Wednesday, July 25, 2007

The 110-Word "We Got To Do Better" Review

Terrible.

No surprise: 30 minutes of ancient YouTube clips, late night urban commercials and assorted unfunny filler. That the show tries to paint itself as satire towards societal change is more offensive than any of the stereotypes on said show.

The premiere episode included footage with references to its original name "Hot Ghetto Mess". I assume host Charlie Murphy didn't have time to re-film his scenes, since it's a two-day Greyhound ride from whatever bridge he's currently living under. And, whatever charisma he once flashed on "The Chappelle Show" was nowhere to be found.

"We Got To Do Better"? Hell, it's BET.

They had the name right the first time.

6 comments:

Sean in Accounting said...

Great job Bootleg Guy. While I agree with your premise w/r/t the media’s agenda vs. Bonds, I do think you conveniently ignore the fact that Bonds DOES bring a lot of this on himself. Eddie Murray was notoriously evasive of the media and rarely did interviews, yet by all accounts, he was gracious about it. But, Bonds seems to delight in humiliating the people that cover him and is anyone shocked that the press is embracing the chance to stick it to him?

That Bootleg Guy said...

Way to post in the wrong thread, Sean. So glad you're managing the money on my contracts.

Mathan said...

Wow. I bet you albums by rappers after they get shot too. Way to fall for the hype.

If only there were some way I could get Hudlin to turn my web content into a BET show.

That Bootleg Guy said...

Oh, Mathan, please.

I saw one online news item about advertisers jumping ship and set the DVR to see what all the hubbub was about.

See words #2 and 3 of the "review".

Christ, no wonder Gloomchen hates you.

Mathan said...

For the record, Summer and I are Wii pals.

So bust!

Oh, I checked out the show (it cut into my two hour block of Girlfriends) and clearly your 110 words don't do it justice.

Charlie Murphy managed to bridge the gap between "awkward" and "menacing" without ever approaching "entertaining."

I'm really confused at what the point of the program was.

Anonymous said...

I'm with Mathan on this, in that I have no idea what the point was.

Was it supposed to be "laugh at ourselves" satire? A depressing social commentary? And, who is the "we" in the title? The show featured a few clips of white buffoonery, too.

Oh, BET. Where have you gone, Tavis Smiley?