The Nightly Show: Season One Talk

[Hanahope]

Loved the bit comparing Hillary to Dany and Game of Thrones.

 

Well, this confirms that the panel isn't always the most informed.  They thought it was funny HC had her own server. If you do a very small amount of research, you can learn that the server was set up by the Secret Service after Bill left the White House because they still wanted to use email and obviously the Clintons/SS felt it better that a former President (and his family) use something a bit more secure rather than like say gmail, and because they were no longer officially with the government, they couldn't use the government email.  Yeah, its never been done anymore, because before Clinton, we had Reagan and Bush, and I bet neither one has ever even used email (or at least regularly).  Perhaps a different procedure came into being with GWB, but I bet it was at bit more "oh yeah, we need to figure out something" when the Clintons had to get something set up.

Edited April 14, 2015 by Hanahope

[ganesh]

iirc, Jeb Bush used a similar private server as FL governor too.

I don't actually care but I wonder what she's thinking. She has to know she is under way more scrutiny than anyone for everything.

[ChelseaNH]

What was up with all the Benghazi mentions?  Is that still a thing?

[ruby24]

Bengazi is a stupid, fake, complete non-scandal made up by the Republicans, so I don't know what that was about. He seems to just to believe the old image that the Clintons always have something to hide.

 

Personally, I think that was yet another useless panel. To be honest, it is SO much better for Hillary to make her campaign about the voters rather than herself this time, so she's lucky Larry's not one of her advisors.

[ganesh]

She's going to be fending off Bengahzi for the entire campaign though. The republican strategy is to just yell whatever will scare people the loudest. It worked in 2014. 

[LJonEarth]

Panel members from the audience

 

I suppose I've never noticed what it looks like to see one of these shows figure things out as it goes. I don't watch the either of the Jimmies and Craig Ferguson did whatever, damn the consequences. @midnight did a bunch of test runs to work the kinks out. It's pretty uncomfortable to see them just throwing things out there to see what sticks. Add the bumper about inviting people to be in the audience, and I'm barely hanging on.

 

Even as someone's who's never been a big Hillary fan, I found his take down of Hillary off-putting. I think my issues with his past snide little remarks about women are coloring how I feel about his Hillary stuff.

[Skyfall]

Panel members from the audience

 

I suppose I've never noticed what it looks like to see one of these shows figure things out as it goes. I don't watch the either of the Jimmies and Craig Ferguson did whatever, damn the consequences. @midnight did a bunch of test runs to work the kinks out. It's pretty uncomfortable to see them just throwing things out there to see what sticks. Add the bumper about inviting people to be in the audience, and I'm barely hanging on.

 

Even as someone's who's never been a big Hillary fan, I found his take down of Hillary off-putting. I think my issues with his past snide little remarks about women are coloring how I feel about his Hillary stuff.

I'm used to the bumper due to other shows.

[ganesh]

"Lady from the Audience" hee! I liked it. She was funny.

 

That comedian on the right wasn't good though. Don't use the show to work on new material; just be funny in the conversation.

[cyberfruit]

That comedian wasn't even remotely funny, though -- he was just offensive. When are we as a society going to retire the prison rape jokes along with laughing at transgender people? And then he was joking about sex change operations as a punishment? Absolutely gross. Also the woman on the panel, her name escapes me, appeared to be completely thrown by his joke. She brought thought she was going to be having an intelligent, yet funny discussion and got...that. 

 

As for the topic itself, the death penalty is something that I also grapple with. I used to support it unconditionally (an unfortunate by-product of being Texas bred) but when I started forming my own opinions about death as a punishment, I turned against it. That being said, Tsarnaev's punishment is next level for me because I live in Boston and the realization of finally understanding just what had happened left me with a fear I've never known nor experienced until that day. And once again the following Thursday Night/Friday morning when the brothers remerged and shit got real. Still, I don't know if I want him to die. Life without parole is something I can get behind. Larry can drag me for being in the "Not Sure" category, I don't care. He's emotionally removed from the situation. Everyone living the Boston Metro Area? Not so much. 

 

As for the show, I'm glad the panel dropped a person and appears to be reconstructing itself as one or two experts + a comedian and sometimes even dropping a comedian altogether (the panel with Bernie Sanders was probably the best one yet). I'm okay with letting go of the comedians who generally derail conversations and letting Larry jump in with jokes to keep the show light in some parts. 

[Kaoteek]

"Let's kill him !" "Nah, let's have him change sex and get raped every day !" "Nah, let's kill him, cos putting him in solitary is torture, and torture is worse than killing !" "Okay, let's kill him, then !" "But guys, it's more complicat---" "Awesome, then we all agree that he should die !"
 
Man, that panel really was a nexus of... hmm... can't find a word to express how much I facepalmed.

 

I really should stop watching the show, cos each time Larry decides to play the self-appointed judge in his "common sense"-driven people's court, I end up disliking him a bit more.

[Wax Lion]

"Let's kill him !" "Nah, let's have him change sex and get raped every day !" "Nah, let's kill him, cos putting him in solitary is torture, and torture is worse than killing !" "Okay, let's kill him, then !" "But guys, it's more complicat---" "Awesome, then we all agree that he should die !"

 

God, you summed up what made this show's panels so infuriating.

 

Comedy Central's late night shows used to shine a light on how dumb cable news punditry has gotten but here the cable news pundit was the only one trying to discuss the topic intelligently.

 

Thing is I don't know Keith Robinson as a right wing comedian but that was so appalling. On the topic of unusual punishments, I'm haunted by an issue of Swamp Thing where a serial child killer is put in a cell with just pictures of his victims (of course that punishment worked because he was possessed when he was committing the murders so reminding him of what he did pulled at him emotionally).

Edited April 16, 2015 by Wax Lion

[maraleia]

I finally pulled the plug on my season pass for this show. It's just not doing it for me which is sad because I do want to see more women and POC's on late night TV.

[futurechemist]

Well that was a waste of Neil deGrasse Tyson.  Sigh.

 

The good:  They seem to be keeping to 3 panel members, so each person gets to say more.

Larry seems to be getting better at moderating the discussion.

 

The bad:

The timing is still off on the segments.  The opening graphics are uninteresting and seem to go on way too long - like that very long plane banner thing.

Why did they devote part of the panel segment to an unfunny video of Larry in the "70s"?

There wasn't any substance to the panel discussion. They couldn't have had someone talking about the psychology behind believing in conspiracies?

Edited April 17, 2015 by futurechemist

[ottoDbusdriver]

Well that was a waste of Neil deGrasse Tyson.  Sigh.

 

Agreed, it was a waste of having Neil deGrasse Tyson on only to discuss stupid things believed by conspiracy theorists.  

 

Having said that, his answers to all the conspiracies were spot on.

 

Are they running out of guests already because they seem to be having a lot more TNS show staff and writers on a lot lately.

[Kaoteek]

It's weird seeing the lead writer of the show laughing her ass off and clapping at the "70s Larry" segment, which a) wasn't particularly funny (and was way too predictable, like a lot of Nightly Show jokes) and b) she probably helped write & shoot. But then again, she seemed to be trying way too hard during the entire panel, so I guess she was just that into it.

 

Aside from that, yeah, pointless panel, and let's not forget that earlier on in the season, the show had a disastrous Travel to Mars panel that NDT could have saved, which makes this conspiracy panel even more frustrating.

 

(on a related note, over at the AV Club, they have an editorial talking about the Daily Show/Noah situation, and arguing that the problem isn't Noah's presence, but Larry Wilmore's absence ; unsurprisingly, the overall reaction to that is pretty negative, with most commenters complaining about the same Nightly Show issues we've been talking about here)

[ganesh]

Well that was a waste of Neil deGrasse Tyson.  Sigh.

 

Really. And NdGT is usually down for whatever, so it's not like he was holding the panel back for being a stick in the mud.

 

I found the discussion to be way too superficial and repetitive. Why not ask why people believe these things.

 

I find it highly highly highly condescending when people dismiss the moon landing. It is *the* engineering achievement of the 20th century imo and to be like, "I don't think it happened" is ignorant, misinformed, and just plain wrong. People *died* for the space program. 

 

The head writer came off as stupid to me. I'm sure she's not, since she's the head writer on a show that airs 4 nights a week, but she didn't comport herself well. 

 

I'm surprised they didn't say anything about JFK. 

[revbfc]

Is anyone feeling like this show is somehow experiencing the paradox of trying too hard while not trying hard enough?

[ganesh]

I appreciate Teigen's opinion and I think she was actually entertaining, but she's wrong. Here's a wildly whacked out idea: Treat people with common courtesy. Sometimes it's hard. That's called being an adult. 

 

It was funny how she was quick to answer which song she hated. 

 

I think it's hilarious that Ben Affleck thinks people care enough about him that he'd want to suppress the information. 

[revbfc]

I don't endorse how that lady spoke to the towing company employee, but Advanced Towing has a bad habit of taking both illegally and legally parked cars. it's been a story in the DC area even before the reporter's rant went public. People in my area are VERY angry with Advanced Towing and want them stopped.

http://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/Complaints-Against-Advanced-Towing-Continue-to-Pile-Up-300403301.html

[Kaoteek]

So the whole reason for that dumb, flat Affleck ghost segment was to make an extended "Ben Affleck does bad movies & is an untalented hack" joke. Face, meet palm.

[Skyfall]

Last night was the straw that broke the Season Pass' back. I'm out!

[ChelseaNH]

I appreciate Teigen's opinion and I think she was actually entertaining, but she's wrong. Here's a wildly whacked out idea: Treat people with common courtesy.

 

I suspect she wasn't arguing for a right to insult people; I think it was more about getting angry or frustrated.  Like me going through the self-serve checkout at the grocery store, and the stupid thing telling me I have to remove an item from the bagging area that I was trying to bag, and then not letting me proceed after removing it and WHY CAN'T YOU WORK?!?!?!?!  Or a celebrity getting off a redeye and having a pack of paparazzi in your face asking insulting questions.  This is related to the author that John Stewart had on recently, about people getting publicly/nationally shamed for what used to be private/local transgressions.

 

Unfortunately Larry was too hung up on being his plainspoken voice of the peoples to let her explain herself.  Or he had to wrap things up and get on to the next topic, because who has time for an actual discussion?

[ruby24]

How's this show doing, ratings-wise? I can't imagine it holding its own after Jon leaves TDS. I'm so disappointed- I loved Larry on The Daily Show and would get excited every time he showed up. I never would have predicted that his show would be this lame.

 

He just has terrible writers. It's been a real letdown.

[ganesh]

I think it was more about getting angry or frustrated.

 

Everyone is going through something. No one has a right to belittle someone else because of a bad day. Find another way to vent. 

[LJonEarth]

How's this show doing, ratings-wise? I can't imagine it holding its own after Jon leaves TDS. I'm so disappointed- I loved Larry on The Daily Show and would get excited every time he showed up. I never would have predicted that his show would be this lame.

 

He just has terrible writers. It's been a real letdown.

 

If I'm reading this correctly, the ratings are not good at all. I don't know what the goal was, but it's around half of TDS and The Colbert Report was even with TDS.

 

After returning from vacation, not missing this show and reading the comments here from last week, I've dropped this show. Sad. I had such high hopes. There's always room for growth. If it stays around and gets better, I have no shame in coming back. But right now, it's not worth it.

 

I'm left wondering if what we're seeing matches the original plan when this show was The Minority Report.

[ganesh]

I think the problem is largely the topics. I don't need another episode about vaccines. There's no jokes left there. I want more episodes like, "This is my show. Cosby did it. Shut up." There's tons of little known minority issues that could be showcased. I still say their best episode was black fathers. 

 

It's patently obvious that the three person panel works far far better. They've gotten less comedians just there to do 3 minutes of new material too. So, they're willing to make changes. I thought the Lady From The Audience was actually really entertaining and should be a regular feature. 

 

Honestly, they could have spent the entire time on 'does it matter if people's ancestors were slaveholders?' Get someone on the show to talk about it. Are we over that yet? Clearly, not. 

 

I feel like they're actually too tepid. I don't know if that's network interference or they just don't have a fresh vision. I mean, I read jokes about Affleck's bad movies on internet boards. You have to do better than that level of comedy. Take the gloves off. 

Edited April 22, 2015 by ganesh

[AmandaPanda]

I will probably stick with this show through the end of Jon Stewart's time on TDS. It's just become a part of my routine to watch them back-to-back on Hulu. I don't know if I'll be sticking with it past then, though. I just keep holding out hope it's going to get good. I also loved Larry's segments on TDS, so got really excited when this show was announced. It's been steadily declining, though. I can't decide if I like the episodes where they jump around to different issues or not. They aren't going to discuss anything in-depth, so maybe the shorter conversations are better. 

[Paws]

Why doesn't he have on guests who know what they're talking about? When talking about vaccines, why not have a doctor on? That type of thing. His panelists rarely have anything to do with the topic at hand, or only tangentially. The black fathers ep was so good because the panel was all black fathers, including Larry himself.

I used to be surprised by how quickly @midnight came on. Now it's torture to wait for it to come on. I didn't expect Larry to be Stephen, but I did expect him to be entertaining. And that's not happening.

I wonder if some of it is that Larry, while funny, doesn't have that star quality that Colbert and Oliver have. I used to wait for them to show up...they always had the smartest, funniest pieces. The person who has that on TDS now is Jessica Williams and why she doesn't have her own show is beyond me.

Edited April 22, 2015 by Paws

[Milburn Stone]

If I'm reading this correctly, the ratings are not good at all. I don't know what the goal was, but it's around half of TDS and The Colbert Report was even with TDS.

 

The one thing that surprises me in that ratings report is that Conan's ratings are hardly better than The Nightly Show's. I have to confess I'm out of the habit of watching Conan myself, so I'm not helping things any. But I still think he's a major comic talent, and every time I do see a clip for some reason, I think he's still got it. I knew his ratings couldn't be great, but I didn't think they were Nightly Show bad.

[ChelseaNH]

No one has a right to belittle someone else because of a bad day.

 

Which is why I pointed to being angry/frustrated in constrast to insulting people.

[pakalolo]

I thought this show started off really strong and I felt no need to come here to gripe about it, but it went from the first thing I would watch on the DVR in the morning to whenever I got around to it in the past few weeks. I still like watching but it seems they are having a problem getting more interesting panelists (lots of staff members) or wasting the good ones they get (Neil DeGrasse Tyson) but the recent episode with Scarface...yikes!

I actually came here hoping to find a discussion of why Scarface was being so strange, the giant backpack, adult braces, the whole hawk and rabbit thing...wtf?? Its not like he is new to the game, he's been a somewhat famous rapper since the late 80's so he should know how he is going to come across on television. Was he drunk/drugged, mental health issues, was he forced to be there and just didn't care what he said, or was he just being weird to get attention? It was just really bizzare to watch.

[ganesh]

I don't think Larry expected that either. 

[revbfc]

I thought this show started off really strong and I felt no need to come here to gripe about it, but it went from the first thing I would watch on the DVR in the morning to whenever I got around to it in the past few weeks. I still like watching but it seems they are having a problem getting more interesting panelists (lots of staff members) or wasting the good ones they get (Neil DeGrasse Tyson) but the recent episode with Scarface...yikes!

I actually came here hoping to find a discussion of why Scarface was being so strange, the giant backpack, adult braces, the whole hawk and rabbit thing...wtf?? Its not like he is new to the game, he's been a somewhat famous rapper since the late 80's so he should know how he is going to come across on television. Was he drunk/drugged, mental health issues, was he forced to be there and just didn't care what he said, or was he just being weird to get attention? It was just really bizzare to watch.

Do you think the lack of panelists has to do with budget issues? The show looks cheaper than @Midnight.

[DrSparkles]

I actually came here hoping to find a discussion of why Scarface was being so strange, the giant backpack, adult braces, the whole hawk and rabbit thing...wtf?? Its not like he is new to the game, he's been a somewhat famous rapper since the late 80's so he should know how he is going to come across on television. Was he drunk/drugged, mental health issues, was he forced to be there and just didn't care what he said, or was he just being weird to get attention?

Alls I can say is: who? Whut? & why???

[BusyOctober]

I keep watching this, but my patience are wearing thin.  I think there needs to be more tweaks to get this right.  Cutting the panel to 3 was a good idea.  I like Larry Wilmore during his solo time at the desk.  But I don't think he handles the interacting w/ guests well yet.  I think he needs a higher caliber of writers/performers too.  The "bits" they do are just not funny.  I don't know any of their names but 3 of his regulars really irk. The older guy who wants to be Colin Quinn, the young guy w/ the wool hat and the the woman with long dark hair (Treasure???) are just not funny. At all.  I get the feeling they once did or said something amusing while drunk at a party full of other drunks and were told "OMG! You are sooo funny!"  Go back to the Learning Annex for summer course catalog and stay away from open mike nights.  Comedy isn't for everyone.

[attica]

I thought last night's panel was actually kind of useful. Having transpeople do a primer on the basics of transgender stuff, instead of 1) assuming everybody knows by now what 'cis-' is 2) making stupid weiner jokes. It wasn't flawless -- there was probably a more elegant way to deliver the news that 'tranny' is an epithet -- but it was pretty good. 

 

Describing Jenner as a 'mean girl'? Well, he's lived in Hollywood amongst the Kardashians for all these years -- he could be nothing but shallow and looks obsessed. Making that observation into a sexist jab was ungood.

 

Lastly, the closing comment about keeping calm in Baltimore made me uncomfortable. I've been struggling with why until I read Ta-Nahisi Coates this morning. He's a deeper thinker than I am, for sure, so it pleases me when my musings find purchase in his voice.

[ganesh]

I like Colin Quinn, but the bit was kind of dumb. The panel was good, and his approach to the topic was also good.

I've said before, the show needs to find its identity, ironically. This is good. Vaccines, not so good.

[ChelseaNH]

I've been struggling with why until I read Ta-Nahisi Coates this morning.

 

I disagree that nonviolence equals compliance (or must equal compliance) but I go back to Mohandas Gandhi overthrowing a government through nonviolent protest.

[attica]

I've been thinking about that very thing, ChelseaNH, and I'm starting to persuade myself that it maybe wasn't so much the non-violent protest that ultimately succeeded, but rather public disgust for the violent response that the NVPs provoked from the ruling class. Same in the US South: it was horror at the firehoses on kids and beating peaceful marchers that got public opinion turned around. Had the violence not occurred, the protests might have been more easily ignored -- as have non-violent marches here in the US about these police killings been largely ignored. If they've been covered at all, they certainly haven't led to change. Only the outburst in Ferguson got change in gear, as far as I can reckon. 

 

Yes, it's upsetting for private property to be set alight; certainly that's true. I sympathize with the people there seeing their buildings destroyed when they are just bystanders. I totally agree it's not the high road. I just wonder if it's not the only road open.

[ChelseaNH]

The thing is, the non-violent protesters expected to be treated violently, and deliberately chose not to respond in kind.  The contrast of their peaceful actions and the gross violence of the reaction won them public opinion.  In India, it was the white man's burden to civilize the natives, yet the English showed how barbaric they could be.  Likewise in the south.  These were examples of oppressed people claiming their dignity by acting in a dignified, "civilized" manner.

 

So the question is, would that same contrast be effective today, or are we more tolerant of/less outraged by violence toward blatantly peaceful people?

[Hanahope]

So in regards to Bruce Jenner, he's currently a man, who feels like a woman, and is sexually attracted to women.  He says he's "not gay."  But he wants to actually become a woman, and presumably he would still be sexually attracted to women.  So is he technically "not gay" until his 'plumbing' is actually changed and then he will be "gay"? Or is he just trying to play with semantics because he is also a Republican?

[Wax Lion]

Hanahope, those are actually pretty complicated questions from what I've heard from trans people. Some people find it difficult to identify as a particular sexual orientation  until all the other stuff becomes clearer.

 

That Colin Quinn Pinocchio segment was painful.

 

I though "third gender" referred to designations in old cultural for trans people like the fa'fafine of Samoa, the Native American two-spirit, the Native Hawaiian version (unfortunately the word has become an anti-gay slur) and the Thai kathoey.

 

But who let out that "Oh, god" whine during Ian's segment? I thought it would be a woman on the panel (I actually thought it kinda sounded like Judy Gold), but the woman on the panel was trans and sounded different.

 

Boy, it was awkward for Larry to use a trans slur as a joke and to say "fag" but to also say "n-word". I'm usually the opposite,

[revbfc]

Thanks to the other posters who have expressed views similar to mine in the past few days (you know who you are). I just don't have the will to complain about this show anymore without seeming obsessed with it. I want Larry Wilmore to succeed, I just feel let down by this show.

[ganesh]

Yeah, I'm not hate watching. I think the show could be better with fairly easy fixes. 

[Brandi Maxxxx]

So in regards to Bruce Jenner, he's currently a man, who feels like a woman, and is sexually attracted to women.  He says he's "not gay."  But he wants to actually become a woman, and presumably he would still be sexually attracted to women.  So is he technically "not gay" until his 'plumbing' is actually changed and then he will be "gay"? Or is he just trying to play with semantics because he is also a Republican?

He said he was asexual.

 

I haven't been watching this show much lately but I thought last week's episode about teacher-student sex was very funny.

[Hanahope]

Hanahope, those are actually pretty complicated questions from what I've heard from trans people. Some people find it difficult to identify as a particular sexual orientation  until all the other stuff becomes clearer.

 

I suppose that makes sense.

 

He said he was asexual.

 

That means not sexually attracted to any gender, correct?  I always thought that was difficult for a man, who obviously was able to physically have sex.  But I will admit, its hard to really know and understand what a different person goes through.

 

I have to admit that medical science is pretty darn good because I would never have been able to tell that either of the two transsexual panelists were so.

 

I have to admit, I miss the Colbert Report so much it hurts some days.  Larry's show is ok, some episodes are pretty good, but its not really the 'must see' type of show for me TCR was.

[ganesh]

I'd much rather Larry cover these topics. His opening was solid. It's you're show; you're allowed to have an opinion and be mad about something. 

 

I don't think much of the 'black mom parenting' was strictly limited to black moms because I've been smacked with a broom, and when my friend got the "two names," we *all* stopped what we were doing.

[AmandaPanda]

I suppose that makes sense.

 

That means not sexually attracted to any gender, correct?  I always thought that was difficult for a man, who obviously was able to physically have sex.  But I will admit, its hard to really know and understand what a different person goes through.

 

Correct. Asexual means no sexual attraction to either gender. It's not quite that clear-cut, though. There's a difference between sexual orientation and romantic orientation. There are people who might be heteroromantic (romantically attracted to people of the opposite gender), biromantic (romantically attracted to people of either gender), homoromantic (romantically attracted to people of the same gender), or panromantic (romantically attracted to a particular person, rather than a gender). The full spectrum of sexual orientation and romantic orientation is so vast that it's hard to put anyone into a specific category. I have a former co-worker who is asexual, but heteroromantic. She's had a boyfriend for a while, but she has no interest in having sex.

[Hanahope]

Yeah, I'm all for Larry using his show for these kinds of topics.  Certainly aren't being discussed with the same perspective on most other shows.

[Kaoteek]

Credit where credit is due, the Baltimore Riots episode was pretty good.