Anonymous wrote:As previous posters have already stated, OPs assessment of Eddie Murphy’s career and comparison to Denzel is very odd. Almost proves the doc’s theory about “there can only be one.”

Anonymous wrote:This thread is odd. Eddie wanted to be Denzel? Really? I mean he may have alienated folks and got shut out of opportunities but he was never going to give Denzel a run for his money. I think even Eddie Murphy knew that, hence him taking the roles he did.

Also, Denzel was the star of Malcolm X. Why would he have been competing with Eddie for another small part in the same film?

All in all I liked the doc and laughed a lot. Whatever reasons he did or didn't do this or that, he seems to be alright from where I'm sitting.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are you guy kidding? Raw and delirious are considered top 10 stand up specials of all time and he didn’t have the type of movies Denzel did but he was very successful in his movie career and had lots of hits

She is judging his comedy by today's Puritanical standards where nothing is funny and everything is offensive.

Wrong.

I’m in my 50s and watched his original stand-up when it came out. I thought it was funny…but I was young.

Have you rewatched it recently? It’s not that funny. A lot if it was boring. Silly.

And I’m not judging it by puritanical standards or today’s values. I love comedy and my taste skews off color/offensive/pushing limits.

Like some others deemed legendary/icons/GOATS by prior generations, subsequent talents have dramatically eclipsed him—illustrating that he was a bit overrated.

ICYMI: his stand-up career was very short-lived. He had a limited amount of material and at some point realized he needed to hang up the microphone lest he tarnish his reputation. That’s okay, but it underscores how he really wasn’t the stand-up genius some people thought. Yes, his silly movie career (a la Sandler) was quite lucrative. So much so that he could have transitioned to a more serious/quasi-serious film career (a la Sandler), but he didn’t…because his pompous and difficult reputation preceded him (along with baby mama drama and drug issues).

You are vastly underrating his early movie career by calling it "silly." 48 Hours was the start of an entire genre - the buddy cop comedy - and Beverly Hills Cop continued it along. For a time, he was one of the biggest movie stars in the US.

you seem to be simultaneously arguing that Eddie was (i) overrated and (ii) a tremendous talent who limited his career because he was an a-hole. Pick a lane.

And I'm also in his 50s, and still think the early standup was hilarious.

I’m really not underestimating his early career. In fact, I think he had quick success with a number of legit films early on—so much so that he was well primed to transition into a far more substantial acting career. Heck, I said he could have transitioned to play roles like Denzel!

He always had presence. It’s what got him the SNL gig (after another black comic got it but was quickly let go) which opened the door to his two big stand up specials and movies. He was everywhere, riding a big wave of popularity.

But he had some scandals and generally burned some bridges in Hollywood, which obviously impacted his trajectory.

I’m not saying he was a failure. Rather, he could have been more successful but for his missteps and personality issues. I suspect he knows this and it probably irritates him.

His legacy is essentially a couple stand up specials that were raw and unique at the time (but not as funny as many of his successors), SNL (a handful of classic skits), and a highly profitable catalogue of movies—a few of which remain classics/solid but many of which skew silly.

Seems entirely plausible that a man of his age might look back and wish he could have been taken more seriously as an actor. Personally, I think he’s more talented than Will Smith, yet Will transitioned to a more substantial body of work than Eddie did.

Anyway, the ping of this thread is he’s put out a whitewash history…which I guess is to be expected. Everyone knows his ego is huge and he demands respect. Zero chance a more honest account of his life/career would happen.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are you guy kidding? Raw and delirious are considered top 10 stand up specials of all time and he didn’t have the type of movies Denzel did but he was very successful in his movie career and had lots of hits

She is judging his comedy by today's Puritanical standards where nothing is funny and everything is offensive.

Wrong.

I’m in my 50s and watched his original stand-up when it came out. I thought it was funny…but I was young.

Have you rewatched it recently? It’s not that funny. A lot if it was boring. Silly.

And I’m not judging it by puritanical standards or today’s values. I love comedy and my taste skews off color/offensive/pushing limits.

Like some others deemed legendary/icons/GOATS by prior generations, subsequent talents have dramatically eclipsed him—illustrating that he was a bit overrated.

ICYMI: his stand-up career was very short-lived. He had a limited amount of material and at some point realized he needed to hang up the microphone lest he tarnish his reputation. That’s okay, but it underscores how he really wasn’t the stand-up genius some people thought. Yes, his silly movie career (a la Sandler) was quite lucrative. So much so that he could have transitioned to a more serious/quasi-serious film career (a la Sandler), but he didn’t…because his pompous and difficult reputation preceded him (along with baby mama drama and drug issues).

You are vastly underrating his early movie career by calling it "silly." 48 Hours was the start of an entire genre - the buddy cop comedy - and Beverly Hills Cop continued it along. For a time, he was one of the biggest movie stars in the US.

you seem to be simultaneously arguing that Eddie was (i) overrated and (ii) a tremendous talent who limited his career because he was an a-hole. Pick a lane.

And I'm also in his 50s, and still think the early standup was hilarious.

I’m really not underestimating his early career. In fact, I think he had quick success with a number of legit films early on—so much so that he was well primed to transition into a far more substantial acting career. Heck, I said he could have transitioned to play roles like Denzel!

He always had presence. It’s what got him the SNL gig (after another black comic got it but was quickly let go) which opened the door to his two big stand up specials and movies. He was everywhere, riding a big wave of popularity.

But he had some scandals and generally burned some bridges in Hollywood, which obviously impacted his trajectory.

I’m not saying he was a failure. Rather, he could have been more successful but for his missteps and personality issues. I suspect he knows this and it probably irritates him.

His legacy is essentially a couple stand up specials that were raw and unique at the time (but not as funny as many of his successors), SNL (a handful of classic skits), and a highly profitable catalogue of movies—a few of which remain classics/solid but many of which skew silly.

Seems entirely plausible that a man of his age might look back and wish he could have been taken more seriously as an actor. Personally, I think he’s more talented than Will Smith, yet Will transitioned to a more substantial body of work than Eddie did.

Anyway, the ping of this thread is he’s put out a whitewash history…which I guess is to be expected. Everyone knows his ego is huge and he demands respect. Zero chance a more honest account of his life/career would happen.

Something is so odd about you comparing Eddie to the biggest and best known black actor on the planet and saying he could of been more like him. One is a comedic actor and one isn’t but you making the comparison is this weird race thing you’ve got going on

?

They both got famous at the same time in the early 80s, and they both competed for the Alex Haley role in Spike’s Malcolm X movie.

I mean, they were contemporaries who competed for roles…until Denzel eclipsed him.

ICYMI: Eddie wanted to be a serious actor…but he fell short.

Connect the dots that myriad commentators already have: Eddie went all in on the family film schmaltz following his scandal and because he was losing his audience, positive press, etc. Plus: once he was labeled as difficult to work with, he was shut out of some work.

Perhaps refresh your memory of the 80s and 90s when it comes to Eddie and Denzel, pp?

No, because nobody I’ve ever heard of has made that insane comparison. Jim Carey also didn’t take roles that Denzel did but has had a great career. I love Denzel and Eddie and have never thought of comparing their movie choices.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are you guy kidding? Raw and delirious are considered top 10 stand up specials of all time and he didn’t have the type of movies Denzel did but he was very successful in his movie career and had lots of hits

She is judging his comedy by today's Puritanical standards where nothing is funny and everything is offensive.

Wrong.

I’m in my 50s and watched his original stand-up when it came out. I thought it was funny…but I was young.

Have you rewatched it recently? It’s not that funny. A lot if it was boring. Silly.

And I’m not judging it by puritanical standards or today’s values. I love comedy and my taste skews off color/offensive/pushing limits.

Like some others deemed legendary/icons/GOATS by prior generations, subsequent talents have dramatically eclipsed him—illustrating that he was a bit overrated.

ICYMI: his stand-up career was very short-lived. He had a limited amount of material and at some point realized he needed to hang up the microphone lest he tarnish his reputation. That’s okay, but it underscores how he really wasn’t the stand-up genius some people thought. Yes, his silly movie career (a la Sandler) was quite lucrative. So much so that he could have transitioned to a more serious/quasi-serious film career (a la Sandler), but he didn’t…because his pompous and difficult reputation preceded him (along with baby mama drama and drug issues).

You are vastly underrating his early movie career by calling it "silly." 48 Hours was the start of an entire genre - the buddy cop comedy - and Beverly Hills Cop continued it along. For a time, he was one of the biggest movie stars in the US.

you seem to be simultaneously arguing that Eddie was (i) overrated and (ii) a tremendous talent who limited his career because he was an a-hole. Pick a lane.

And I'm also in his 50s, and still think the early standup was hilarious.

I’m really not underestimating his early career. In fact, I think he had quick success with a number of legit films early on—so much so that he was well primed to transition into a far more substantial acting career. Heck, I said he could have transitioned to play roles like Denzel!

He always had presence. It’s what got him the SNL gig (after another black comic got it but was quickly let go) which opened the door to his two big stand up specials and movies. He was everywhere, riding a big wave of popularity.

But he had some scandals and generally burned some bridges in Hollywood, which obviously impacted his trajectory.

I’m not saying he was a failure. Rather, he could have been more successful but for his missteps and personality issues. I suspect he knows this and it probably irritates him.

His legacy is essentially a couple stand up specials that were raw and unique at the time (but not as funny as many of his successors), SNL (a handful of classic skits), and a highly profitable catalogue of movies—a few of which remain classics/solid but many of which skew silly.

Seems entirely plausible that a man of his age might look back and wish he could have been taken more seriously as an actor. Personally, I think he’s more talented than Will Smith, yet Will transitioned to a more substantial body of work than Eddie did.

Anyway, the ping of this thread is he’s put out a whitewash history…which I guess is to be expected. Everyone knows his ego is huge and he demands respect. Zero chance a more honest account of his life/career would happen.

Something is so odd about you comparing Eddie to the biggest and best known black actor on the planet and saying he could of been more like him. One is a comedic actor and one isn’t but you making the comparison is this weird race thing you’ve got going on

?

They both got famous at the same time in the early 80s, and they both competed for the Alex Haley role in Spike’s Malcolm X movie.

I mean, they were contemporaries who competed for roles…until Denzel eclipsed him.

ICYMI: Eddie wanted to be a serious actor…but he fell short.

Connect the dots that myriad commentators already have: Eddie went all in on the family film schmaltz following his scandal and because he was losing his audience, positive press, etc. Plus: once he was labeled as difficult to work with, he was shut out of some work.

Perhaps refresh your memory of the 80s and 90s when it comes to Eddie and Denzel, pp?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Eddie did 2 wildly successful stand up specials: Delirious and Raw.

Then nada.

He teased returning to stand up in the 90s but never did.

Folks seem to forget how pressed he was to be famous. He acted and dressed like a rockstar in leather jumpsuits. Heck, he released an album where he sang. Do you people not remember “My Girl Likes to Party All the Time”?

His comedy was a lot like Sam Kinnison and Dice Clay (and Eddie himself lamented that they seemed to get away with dirty, not woke comedy in their past while he didn’t…but I mean, Kinnison died and Dice didn’t stop doing comedy, and instead evolved a bit with his routine).

I really think Eddie regrets that he couldn’t produce another stand-up special, but he abandoned the craft (whether due to lack of interest or talent).

Eddie could do another stand up tour tomorrow and it would sell out all over the world.

Anonymous wrote:Eddie did 2 wildly successful stand up specials: Delirious and Raw.

Then nada.

He teased returning to stand up in the 90s but never did.

Folks seem to forget how pressed he was to be famous. He acted and dressed like a rockstar in leather jumpsuits. Heck, he released an album where he sang. Do you people not remember “My Girl Likes to Party All the Time”?

His comedy was a lot like Sam Kinnison and Dice Clay (and Eddie himself lamented that they seemed to get away with dirty, not woke comedy in their past while he didn’t…but I mean, Kinnison died and Dice didn’t stop doing comedy, and instead evolved a bit with his routine).

I really think Eddie regrets that he couldn’t produce another stand-up special, but he abandoned the craft (whether due to lack of interest or talent).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are you guy kidding? Raw and delirious are considered top 10 stand up specials of all time and he didn’t have the type of movies Denzel did but he was very successful in his movie career and had lots of hits

She is judging his comedy by today's Puritanical standards where nothing is funny and everything is offensive.

Wrong.

I’m in my 50s and watched his original stand-up when it came out. I thought it was funny…but I was young.

Have you rewatched it recently? It’s not that funny. A lot if it was boring. Silly.

And I’m not judging it by puritanical standards or today’s values. I love comedy and my taste skews off color/offensive/pushing limits.

Like some others deemed legendary/icons/GOATS by prior generations, subsequent talents have dramatically eclipsed him—illustrating that he was a bit overrated.

ICYMI: his stand-up career was very short-lived. He had a limited amount of material and at some point realized he needed to hang up the microphone lest he tarnish his reputation. That’s okay, but it underscores how he really wasn’t the stand-up genius some people thought. Yes, his silly movie career (a la Sandler) was quite lucrative. So much so that he could have transitioned to a more serious/quasi-serious film career (a la Sandler), but he didn’t…because his pompous and difficult reputation preceded him (along with baby mama drama and drug issues).

You are vastly underrating his early movie career by calling it "silly." 48 Hours was the start of an entire genre - the buddy cop comedy - and Beverly Hills Cop continued it along. For a time, he was one of the biggest movie stars in the US.

you seem to be simultaneously arguing that Eddie was (i) overrated and (ii) a tremendous talent who limited his career because he was an a-hole. Pick a lane.

And I'm also in his 50s, and still think the early standup was hilarious.

I’m really not underestimating his early career. In fact, I think he had quick success with a number of legit films early on—so much so that he was well primed to transition into a far more substantial acting career. Heck, I said he could have transitioned to play roles like Denzel!

He always had presence. It’s what got him the SNL gig (after another black comic got it but was quickly let go) which opened the door to his two big stand up specials and movies. He was everywhere, riding a big wave of popularity.

But he had some scandals and generally burned some bridges in Hollywood, which obviously impacted his trajectory.

I’m not saying he was a failure. Rather, he could have been more successful but for his missteps and personality issues. I suspect he knows this and it probably irritates him.

His legacy is essentially a couple stand up specials that were raw and unique at the time (but not as funny as many of his successors), SNL (a handful of classic skits), and a highly profitable catalogue of movies—a few of which remain classics/solid but many of which skew silly.

Seems entirely plausible that a man of his age might look back and wish he could have been taken more seriously as an actor. Personally, I think he’s more talented than Will Smith, yet Will transitioned to a more substantial body of work than Eddie did.

Anyway, the ping of this thread is he’s put out a whitewash history…which I guess is to be expected. Everyone knows his ego is huge and he demands respect. Zero chance a more honest account of his life/career would happen.

Something is so odd about you comparing Eddie to the biggest and best known black actor on the planet and saying he could of been more like him. One is a comedic actor and one isn’t but you making the comparison is this weird race thing you’ve got going on

?

They both got famous at the same time in the early 80s, and they both competed for the Alex Haley role in Spike’s Malcolm X movie.

I mean, they were contemporaries who competed for roles…until Denzel eclipsed him.

ICYMI: Eddie wanted to be a serious actor…but he fell short.

Connect the dots that myriad commentators already have: Eddie went all in on the family film schmaltz following his scandal and because he was losing his audience, positive press, etc. Plus: once he was labeled as difficult to work with, he was shut out of some work.

Perhaps refresh your memory of the 80s and 90s when it comes to Eddie and Denzel, pp?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are you guy kidding? Raw and delirious are considered top 10 stand up specials of all time and he didn’t have the type of movies Denzel did but he was very successful in his movie career and had lots of hits

She is judging his comedy by today's Puritanical standards where nothing is funny and everything is offensive.

Wrong.

I’m in my 50s and watched his original stand-up when it came out. I thought it was funny…but I was young.

Have you rewatched it recently? It’s not that funny. A lot if it was boring. Silly.

And I’m not judging it by puritanical standards or today’s values. I love comedy and my taste skews off color/offensive/pushing limits.

Like some others deemed legendary/icons/GOATS by prior generations, subsequent talents have dramatically eclipsed him—illustrating that he was a bit overrated.

ICYMI: his stand-up career was very short-lived. He had a limited amount of material and at some point realized he needed to hang up the microphone lest he tarnish his reputation. That’s okay, but it underscores how he really wasn’t the stand-up genius some people thought. Yes, his silly movie career (a la Sandler) was quite lucrative. So much so that he could have transitioned to a more serious/quasi-serious film career (a la Sandler), but he didn’t…because his pompous and difficult reputation preceded him (along with baby mama drama and drug issues).

You are vastly underrating his early movie career by calling it "silly." 48 Hours was the start of an entire genre - the buddy cop comedy - and Beverly Hills Cop continued it along. For a time, he was one of the biggest movie stars in the US.

you seem to be simultaneously arguing that Eddie was (i) overrated and (ii) a tremendous talent who limited his career because he was an a-hole. Pick a lane.

And I'm also in his 50s, and still think the early standup was hilarious.

I’m really not underestimating his early career. In fact, I think he had quick success with a number of legit films early on—so much so that he was well primed to transition into a far more substantial acting career. Heck, I said he could have transitioned to play roles like Denzel!

He always had presence. It’s what got him the SNL gig (after another black comic got it but was quickly let go) which opened the door to his two big stand up specials and movies. He was everywhere, riding a big wave of popularity.

But he had some scandals and generally burned some bridges in Hollywood, which obviously impacted his trajectory.

I’m not saying he was a failure. Rather, he could have been more successful but for his missteps and personality issues. I suspect he knows this and it probably irritates him.

His legacy is essentially a couple stand up specials that were raw and unique at the time (but not as funny as many of his successors), SNL (a handful of classic skits), and a highly profitable catalogue of movies—a few of which remain classics/solid but many of which skew silly.

Seems entirely plausible that a man of his age might look back and wish he could have been taken more seriously as an actor. Personally, I think he’s more talented than Will Smith, yet Will transitioned to a more substantial body of work than Eddie did.

Anyway, the ping of this thread is he’s put out a whitewash history…which I guess is to be expected. Everyone knows his ego is huge and he demands respect. Zero chance a more honest account of his life/career would happen.

Something is so odd about you comparing Eddie to the biggest and best known black actor on the planet and saying he could of been more like him. One is a comedic actor and one isn’t but you making the comparison is this weird race thing you’ve got going on