Ludacris Performance At Correspondents Dinner
April 30, 2006 at 1:43 pm
It’s Sunday afternoon and the White House Correspondents Association Dinner just concluded. No seriously, it’s still going on. No seriously, they’re only up to Best Supporting Actress. No seriously, and you thought the Six Day War went long.
Stephen Colbert is being roundly panned for his mean-spirited performance. He was big on edge, short on rib-tickling. And the audience? A tough crowd reacting with embarrasment and silence. From my table I counted three rounds of infectious yawns spreading around the room like the wave at football games. It’s gotta be tough to hear silence when telling rat-a-tat jokes in front of 3,000 people. Imagine singing the Spanish Star Spangled Banner to the Minutemen. Even worse, these were mostly drunk reporters — normally an easy mark. Colbert’s editorial act quickly sobered folks up like an unwelcome buzz kill, like a newspaper’s retirement buyout offer was rescinded. (By the way, cheers to Fox News for good-naturedly running the clip of Colbert mocking Fox News for presenting both sides of the issue — the President’s side and the Vice President’s side.)
Meanwhile, Extreme Mortman was Extremely proud to have a better seat than Def Jam rapper Ludacris, who sat one table behind me. To be fair, throughout the night Ludacris had many more people asking for his autograph and photo than I, who had none. Ludacris did provide me one fascinating scene to watch. When the dinner ended, the crowd stampeded the exits like a massive hostage release. I was one of the first to make it to the Washington Hilton’s lower entranceway. But I and others were blocked by security who said no one could leave through those doors until the President was out the building. As I began the trek to the upper level doors, Ludacris walked right by. He was spotted by one of the security agents, who called out “Chris!” The security guy left his post to personally escort Ludacris to a place he could quietly and immediately exit — off the Hilton’s massive back patio over an iron gate. I followed and watched Ludacris’ entourage scale that fence. Thanks to the Ludacris-friendly security guy they all probably saved a whole 90 seconds of wait time.
In my next life, I’d like to be a rap artist. Quicker getaways, with beefy escorts, too. Something Stephen Colbert might have needed.
White House Political comedy mainstream media Famous Media Hollywood White House press corps
Melquiades said,
May 1, 2006 @ 11:37 am
Roundly panned? The link you provide for that statement takes me to a Q&A in which both the Qs and As are complementary of Colbert’s performance. How do you get roundly panned from that??
Extreme Mortman said,
May 1, 2006 @ 11:43 am
thanks for the catch. I fixed the link I meant to put in,
Paul Wachter said,
May 1, 2006 @ 12:04 pm
This new link doesn’t even go to a pan. It only mentions Colbert at the end and, overall, approvingly. “Roundly panned,” — I think not, and certainly not by the thousands of viewers not in the room who have downloaded the speech by now…
Jim Leinfelder said,
May 1, 2006 @ 12:11 pm
Huh? Roundly panned? Still not tracking. You mean to refer to Al Eisele’s post on Huffington Post? He’s roundly panning the very event itself, his colleagues’ slavish truckling to the D.C. power elite, their slack-jawed coverage of the Bush administration, and then, at the very end he makes a rather benign and passing reference to Colbert. Your reference needs some better support. Kinda’ smacks of :”truthiness.”
Extreme Mortman said,
May 1, 2006 @ 12:17 pm
Roundly panned indeed. Those were the comments I heard in person at the dinner and after. I just threw in one link as an example — in person, though, the comments were much more vicious. My characterization is actually a toned-down paraphrase.
Kris Meister said,
May 1, 2006 @ 12:25 pm
Now I wasn’t there but i have seen the video, and Extreme is right. Colbert wasn’t getting nearly the level of reaction that the room was primed for. His skit was the type of thing which on his show is quite funny. But for the performance I watched on CSPAN I was left only grinning, and wondering how small the crowd was to be making so little noise.
Bill Moyer said,
May 1, 2006 @ 12:46 pm
I was watching from home, and I have never seen a pregnant pause used with such skill. I think you might be in touch with most of the people in the room, but you sure missed the laughter at my house. We had a couple of people over and somehow, someone happened to come across c-span’s coverage. We were all laughing so much, we watched it again when it aired again. I love the fact that Stephen Colbert’s guest at the head table was Helen Thomas. It should that Stephen knew exactly who his audience was. Kudos to Colbert for delivering a comic routine I will never forget.
Chris Abraham said,
May 1, 2006 @ 12:47 pm
See, the right is confused. Colbert is all about nuance and subtlety. So subtle is he, in fact, that very few conservatives realize that Colbert is a tree-hugging pinko radical liberal.
And so, what Colbert is doing — passing — is just poor form. Passing? Yes, passing for a self-obsessed, narcissistic, short-sighted, flag-waving, heart-thumping, God-fearing, arch-conservative.
The thing is, he has yet to be “made” because the right isn’t very flexible. They’re still dazed. Still a lot confused. On their knees searching blindly around as though their glasses had been knocked off.
Here, finally, is a man you can trust: Stephen Colbert! Loves America, loves Jesus, loved Family, and love his little Eagle, Steve, Jr.
The truth is, Stephen Colbert does unknown damage to the left through his comedy and very little damage to the right. The Right is not only oblivious to the too too subtle slings because the net gain is that the Colbert Report essentially conveys the conservative message.
The conservative message is only in the pomp and circumstance and like a meniscus, it is only on the surface. But the surface is enough.
Don’t forget, these are folks who are literalists in all things: the Bible, the Constitution, the Ten Commandments.
People who have not an interpretational bone in their body are surely never going to figure out that Stephen Colbert is in fact a comedian making acerbic commentary on the ghoulish, absurd caricature that is the American Neocon Right.
TonyRz said,
May 1, 2006 @ 1:13 pm
FYI — Stephen C. is a practicing and completely unapologetic Roman Catholic from South Carolina with 3(?) kids, who are only intermiitently allowed to watch him work. He can clearly quote swaths of scripture without prep, as he has evidenced in unscripted circumstances.
I’m gonna go “yes” with ‘loves family’ and ‘loves Jesus’. I honestly don’t know about the rest of it.
So hate him or love him, wingnut or moonbat, be careful about what you think you “know”.
WWB said,
May 1, 2006 @ 1:23 pm
As Kris says, had he done that routine on The Colbert Report it would have been a well-regarded episode. But let’s consider location, location, location, as real estate wags always tell us (at least that’s what they tell me). So with Stewart’s mixed reception at the Oscars and now Colbert’s mixed reception here, is this the high water mark of Comedy Central’s late night programming?
I say yes, and I mean that even if both shows continue to be funny and influential (well, oft-referred to by elite blue state types as ourselves) for years to come. In the first half of 2006, Stewart and Colbert were both given the keys to the mainstream entertainment car, and it apparently the powers that be (i.e. the coveted 18-49 demographic) didn’t appreciate the ride.
I also think Colbert is a little more transparent than Chris does. tephen Colbert worries too much that “Stephen Colbert” won’t be taken as parody. As Colbert told Newsweek and as he said on 60 Minutes this weekend, he won’t let his kids see much of what he does because he doesn’t want them to see him being insincere. And he doesn’t seem to trust the American people to know the difference either, which leads him to drop the right-wing facade every once in awhile. Unsurprisingly, these are the least funny parts of the show.
I don’t think he does any damage to the left, though. Nor much to the right. If ever there was a block of programming that mattered only to those who watch it (religiously), it’s Comedy Central M-T 11PM-12AM (10-11 CST).
P.S. Bill Moyers, isn’t there an industry you should be out investigating?
Chris Abraham said,
May 1, 2006 @ 1:27 pm
Some of my best friends are both tree-hugging pinko radical liberals and devout Roman Catholics. How the Ach-Eee-Double-Hockey-Sticks can that work out? I mean, most of the Catholic priests that are disappeared every year are both tree-hugging pinko radical liberals and devout Roman Catholics.
Chris Abraham said,
May 1, 2006 @ 1:28 pm
(Oh, and it doesn’t matter how “transparent” Stephen Colbert tries to be, Stephen Colbert is officially considered only at face-value. Remember, nuance is a French word and we hate the French.)
Ed said,
May 1, 2006 @ 1:34 pm
I think Colbert’s performance was brilliant satire. Of course it didn’t create widespread laughter at the venue, he was skewering both the Bush and the media. Who else was there in the crowd to laugh? But those of us out in the great unwashed who saw it, loved it. It was magnificently cutting and honest and the likes of Twain and Mencken would be proud.
Don’t believe me? Try reading a transcript of it.
Bill Moyer said,
May 1, 2006 @ 1:41 pm
Of course, the Bush routine was a funny as the one we used to do at summer camp. Ah, how I long for those simpler times. And I might add that Chris’ tirade about how much he seems to hate everything is simple but not so refreshing.
Jim Leinfelder said,
May 1, 2006 @ 2:10 pm
Extreme Mortman said,
May 1, 2006 @ 12:17 pm
Roundly panned indeed. Those were the comments I heard in person at the dinner and after. I just threw in one link as an example — in person, though, the comments were much more vicious. My characterization is actually a toned-down paraphrase.
You don’t say? Toned down. More like tone deaf. The very people being so adroitly flayed responded by whipping themselves into a swivet of high dudgeon, thereby guaranteeing the flayings will continue. Huh, who’d have ever seen that coming? I’ve not encountered your media persona before today. Am I to understand that you are somehow engaged as an advisor-for-hire on media management? Do you see the delightfully circular logic in that? Wait, look who I’m asking? Would that my home in frigid MN had the R-value of your analysis of this event.
Newbie said,
May 1, 2006 @ 6:37 pm
New poster, found the link to this through Romenesko. I don’t mean to come into your house and be rude, but, if Colbert’s routine “bombed,” in front of everyone, good. That’s the point. I hope they were all offended. People watching at home got it. About time someone lets the White House press corps know their stuff does indeed stink. If the White House press corps did its job right it wouldn’t be so rife for such biting satire.
Thumbelina said,
May 2, 2006 @ 8:04 am
Now this thread is getting extreme.
What’s Hot: Colbert
What’s Not (or starting not to be): Stewart
DEBATE THAT!
rlj said,
May 2, 2006 @ 9:11 am
I’m surprised that people expected anything different than what Stephen Cobert delivered. Watching him at the dinner was just like watching his show - some really, really funny and some not so funny.
To get a good read on what he is all about all you had to do was watch his show last night when he even poked fun at himself. He showed people in the audience not laughing at him. Typical Stephen.
Jim Leinfelder said,
May 2, 2006 @ 1:43 pm
Asking one of the WHCD attendees as to whether or not Colbert’s act was “funny” seems rather like cutting Saint Sebastian loose from his martyr’s post and asking him if he is a fan of archery.