Joe Rogan caught being fake as fuck with Quentin Tarantino
By - Ishaan863
"Joe Rogan is like some barbarian khan from the steppes that took an interest in intellectual things and his show is basically him bringing slightly nervous scholars and magicians to come before him to explain how the world works "glasses man, you explain to Joe why sky big, and how tree grow" but he will also believe almost anything you tell him, and only recently (in the past few years) does he clap back like "Tiny hat man say otherwise, do you lie to Joe? Tiny hat man say fat not bad for you, that sugar is enemy, so which is truth? Joe thinks you are wrong" and people just nervously go "oh-oh ok h-Haha yah I guess so"
"Joe spend many moons on horseback and training with bow and sword, but joe also wonder why skyfire rise from mountains every morning, you will explain this to Joe."
[My favorite is Bill Burr calling him out on masks](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1chYhsp3NRw)
Damn that was strategic as hell
Called him out in a joking but direct way, while also maintaining the light heartedness of it all with how he side steps the topic
He's like the Muhammad Ali of comedy. Weaves in, bops you and weaves out
Fly like a butterfly, lol like a bee.
Rogan: I don't rollerblade
Burr: You don't have the body type for it.... your fucking knuckles would drag on the ground. Even with the extra 2 inches.
That’s fantastic. Really speaks to Bill Burr’s character how he was able to shut down Joe’s idiocy with good-natured humor.
I love how is slowly roasting him and keeping him laughing haha
Almost like they're friends
I swear these people don’t have friends they banter with
Lol his comment makes it seem like it's a foreign concept he doesn't understand. "I like how they laugh and joke with each other! What do you call that?!"
They’ve also been friends for a long time. You can take a heaping shit on your friend like that if they deserve it.
Joe says it's cool for dudes to crap on other dudes for wearing masks, because that's just what dudes do.
But he's all on about how awful it is to blame "toxic masculinity" for problems?
Joe's take boils down to protecting yourself and others not being manly, so don't take the most effective, known measure (at the time, pre-vaccine) to stopping the pandemic.
I don't know how much more stark it can be than that.
> Oh god you're so tough with your fuckin' open nose and throat
Maybe one of my favorite quotes of all time
I was having a particularly frustrating day, just idiots all around me, you know those days where you feel like screaming because you keeping getting assaulted with stupidity everywhere you go? Anyway your comment inspired me to go down a Bill Burr YouTube rabbit hole and now I feel way less murderous. He’s like the Everyman anger translator. Bill Burr yells about morons so the rest of us might be saved amen.
That’s how I’ve always felt about Louis Black and George Carlin.
When Bill tells Joe he got scared and made fun of people wearing masks “and that’s how the hatred starts” gives me chills because Bill was speaking to Joe on a very intimate and serious level. Yeah Bill is great at keeping things lighthearted, but that delivery will forever live in my mind rent free.
It's amazing how intuitively smart Bill is, I agree that was a real powerful observation on his part.
Fuck Joe Rogen
I can already tell that’s a You Tube clip I’ll rewatch with a smile at least once a week. Masterful job of dismantling a smug asshole.
Whats this from? I remember it, but can't remember the source
I found it from a greentext but it might be from somewhere else
From 4chan yes
It’s a copypasta from 4chan
It's a 4chan greentext written by my online buddy Wayne Samiere that has been screencapped and gone viral. Unfortunately he passed away from an asthma attack around a year ago but seeing it come back around reminds me of some good times
Has glasses man seen moose crash into horse? Young Jamie, show glasses man cave painting.
Has glasses man or tiny hat man seen a hairless tree ape? It is like man disturbed by many spirits.
I've said it before:
There's two sides to Joe Rogan. One is a stoner, dabbling into a cosmos of scientific discussion, philosophy and socratic thought that would impress anyone who takes the time to listen. This side of Joe Rogan is admirable: a man admittedly inexperienced in academic fields, inviting paleontologists, tech innovators, and doctors of philosophy on his show to talk about the higher themes of life with which we frame the context of humanity. And there's some funny videos thrown in because we're human and stories over a joint are grounded.
The other side is deeply concerning: Its a man slowly becoming a tool of a rising political movement, whether he realizes it or not (I don't think he has any intention of this). Though Joe Rogan will admit his intellectual shortcomings, he still allows himself to be drawn to emotional, illogical thought. Joe Rogan will say a blithely sexist statement and allow it of himself because, well, what should we expect of him, or he of *himself*? Joe Rogan will impulsively shun logic for emotionality, like deriding masks because they don't feel brave and masculine to him. But what does this have to do with politics? Well, Joe Rogan, although declared (and I think he believes it of himself) liberal, Joe Rogan tends to think like a conservative. Absolutist, bound by sense, feeling and intuition of what ought to be rather than logical, critical thought of what ought to be. He has no argument for why masks are weak *they just are*. And sure, he's a weed smoking California boy who hangs with Elon Musk, but these are exceptions rather than patterns to a rule. One ought to look at his past guests to get an idea of how Joe Rogan is becoming what many call a gateway to the alt-right.
Ian Danskin is an eclectic youtuber who, between monologues about video games, does research on the tactics of the Alt-Right, and he has a series that has been slowly picking up steam called "[The Alt-Right Playbook](https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLJA_jUddXvY7v0VkYRbANnTnzkA_HMFtQ)". One of his videos, "How to Radicalize a Normie", talks about the methods by which various Alt-Right groups bring themselves to potential recruits or vice-versa. If I can quote him in what might as well be my latest essay, "What they [pundits or gateway personalities for the Alt-Right] have in common, especially the most accessible ones, is that they don't present themselves as entry points to the radical right. In fact, many of them did not set out *to be* Far Right thought leaders, and may not think of themselves as such. Though they are often selling products of which the Far Right are among their biggest purchasers, and its not like they're turning the money away". I do not believe Joe Rogan thinks he is or set out to be an early stepping stone on the road to the Alt-Right. I just notice an undeniable connection between who he invites, his audience of the white male frat boy, and the Alt-Right. But there's also the road of people like Joe himself. "Media personalities sometimes become gateways to the Alt-Right almost by accident: they do something edgy, a part of their audience [the alt-right] reacts positively and, facing no real consequence, they do it more; this leads to further positive reinforcement from conservative fans, the rest of the audience acclimates [or leaves], and the cycle repeats, the personality pushing the envelope further and further based on what flies with their conservative audience". He's actually calling out Pewdiepie here, but the point one should be noticing is that Joe Rogan's opinions on masks were not created from nothing, but were actually a long time coming.
He does actually touch on Joe Rogan explicitly too, pointing out the frequency with which Joe Rogan invites Alt-Right figures onto the show, and the noticeable absence- or extreme disparity- of liberals. "Those within the network [of Alt-Right onboarding personalities] have laissez-faire relationships, even if they on paper disavow one another. When they need a source or a guest host, they aren't going to go to the left, they're going to feature each other. The Left is the enemy: their ideas are beneath consideration, and the only reason to engage them is for public humiliation. But you can interview a "Western Chauvinist" [Proud Boy], and that doesn't mean you're endorsing him. *You know, just, its fine to hear him out! Nothing should be off limits in the marketplace of ideas.*... and because these guys keep showing up in each other's metadata, regardless of what they say, Google thinks there is definitely a relationship between the guy "Just asking questions" and the guy denying the Holocaust. This is an environment where de-radicalizing- listening to the Left, is sleeping with the enemy. But radicalizing further? Eh, you do you, buddy. That's where Joe Rogan comes in. He is the crumbly patch of dirt at the rim of the rabbit hole. I have no reason to believe he intends to be in the position he's in now. But he is here, and its concerning, and I hope he realizes this and uses his position to walk his followers back. End the feedback loop of radicalization among himself and his audience.
Thank you for posting this most insightful comment.
This is both the funniest and most accurate take on Joe Rogan I've ever seen
I seriously don't get the appeal behind JR. I mean, he brings on pretty high-profile people, but the conversation just feels super flat to me. It's 100% one-sided with Joe throwing in comments to ease into/out of the topics while rarely seeming to have a valid opinion of his own.
> I seriously don't get the appeal behind JR.
He makes stupid people think their stupid opinions are valuable.
he's Gweneth Paltrow for dudes
>I seriously don't get the appeal behind JR.
>He makes stupid people think their stupid opinions are valuable.
Hey! That's what the internet is for!
The editing of this makes me feel like I just had a mental break.
Top comment on Reddit: "The editing made me feel like I had a mental break."
Top comment on Youtube: The editing is perfect."
And as usual both are hyperboles in opposite end of the spectrum.
The editing was okay, could have been better but wasn't really problematic - but that's a boring take I guess, doesn't really get the dopamine flowing.
This cat just played Devil's Neutral
*"I hate these filthy Neutrals, Kif. With enemies you know where they stand but with Neutrals, who knows? It sickens me."* \- Zapp Brannigan
"If I die tell my wife I said... 'hello'"
[I Have No Strong Feelings One Way or the Other..](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CxK_nA2iVXw)
What makes a man turn neutral?
[Just the interview without the annoying editing](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YmvOEj00LB8)
Why? It was simple to follow. The form was:
- Clips of Rogan shit talking Tarantino's points of view on a topic to other people in the past
- Clip of Tarantino telling his opinion on the same topic to Rogan and Rogan going, "oh wow, I didn't know that, that's a huge drop."
**Edit:** Y'all he's being fake by pretending to have never heard Tarantino's opinions before when he's on record having disagreed with Tarantino's opinions. It's not that hard to understand. He's not "learning new information." We know he was aware of the information because he's publicly shit-talked Tarantino's opinion in the past.
This type of shit happens with Joe from Podcast to Podcast.
And if there's someone like me who doesn't listen to him from podcast to podcast, then I don't completely understand the context and wouldn't get it. It would just sound like a regular interview and nothing more.
Sounds like he's fake with everyone he interviews.
Yes and no. Honestly I think he's kind of just an open minded idiot. Takes a lot of uninformed stances on things, then changes as soon as he talks to anyone with actual experience
So open minded his brain leaks out.
Right? Imagine taking an uninformed stance, grandstanding said stance against the informed opposition, getting schooled, apologizing, and then still repeating your deeply flawed process on the next topic of discussion.
By your third public apology, you should really have changed something about your core methodology.
The [BS Asymmetry Principle](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandolini%27s_law) is really frustrating. The other guys are doubting him once they get a word in edgewise but he's spouting a (at the time) 15 year old bad NatGeo article as if it's fact while saying the Congo is somehow only 2000 years old and "trapped" savannah animals.
Someone blow his mind about US/Russia/China all fitting into Africa with room to spare. It can have both a rainforest and savannah at the same time.
Jesus christ. "Why do people argue about...?" She didn't argue anything. He didn't allow her to say more than two words. He himself made "her" argument. What a jackass. I'm a little surprised Bill Burr didn't tear into him a little for that.
Jesus christ. That was disgusting
Damn that was… sad
Also, the report was misinformation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bili\_ape
lol what a fucking goof
He's been doing that process for most of his life and it largely got him where he is. Of course he thinks his process is fine.
He’s the dumb mans philosopher. The stupid mans intellectual. He’s great entertainment for the uninformed. There’s a reason he’s so wildly popular making millions and ‘All Things Considered’ is still just a non-profit show on NPR.
Joe, whether it's a calculated, insidious choice or not, has a habit of making simple things seem complex, and taking complex concepts and oversimplifying them. in doing this, he enables his largest audience of the average/slightly below average masses of uniformed stoners to feel as though they are more intellectual than they are- they can feel as if they have some higher appreciation for the [fabricated] complexity of simple things, which makes them feel like some sort of modern philosopher. It also allows them to feel as though they easily grasp very complex concepts/subjects, which obviously makes them feel an inflated sense of their own intellect. it's a masturbatory thing for the audience, which is always good for repeat listener/viewership, which i suspect is why he's so wildly successful.
he isn't just a dumb person's idea of a smart person... he MAKES dumb people FEEL smart themselves. and I don't meant to COMPLETELY bash him or all of his audience- i get the appeal of his show. it's entertaining often. the bill burr ep was great, and bill is a reasonable guy, so the chat kinda stayed on the rails, and bill dropped some great jokes and roasted joe pretty good. I don't listen or watch his eps ever, but I catch bits and pieces from just being online, and he can be enjoyable to listen to when he's just shooting the shit and joking around and having fun. there IS an appeal to being able to listen to somebody like Elon Musk just chat freely.
I'd expect to see this on the back sleeve of Joe Rogans biography.
If only Seagel and Cornish were chainsmoking blunts for the whole show... If only...
Like a chameleon if you will.
IMO, I think it sounds like he's real in the way that he's open to learning from Tarantino. But certainly full of shit in the clips showing him talk about Bruce Lee like he knew the guy.
Were people expecting him to take a big dump on Tarantino in the interview or something? I feel like, "being polite and hearing out the person you disagree with" is not actually a bad trait. It would only be bad if Joe were to have taken nothing away from his interaction with Tarantino (no idea how or if Joe's opinion changed afterwards).
Being polite and being dishonest might be the same thing when it's minor "do you like my new haircut" stuff, but it isn't when you're a professional conducting an interview, and it's *entirely* possible for him to be honest here while also being polite and professional about it. That's what *good* interviewers do.
The problem, I suppose, is that Joe Rogan is not a good interviewer. He's just a guy who gets baked and then likes to hear himself talk.
The problem is, Rogan is not a journalist. He has a lot of opinions, but no rigor, and when he opines and talks shit out of his ass about somebody, then has to face that person in real life, he falls apart.
He's a pro wrestler of talk. All the conflict is kayfabe. Sometimes he's the face, sometimes he's the heel. But it's all bullshit.
The last segment where he's talking about how Tarantino is a chameleon I almost spit my coffee out, Joe Rogan is the biggest fucking chameleon in the world. Talk about the kettle calling the pot black
"...He's louder, he's more heterosexual..." Lol wtf
*Screams in heterosexual*
You wouldn’t get it bro you ain’t heterosexual enough
High school all over again
Right? Also is he implying that Howard Stern turned Quentin Tarantino gay? Even if just for the duration of the interview?
I like how he talks about Tarantino being more agreeable in front of Stern's 'alpha'.........and Tarantino literally told Joe Rogan to go suck a dick and pound sand.........and Joe just nervously laughed. Like all the conviction he had talking about Tarantino was bullshit, or he really believed it and in the moment lost his balls.
Either way Rogan is and always has been a chump.
He maintains his way of speaking. He changes his opinions like mad.
Quentin changes his way of speaking but keeps his opinions. Similar but not the same.
Important distinction. Folks will match the tones and mannerisms of people around them without thinking about it. It takes intent to change your opinion to please the people around you.
I been just sayin' the same thin' to me mate blackbeard.
It’s an empathy response. Kinda like code switching.
Not only tones, we all speak many different dialect language variants of English, which change based on the people we are communicating with. We talk differently to our family members than we talk to friends, and we talk differently to friends than we talk to authority figures. Was just reading a great DFW essay that deals with this, Authority and American Usage.
Yep, he talks to Cornel West or Bernie Sanders and he's a socialist and then he goes and talks to Ben Shabibo or some other far right figure and agrees with almost everything they say.
Only times I ever saw him push back was when Coldfeet Crowder attacked smoking pot or when Dave Rubin said something beyond idiotic about regulation.
The only consistent opinion Rogan has is that he wants to smoke weed and deal in under-regulated dietary supplements.
This begs the question, if you found another person who mimics behavior like Joe, who would they behave like?
From now on I'm calling Ben Shabibo, Ben Shabibo 🤣
That's because smoking weed is the most solid part of his identity. I have nothing against weed but god I can't stand when it's a person's entire freaking personality.
and Tarantino absolutely isn’t. Dude sticks by his word and is very consistent
Especially if that word is "feet".
The Ben Shabiboo podcast quickly came to mind.
Who's that guy? Sounds like someone who pounds sand
Not a polite way of putting it, but [I know what you mean](https://observer.com/2020/08/wap-video-cardi-b-megan-thee-stallion-ben-shapiro-ceelo-green/).
Wow that article reads baaad. But i do like a good shapiro's drier than the saharas wifes pussy jokes.
An article about how Ben Shapiro's wife doesn't find him sexually stimulating probably won't be written in AP style
P R O J E C T I O N
Kettle bell calling the legalized pot black
this is just joe being polite to a podcast guest
imo there is a thin line between being fake and just being polite
Agreed. With Tarantino there, he's being polite and implying there are differences of opinion. Did people expect him to approach the discussion with a 'Fuck you, you disrespected my hero' kind of attitude? To say 'no, you're wrong, before digging into it'? Tarantino would just end the interview and would be right to do so.
Also, the other clips are from old videos showing what he previously thought about Lee and Tarantino. Then he addressed almost all of the issues with him directly in this recent chat with Tarantino and admits his mind was blown or whatever. I don't see the issue here.
Tarantino is aware of what Rogan had said previously and is getting the chance to set the record straight.
Tarantino clearly showed he could back up his take on it and Rogan accepted that. Isn't that a good thing? People are allowed to change their views based on new details or information.
If he had interviewed Tarantino first, agreed with him, then went on to say these things later that would be fake.
Maybe people want Rogan to 'keep it real' and ignore those he disagrees with or tell them to fuck off? Maybe Rogan should have taken the opportunity to choke Tarantino out, right there, for disrespecting Bruce.
"That's your hero he's talkin' about, Joe! You gonna let him disrespect your hero? You gonna let a difference of opinion based on a set of facts you weren't aware of get in the way of chokin' dis guy out!?"
lmao summarized it perfectly. The response to this really is infantile
I think this is exactly right. The clips where Rogan defends Bruce Lee are all prior to the Tarantino interview, and at the end of the day, Rogan has to be cordial with his guests to facilitate the format of the show. Not sure what the “correct” response from Rogan would have been here.
Yeah tarantinos replies all stem from dropping names of actual stuntmen and biographies. He even acknowledged his lees daughter took issue with it and refuted that with "it's her father" which fair enough as an outside I can accept.
I don't know if this video left it out, but most of joes arguments stemmed from "people have said good things about him". Without specific sources or specific names. Tarantino straight up dropped a stuntman from green hornet. And also the biographer of lee. And still backs up his claim.
If anything if people wanted joe to go harder. He probably should have done more research than what he's heard from his idolised fan view.
The fact that Tarantino said everybody else can suck a dick knowing Rogan is one of those people was actually pretty gutsy, and Joe took it the right way by laughing. I don't see anything wrong with this interview at all.
Dude people are reaching so hard with this. Rogan acted fine and asked him the exact questions he had a prior stance on. Every response Joe had was, “huh?” As in he knew he said the opposite but since Tarantino was essentially proving him wrong he did what anyone would do.
The critical thing that would show realization/growth to me would be Joe owning those previous opinions while asking the questions. "Lots of people were upset about the scene, and ya know, it rubbed me the wrong way too" would be a passive language way of owning it. A more direct way would be "As a fan of his, I was pretty critical of your Bruce Lee scene, why did you make those decisions about a figure who is held in such high regard?"
Saying "I'm a giant Bruce Lee fan" then later saying "heavy shit for Bruce Lee fans" is a way of actively distancing himself from those people Tarantino is criticizing.
While this is a perfectly valid comment, it's not abnormal or unreasonable for a person - particularly in a broadcast interview - to not explicitly call out a guest and point out that you have a problem with them.
Howard Stern would probably have no issue doing that, but that's his M.O. and it's not going to hurt his brand or his reputation among his guest pool.
Also it’s neither fake nor overly polite to laugh delightedly when someone tells you that you can suck a dick for your opinion of them.
That people think this is in any way two faced is mind boggling to me.
i think it was extremely funny. tarantino had to have known that joe was critical of the bruce lee part of the movie. so he essentially went on the JRE, looked joe in the eye and told him to suck a dick. if he did that to me i would find that fucking hilarious.
Yeah, this exactly. I don't shy away from criticizing Joe, but he acted like an adult here and took that in great humor. Lots of people -- including a certain former leader -- would storm out like a little kid just for being made fun of.
Reddit isn’t exactly great at the whole social behavior thing. We’re used to just reeeing when we feel conflicted.
Came to say this- I don’t think he was being fake I think he didn’t want to attack his guest and he probably also learned some stuff he didn’t know.
not just that but maybe joe is actually considering that maybe tarantino was right. joe seemed to be open to the idea that maybe he was wrong and that seems to be unthinkable in american culture lately.
I think the thing about Joe is he's very impressionable, especially when it's with people he believes would know more. The problem is with people like that is they can be pushed back the other way easily as soon as the "expert" leaves. It makes him agreeable but it also makes him someone you shouldn't have as an advisor because he is basically just whatever he surrounds himself with and is exposed to most and most recently.
Redditors don’t understand interviews. They’re constantly fed Twitter feed gotchas and r/politics “slams” so they think if you don’t immediately call someone out on their bullshit, it means you’re a shill. No, not every conversation has to be an interrogation.
I was expecting something completely different going into the video based on the title. He just listened to what Quentin had to say and didn't argue, possibly even changed his mind. That's being 'fake as fuck' now? That's how people SHOULD behave.
There seems to be a concentrated effort on reddit, and in particular on this sub, to make JR look as bad as possible. I personally think the guy is boring and a bit of an idiot, but this is something else.
I mean, the title of the post couldn't be more blatant about the spin being put on it. Like "He's so fake because he invited a guest into his house and onto his podcast, then he didnt even start any arguments!" Who are these cavepeople who expect conflict at every chance?
They also don't understand the idea of not everything being black and white or that people can change their minds on things... like a fucking clip from 2 years aog? really?
Lol this is all the same fucking issue. Hero worship. None of these guys are right about everything. All of them probably have really fucked up opinions about stuff. You’re allowed to like Bruce Lee and also acknowledge he was kind of a dick. You’re allowed to like Joe Rogan and acknowledge he talks out of his ass a lot of the time. You’re allowed to like Tarantino. That’s it.
> You’re allowed to like Joe Rogan...
Now let's not get carried away!
I liked him better when he was fixing things at that radio station.
Damn, I haven't thought about Newsradio in decades. That was a pretty good show.
Obligatory fuck Andy Dick.
He'd like that.
I forgot Andy Dick was a person until this comment. I'm OOTL. Why are we fucking him?
IIRC he got Phil Hartmans wife all fucked up on drugs or something similar right before she killed Phil.
Brynn was a drug addict, like Andy Dick was and still is. She relapsed, partied with Andy, and shot Phil and herself. Before the murder, they argued a lot and their relationship was full of arguments that turned physical regarding her drug abuse. I'm not excusing Andy Dick - he's not funny and his comedy is weird and inappropriate at best - but drug addiction and relapsing is not as cut and dry as "so and so reintroduced drugs to someone."
You can find the first 4 seasons on YT, and it absolutely holds up! Also, /r/newsradio
Didn't he always fail to fix them?
YES!!! It's my all time favorite tv show!!!
I think it's easier to enjoy the Joe rogan experience than it is to like Joe rogan
I like the diversity of guests and that it gives them sufficient time to explain whatever it is they do in a casual conversation format
I don't really like Joe and think he's a terrible comic
The idea that you have to like all of someone to enjoy what they put out is nonsense
With all the time he spends talking about and gatekeeping comedy you'd think he would be good at it, but his specials are terrible.
Wait.. have you seen Crashing with Pete Holmes? Is Dov Davidoff’s character and his stool humping scene based on Rogan? If so, I love that show even more
Holy shit that video is gold
There's gotta be the right comic, and the right reason
I mean, I think it's funny. As in it makes me laugh. But like, so do farts. That doesn't make farts a good comedian.
That ending bit was hilarious
Joe-"bUt WhAt If ThErE's A GoOd ReAsOn FoR iT?"
There are a ton of stool jumpers in comedy.
Tim Minchin phrased it best. If you open your mind too much, your brain will fall out.
Rogan is great for letting people who usually get reduced to sound bites explain themselves and what they believe, but often he only confronts the parts he disagrees with and doesn't press the guest on topics he does agree with to hear why they believe what they do.
I don't remember if it was Tim Pool or Peterson or Bernie or who the interview was with, but Joe basically refuted his own arguments half a dozen times throughout the interview as he tried to mental gymnastics his way into "might is right" and poor people are inherently parasites who deserve no assistance.
Then there was the guy who claimed to work with UFOs in area 51. Hoo, that interview is... an experience, to say the least. Quite an echo chamber.
Well Tarantino was talking on his ass. He misquoted his 'sources' in this interview to make false claims about Bruce being an asshole who had nothing but disrespect for american stuntment (the author of the book he claims said this went on twitter and said his book absolutely does not say that) and arrogant (he said Bruce's wife said this and also said that he thought he could beat Muhammad Ali, their daughter said that was totally false).
[that's false, my book did not say that](https://twitter.com/MatthewEPolly/status/1410021611126788103). That's all facts—unlike what QT was saying.
Makes me wonder if QT was just trying to find common ground with JR, and then bait him into hero anti-worship.
Sounds like Quentin just misunderstood the intent of the writing Polly did on the subject. It still means Bruce Lee was being a bit of a douche but had problems with the process of American chereography and not outright disrespect for the stuntmen themselves.
I would very much argue that Rogan talking out of his ass isn't really quite the same as the other two. Lee being a dickhead or not doesn't really affect anything as far as I can tell; Tarantino getting his sources wrong in a fictitious depiction isn't great, but it's still just a movie; but Rogan asserting things the way he does, with the platform he has, and (less his fault personally, but serious nonetheless) the reverence some of his fans have for the things he says gives him a lot of power to shape narrative and public thought, at least among some segments of the population.
I know he's just an entertainer and probably didn't set out to be a information or news program or something, but at some point he should really recognize that it's downright irresponsible to not do due diligence on the things he so freely touts as true.
It doesn't make him history's greatest monster or anything, but at a certain point his seeming refusal to be informed before he says things is troubling.
This had been my thoughts especially regarding Covid, where I literally never hear how amazing it is we have a 95% effective vaccine within one year, and yet constantly hear about other shit like ivermectin, which has absolutely no evidence and has probably been considered, or any number of very dubious things which can't compare to the hundreds of millions of data points we now have for all the vaccines. He is directly responsible for a lot of people's skepticism, whether he intends to or not, given her had the largest platform of any single human on the planet.
Bill Burr "I'm not gonna sit here with no medical degree listening to you with no medical degree with an American flag behind you acting like we know what's up better than the CDC"
Bill Burr is fucking amazing lol. When Joe said something about rollerskating and he couldn't do it Bill was like "because you don't have the body for it! Even with the extra clearance your knuckles would drag"
Bill Burr probably saved lives that day.
Something really weird happened in the last few decades where people have started making the argument that they have absolutely no responsibility as a _human being_ and only the responsibilities of their _role_. I'm just a comedian, I'm just a podcaster, I'm just a CEO, and most bizarre of all, I'm just a politician. As long as I make people laugh or keep them entertained, nothing else matters.
If a person with limited sight is about to the cross the street and I say "it's all clear, go ahead" even though I know cars are coming, I'm an awful human being. I knew there would be consequences. I knew that person could potentially be injured or killed.
When you're a media personality talking to people with limited insight into world events and happenings, you should have the same responsibility. People are changing their behavior based on what you say, whether you like it or not. It doesn't matter that you're "just a comedian" or "just a podcaster." You should take responsibility.
Every human being has the ability to affect the world in small or large ways. It's ludicrous to give some people a shield because of their role.
Smartest thing I've seen written on here in a long while. Same people slamming Quentin and Rogan are the same people that read a Reddit comment that seems right and all of a sudden it's concrete proof in their minds. We're all human and we all do it.
Off-topic but that episode of JRE was disappointing. Norton - despite being a terrific actor - just isn’t very interesting in long form discussion.
he is when its a discussion with someobody that is also cine-literate
Sounds like the Howard Stern school of radio.
Joe Rogan is the Bruce Lee of podcasting: *"Be like a water"*.
He completely flows with his quest, throws softballs and agrees with them. He makes money from filling air with bro-talk, not with researching the subjects he talks about or being hard hitting. He is really good with it.
Normally exellent bro-comedian with made up bro-opinion would be completely harmless, but his audience is swayed with what he says and it some of his most dangerous opinions (like about covid-19) kill people. When he admits that he is big ape who does not know anything, people should believe him.
I was under the impression that scene was the false recollection of Brad Pitts character , because Brad Pitts character was an asshole.
The proof of it was the non existent dent in the car from the fight.
EDIT - he was daydreaming the fight as he was doing the mundane job of repairing something on Leo’s characters roof.
I never saw it as a dig at Bruce Lee.
I took it as the ultimate example of what Leo and ~~De Niro~~ Pacino discussed in the first scene.
How do you establish that your new character is a badass? Get an actor that they all see as a badass and have your character beat them up.
I think you mean Pacino
Shit, my bad, Pacino
That's a great insight!
Isn't that the Worf trope?
Bruce Lee has no honor!
Ah yes, this is a trope thats been coined as being the 'worf effect' where to show how strong a character is, they beat up an already recognisedly tough character.
[The “Worf Effect”](https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheWorfEffect)
Want a quick way to show how dangerous one of your unknown characters is? Simple, make them do well or win in a fight with a character that the audience already knows is tough. This establishes them as willing to fight and marks them as sufficiently dangerous.
Problem is they used it so much I grew up thinking Worf was a lil bitch
Then DS9 Worf shows up and immediatley starts kicking ass.
He wasn't daydreaming the fight. He wondered to himself why the director him and Leo had just talked about wouldn't hire him no matter what, and then recalled that incident. It's 100% not displayed as an unreliable narrator recollection.
yeah he takes a drag of that joint or cig whatever and just kinda goes... "yep" lol
> he was daydreaming the fight as he was doing the mundane job of repairing something on Leo’s characters roof.
That's not true. I recently finished reading the novelisation of the movie. In the novel, Brad Pitt's character's altercation with Bruce Lee led him to being black balled from doing stunt work in Hollywood. Other characters also reference his altercation in the book
To save people the Googling: written by Tarantino
I only watched the movie once but I thought he was blackballed because what happened to his wife? Might be misremembering it.
they didn't like him before the bruce lee altercation due to the wife's shady death, but they had been willing to work with him after Leo's character pleading.
They kicked him off the set after he threw bruce lee.
I thought it was the rumors that Cliff Booth murdered his wife or some shit that made him be avoided by the industry?
That’s why Kurt Russels wife wouldn’t hire him. But Kurt gave him a chance and he did that shit with Bruce Lee. After than I’m pretty sure he had NOONE on his side to vouch for him
Nah, i read the novel, no daydreaming in that movie.
He also did kill his wife
When was brad pitts character an asshole in the movie?
Well he did murder his wife, that wasn't very kind.
How’s this fake? It’s called being polite. You guys don’t do this? Do you all live on Twitter and have zero people skills? What’s wrong with you all?
It’s not even a matter of being polite either. He states he’s aware of Joe’s issues and then brings up facts to support true choices he made in the movie. The simple truth is Joe realizes he doesn’t know what he thought he knows. He even says his mind is blown. He’s also totally being polite but he’s doing what people should do… look at new facts and adjust his opinion. All the videos were before the interview when Joe thought he was right. Unless someone’s got some video after this interview of him doubling down again, it seems like Joe probably has a new opinion on the subject and learned new stuff about his “hero”.
I don’t see the issue at all with this lol
Yeah, sorry, I'm quick to shit on Rogan when he deserves it, but this is kind of reaching. Tarantino is a guest at his spot. What do you want Joe to do? Get super upset? Argue hard and make Tarantino uncomfortable?
Not needing to always be right and try to prove it is a sign of emotional maturity.
I don't like meathead Joe, but this is called "not antagonizing your guest". It's not fake it's polite
I have seen him antagonising guests plenty of times
Surely not someone as big as Tarantino though.
He's *really* inconsistent about it, though.
It's one of the main reasons I stopped listening to his podcast.
I mean in Joe's defense I don't know that this is so much being "fake" as it is just not wanting to be confrontational with his guest and letting him talk as opposed to challenging everything he says. I see where it comes off as "fake" to people and that is hard to argue with but I personally don't look at it that way and was glad he didn't derail the interview to get into this trivial Bruce Lee argument.
Yea, he's literally always done this. I'm not even a fan of Rogan but it's clear he doesn't want to torpedo the whole conversation, especially with famous people with huge egos, just by pressing them on something that's ultimately not a huge deal. Some of these people will literally storm out of the room and rescind their release contract because they're massive egomaniacs. Then you just don't have a show that week, that's no good. Like Kanye, if you tried to press that guy on anything, you know he's gonna have a meltdown, but then a million people farmed videos about how JOE ROGAN SO FAKE TO KANYE'S FACE. Hell, this whole Youtube channel appears to be just that, take a small snippet where Rogan didn't really press that hard and blow it way out of proportion. It's garbage.
If you don't like that kind of interview style, don't watch it. I personally don't. But it's extremely weird to hate watch manipulated clips like this and be like WOW HE'S SUCH A FAKE ASSHOLE. Get a grip.
>he doesn't want to torpedo the whole conversation, especially with famous people with huge egos,
This he pretty obviously tries to control the conversation to get what he wants out of the guest. When the guest is a big star, he feeds their ego to keep them talking.
When it's another comedian he purposfully tries to get a rise out of them so that they'll say somthing funny like he did with Bill Burr or Ari Shaffir recently.
This isn’t really joe being fake, this is Joe respecting an opinion different than his. Some of y’all could learn a lesson from that sort of response to someone not caring about your opinion…just laugh it off
I’ve never been interested in the Joe Rogan podcast but come on. So this video is mad that he has an open mind to change his opinion when he learns new information? OP would prefer if everyone Just stuck to their original opinions until they die?
I just see a man being polite to his guest
This is a stupid title and video. No one is gonna start an argument with a guest over something like this. Joe even seemed skeptical while talking to Quentin.
I'm no fan of Joe Rogan, but this doesn't sound like he's explicitly being fake here (at least, no more than any show host). He had specific criticisms of Tarantino's portrayal of Bruce Lee, specifically asked Tarantino about it and gave him a chance to respond, then paused and floundered a bit when he realized his prior comments may not have been accurate or the entire story.
I don't think that you understand what "being fake" means.
So... you people are having your minds blown by seeing two adults listening to each other and talking politely despite having a couple of differing opinions on an ultimately irrelevant topic? Well, fuck.
I don't know if I would call it being fake so much as Joe just not confronting Tarantino on some things. He's also done enough interviews to know that being combative with a guest usually doesn't go well, and just lets them speak their peace for the most part.
There's also the fact that Joe has mostly just his opinion to go on in regards to Bruce Lee, so he may have just genuinely accepted Tarantino's description as the truth of the matter.
Who is Joe Rogan anyways? I only know him as the host of Fear Factor.
What's Fear Factor? I only know him from News Radio
Joe Rogan is the Gwyneth Paltrow for men