I love the addition of the commercials. I was 14 or 15 during the time of this show. I was obsessed with it and watched Comedy Central all the time. I remember almost all of them and it really brings me back.
They need to get Vice or someone to bring this show back. I know Colin and Jimmy would love to do it again. Make it once or twice a week but for an hour or 2.
Hahaha that Steve Carell comertial would never be able to be aired now a days. also nick dipaolo is the man, he seems really intense on tough crowd but all his appearances on o and a he's cool as fuck
Yes it was David Spade in that Sierra Mist commercial. It's not even called that anymore, it's called Mist or Dew Mist or some shit. I remember back in the day,a few of us at work would go to the soda fountain machine & fill up half Sierra Mist & half Cranberry Juice(it was really good & semi-healthy)& then Mist came out with that flavor a few years later... I'm still waiting for my royalty checks, I'm pretty sure we came up with that 😒😒 😅😅
@@lurchlogan that was a category on jeopardy a few days ago. What is lurch loogan drinking. And the question was who gives a shit alex. I ll take what is lurch loogan drinking for 800 alex
I think Nick Dipaolo should be able to believe in and say whatever he wants, but it raises a weird question. Because he believes a lot of the things he says in his act, is he actually a comedian? When viewed as a stand up comedian, the fact that he actually believes the things he says in his stand up,which I enjoy, to be factual or at least not far from the fact, one assumes it's hyperbole but I don't think it's a stretch to say that a lot of his stand up material is not hyperbolic. If that's true than he's just a man on a stage, spouting an ideology(which he is entitled to) but us as the viewing public(or at least me lol) find it funny, because the views sound inflated, and absurd; leading one to believe he had critically thought about (insert institutional abuse here) and he was then talented enough to dissect multiple social issues and then bring attention to them through means of radicalizing the facts, drawing people towards the issues because in doing so makes the issues seem trivial and obnoxious. We find the mocking of (insect institutional abuse here) to be funny. Even if the attempt is to be funny, when he does his political shtick, does he not turn into just someone saying what they believe to be facts, which we laugh at because it is being said in a context we only assume we are in, thus making us the comedians, or is there an element there of finding him funny the way we find an absurd Donald Trump speech funny, or is he simply a comic because he has found a way to make us laugh and that's it, period, end of sentence. I'm just kinda leaving a stream of consciousness type thing here. I don't actually subscribe to any of these possibilities, i'm just really high and find interesting to analyze odd grey areas. One of which is particularly interesting. There is a case to be made that Nick Dipaolo is a sociopath. We might be just laughing at the ideals of a fellow American who has merely capitalized on knowing others thought his ideals were ridiculous and that if portrayed in a live performance under the guise of a comic act, knowing they would find his ill informed beliefs to be nothing more than hyperbole and therefore funny, would make him money. Hahaha that would be so insidious.
