• ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️



    Film & Television

    Welcome Guest


    ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️
  • ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️
    Forum Rules Film Chit-Chat
    Recently Watched Best Documentaries
    ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️
  • Film & TV Moderators: ghostfreak

Television Real Time with Bill Maher

Cyc

Cyc

Bluelighter
Joined
Sep 11, 2000
Messages
11,370
Location
Canada
real-time-with-bill-maher-8.jpg


Anyone else a Real Time fan? I've been watching pretty religiously (joke intended) for the past two years. He always has good guests, a diverse panel and I think he's a pretty good debate moderator. He exists in the ether between comedian and pundit, but for the most part he walks the tightrope of both pretty well.

Overall I love the show, but I do have three peeves.

1.) He fellates Obama too often and is pro-war. He seems to at least passively support US imperialism and empire building.

2.) He gets far too distracted by his audience. Other performers will shrug off a bad joke, but he'll try to defend himself. He needs to stop fighting with his audience.

3.) He is too arrogant about some of his views, especially about religion.

The best parts of the show happen when the panel gets into a good back n' forth about current issues.
 
I don't watch it as often as I used to, but I enjoy it every time I catch an episode; his style of humor has always jived with me. (Remember Karab Amabo?) He isn't perfect, though; I don't think he's quite as clever as Jon Stewart when it comes to making conservatives look like hypocrites, probably because he isn't as limited by censorship. As Cyc mentioned, he's often preachy--man, how often I wanted to whack him over the head with a guitar when he couldn't stop going on and on about health food, which is wise coming from a guy who has smoked, drank, and done God knows what else in his time and today.

Those are forgettable, though, compared to the one thing about the show that really annoys me: that his "panel" typically consists of two liberals, and a token conservative that they both pick on. However funny his points are, that's the kind of stilted nonsense I'd expect from Fox News; I'd like the show a lot more if he reversed that ratio (which would show the strength of his convictions), or better yet, just made it four with an equal number of conservatives and liberals (which would be just).
 
I really enjoy him but naturally we can't agree on all issues. I sometimes get sick of some the people he has on there, I feel he's trying to promote his agenda sometimes and brings on stupid idiots. But still his intent is right and he's a great debater.
 
Cyc said:
Overall I love the show, but I do have three peeves.

1.) He fellates Obama too often and is pro-war. He seems to at least passively support US imperialism and empire building.
He's not pro-war imo. He's pro-democrat. This is how he has to currently support them I think.

2.) He gets far too distracted by his audience. Other performers will shrug off a bad joke, but he'll try to defend himself. He needs to stop fighting with his audience.
He does this on purpose. If he didn't clue people in, he would lose them. He shits on everyone that is wrong (in his book) and I admire this.

3.) He is too arrogant about some of his views, especially about religion.
He's overly strong about it on purpose. Look at how strong religion has been in the opposite spectrum for how long.
Click to expand...
I've been watching this show since I was a little kid. Christine O'Donnell used to be a regular guest. lol

If it helps you understand him anymore, he comes from the same camp as Larry David, afaik.
 
If he's not pro-war, he should stop doing a victory dance and congratulating Obama every time some the US military takes unsanctioned action against some random despot under some bullshit guise.

Yes, he's happy to withdraw troops from overseas, mostly because he sees it as a huge waste of money. On that we agree, but he has said in the past that he's completely fine with the US acting unilaterally by spreading imperialism through remote or precision-strike methods. He just doesn't think we need to spend billions of dollars to do it when technology can do it for us.

As for the rest, he'd be a much more effective comedian if he reigned in his ego a bit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top