Jump to content
Forums forums
PRIMETIMER
saoirse

The Nightly Show With Larry Wilmore

Recommended Posts

I am seriously creeped out by the "Anastasia" ads that air during this show. Does everyone see these? I try to FF before my skin starts crawling, but still their presence distracts me so much that I have to shake myself in order to pay attention to the show itself. I wonder if they are having trouble finding sponsors? I hope not, but <<shudder>> I seriously want them to do a show or twenty about human trafficking, to make up for airing those ads.

Share this post


Link to post

I am seriously creeped out by the "Anastasia" ads that air during this show. Does everyone see these? I try to FF before my skin starts crawling, but still their presence distracts me so much that I have to shake myself in order to pay attention to the show itself. I wonder if they are having trouble finding sponsors? I hope not, but <<shudder>> I seriously want them to do a show or twenty about human trafficking, to make up for airing those ads.

Are you watching the initial airing (11:30 PM)? I notice that if I record one of the later airings (Comedy Central airs the whole TDS/TNS/@M block again at 1:30 AM in my time zone), the ads are WAY sleazier.

Share this post


Link to post

You know who isn't comfortable talking about their PhD? Someone without one. I have one! I'll talk about it all day long. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

I'm watching the 11:30 pm airing-- now I'm curious how much creepier the ads can get at 1:30!

 

I thought the panel was terrible last night. Jordan tried to point out that there actually is a real problem with low wages, and Larry also tried to interject some thoughts about how low wage workers are actually working their butts off, but the get off my lawn crowd was too interested in saying the same thing over and over again about entitled millennials. I didn't see the original letter that they were discussing, but seriously-- are we really advocating that company owners are working hard and deserve to exploit the labor of others, and those who are "the most productive in the world" should live on ramen so the hard working company owners can benefit at their expense?

 

The idea that you can just get a cheaper apartment somewhere else is ridiculous. Low wage workers can't afford even low rents, and the location of cheap housing, if it exists at all, is rarely proximate to the location of decent jobs. So it's really a lot of bullshit that people with low wages should just somehow live within their means. It's been shown over and over again that it's not an option.

 

If you want to starve for your art, like Papa, that is not the same thing at all. It's not the same as people who are starving because there's nothing else to do. I was really annoyed, and wondered if I'd turned on a FoxNews panel instead of TNS.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

I'm watching the 11:30 pm airing-- now I'm curious how much creepier the ads can get at 1:30!

 

I thought the panel was terrible last night. Jordan tried to point out that there actually is a real problem with low wages, and Larry also tried to interject some thoughts about how low wage workers are actually working their butts off, but the get off my lawn crowd was too interested in saying the same thing over and over again about entitled millennials. I didn't see the original letter that they were discussing, but seriously-- are we really advocating that company owners are working hard and deserve to exploit the labor of others, and those who are "the most productive in the world" should live on ramen so the hard working company owners can benefit at their expense?

 

The idea that you can just get a cheaper apartment somewhere else is ridiculous. Low wage workers can't afford even low rents, and the location of cheap housing, if it exists at all, is rarely proximate to the location of decent jobs. So it's really a lot of bullshit that people with low wages should just somehow live within their means. It's been shown over and over again that it's not an option.

I could not agree more, that was such a tone-deaf panel. Someone who knows that minimum wage is NOT a living wage isn't "entitled," and it was truly bizarre that they picked that topic and had four comedians at the table. I mean... have one person with a little damn knowledge on the actual topic at hand! Are there some millennials with an astonishing sense of entitlement? Of course! Does it get annoying when each generation acts as if they're the first generation to have unpaid internships in creative and extremely competitive fields? Of course! That's not what this was, though. 

 

And the idea that a person who made millions by getting other people to invest in his idea has worked SO HARD that he has some right not to pay his employees a living wage is completely absurd.

 

Also, what the hell part of Brooklyn does Mike Yard live in that's so cheap? Hook me up, Mike, I wish I could afford Brooklyn these days!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Don't get a $1200 apartment is good advice, but like, duh. Also, it's short sighted. The SF Bay area, typical hourly wage earners are coming into the city over an hour on public transportation. That cost adds up.

My rent in the area went up every year. My pay didn't. It's hard to "just move".

Though I agree, sometimes you whoop you kids.

Share this post


Link to post

You know who isn't comfortable talking about their PhD? Someone without one. I have one! I'll talk about it all day long. 

 

True. I know many PhDs. There's a few of them that aren't comfortable announcing it since they don't want to be seen as the stereotypical pompous academic, but any of them if you ask them what subject their doctorate is in will tell you then go on in great length to tell you what they specialize in if you show the slightest interest.

 

I thought the panel was terrible last night. Jordan tried to point out that there actually is a real problem with low wages, and Larry also tried to interject some thoughts about how low wage workers are actually working their butts off, but the get off my lawn crowd was too interested in saying the same thing over and over again about entitled millennials. I didn't see the original letter that they were discussing, but seriously-- are we really advocating that company owners are working hard and deserve to exploit the labor of others, and those who are "the most productive in the world" should live on ramen so the hard working company owners can benefit at their expense?

 

The idea that you can just get a cheaper apartment somewhere else is ridiculous. Low wage workers can't afford even low rents, and the location of cheap housing, if it exists at all, is rarely proximate to the location of decent jobs. So it's really a lot of bullshit that people with low wages should just somehow live within their means. It's been shown over and over again that it's not an option.

 

If you want to starve for your art, like Papa, that is not the same thing at all. It's not the same as people who are starving because there's nothing else to do. I was really annoyed, and wondered if I'd turned on a FoxNews panel instead of TNS.

 

OMG I so totally agree with this! I love Mike Yard. I think he is hilarious and the breakout star of the show (with Holly Walker). But he can be really shallow when it comes to serious political discussions. He's way too quick to assume that his experiences are universal and too dismissive of other opinions. And it really seemed that the 2 loudmouths hadn't even read what they were talking about. That whole "I lived in Brooklyn" biit. She lives 30 miles away from work in the cheapest apartment she could find near the train. Forget about Brooklyn Mike she's already in Newark or Staten Island. I might be able to forgive Tom Papa since he's just a comedian and not a particularly political one from the little I've ever seen of him. But when you're a writer and performer on a current events focused show I expect more. Especially when you were loudly demanding instant results when it came to economic justice for you and yours and that same show not too long ago.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

It's guests like Daveed Diggs that make me wish Larry had an interview segment, rather than just putting him on the panel. I mean, he did well on the panel, but: so hot and interesting.

 

I wonder what the kid who stole Flat Larry is doing. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

"Nightly Nightly" needs to go. It's a one-joke bit that, if it goes beyond 15 seconds, is too much. We get it. It's the "Entertainment Tonightization of News." It's not particularly new or original.

 

The show is starting to make me tired. I can't get into any of the correspondents. And I've outgrown, "I smoke a lot of pot" references. Every now and then something comes along which makes me laugh too much. Flat Larry shooting laser beams from his eyes at Cosby will never not be funny.

 

I don't know, maybe it's me. I love Wilmore and think he's a pretty brilliant writer. But perhaps I need to walk away from the show.

Share this post


Link to post
I wonder what the kid who stole Flat Larry is doing.

 

How hard is it to find that guy? His jacket gives out his measurements. (first time I noticed was last night)

 

The plantation bit was funny. "If we conceive, do you get to keep the baby?" That poor lady. She was a good sport and I'm glad that Larry said nice things about the place in the end.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

I loved the piece about the frat guy who was arrested in North Korea. I hadn't heard about that story, and afterward I looked it up online and read more. He traveled to Cuba last year, so I guess he was trying to go to all of the countries the U.S. doesn't get along with.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Wow, Yard could not be more wrong on football. Yes, players know of generalized risk of injuries and make the choice to play, but as MG was trying to say, and he wasn't saying it well at all, is that because CTE effects are not well understood, players are accepting risks for which they are not informed. "Informed consent" is basically the foundation for medical ethics. 

I don't see why the NFL isn't sinking any money into equipment R&D at the least. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Plus, there's plenty of research now showing concussion effects on kids' cognitive function in the here and now, not just cumulatively. Like kids who play football start the school year smart and get measurably less so as the football season wears on. I bet that the game-playing landscape will be very different 10 years from now.

Share this post


Link to post

Oh, no doubt. There needs to be a huge definitive study similar to the one that finally linked smoking to cancer, scientifically. So to speak. The NFL should be getting ahead of it and working on safer equipment, etc. 

 

I tend to think that coaching the proper techniques will help a lot.

Share this post


Link to post

This show (and especially the panel) feels like black issues special on many days.  (Unblackening was funny first few times, now it does not seem that funny) While that would appeal to a certain group of viewers, I think it will reduce the overall viewership and the show may not be able to go on with limited viewers. Its still one of my regular shows and I like it better than Colbert celebrity chit chat.

Has Larry or anyone stated that they want to focus more on black issues? Is that what this show sets out to be about? Is my impression of what the show is focusing on messed up?

Share this post


Link to post

I think the show is much much stronger when they focus on minority issues, and the panels have been way more interesting. I know they need ratings, but I don't need another discussion on Trump. *Everyone* is talking about Trump. It doesn't just have to be black issues; the panel they did with the transgendered people was fantastic. Anything where they bring on guests (like the 19 y/o to talk about idiot Sean Penn) that you're not seeing anywhere else, they do well. When they have on just rando comedians, it's not that good. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

Has Larry or anyone stated that they want to focus more on black issues? Is that what this show sets out to be about? Is my impression of what the show is focusing on messed up?

 

The original name of the show was "The Minority Report" and it had to be changed because of the Fox show based on the movie Minority Report. If that helps you with what the original set up of the show was.

 

This show is regulated for clip watch only because it seems less fact checked and informative than a satire show like this should be. I don't like watching comedians who aren't funny in any other circumstances and don't see any reason I should force myself to with this show either. And honestly, I find it annoying when "informed" guests are brought in and then ignored/spoken over on other programs, this show is no different. Too many strikes against it. Someone needs to find a happy middle between this and Bill Maher's show.

Edited by solotrek

Share this post


Link to post

I don't mind the show's focus on black issues. I'm just tired of the words "unblackening" and "de-negrofying" the white house.

 

Just like I'm tired of Stephen Colbert doing the Hunger Games thing whenever a GOP candidate drops out.

 

It's amusing at first, but annoying as hell after the umpeenth time.

 

 

Re: Flat Larry. I'm a Howard Stern fan, and they have a recurring bit called "Flat Ronnie," named after Stern's bodyguard/driver. Flat Ronnie has been on several TV shows...Now it feels like The Nightly Show is copying the Stern show bit (but I don't know if the "Flat" thing has been popular elsewhere before).

 

Re: The Correspondents: I fast forward when I see any one of them. I just watch the first 10 minutes when it's just Larry....Occasionally, I'll get to the roundtable when there's a guest I like, such as Michael K. Williams last night.

 

The Nightly Show correspondents have made me appreciate The Daily Show correspondents even more (at least the pre-Trevor Noah ones). I just can't buy into them.

Edited by nowandlater

Share this post


Link to post

I love (LOVE) the "unblackening" joke-- I think it's funny and it's no more of a problem to me that they use it again and again than how TDS used to use "Indecision" for election years. I also love when the show focuses on Black and Latino/a issues, and the perspectives of people of color in general. We can get the white viewpoint on just about anything, just about anywhere and any time. Giving air to other people is a huge relief and I wish more places would do it. RE the show was originally called "The Minority Report" before there was a prime time drama with that name, at which point they changed it to avoid confusion: It's too bad, since that other show didn't last, and this one (I hope) will.

 

I admit I hate the "Nightly Nightly" segments, though. It's not because they're repeats, it's because they tend to be free of any actual comment, other than the one that shallow entertainment should not be used to obscure actual issues. If they want to live up to that comment, they should stop wasting time on the show with contentless blather and use it for more substantive issue deconstruction.

Edited by possibilities
  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
I love (LOVE) the "unblackening" joke

 

Me, too. I especially like it that he rhymes it with 'happening' -- makes it rhythmic and fun.

 

I'm an old white, who works with a bunch of other white people. I really appreciate TNS's focus on minority issues, because I doubt I'd get them any where else. I can at least have conversations with my black friends that aren't all awkward, and they then don't have the responsibility of having to school me.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

Just catching up on this week's shows.  On Wednesday's show, when they showed excerpts from e-mails on the Flint water crisis that said something like "It won't do any good to invest more in water infrastructure if we're finding windowsills with teethmarks,' that no one seemed to realize they were talking about lead paint on windowsills (which children do sometimes chew on because the paint tastes sweet).  Lead paint has been banned in the US for decades, and although it's possible that some older home in Flint may still have lead paint, it seems unlikely that this is still a major problem.  It seems like the officials were saying "Hey, why should we bother to get rid of lead in the pipes when they "might" have lead paint in the homes.  Which is a horrible thing to say, they should certainly be working on getting rid of both sources of lead.  I get the impression none of the panelists were even aware of the problems with lead paint.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

The one thing I wish they would get rid of is that annoying NIGHTLY! NIGHTLY! because every time I hear it, I want to poke my eyes out. It's like nails on a chalkboard double squared.

Edited by GHScorpiosRule
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

I get why it's annoying, but I agree with their point. I think Grace is funny in the part, but it's been overused lately. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Re: Flat Larry. I'm a Howard Stern fan, and they have a recurring bit called "Flat Ronnie," named after Stern's bodyguard/driver. Flat Ronnie has been on several TV shows...Now it feels like The Nightly Show is copying the Stern show bit (but I don't know if the "Flat" thing has been popular elsewhere before).

 

Haven't seen the Howard Stern bit referenced, but it sounds like it's making the same reference Larry is to the character Flat Stanley and the popular grade school project - https://www.flatstanley.com/about?subpage=how_it_works

 

Just catching up on this week's shows.  On Wednesday's show, when they showed excerpts from e-mails on the Flint water crisis that said something like "It won't do any good to invest more in water infrastructure if we're finding windowsills with teethmarks,' that no one seemed to realize they were talking about lead paint on windowsills (which children do sometimes chew on because the paint tastes sweet).  Lead paint has been banned in the US for decades, and although it's possible that some older home in Flint may still have lead paint, it seems unlikely that this is still a major problem.  It seems like the officials were saying "Hey, why should we bother to get rid of lead in the pipes when they "might" have lead paint in the homes.  Which is a horrible thing to say, they should certainly be working on getting rid of both sources of lead.  I get the impression none of the panelists were even aware of the problems with lead paint.  

 

Unfortunately lead paint is still is a significant problem. In older homes that aren't kept up the newer paint can chip away and eventually lead paint chips do flake off. There is also an issue where windows being regularly opened and shut can generate lead paint dust that is then inhaled by kids. It is a very common trope among certain segments of the population that this means that any efforts to remove lead from other sources are just "big government libtards" wasting their tax dollars. And that all the problem is just the poors being lazy and not watching their kids (since we all know that their kids never put random things in their mouths) or caring about their homes (since we all know that nobody is ever at the mercy of a bad landlord or forced to chose between a fresh coat of paint and paying the electric bill). I'm not too surprised to find people who should know better embracing this stupidity, just disappointed.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I really enjoyed the discussion from Thursday's episode about Nina Simone and Zoe Saldana. All of the panelists had interesting things to contribute, but were also entertaining. I really enjoy everything I have seen so far from Francesca Ramsey. She's quickly becoming one of my favorite panelists. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
It is a very common trope among certain segments of the population that this means that any efforts to remove lead from other sources are just "big government libtards" wasting their tax dollars

 

And of course if the lead is from paint, then it isn't the government's problem, and they don't have to do anything about it. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

 

The one thing I wish they would get rid of is that annoying NIGHTLY! NIGHTLY! because every time I hear it, I want to poke my eyes out. It's like nails on a chalkboard double squared.

I am firmly on board with  "NIGHTLY! NIGHTLY" Must. Die. Now.  

 

The first time the bit aired I thought it was kinda dumb, but I didn't hate it because I could see where they were going with their mockery of fluff "news" coverage of serious issues.  But since that first use of the bit, it's made my ears (and whatever) bleed every time I hear it.  One time was an ok attempt at mockery of a subject that deserves mockery.  But each subsequent airing is the same - just Grace prattling dumb stuff about a serious subject, followed by some annoying blast of noise, followed by Larry whining "Grace, stop it!! Just stop it!!", lather, rinse, repeat.   Well, yes.  Stop it.  Just stop it.  Please. 

  • Like 10

Share this post


Link to post

It's long past time for Comedy Central to stop bleeping their shows. The conversation about Trump was beautifully profane and we miss a lot of it with the constant bleeping. Just give in CC. Or make a non-bleeped version available on the web.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

The piece on interrupting women and yelling was really good. They showed the clip with Cruz figuratively screaming his head off. 

 

The only thing I'd say is that cable news is largely a circus as it is, and Mathews et al., tend to interrupt everyone all the time.

 

The point about Ghostbusters isn't racial or gender. It's that reboots are tired and lame. 

 

"She's playing the Ernie Hudson character." That's the problem. She's not playing a character from another movie. How about a horror/comedy based on a brand new idea instead?

Edited by ganesh
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Just catching up on the last handful of episodes and had to come here to express my utter incredulity at Ricky Velez insisting that Donald Trump can't really be a racist because he lives in NYC. Is he insane? Trump is a billionaire who has spent his entire life being utterly insulated to the point of literally never having to even look at the unwashed masses much less interact with them if he doesn't want to. And might I add that if you run a presidential campaign that preys on racism and that makes racist promises, uh... that's racist. I'm not sure where Ricky's disconnect is there.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I think he was saying that Trump's campaign antics are more of an act than based on personal deep seeded racism. A lot of people have speculated Trump has been putting on an act, so I didn't think it was a big deal. 

Share this post


Link to post

The point about Ghostbusters isn't racial or gender. It's that reboots are tired and lame. 

 

"She's playing the Ernie Hudson character." That's the problem. She's not playing a character from another movie.

Leslie Jones seems to be playing the same character she plays in every SNL sketch she's ever been in.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
The piece on interrupting women and yelling was really good. They showed the clip with Cruz figuratively screaming his head off.

 

What is it about men's tender earholes that a woman's increased decibel level so debilitates them? There's a research study waiting to be done. Can't be pitch -- Hillary's voice is no higher than, say, Rubio's. Maybe we emit special lady-rays that discombobulate the audio centers in men's brains.

 

I loved!!! that the audience booed Larry when he interrupted the women. I expected the ladies to get fierce; I didn't expect the audience to do so. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

She wasn't even yelling in the clip. It was campaign-speak. They all talk like that, where you ramp your voice up to whip up the crowd. 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

I actually watched the debate, and the reason Bernie shushed her is that Hillary was continually interrupting him during his time, basically stopping him from speaking. The way it was structured, they each got a minute to reply to a question. After that, the other person got a minute to refute. But Hillary was interrupting Bernie over and over again, eating up his time, and stopping him from speaking. So actually in this case, Bernie was the injured party, Hillary was the rude one, and I wish this show would actually watch the stuff they comment on before commenting, because it's a chronic problem that they comment on shit they know nothing about and it pisses me off.

 

Meanwhile, their very own panels are impossible to follow half the time because of everyone jockeying to interrupt everyone else and Larry sitting there holding his index cards and letting them do it.

 

The larger point is valid: men who won't let women speak (or speak passionately) is a bad thing, and there's a double standard, and it's obnoxious. But the example they gave with Bernie interrupting Hillary was completely not an example of that. It's just irresponsible bullshit to cast it as though it was. Even Anderson Cooper (the moderator) recognized that Hillary was the one who was interrupting and backed up Bernie's asking her to wait her turn, and you could tell from his questions that he was very skeptical of Bernie in general.

Edited by possibilities
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

I won't lie. The bit with all the women correspondents had me laughing.  And the bit with "Trump" had me ROLLING. I laughed so hard, my tummy hurt.

 

I'm sure I missed Larry saying who was "playing" him. Does anyone know?

 

Every time I see Chris Matthews, there's a disconnect for me, because I met him years ago, when he was promoting a book. I can't recall the title but I was working part-time at Barnes & Noble and he and his wife (who is also a lovely person and who I worked with when she was at the local ABC affiliate yearsssss ago, and I was the student intern) was there. He is SO the opposite in temperament in real life. I mean there was a large crowd, some hecklers, but he was so calm, didn't raise his voice or get angry or turn into a jerk. Go figure.

Share this post


Link to post

I gotta disagree with Robin. Harriet Tubman belongs on the $20, not the $10. Hamilton was awesome (and an abolitionist!) and deserves his spot on money. Jackson, on the other hand, was a genocidal horror show, and ought to be relegated to history's dustbin.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

Jackson was nuts, but he wrecked it all over the battlefield. I'd say put him on the 50 and get rid of Grant. But how does anyone not know who she is? 

 

Ugh, I'm so over "religious liberty." Sorry, but your little book doesn't trump secular law in this country. I don't really care whether you like gay people or not. 

 

I take Franchesca's point, but using KK as an example was a poor choice. For one, the pic was like a year old, and for the other, we're talking about someone who has had surgery to enhance their body. For the other, she's a two bit scam artist. So, no.

Edited by ganesh

Share this post


Link to post

The panel topic was good, but the example of KK is just the absolute wrong one to use. And the pics were censored anyway! What's the point?

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×