I think my head hurts after that one. I'm skeptical about your optimism about Shattner's ingenuous attempts at subverting my skepticism about his comedy.
On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 6:47 PM, Sal Armoniac <[email protected]> wrote: > I detect that you and others detect a certain cynicism. :) Can one be > cynical about one's motives for being funny? > > Sarah > > On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 11:12 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Have you seen his talk show? >> >> He know's what has made him a household name. So he plays to that. >> >> Wayne >> >> In a message dated 3/1/2010 10:36:28 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, >> [email protected] writes: >> >> >> Re. satire versus seriousness, I'm with Jonathan on this one. Shatner's >> whole "Transformed Man" LP is full of painful stuff like that. (His cover of >> "Mister Tambourine Man" is actually kind of terrifying. It's like the >> Tambourine Man is Freddy Krueger or something. "I'll come FOLLOWIN' YA!") >> Add that to stories that folks like Walter Koenig and George Takei tell, and >> it's hard for me to take this as satire. >> >> Shatner reminds me of those little kids who start out being serious, get >> laughs, and then ham it up to keep getting attention. He does have good >> comic timing, though, it's true. He was hilarious when he hosted SNL >> (especially the bit where he posed in front of a mirror, flexing and >> complimenting himself, for the entire sketch). The bits in the early days of >> Boston Legal where every line of his dialogue for an entire scene would be >> inflections on "Denny Crane" could be very funny. Unfortunately David Kelley >> has the same ego/performance issues as Shatner, with no one (e.g. a >> director) to tell him when he's out to sea. >> >> Does Shatner know he's doing parody? By this point and based on some >> things he says, I think he must. But I also think he forgets. And sometimes, >> even when the schtick gets serious -- e.g. he did a cover of "Common People" >> with Joe Jackson that's not half bad. I suspect that's because Ben Folds >> rode him on the "interpretative" excesses. >> >> >> >> On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 8:41 AM, Jonathan Sherwood < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> I don't know. I don't think he got into his satirical phase until much >>> later. If I heard the audience laughing, then I'd believe it was meant to be >>> a joke. Or if I saw the slightest twinkle in Shattner's eye to suggest he >>> was poking fun at himself - but I think he was just trying to get his >>> singing career off the ground. <slaps hands over eyes - I can't watch >>> anymore!> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 2:26 AM, Sal Armoniac <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> PS: I laugh hysterically every time I see it! :) It's hilarious. >>>> >>>> >>>> On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 2:21 AM, Sal Armoniac <[email protected]>wrote: >>>> >>>>> Ha guys, didn't any of you see it as satiric? Shatner is playing that >>>>> role to this day on Boston Legal. That character didn't come out of the >>>>> blue. >>>>> >>>>> I'm convinced that that's a parody Shatner is doing of Shatner as he >>>>> plays Kirk. :) >>>>> >>>>> Sarah >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> -- >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>> Groups "R-SPEC: The Rochester Speculative Literature Association" group. >>>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>> [email protected]<r-spec%[email protected]> >>>> . >>>> For more options, visit this group at >>>> http://groups.google.com/group/r-spec?hl=en. >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >>> "R-SPEC: The Rochester Speculative Literature Association" group. >>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>> [email protected]<r-spec%[email protected]> >>> . >>> For more options, visit this group at >>> http://groups.google.com/group/r-spec?hl=en. >>> >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "R-SPEC: The Rochester Speculative Literature Association" group. >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> [email protected]<r-spec%[email protected]> >> . >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/r-spec?hl=en. >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "R-SPEC: The Rochester Speculative Literature Association" group. >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> [email protected]<r-spec%[email protected]> >> . >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/r-spec?hl=en. >> > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "R-SPEC: The Rochester Speculative Literature Association" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]<r-spec%[email protected]> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/r-spec?hl=en. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "R-SPEC: The Rochester Speculative Literature Association" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/r-spec?hl=en.
