Please post a webisode or youtube video that's entertained you lately. Don't worry about commenting much on it in introduction, but please use your 200 words to comment on a clip that another class member uploads. Last blog post due anytime before course final exam.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jaRoqslM4W0
ReplyDeleteComments on "Weed Snobs: Episode 1"
DeleteIn this episode of Weed Snobs, two young men are depicted getting dinner together at a supposed 5-star restaurant. When the waiter comes along, they order a bunch of weed to smoke along with their drinks. This show takes place in a society in which alcohol has been banned, and replaced with weed. This spoof shows the society as treating weed as if it were a very high class product, and exemplified by the two men, who had on shiny fake mustaches, were wearing tuxedos, and clearly had make up on, as stereotypes of the upper class society. The pompous way that they exchange words with the waiter adds on to that effect as well. One guy asks a question about pre-1998 weed, and makes clear that he can taste the difference between pre-98 and post-98. The dating of the weed is like a play of aging alcohol, and the pickiness of his order is yet another spoof on upper levels of society.
When the waiter goes to get their weed, they start talking to each other about life, one guy mentioning how he and his wife are fed up doing business with someone due to their involvement with alcohol, and the other man responding about how people who can't make it through life without getting hammered need to get their lives together. Then, the two start talking about the what-ifs if alcohol were to be legalized again, overdramatizing the negative effects of alcohol and even saying how it would be stupid to purposefully put poison in one's body. Which is very ironic given that they're smoking weed at the moment. Finally, a drunk man comes staggering in, and one of the two friends goes to confront him about being such an embarrassment in public for being drunk, even though he himself is getting high. The man is extremely apologetic and the woman accompanying him also has a look of frightened shock on her face. And while the drunkard is about to get up to leave, the man who confronted him struck out and punched him, proceeding to yell out that it was in self-defense and the drunk man had been the one to swing first. Again, this is ironic because he was acting more like a drunkard than the actual drunkard was, adding to the spoof of the show on weed being better than alcohol.
http://comediansincarsgettingcoffee.com/fred-armisen-i-wasnt-told-about-this-with-special-feature-i-m-dying-jerry
ReplyDeleteIn response to the Colbert v Smaug video:
The interview between Colbert and the dragon Smaug from the Hobbit films(not books though) is a spot on representation of the type of videos that we see in the new world of entertainment. It simply epitomizes the convergence culture circulating the internet. There is, first and foremost, a clear convergence of film, literature, television, and internet into one seven minute video. Colbert is interviewing a CGI dragon, from The Hobbit novels, translated into a Warner Brothers film, on a Viacom television network, in live action, and now posted on the internet. This form of video relies on audience understanding and participation of a multi-layered text that parodies the characters on every step of the way. According to Caldwell, there has been a blurring of categories and genres because of internet convergence technique, and this clip plays to this blur. Colbert is already a parody unto itself, but he then brings in a dragon from another film universe--a fantastical and serious one in The Hobbit--that acts like a big shot conservative diva in real life. The dragon itself is stepping out of character to bring a sense of character expansion backstory to who this person/dragon/thing truly is. And on top of that, the dragon brings in topics like CGI and the actual Hobbit book to push a meta-reflexive agenda that forces the viewer to use their knowledge to create this interview as something subjectively possible in this circumstance.
Charlie the Unicorn Episode 2:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QFCSXr6qnv4&index=2&list=PL6CCF261688AD0C4D
Comment on Comedians in Cars getting Coffee:
In this episode, Jerry Seinfeld and Fred Armisen go in (you got it), a classic car and get coffee! The beginning of the show features like a detailed promo of the car the comedians will be sporting for the day. The narration is by Jerry Seinfeld so it's actually funny and sarcastic. Both comedians comment on the car and it's beauty and the different things it can do. In a sense they promote SAB cars which are almost extinct nowadays. They show how to put gas and oil into the car while making sarcastic comments about it all. They drive around in the car and talk about different things they see and observe on the streets and make fun of it.
For some reason, in every show, the comedians take a stroll through the streets and then come across a product placement of Acura car pieces. There is a lot of heavy product placement throughout the entire show, but it's also really sarcastic and funny! They grab coffee and it's literally like a promo for a coffee shop. They time the customer service of the shop and see whether the wait was worth it when they try the coffee later. They also engage in conversation even with the other comedian not present. It demonstrates the ways in TV that an actor has to act like if the other character is there even if they aren't. The funny thing it that they show them both not answering one another. They have no shame of the other camera operator appearing in the background while filming. The show has a lot of sarcasm and contains tons of product placement.
Weed Snobs, ep. 1
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ca1UyiveO2Q
First, excellent choice with the video post. Charlie the Unicorn is a beloved jewel of our generation, and needless to say I was excited at the prospect of commenting on the sequel. Before delving into the storyline or the textual characteristics of this sequel, it should be noted that the creators were quite smart in developing the narrative trajectory of the video. Misleading the audience was a (major) reason why the original Charlie the Unicorn became an Internet phenomenon in the first place, so the “act-by-act” similarities between the first and the second videos provide a “familiar-but-fresh” feel -- a wise move on their part. The cotton candy-esque appearance and behaviors of the blue and red unicorns, and the cartoonish aesthetic of the original video, establish a light, cheery, if not delightfully bizarre atmosphere that misleads audience expectations, making the dark twist at the end all the more surprising. The similarities between the first Charlie the Unicorn and the second lead the audience to believe that another twist ending is in store. But instead of choosing this path, which might appeal to a niche audience (according to channel visits and combined video views, the audience for Charlie the Unicorn 2 is quite mainstream) the narrative dives into a pool of nonsensical sights and sounds that looks and feels like a postmodern pastiche. The “new-but-formulaic” narrative structure of Charlie the Unicorn 2 reinforces this idea, and is evident from the get-go.
Hence, the opening to Charlie the Unicorn 2 is similar to the opening of the first. In the sequel, Charlie the Unicorn is lounging in the forest, minding his own business in solitude, when the blue and red unicorns intrude and pester him. They hover in midair, wearing scuba gear. Similar to the first video, they present him with a fantastical problem that, for whatever reason, requires his assistance in order to save X (Candy Mountain in 1, the Banana Temple in 2) from the evil powers at work. They take him on a journey through the forest and, like the first video, act in bizarre, nonsensical ways that are of great annoyance to Charlie. Whereas the trio encounter a Leopluradon in the original, they stumble across a gigantic and magical Z. Here, the show dives into something new and different: the two unicorns speak to each other in fluent Spanish, obscuring the meaning of their conversation from Charlie and, more importantly, from those in the audience who do not know Spanish. This adds a layer of complexity to the story, albeit in an illogical fashion. The Spanish speaking between the two unicorns is accessible by Spanish speakers, but not by those unfamiliar with the language. There is no reason for the unicorns to start speaking Spanish other than the fact that they are spontaneous. Charlie, being the voice of reason or the main point of identification in the video, asks only why they are speaking Spanish.
--continued below in a second post--
The trio then arrive to the Banana Temple, their destination. Inscribed across the face of the temple is the name of the temple: Er Oriente Lux Banana, which is either middle-age Spanish (the language of the conquistadors), a variant combined from Castilian and a Central American language, or a mixture of several romance languages. This last possibility is the most likely. In addition, a hammer and banana adorned across the face of the temple form what is clearly a variant of the Communist hammer and sickle. Other symbols such as fire, the banana as the sun, and tiki torches with bananas protruding from the torch part populate the area on and around the temple. These symbols, which we might recognize but find difficult to put context to, confuse the historical references of the banana temple. An ambiguous creature --ambiguous in the sense that it is not easily defined-- then emerges from the ground. The body of the creature resembles what one might imagine to be a slug and mermaid hybrid. It wears red lipstick, a bib and Christmas hat, and sports a white-colored French mustache. Little banana people, reminiscent of the candy people in the first Charlie the Unicorn, proclaim Charlie the Banana King during a song that transports Charlie outside a galaxy formation. Unlike the first Charlie the Unicorn, however, the banana people do not abduct him or steal his kidney. Once the song ends, Charlie drops to the ground with a thud and everybody disappears. He trots back and finds that the two unicorns have stolen his TV set and mattress. This is a much tamer ending than the original video, one that is probably geared for a more mainstream audience. The nonsensical pastiche of historical references and illogical, scattered behavior serves to entertain rather than be idiosyncratic or alternative.
ReplyDelete