Last Week Tonight with John Oliver (HBO)

bnt

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6GLuuqrNqxQ

Anybody watching this, and if so, what's it like so far? I don't get Sky Atlantic, so I'm watching bits on YouTube. Covering the death penalty on a comedy news show took some doing ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kye2oX-b39E

Hande hoche!

Find it very hit and miss. Occasionally it's funny but largely dross. Pity as Duncan was one of my favourites on Community.

meoklmrk91

I have been watching it, I really enjoy it, I think John Oliver is really likeable, covers interesting stories and it can be utterly hilarious. I particularly like the fact that they seem committed to covering stories worldwide as opposed to just the US ala The Daily Show and the Colbert Report.

For me the absolute highpoints would be Johns rant about Net Nutrality, I saw it on reddit the following morning after it aired and have been watching since.

And of course Right Said Fred's I'm too Sexy(Bashar al Assad version).

EyeSight

Must say I'm surprised how good it has been. I like John Oliver so I am glad he's doing well. Maybe he will take Colberts slot once he takes Lettermans place?
Highlights: Net neutrality, the segments on other countries leaders and his GM rant

meoklmrk91

EyeSight wrote: »

Must say I'm surprised how good it has been. I like John Oliver so I am glad he's doing well. Maybe he will take Colberts slot once he takes Lettermans place?
Highlights: Net neutrality, the segments on other countries leaders and his GM rant

Doubtful, I think he's much better off staying with HBO anyways. Apparently once John Oliver settles into the roll they want to talk about taking it to an hour long show.

lertsnim

He did well when he stood in for John Stewart so it doesn't surprise me he's doing well here. I wasn't aware that Sky Atlantic showed this so happy days.

drugstore cowboy

Really enjoying it so far, he's a funny guy!

bur

This is up there with Brass Eye, as some of the most informative and funny satire I've ever seen.

If only someone in Ireland could produce something like it. Not like there isn't enough material to work with.

philthrill69

Outstanding show.

wp_rathead

This is gold

#JEFFWECAN

briany

I wonder is Tonight with John Oliver coming under much pressure from the institutions and entities it attacks? I know it's not as if a lot of the things he sheds light on are exactly top secret, but he's got a popular platform that's well presented and a lot of the items go viral. Plus things like Big Tobacco and the American pharmaceutical industry have a fair amount of stroke and money. HBO's a good platform to do his stuff on as they don't have ad breaks and therefore aren't beholden to the advertisers, or at least the same kind of advertisers (product placement in shows?) as other networks may be, so that helps, but I wonder what their strategy is if someone guns for them. Probably do an item on it at least. :pac:

wp_rathead

Philip Morris respond to LWT

"While we recognize the tobacco industry is an easy target for comedians, we take seriously the responsibility that comes with selling a product that is an adult choice and is harmful to health," the statement further read.

"We support and comply with thousands of regulations worldwide - including advertising restrictions, penalties for selling tobacco products to minors, and substantial health warnings on packaging. We're investing billions into developing and scientifically assessing a portfolio of products that have the potential to be less harmful and that are satisfying so smokers will switch to them. And, like any other company with a responsibility to its business partners, shareholders and employees, we ask only that laws protecting investments, including trademarks, be equally applied to us."

FloatingVoter

Big Tobacco is threatening to sue us now.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/tobacco-giant-issues-legal-threat-over-plain-packaging-1.2106300

I'm guessing our glorious leaders haven't seen the show (as they can't work d'interweb yet) and will need to seek legal advice costing many millions of taxpayers cash.

Thrill

Renewed for another 2 seasons.

Silencing any chatter of a possible John Oliver return to Comedy Central to take over The Daily Show, HBO has renewed his weekly HBO program for two more seasons.

Each season will consist of 35 shows, with Season 3 running in 2016, to be followed by season four in 2017.

http://deadline.com/2015/02/last-week-tonight-with-john-oliver-renewed-season-2-3-hbo-1201375223/

FloatingVoter

According to John Meagher in today's Indo..."John Oliver is one of Australia's leading satirists".
It'd be nice if TV corespondents actually watched a little TV every now and again.

human 19

This guy , from England, is actually starting to influence policy in th U.S. The main reason seems to be that he doesnt just use current issues and brush them aside with a couple of jokes and then move on...he spends up to 20 minutes on 1 issue showing its ludicrous nature up in a very humerous way which entertains and informs. You really should follow him on FB or YT. Guaranteed weekly entertainment......(along with Bil Maher; follow that dude also)

http://www.dailydot.com/politics/john-oliver-washington-internet-testimony-bill/

wp_rathead

Ireland got a mention at the end of this weeks Episode following us bringing in the Plain Packaging laws on Cigerettes

evilivor

Hande hoche! wrote: »

Find it very hit and miss. Occasionally it's funny but largely dross. Pity as Duncan was one of my favourites on Community.

I'd have to agree. I don't think he's as funny as he or the writers think.

Some nice ideas - and they did some topics like Student Debt really well - but overall needs more work.

FloatingVoter

Not surprisingly, Ireland's little drug experiment last week gets a mention. Dev would be proud.

wp_rathead

I would probably buy March Sadness 2015 I gotta say :pac:

Raspberry Fileds

I've listened to the Bugle - the "satirical podcast" which Oliver co-hosts - for a few years now, so am quite familiar with him and would probably consider myself a fan of his. I enjoy LWT and admire its ambition but I think it's limited.

Does this format sound familiar?: the topic is introduced with a news clip or interview extract; the audience gasps and Oliver says something like, "Yeah, that's right"; he spends the next thirty seconds or more giving detail, perhaps without any joke; with the preamble over, what follows is a series of attempts to portray some aspect of the topic as being ludicrous, after each of which he draws an analogy - "That's like me saying to my dog..." Obviously there is more variety than that, but I think it's a worryingly accurate summary.

The humour excessively relies on the analogy gag and, as a result, is often separate from the story - "Let me explain this terrible thing; now let me tell you a joke that uses it for scaffolding." The satirical comedy of Chris Morris, on the other hand, is woven with the subject.

It portrays itself as an investigative show, but it largely relies on existing investigations and/or campaigners.

I'm conscious that satire doesn't really do nuance; it would be entirely neutered were it expected to. But considering the show presents itself as taking a certain topic and then comprehensively explaining it to the viewer, it ought to be more factually dependable, and I get the impression that some examples are set up to seem preposterous when in reality there may be an understandable reason why something dysfunctional is the way it is.

All that said, I enjoy it and would probably be disappointed were it cancelled.

serfboard

Raspberry Fileds wrote: »

Does this format sound familiar?: the topic is introduced with a news clip or interview extract; the audience gasps and Oliver says something like, "Yeah, that's right"; he spends the next thirty seconds or more giving detail, perhaps without any joke; with the preamble over, what follows is a series of attempts to portray some aspect of the topic as being ludicrous, after each of which he draws an analogy - "That's like me saying to my dog..." Obviously there is more variety than that, but I think it's a worryingly accurate summary.

Spot on - and I agree with the rest of your comments as well. I'd also add one of my own in that I think it could pack more of a punch if he didn't feel the need to end every review with a joke, which may be completely unrelated to the topic. Loses the message a bit, for me.

Having said that, I do like the show and think it exposes people to current affairs and into how politics is working on both a macro and micro level. It makes people aware of things they ought to be aware of but might otherwise not be - the pharmaceutical industry and doctors, or the payday loans industry being two that come to mind.

JO said in an interview that having a weekly review format (rather than the pressure of a Daily Show), gives more time to put current events into context and they can give more background into why things are happening.

Bringing things to light in this way is what made Jon Stewart one of the most trusted men in America. And, given what happened to Brian Williams lately ("the trustworthiness of one of America’s best-known and most revered TV journalists has been damaged") one would think that the reputation of these satirists will only be enhanced.

lertsnim

He did a pretty excellent piece on the NCAA this week.

I like the show and glad HBO show it as I don't think it would last long on a channel funded by commercials.

everlast75

is it available on one of Sky's channels, or would I have to use a VPN online?

lertsnim

Sky Atlantic show it on Mondays I think. It should also be available on demand or through Sky Go.

Lovely Bloke

lertsnim wrote: »

I don't think it would last long on a channel funded by commercials.

Do you think HBO is not funded by commercial interests?

Seriously, how naive are you?

serfboard

Baldy Conscience wrote: »

Do you think HBO is not funded by commercial interests?

Seriously, how naive are you?

In fairness, the poster said:

lertsnim wrote: »

I don't think it would last long on a channel funded by commercials.

i.e. advertising. They wouldn't be able to pull the p1ss out of (or even report/inform on) products that spent large amounts of money on advertising on the channel. (If you want to see how this works, check out the shenanigans involving The Daily Telegraph and HSBC.) But since HBO is subscription-only, this doesn't apply.

lertsnim

Baldy Conscience wrote: »

Do you think HBO is not funded by commercial interests?

Seriously, how naive are you?

Try reading my post correctly before you get all uppity on your high horse :rolleyes:

Do you really think I didn't know that there is commercial interests in it? Time Warner owns it after all. Who's being naive now?

Lovely Bloke

They still have commercial interests paying them to advertise their products within shows - it's not as in your face, but it's there.

Anyone who thinks they aren't just as beholden to these advertisers as other networks are to theirs is seriously missing a trick.

serfboard

Baldy Conscience wrote: »

They still have commercial interests paying them to advertise their products within shows

I'm not saying you're wrong, but do you have any evidence to back up that assertion? And do you have specific evidence to back it up in relation to this particular show? (i.e. I can imagine that there might be product placement within dramas, but is it happening on this show as well, and how do you know that?)

briany

Question about the show - Every week they hit a nerve, but has it inspired much action on the topics it covers or does it all amount to a weekly Kony 2012?

miralize

Incredible interview with Snowden last night.

qweerty

Just watched the clip from the most recent episode on Youtube. Over half an hour long and with an interview with Edward Snowden.

Echoing some of the criticisms above, I thought the switching between jokes and serious content felt contrived and uncomfortable. The jokes were pretty lame too.

Up until the "junk pics" section, I thought the Snowden interview was really weak. The style of LWT interviews is similar to that of Oliver's interviews on the Daily Show and to Stephen Colbert's. But whereas it worked when Oliver was a "correspondent", I don't think it does when he switches from being the straight-man host to being the brash interviewer. It works for Colbert because he retains that brash persona in both roles.

I'm not a supporter of Snowden's, but it seems patently obvious to me that a whistleblower (especially one handling such complex data as Snowden did) is not obliged to ensure that everything they share is absolutely and entirely handled properly; merely that they make a genuine effort. Oliver chided Snowden for the mistake of the New York Times, possibly the most well-resourced newspaper in the world.

Maybe he'd requested that the topic not be discussed, but I'd have liked to have known how Snowden felt about him having (to at least some extent) aligned with a country whose relations with America and the West are fast deteriorating.

The "junk pics" section was more impressive. And Oliver landed the line of the century when he said, "No, you should absolutely not [share the document he was holding with the camera]. And it's unbelievable that you would do that. Actually, it's entirely believable." (Simultaneously mocking the NSA and Snowden). But I felt the playing of ignorant vox pops was not as revealing as the show implied. And the overall implication, in essence, was that Snowden and his media partners should have spun a compelling narrative in order to engage the public. Journalistically, entirely unethical.

It should be noted that the interview was not linear - i.e. footage was, for whatever reason, edited (sometimes mid-answer).

And last, when will Oliver admit that his show sees itself as being more than comedy? He always becomes incredulous when it is put to him that his show is news-based. But he seems blind to the fact that anything that presents itself as interpreting news events is a "news show". It's either satire or really weak comedy that uses current events as a skeleton. Take your pick! He says in this interview that the only responsibility he feels is to make people laugh. They gives rise to some worrying implications, IMO: would he be willing to greatly misrepresent for the sake of comedy.

Tipsy McSwagger

What the hell is going on with last nights episode?

NinetyForNone

Tipsy McSwagger wrote: »

What the hell is going on with last nights episode?

As in showing the Sex Education clips instead of House of Commons speeches?
Think it's some sort of copyright thing...

Penn

NinetyForNone wrote: »

As in showing the Sex Education clips instead of House of Commons speeches?
Think it's some sort of copyright thing...

They've mentioned several times before (in the US version) that legally in the UK they can't show clips from the House of Commons in comedy shows in the UK. So when they air Last Week Tonight in the UK, parts of the show where they're showing clips from the UK Parliament (in the US) have to be replaced with something else (when aired in the UK). I think before they've shown clips of Gilbert Gottfreid reading erotica or stuff like that.

FlicFlak

Sorry for ressurecting an old thread, but wondered whats going on with the time scheduling for this series?

They used to show it at 9 o'clock on a Monday night, now its getting later and later every week, last nights episode was on after midnight! And its not like anything new or good is replacing it at 9, just repeats of other things.

fman

Yep a weird one, slipping and slipping. I was suspicious they were trying to almost quietly dump it but it was still simulcast on showcase last night.

From what I've seen of sky recently I wouldn't even be surprised if it's just down to them being slow to get the episode ready to air. In the past they have slipped on having episodes available in UHD on the same day as advertised with the reason often cited "it takes time with a bigger file".

I know it's comedy central, but their scheduling of the daily show is bizarre too. All showings are out in the 3-4 am slot. Sometimes the show is available on demand before that but not consistently.

Overall I wonder if it's a legal fear. Last week tonight has had some cuts (mostly over the royal family) . The later time giving them the option to drop the show last minute without leaving a hole in the schedule at 9pm.

All just theories. I'm sure if we all contacted sky we would get different answers or one blanket scheduling reasons excuse.