We have reached our Lois point in history...
this post was submitted on 22 Oct 2024
62 points (100.0% liked)
chapotraphouse
13509 readers
1408 users here now
Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.
No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer
Vaush posts go in the_dunk_tank
Dunk posts in general go in the_dunk_tank, not here
Don't post low-hanging fruit here after it gets removed from the_dunk_tank
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
as an elder millennial, I of course recognize Peter Griffin, but I have no idea who this young man to his left is
he looks like he's the person that Tate fellow is trying to be
Hot ones has some great celebrity interviews if you're into that sort of thing. This video is a very unfunny outlier.
does the interview revolve around ones appreciation for wings?
I think the hot wings do a couple things, give them a sort of trajectory for the interview, make interviewee more vulnerable, and gimmick for brand recognition. The interviewer is also just really good at his job and asks interesting questions, so it could probably work without that stuff but certainly wouldn't have the notoriety it currently does.
this is gonna drive me to be @UlyssesT@hexbear.net but about Hot Ones instead of Elon
this is the most ridiculous premise for an interview show
my other comment bears repeating:
how do celebrities feel about paper cuts?!?! check out my new YouTube show to find out
that feels equally pertinent to the culture
Eating hot wings is a pretty standard food challenge in the states. Many local wings places were doing it long before this YouTube show. (Like "if you can eat this plate of ghost pepper wings you get them for free and your picture on the wall") I don't know much about the brand but they definitely were always planning on doing food related things based on the name "first we feast" and this idea makes sense. The interviews are otherwise normal and like I said have this guy who's a good interviewer. If you're curious, find a celebrity you like and watch that episode. Or you can just forget the whole thing because I assure you there are much weirder premises for interview shows.
totally understand the premise of eating hot wings, I have a friend who is super into them and enters contents and impresses large men with her heat-eating ability
it's just baffling to me as a context for Getting To Know Someone, which I'm beginning to understand is how some of you are seeing it
idk how else to explain that it's weird to me that watching someone suffer a food makes them relatable/likable, which leaves me with the idea that it's me that's weird here
everybody else gets it, and I get that, but it is very weird to me
edit: also, I'm not looking for weird interview shows to make celebrities relatable. they will never be relatable to me, fuck celebrities ❤️
The juxtaposition of the challenge and the interview was the novelty that I think gave hot ones its initial appeal though, to be trite the suffering is the point
Have you heard In Vino Veritas? this is the same, but you degrade their faculties with pain instead of CNS depressants.
If it makes you feel better they also didn't think it would do so well/work when they started.
Hot Ones has turned from a semi-prank show cracking jokes in a semi-populated corner of the internet to a heavy hitter on the talk-show circuit.
https://www.eater.com/23045066/hot-ones-celebrity-seasons-show
Maybe seeing dj kahlid not be able to handle cholula then clowned on for his inhiblity to actually give an answer to any question?
it revolves around making both the host and said interviewee increasingly suffer by way of capsaicin while general interview questions (both career and personal) are asked. they do a "flight" of incrementally-hotter hot sauces until it's just asinine scoville levels toward the end. idk what the gag is here, if the VA ate wings as the character or what. I don't care enough to watch it to figure this one out.
??? why is the interview more entertaining if the participants are suffering?
edit: I don't expect you to have an answer for this, I'm realizing this is a question I'm asking myself
what the fuck
It's a few different things combined:
-
Competent host: Sean Evans seems like a perfectly normal guy with above average charisma that isn't as manufactured as Fake Laugh Fallon or Waitstaff Abuser Cordon. The team also seems to do their research in terms of guests and tend to ask questions they didn't already just answer in another interview
-
Novel premise: Instead of the host asking raunchy or off cuff questions, the host asks mundane albeit obscure questions regarding the celebrity in question loses composure due to increasing spice. A part of the spectacle is seeing someone famous lose composure in a way that isn't in a public mental breakdown or substance induced rampage.
-
Generally wholesome: Or at the very least not mean spirited. Despite some dramatic sound effects added after the fact, the show is actually extremely benign and doesn't antagonize anyone. Fairly accommodating, if the interviewee is vegan they'll have vegan wings, if they don't eat processed food they get like fried cauliflower.
I get the appeal and have seen like 4 or 5 episodes.
it is so kind of you to take the time to try to explain this silly shit to me ❤️
because its a way to manufacture relatability for celebrity-commodities
"oh look, hot things hurt them, just like me" ????
really??????
💀🙃
you know what else hurts them? bullets and assault and thorough denigration, just like every-fuckin-body else
it is incomprehensible to me that this is a thing
how do celebrities feel about paper cuts?!?! check out my new YouTube show to find out
people don't watch celebrities for intellectual reasons as your comment would seem to expect. Its for the spectacle / parasocial relations / interpassivity. To marx, the substitution of actual social life with the commodity. As such, the value of the commodity is the illusion of realness, and yes seeing them in pain does enhance this via our brains wiring toward empathy.
being autistic, other people do often watch things for reasons that make little sense to me, it's true
The idea is that as the guest becomes more distracted by the spiciness they become more authentic because they're too distracted to put up their masks
why is the interview more entertaining if the participants are suffering?
Maybe it's fun to see rich people deliberately hurt themselves
God has abandoned us.
Why what the hell
If family guy was ever funny, it was seasons 1-3 when it lampooned 70s and 80s pop culture, and even THAT is hard to watch since it’s got its moments of reactionary cow shit. Seriously, watch the “halloween” special on hulu. It’s almost comical how unfunny it is.
It's pretty shitty if I couldn't get a laugh out of it. Usually low-effort slop works on me.
The "Who's your favorite kid?" "I'm gonna have to say Bart" line got a quick exhale out of me.
Damn, I really was out of it yesterday if I missed that line.
Idk that Peter Griffin looks CGI
Yeah, nah. I'm going to bed. It isn't bedtime, but I'm cooked.
The Donald Duck episode looked like it could be a fun novelty. I haven't watched it. Seeing this now really feels like their jumping the shark.
Like, what I saw of the Donald Duck episode seemed really heavily scripted. The thing that makes the show is watching these people try and think under pressure. I really doubt they capture that honest reaction here, I doubt they flew the voice actors out to eat the wings while trying to improvise as the characters.
Holy crap, Lois. It's almost like that time when...
I found a YouTube link in your post. Here are links to the same video on alternative frontends that protect your privacy: