|
Post by Dave Walker on Oct 25, 2005 8:45:19 GMT -5
I'm sure this has been asked before as well, but I was just curious. Sure, how could it not have? I will repeat what I have said several times before. Up to and including 512 - Mitchell I definitely prefer Joel. However from 513 - The Brain That Wouldn't Die on my preference decidedly switches to Mike. Controversial yes, but I stand by it. Once again, Phantom and I agree. For perspective, here's the previous thread on this topic.
|
|
|
Post by vanhagar3000 on Oct 25, 2005 10:12:08 GMT -5
There use to be another poll (created by me) that went on. I don't know where it is now.
|
|
|
Post by crill on Oct 25, 2005 12:37:36 GMT -5
I'm sure we all agree that the Mads trump Pearl, Bobo and Observer, but that's something I chalk up to the performers. I don't find Mary Jo funny in the least. You could have her rattling off the greatest joke on earth and it wouldn't make me laugh. I think it's her voice. And her face. Whatever. But it's definitely a strike against the Sci Fi era. I shudder to think what that group would be like if they had Joel on board. Not to threadjack this TOO much, but I think what bothered me most about Pearl's delivery was to direct all her lines directly into the camera. Even if she's talking to someone behind her and 10 yards back, she's talking or making facal expressions right into the camera. It's a bit 'high-school play'-ish, and it almost never lets the attention stray away from Pearl. She still had some moments though, like the PBS send-off, or bitterly telling the kids about the 'birds and the bees' with a martini in her hand, or the passive-aggressive cat fight with Bridget Jones in one of the 'Roman Times' episodes.
|
|
|
Post by bill1971 on Oct 25, 2005 15:14:51 GMT -5
I'm sure this has been asked before as well, but I was just curious. Sure, how could it not have? I will repeat what I have said several times before. Up to and including 512 - Mitchell I definitely prefer Joel. However from 513 - The Brain That Wouldn't Die on my preference decidedly switches to Mike. Controversial yes, but I stand by it. I thought the transition from Joel to Mike was a pretty smooth one - much, much smoother than the Crow voice change ; that really took some getting used to. Funny thing, PE, whenever I build a new PC for family, friend, etc., The Brain That Wouldn't Die seems to be always within reach whenever I go to test DVD playback. Every time I watch it, I like it more and more. Good stuff. - Bill
|
|
|
Post by fathermushroom on Oct 25, 2005 15:15:57 GMT -5
I feel churlish saying one's better than the other, because they've both given me hundreds of hours of extremely happy, good times; for me, it's at the episode level. I just like some episodes more than others. However, I have to say that I get annoyed with Joel more than I do with Mike. Joel had a way of slaughtering certain words and blowing some of the jokes by choking on them, almost as if he hadn't thought the lines through.
Examples (I don't remember what episodes these are from):
"You don't have to be crazy to work here, but help." That's supposed to be, "You don't have to be crazy to work here, but IT HELPS."
Joel often used the expression, "I abhore you" when he meant "I emplore you." I don't think he knew he was doing this.
Joel often referred to a part of the throat as the "larnix" but he meant the larynx.
Also, there are quite a few times when Joel seemed to get a little lazy with the writing or the ideas for the skits. One of my least favorite bits was the "Joey the Lemur" piece from (was it King Dinosaur?). Kind of cute for 25 seconds, but if you watch it, it's like Joel really had no ideas and was wasting camera time to make the show long enough. Joel also used to drop in "commercial announcements" into his movie riffs all the time, as if he needed more to say. For instance, the Giant Gila Monster is constantly saying things like, "we'll be right back, after this word from Westinghaus." I get enough of that stuff very quickly.
Maybe this makes me look like a pinhead, but those things always pop up like big red flags when I'm trying to dig the episodes. Mike doesn't have this problem.
|
|
|
Post by jjb3k on Oct 25, 2005 15:22:43 GMT -5
Of the two Joel episodes I've seen, I'd still say Mike is the better host. Joel is good, though, but Mike delivers his lines better. I know Joel's "sleepy" demeanor was an intentional act, but I don't really find it as funny as Mike's constant irritated stutterings and inflictions. Joel sounds like his heart isn't really in it, but Mike sounds much more like a professional actor (I'm guessing this comes from playing bit parts like Torgo, the Amazing Colossal Man, and Jack Perkins during the Joel era - Mike was able to hone his skills working alongside the others). In fact, Joel's performances seem especially weak when they're juxtaposed with the boisterous acting of Trace Beaulieu, Kevin Murphy, and Frank Conniff. If I were an MST3K novice who was watching the show for the first time, I'd probably think that Joel was just some guy they got off the street. But still, he had his moments (the sleepiness was actually beneficial in the theater segments, where he sounded more like he was bored with the movie he was watching and making snide remarks).
(And on an off-topic note, I must agree with crill - Mary Jo Pehl mugged for the camera way too much. It gets to the point where you just want to recoil and go "Aah!" like the guys do so frequently in the theater during extreme close-ups.)
|
|
|
Post by vanhagar3000 on Oct 25, 2005 15:28:12 GMT -5
Uh, they all looked into the camera at times guys. It was part of the show. We see though the eyes of a camera robot (Cambot), while down in Deep 13 (originally) we were seeing things through the eyes of a remote control camera, or a camera operated by Mole People.
|
|
|
Post by jjb3k on Oct 25, 2005 16:10:36 GMT -5
Uh, they all looked into the camera at times guys. It was part of the show. We see though the eyes of a camera robot (Cambot), while down in Deep 13 (originally) we were seeing things through the eyes of a remote control camera, or a camera operated by Mole People. Yes, but there's a difference between addressing the camera (simply looking and talking to it like you would a real person, which is what Joel, Mike, Trace, Kevin, Frank, Patrick, Bridget, Beez, and most anyone else who had a part in the show did) and mugging for the camera (jutting your face into it, bugging your eyes, and making a lot of goofy expressions, which is what Mary Jo did).
|
|
|
Post by Phantom Engineer on Oct 25, 2005 18:31:55 GMT -5
Well we have two Mike/Joel threads going now. Can anyone give me reason why I shouldn't lock the old one that just got bumped? One at a time should be enough.
|
|
|
Post by Shep on Oct 25, 2005 19:07:01 GMT -5
Joel was the best IMO, but Mike was good, too, and really made the show his own during the Sci-Fi years.
|
|
|
Post by Skiptastic on Oct 25, 2005 19:16:00 GMT -5
Sorry for bumping that old one, I just read throught it accidentally and forgot which thread I was in...so I posted there and decided Mike vs. Joel isn't as important to me as Bill vs. Trace.
|
|
|
Post by Phantom Engineer on Oct 25, 2005 20:37:27 GMT -5
Sorry for bumping that old one, I just read throught it accidentally and forgot which thread I was in...so I posted there and decided Mike vs. Joel isn't as important to me as Bill vs. Trace. You're forgiven. For now.
|
|
10s
Nanite
Posts: 46
|
Post by 10s on Nov 5, 2005 20:12:05 GMT -5
I agree with a couple of people on here that said it depends on the mood - sometimes it is the experiment I want to watch vs who is hosting. Not to sound condescending but I did prefer the Joel, the love/family(a bit of a stretch?) style with the bots, he was being forced to watch bad movies & he didnt like it, and felt there was nothing he could do, except make some friends to share the pain with. Again it isnt that I disliked Mike or anything, I could watch either or, and it really depends sometimes on the movie itself, if I want to watch something that will put me to sleep like Red Zone Cuba or if I want to watch an MST version of Zombie Nightmare or Gamera, I could do so at will. I will say when Mike took over I found that there more segments that I didnt like than when Joel was around, and I didnt like the new personas that Dr Clayton War of the Worlds Forrester or TV's Frank had morphed into.
|
|
jmak
Nanite
Posts: 36
|
Post by jmak on Nov 6, 2005 1:53:16 GMT -5
Okay. Here is my opinion. Joel’s era was better, and Joel was the overall better host. There are several reasons. First, the movie riffing was better. There are a few reasons for this. First they were able to snatch up all the AIP films when Orion was in trouble in the 90s. When I think of bad movies, those are the classic types. Amazing Colossal Man, It Conquered the World, etc. are all the typical bad movies, and when you see bad movies parodied by the mainstream, you’ll see influences from some of these movie. They also got the Sandy Frank films, which included the classic Gamera series. The only Godzilla movies are from this era. The only one of Ed Wood’s Big Three (GoG, BotM, P9fOS) is in the Joel era. Joel had all those solid movies taken up. All he was missing were some Universal movies (which Mike got and ended up doing disappointingly IMO). Also, these were usually the cheesy movies, which usually will make for a better episode (i.e. Godzilla vs. Megalon). The other reason riffing was better, was because there were more funny esoteric reference. This is the biggest reason, why I’m guessing Mike fans are turned off. All mixed in with a fair amount of talking back to the screen and poop & fart jokes. That’s why Joel is a little better in the theater. Another thing might be that there were less writers as time went on, from about 10 in seasons five and six, to six in the Sci-Fi era. Let’s say each person averages 100 good riffs per episode. With ten people, you get 1000 good riffs (which is more than enough for a great episode) per episode. With six people you get 600 good riffs (which is less than the average episode). I’m sure they didn’t average 100 good riffs an episode, it’s just an example of what I mean. Then, there was the cast. Trace and Kevin put such personality into the puppets, it mixed well with Joel’s sort of “yeah, what’s up dude” attitude. (Hey it rhymes) Trace was the impressionist and corn ball joke maker, sort of a loon, the more childish of the two. Kevin was the pompous, angry man. Yeah, both could take characteristics of the others. But when Corbett came, both puppets were overly angry, no sort of contrast. Then the sets looked nicer during the Joel, but that’s a minor point (but the feel of a show does play a part). Then the host himself. I’m sorry, I love Mike (and I’m sure he may read my post), but by far I find Joel is better. Joel has a charm, that Mike (and most people in the universe) just does not have. Joel has a presence about him. Joel had a certain kind of charisma. He said he was never a good actor, but there was something about him that made him great. Almost, and X factor that I can’t explain. Also, the mads. No explanation needed. Then one final things about the Joel era that made it great, that is always overlooked- MIKE! Mike had multiple guest spots as a different character. Almost every week of season two had Mike being the Lon Cheney of the 90s. Mike was extremely funny and almost made some of these episodes. Finally, the host segments. I think it’s obvious Joel had better ones. Part of that was that Joel had better chemistry with the bots. I think Kevin & Trace had better chemistry than Kevin & Bill, hell Trace & Josh probably had just as good chemistry as Kevin & Bill. Joel had the better concepts for host segments, I think a big problem is Mike got limited. Mike didn’t have the advantages that Joel had to be honest. Mike didn’t have an invention exchange, he didn’t have Mike to come on and make guest spots as a character from the movie on the hexfield. I think he had less songs as well. Also, Joel’s movies may have been better to make fun of during host segments. Mike came in handicapped greatly. Agaim, another factor I think it may have also had to do with the amount of writers. Then there is the fact they had to have a story arc. Plus they loss the genius that was Dr. F and Frank. To be honest, Mike did an okay job with what ended up happening. I still think Joel’s host segments would have been better, but they were really great. Plus Mike still had a good or great one from time to time. Well that’s my abridged version of why I think Joel is better than Mike. Yeah, the ABRIDGED VERSION. If you’d like to hear the full version of me analyzing this topic, please send $140 to Journal Graphics, for the first of eighty volumes. I agree with everything you said except I think that Mike was the better host.
|
|
10s
Nanite
Posts: 46
|
Post by 10s on Nov 6, 2005 10:42:39 GMT -5
Mike was not the better host. vanhangar is 100% correct on this. Boy did the show ever dwindle as far as segments went in the 7th season on to the sci-fi era. I am not a Mary Jo Pehl fan at all. I hardly found her funny. I liked the nanites though
|
|