Louie (Louis C.K.'s show on FX)

Yeah, I think fundamentally it did come down to "this is too bleak for me right now and I know it's just going to get worse" so I put it aside. One day.

good monologue

The birthday clown piece seemed like something he brought in with him. Really well done.

Didn't really find much of the Netflix standup funny.

I did like when he used the audience member's "CHRIST!!" thruout the "years" bit

most of that monologue was at least two years old; had heard it in concert.
the giraffe bit was relatively new and cracked me up tho

It's like he gave himself the challenge of the toughest subjects to build a comedy set around: abortion, 9/11, ISIS beheadings, rescue dogs, etc.

Loved the quick bit about people before Christ counting down years and not knowing why. Much of it was very good and much better than whatever the last special was.

It's like he gave himself the challenge of the toughest subjects to build a comedy set around: abortion, 9/11, ISIS beheadings, rescue dogs, etc.

― who even are those other cats (Eazy), Sunday, April 9, 2017 8:34 PM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

this occurred to me, too

i recall louie saying in an interview that he was listening to a george carlin set in the car or something and carlin led with an abortion joke, which impressed the hell out of louie. the show was in missouri or something. maybe that was his inspiration. i feel like this is a stevolende post.

something like that:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R37zkizucPU

That's awful.

It's not funny. His delivery is terrible. I like him but no.

He's not doing material...

http://www.thedailybeast.com/tig-notaro-louis-ck-needs-to-handle-his-sexual-misconduct-rumors?source=facebook&via=mobile

I'm assuming (based partially on his dodgy non-response) that there's something there, and also that he knows there's no way to address it without tarnishing his brand and rep, so he'll never do so unless someone forces his hand. Depressing but hardly surprising.

so this movie of his sounds like an extraordinarily bad idea huh

I understand your reservations but I think you'll be pleasantly surprised if you watch Pootie Tang with an open mind.

ha, for real I made a game effort of watching Pootie Tang once upon a time and just count not stand more than half an hour

i keep starting his different shows and not finishing them. started horace & pete and baskets and the new one with whatsherface as a single mom but i never finish them. i also have that weird "should i still listen to my Swans albums?" feeling now with him because the internet says he is a sex criminal.

he doesn't have a lot of creative involvement in Better Things iirc. adlon directed the entire upcoming season

Horace and Pete is a little much for me. It's like watching 5 Louis C.K.s talking about Louis C.K. stuff

I basically loved H&P for its audacity, though the scenes of characters discussing the election were uniformly terrible

Better Things is wonderful

hazlitt.net/feature/truth-jest

oops http://hazlitt.net/feature/truth-jest

Haven't watched Horace & Pete, but Better Things season 1 was fantastic. I didn't get around to it until it was on Hulu for free, so I guess I'll catch season 2 in a year or so.

I found BT a bit hit-and-miss (and the privilege levels on display a little much) but I hear very good things about S2.

New interview:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/11/movies/louis-ck-rumors-wont-answer.html

Premise sounds like prime Louie, in a potentially good way, but hard to imagine walking up to the box office and saying "Two for I Love You, Daddy."

cast looks great but the meta-ness of it (an accused famous pervert making a film about another accused famous pervert in the style of an homage to the latter) might be a bit too much for me

and the way people talk about the "blood in the water" aspect in that piece made me a bit queasy, like the allegations actually *add* value

yeah the whole "I'm not going to talk about this I'm just going to make a provocative movie about it but btw I am not talking about it" is jarring

wtf is wrong with him. why would you make a movie like this unless you want to promote the pervy rumors about you

"If I Did It"

to be fair to him he's having another actor play the pervert

Also it seems like a different flavor of pervert

Ohh nice

either

1. the rumors are at least partly true but he's pretty certain there will never be proof, but he's canny enough to know the "mystique" could add a level of interest and chatter
2. the rumors are not true and everything he has no idea how weird and cagey it looks

and I find the second option nearly impossible to believe at this point

yea too many people have come forward with v similar stories, & if it weren't true idk why the fuck you would perpetuate it with a movie like this

But yeah I really wish he would put his money where his mouth is and confront this honestly. The essay that Sean posted is really good.

xp

yeah the Hazlitt piece does a good job of explaining why this has been particularly diappointing

to be fair to him he's having another actor play the pervert

I love Charlie Day and feel kind of bad for him that this is his role in the movie tbh

Doesn't malkovich play the perv?

Malkovich plays the Woody Allen analogue, Charlie Day plays the public masturbator

louis give two perverts.

er wait I misread that I guess he just "mimes" it

The film’s other provocations include a few slurs and a goof-off comedian (Charlie Day) miming onanism, twice, in front of other people.

still, shades of the allegations against Louis

i havent watched his show since David Lynch was on but the episode described in that Truth In Jest? article sounds horrifying

it's discussed upthread and as with most of the episodes involving his relationship with the Pamela Adlon character, it's pretty gross and unpleasant.

iirc there was some interview shortly after that episode aired with Louis and Adlon where Adlon explicitly defended it as not actually sexual assault or something similar.

what is it supposed to be if not that though? (i haven't seen it, but unless that description in the article is flat out wrong i don't see what else it could possibly be supposed to be depicting?)