News1 min ago
Dapper Laughs
22 Answers
I have never heard of this 'character' or seen his show, but after hearing that a second series of his comedy show has been axed by ITV two, and he has voluntarily cancelled his tour, my question is this -
How could an apparently reasonably inteligent man like Daniel O'Reilly think that creating an 'alter ego' like this could be remotely funny?
And secondly, how could a national broadcaster think it entertainment to offer him a series-long platform for this 'comedy'?
How could an apparently reasonably inteligent man like Daniel O'Reilly think that creating an 'alter ego' like this could be remotely funny?
And secondly, how could a national broadcaster think it entertainment to offer him a series-long platform for this 'comedy'?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by andy-hughes. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.I think he considers himself 'satirical' andy. The problem with that is that most people disagree with him, however there is always an element of 'Emperor's New clothes' in TV etc and wanting to be the 'edgiest' the ' most dangerous' and so on. He clearly pitched himself a edgy laddish humour to someone who bought into that and then has realised to his cost that his audience don't actually find him funny.
kvalidir - "I think he considers himself 'satirical' andy. The problem with that is that most people disagree with him, however there is always an element of 'Emperor's New clothes' in TV etc and wanting to be the 'edgiest' the ' most dangerous' and so on. He clearly pitched himself a edgy laddish humour to someone who bought into that and then has realised to his cost that his audience don't actually find him funny"
I think you've pretty much summed up the situation there kal.
I can quite appreciate laddish humour - if you look at the success of Celebrity Juice, there is obviously a massive audience for it, but this guy seems to have less than co judgement about what is actually funny, and what is frightening and / or offensive.
I have never believed the defence of 'It's not to be taken seriously ...', or 'It's a character, it's not real ...'.
Giving yourself a silly name and pretending to be a character doesn't add a previously missing element of humour to rape and sexual harrassment.
I think you've pretty much summed up the situation there kal.
I can quite appreciate laddish humour - if you look at the success of Celebrity Juice, there is obviously a massive audience for it, but this guy seems to have less than co judgement about what is actually funny, and what is frightening and / or offensive.
I have never believed the defence of 'It's not to be taken seriously ...', or 'It's a character, it's not real ...'.
Giving yourself a silly name and pretending to be a character doesn't add a previously missing element of humour to rape and sexual harrassment.
The thing with Sacha Baron- Cohen though Bednobs is he is not generally that offensive himself and you are in on his 'joke' of setting other people up, he leaves room for his victims to show how offensive they are in real life, so you forgive his character that brought them there- Dapper laughs hasn't copped onto this aspect probably because he's not as bright.
jno - "it seems to be agreed among media moguls that being "edgy" is important and being safe is for squares who like watching Dad's Army. I can't say I agree."
I'd agree with your assessment jno - the problem with being 'edgy' is that you are close to the edge, or as in the case, spectacularly falling over it.
I'd agree with your assessment jno - the problem with being 'edgy' is that you are close to the edge, or as in the case, spectacularly falling over it.
I'd never heard of him either. I sort of wish I never had now. My answer to your questions above is 'no idea' to both.
http:// www.the guardia n.com/t v-and-r adio/tv andradi oblog/2 014/nov /11/dap per-lau ghs-obs curity- celebri ty-big- brother -protes ts-peti tions
http://
Well yes, you don't have to like him, but I think that is the difference between the two 'acts' and why one is considered funny and the other decidedly not. You are never quite sure where Dapper Laughs ends and his originator begins whereas that line is very clearly drawn with Sacha Baron Cohen even if you don't personally like him.
http:// www.dai lymail. co.uk/n ews/art icle-28 31214/D apper-L aughs-g one-Com edian-I TV2-axe d-told- female- audienc e-membe r-gaggi ng-rape -says-s -retiri ng-char acter.h tml
There that might set things off a little, but to some it is just me taking the opportunity to post my daily, Daily Mail link.
There that might set things off a little, but to some it is just me taking the opportunity to post my daily, Daily Mail link.
AOG - "There that might set things off a little, but to some it is just me taking the opportunity to post my daily, Daily Mail link."
I find myself in sync with the Mail on this - they make no pretence to be other than revolted by the material this man has produced as 'comedy', and their bafflement at his self-confessed air of confusion that nobody thinks he is even remotely funny, or that his character represents some form of alter-ego, so it's not actually him saying this nonsense.
I find myself in sync with the Mail on this - they make no pretence to be other than revolted by the material this man has produced as 'comedy', and their bafflement at his self-confessed air of confusion that nobody thinks he is even remotely funny, or that his character represents some form of alter-ego, so it's not actually him saying this nonsense.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.