The general decline in standards today

[Marc Chevalier]

Bob and Ray were doing the real stuff decades before this crowd was born.

As a kid, I used to listen to my parents' "Bob and Ray" comedy albums. (Bill Cosby's early albums, too.) Loved 'em.


Sadly, Bob Elliot's son, Chris, was a king of puerile comedy in the '90s. Ever seen his nails-on-a-chalkboard TV sitcom, "Get a Life"? It came true for a generation of young men. Ever seen "Cabin Boy"? Don't.

 

[Marc Chevalier]

As opposed to the puerile dreck, good sophomoric comedy is possible. The National Lampoon raised it to Olympian levels in their 1978 movie, "Animal House" ... and "Vacation" followed close behind.

 

[Undertow]

But they don't get in the movies without SNL....

Now that, my friend, is a stretch.

 

[Undertow]

Somewhat related but a few years ago Carl's Jr. ran a series of messy burger commercials which actually turned me off of the fast food chain for quite some time...

Fast food (of all brands) was already declining in my taste selection by that point, but those disgusting, juvenile commercials were the proverbial cataclysmic asteroid. :rip:

 

[Undertow]

I think Lizzie's comment sums up the attitude today.
Do we really have adults making these business decisions?
Unfortunately we do..

No but seriously...those are real? Someone came up with those and said, "Hey fellas, I have a great idea for an ad campaign!"? Really?

 

[Tomasso]

Now that, my friend, is a stretch.

It went Second City------SNL-----Movies. If they don't make the main stage at SC-----they don't get to SNL----- no SNL-----[huh]

 

[Marc Chevalier]

Fast food (of all brands) was already declining in my taste selection by that point, but those disgusting, juvenile commercials were the proverbial cataclysmic asteroid. :rip:

Fast food commercials have always been saccharine at best, distasteful at worst. They can't help but reflect their product.

 

[LizzieMaine]

"McDonalds Is Your Kind of Place
They squirt mustard in your face
Ketchup up your nose
Pickles between your toes!"
-- 8 year old on the playground.

"That's it! We'll run it!"
-- modern ad agency exec.

 

[PoohBang]

Comedy does change throughout the decades. But I wouldn't say the writers of the ones you mentioned lack comprehension or skills. They write for the show their working for.

Don't watch them or listen to them if you don't like them. I very much enjoy comedy as a whole, and there are pieces of each of the comedy shows you mentioned that are quite good. They may not be to your taste but there is not need to put down the writers because they write for the voice of the show.

 

[Feraud]

No but seriously...those are real? Someone came up with those and said, "Hey fellas, I have a great idea for an ad campaign!"? Really?

Unfortunately those are real and I've seen similarly gaudy examples on the street.
I will assume the type of people who pay any attention to such ads might also be seen "planking"..

 

[LizzieMaine]

I will say there's one writer in comedy today who I really respect, and that's Mike Judge. He understood that mass culture was being packaged and written for Beavis and Butthead twenty years before most people understood that. And with "King Of The Hill" he proved that he understood how to do subtle character comedy in a way that hadn't been seen in a very long time -- while continuing to critique what mass culture was becoming. He would have been a Sturges-like figure in the Era, but today his films struggle to get a release.

 

[Marc Chevalier]

And it's telling that Trey Parker's and Matt Stone's 2004 sex-violence-Korean dictator puppet movie, TEAM AMERICA: WORLD POLICE, is a huge hit among American soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan.

 

[Undertow]

I will say there's one writer in comedy today who I really respect, and that's Mike Judge. He understood that mass culture was being packaged and written for Beavis and Butthead twenty years before most people understood that. And with "King Of The Hill" he proved that he understood how to do subtle character comedy in a way that hadn't been seen in a very long time -- while continuing to critique what mass culture was becoming. He would have been a Sturges-like figure in the Era, but today his films struggle to get a release.

I agree with you on this. Mike Judge is a bit of an unsung hero.

I'd like to add (and probably with much disagreement from others) that Ren&Stimpy creator John Kricfalusi is in the same boat. His work with R&S seemed the epitome of stupid, much like Beavis and Butthead. However, there was a real passion and zeal in the details that so many folks missed. He was not only trying to capture the same magic lost from his childhood (commercials, cartoons, gender roles, musicians, etc), but he was also pointing with a really big finger at the silliness of adult culture in America through the two main characters' misadventures.

On an interesting aside, I remember a particular commentary in which he and some artists discussed that he would not stand for the same emotion expressed in one cartoon to another; i.e. if Ren were "stressed" the artists had to have a unique expression for each instance between episodes and could not rehash the same drawn expression.

 

[ButteMT61]

And it's telling that Trey Parker's and Matt Stone's 2004 sex-violence-Korean dictator puppet movie, TEAM AMERICA: WORLD POLICE, is a huge hit among American soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Well, I'm guilty too - I find that movie hilarious. And not just because my wife worked on it
What was funny was we brought our then 12 year old son with us to the premier. She hadn't seen it and had no clue about it's content (you'd have to know her...) When the doll $3x scene came on, she was trying to cover his face with not much luck. I had tears running down my face I was laughing so hard. I'm a baaaad parent.

 

[Marc Chevalier]

Well, I'm guilty too - I find that movie hilarious.

Granted, the best puppeteering work ever seen on film. Even blew away the marionettes in BEING JOHN MALKOVICH (1999).

 

[Widebrim]

This isn't about legislating that Rue has to grab an M16 and start taking headshots. It's for allowing all the other women who might want to but can't a fair chance.

Actually, Pompidou, it could very well start with the latter and lead up to former, if it ever came down to a universal draft.

 

[Pompidou]

Actually, Pompidou, it could very well start with the latter and lead up to former, if it ever came down to a universal draft.

Maybe, but in a future where the pool of eligible frontline candidates is potentially double what it is today, because of women being allowed to fight alongside men - in that future, if a universal draft is even necessary, we're totally screwed anyway, and I bet even guys like me would've already been killed off. It's looking like the future of warfare is prolonged skirmishes against insurgencies and such. I'm no military expert, but I think the days of winning with sheer manpower are over. Small, highly trained forces and better weapons will preclude the need for future drafts. Wars can't be won anymore by handing every able bodied citizen a rifle and sending them over the hill. Who knows though?

 

[Widebrim]

It's a really interesting phenomenon -- I remember hearing an interview on the radio with a person who had gone thru a sex change from female to male, describing the way his mind changed once he started injecting testosterone, and how he felt like a caged animal sometimes, pacing back and forth, wanting to attack something for no good reason, having random thoughts about beating the snot out of the guy sitting next to him on the bus just for the hell of it. Think of how irrational and violent adolescent boys can get when they go thru puberty -- it's the same deal. I'm convinced that male and female minds truly do process the world differently, and it's the chemistry that does it. And that sort of thing's got to make a difference on the battlefield.

It only makes sense that the chemistry aspect would make a difference on the battlefield, as well as the fact that men have a greater muscle mass than women (resulting in more muscle fibers), and have denser, stronger bones, tendons, and ligaments. (It's one thing, for example, to fire a .50 machine gun; it's quite another to mount the rather weighty receiver and barrel on a vehicle, by yourself.) In addition, men average about 56 percent greater lung volume per body mass, have larger hearts, 10 percent higher red blood cell count, higher haemoglobin, and consequently greater oxygen-carrying capacity. They also have higher circulating clotting factors. These latter differences result in faster healing of wounds and higher peripheral pain tolerance (both of which are crucial). All of these factors cannot be dismissed, for the sake of "equality," when it comes to the issue of women in combat roles. And while there are obviously exceptions to every "rule" (and we've seen a couple posted on this thread), it is the norm, rather than the exception, which makes said rule.

 

[Widebrim]

Maybe, but in a future where the pool of eligible frontline candidates is potentially double what it is today, because of women being allowed to fight alongside men - in that future, if a universal draft is even necessary, we're totally screwed anyway, and I bet even guys like me would've already been killed off. It's looking like the future of warfare is prolonged skirmishes against insurgencies and such. I'm no military expert, but I think the days of winning with sheer manpower are over. Small, highly trained forces and better weapons will preclude the need for future drafts. Wars can't be won anymore by handing every able bodied citizen a rifle and sending them over the hill. Who knows though?

Reminds me of Germany in the last days of WWII, when boys were being conscripted. Well, as you said, who truly knows what the future holds for warfare?

 

[sheeplady]

I do understand what you and many others will post about this topic, and would hope that everyone would also allow that my position on this is just that, my take on it, and of course, that means that my opinion would not be a "policy" making one for the masses.

I understand that, no worries. I also know that you weren't trying to deface the military. My point, however, is that men and women in the military are not "average people" you see on the street. That is why the military has standards and tests. That is why many people can't qualify for service.

Actually, Pompidou, it could very well start with the latter and lead up to former, if it ever came down to a universal draft.

I don't understand why they would choose less-ideal females before more ideal females in a draft situation. According to my knowledge of how drafting worked in the past, everyone was rated according to health (as well as mental health) and selected based upon that. It's not like they randomly call your number and you go immediately overseas, no questions asked.