forum have suggested) Lorelai purposely made it a little hard for Christopher to have a say in Rory's childhood, it was clear that Christopher did little to fight for his daughter. Even in the show, it was said repeatedly how absentee he was, how unreliable he was, how he'd miss phone calls (until Sherry came into the picture and he got his life together), and would miss big events (which is why Rory was scared of asking him to her coming out party). Heck, Christopher was upset that Rory "finked on him" when his credit card didn't go through. It shows the lack of maturity that basically kept Christopher from being a good father.
Comparing the Christopher-Rory situation with the Luke-April one is like comparing apples to penguins.
-
3
-
-
The thing is, both of them had their reasons for doing what they did both good and bad. But the fact that neither could deal with their choices and each other's choices/each other like normal people showed why getting married at the time was a bad idea. Lorelai seemed to think marriage would be some great band-aid for their issues which is basically similar to a married couple having kids to save their marriage. Luke was insensitive and in his own little world, ignoring the fact that Lorelai had emotions/thoughts/opinions.
I will say that Lorelai sleeping with Christopher was inexcusable. Sort of justifies Lukes paranoia about that relationship. People got mad that Logan horn dogged it up after he and Rory "broke up ". What Lorelai did was worse and since that's how the whole engagement ended, I can see why more people would side with Luke. Seriously, who sleeps with an ex the same night after ending an engagement?
-
1
-
-
Well got my answer:
The #DailyShow returns next week w/ new episodes, including Jon's final interview w/ @POTUS Barack Obama, Tues, 7/21 http://Edit To Add: Well the 21st is clickable on the ticket site now, but obviously sold out.
-
2
-
-
-
Headmaster C also gave zero f's about Richard and his bloviating about the locker first aid kits.
-
4
-
-
I had trouble following what the heck Logan was and wasn't doing professionally in S7, but wasn't he initially out from under his father's wing?
He was still working with his father up until the copyright lawsuit. That was a deal he made, while working under his father, behind his father's back (Mitchum didn't think the deal was a good idea and rejected it). I'm not entirely sure what the Huntzberger company or corporation does though. I'm thinking a Rupert Murdoch type thing where they invest in news organizations ala TV, print, radio, internet. But I'm not entirely sure how Logan's deal with the facebook/linkdin type company fits in.
-
1
-
-
I wasn't entirely sure of the terms of her internship and from what I saw from the show, neither did Rory. However, Mitchum clearly had a point if Rory's reaction to his speech was to quit school, quit her dream, and shrivel into a ball of misery alienating the one person who was always there for her.
I thought Rory showed a little spunk (I think it's similar to gumption) when getting the job at the Stanford Eagle Gazette. Of course the editor could have just called security and hauled her ass out, but regardless she stayed until she got the job.
Rory didn't show investigative skills.Though journalists have to have some investigative skills, it never really seemed she was going to be an investigative reporter. She was very thorough with her research for each article, as evident by the binders full of information for one story. And if someone gave her insider information for something big, she'd probably go full on investigator mode for the story to write her article. However, investigative reporter was not her end goal. There's a difference there. She was mainly an editorial writer.
I'll defend Rory a little bit, and say she wasn't really dressed appropriately to speak with her,Not only that, didn't Lorelai just pull her out of bed and drag her there? The morning breath, the eye gunk, pajamas, and depending on when she showers the griminess of it all - I wouldn't speak to my friends looking like that let alone my celebrity idol.
-
Can I just...the French male name for this character is Michel. It's a cognate of Michael. Sorry for the correction.
No worries, I spelled Lorelai - Lorelei for years before I realized I was wrong. No one corrected me and it made me feel like no one read anything I had ever posted. So just the fact that someone read something, it's great!
-
4
-
-
She was fortunate however in that she did have men in her world - like Luke and to an extent Morey and Jackson - who modeled kindly and decent male behaviour. That would likely stand her in good stead as time went on.
Was Jackson very much involved in Rory's early life though? It didn't seem like Jackson was more than the vegetable guy until he got involved with Sookie. At the time of her growing up, he'd probably be on the level of Taylor or something. She seemed to be around Michele more than Jackson, for better or worse.
-
Don't know if this was the a writer's room quirk or not, but sometimes people just say either "go up" or "come down" even if geographically it doesn't make sense. I know I do. Whenever I refer to someone going somewhere, I'll end up saying "go up" or "drive up". Whenever I refer to someone coming to where I am, I'll say "come down" or "drive down". For instance, I currently live downstate. For 4th of July, we ended up camping upstate. However, when referring to people who were arriving later, I always ended up saying something like "____ is coming down in an hour or so" even though we were geographically north of where said person was coming from. I always ended up correcting myself, but it's a weird habit and I don't know when it was developed.
Or maybe the writer's room doesn't know geography.
-
2
-
-
It's weird that a live interview with John Edwards was such a huge get back in 2003.
I think the bigger get was him announcing his presidential campaign on The Daily Show. What a squandered career. September 15, 2003 right now guys. Cuba Gooding Junior is the guest. Remember him?
-
My husband was really amazed how good Carrel was. We missed his tenure initially. He's definitely up there. I'm surprised I haven't seen a Sam Bee episode yet. I like Ed Helms too Victor, he's had some bad pieces though. There was a Rachael lady that I don't remember anyone ever talking about.
I hate the couch. It looks boxy and uncomfortable, and doesn't seem to fit with the set.
ETA: Spoke too soon, here's Sam Bee. A segment called We <3 Showbiz with Rob Corddry. Was this a replacement for the Frank Decaro segment? I'm so glad TDS got rid of stuff like this.
-
Canali clothing? Never heard of them. So many different companies.
Jon Stewart is the gayest of all gays is a joke they're using in this segment with Rob Corrdry. What a difference 12 years makes. Also, Rob is a great correspondent. Channeling Colbert it seems.
Ed Helms is doing a segment on the Free Porn for our Troops guy. It's not that funny at all, but Ed Helms isn't awful. Randy Jackson is the guest. Ugh.
In the Media: The Blogs Must Be Crazy
in The Daily Show With Jon Stewart [V]
Apparently Timothy Geitner's trips to TDS to talk to Jon privately about the financial crisis was just the tip of the iceberg. Seems like Obama had Jon over to the White House for chats about things.