First time I watched this when we finally saw his act I remember it being solid.When I saw it the second time I realised it was just hokey.What happened? Did I just desperately want him to actually be as talented as he thought he was?
>>217006946Your taste in humor changed.
>>217006946I miss Pee Wee Herman
>>217006946the movie actually would have hit a lot harder if he had killed it, the cringy shitty jokes at the end were a letdown
>>217006946I just rewatched the scene removed from the context of the rest of the picture, including the introduction by Tony Randall (since Rupert wrote that part too), and yeah it is pretty hokey. There are some moments where he holds his pauses too long or invites the audience to react too soon, like he's a bit full of himself despite the material he's flinging out. Honestly, it seems like he casts the net a bit too wide in places, holding himself back too much or going too dark, making sure everybody in the crowd gets at least 1 laugh rather than focusing on what pleases the most people Consistently. I do agree that it felt much funnier after all the buildup, ESPECIALLY with the closing "joke" about having Jerry tied up, which falls VERY flat compared to the other ones when you're trying to put yourself in the shoes of someone who doesn't know he's not lying.
>>217007430I think him not actually having talent is more appropriate. He's genuinely not good and he also doesn't care about getting better, he just cares about being famous.
