RichardPryor.com Forums

In the middle of a debate on another board about the funniest comedians ever. Some of these people are putting Richard BEHIND the likes of Dave Chappelle and Chris Rock! Granted, those guys are hilarious, but Richard was the original. The best Chappelle and Rock can hope for is to be a watered-down version of Richard.

Just had to vent. I feel better now.

ClarkWashington,

Personally I don't think any 90's/present day living comedians can hold a torch to Mr Pryor. I think they lack his charm and 'hyper-cool' personality.

Although I've been told to give Chris Rock another try...

ClarkWashington,
the "new school" comics owe EVERYTHING 2 richard...and most recognize this....their fans usually don't. any new, young, black, hip comic u watch...at least one part of their act, pryor had donr b4..and better! there is a reason why he is a legend....and aint dead yet!!!

bountyhunterseven,
I have to agree with you, whenever I have this discussion with people, I usually point out any subject comics talk about Richard Pryor either already did it or decided it wasn't funny. As comedians, we have to respect the craft by being original and being honest with our feelings and use that to add something new to comedy. That's the only way to keep this art form growing.
We owe it to guys like Pryor and Mooney. I'm sure they like to sit back and see comedians bring something "different" to the stage, like they do, so they can sit back and enjoy a show the way we enjoy them.

For me, personally, the only stand-ups who even come close to Richard are Chris Rock and George Carlin. (I'm aware that a lot of people would add Lenny Bruce. Since I've had relatively little exposure to his work, and his importance and influence are beyond question, I'll give them the benefit of the doubt.)

Beyond being flat-out hilarious, Chris Rock, in my opinion, is not only influenced by Richard, but he's taking what Pryor and Paul Mooney did and is running with it, putting his own personal stamp on it in the process. His level of insight combined with his razor-sharp humor puts him in or near the comic genius category, and he's still growing. It's also what separates him from most of his post-Pryor peers. But Pryor could do everything that Rock can do; but Rock can't do everything Pryor can do. That's no disrespect to Rock at all, because I would say that about every other post-Pryor comic as well. However, to me, Chris comes the closest.

Carlin, of course, has been around for decades...and, if you ask me (even though I'm well aware that a lot of his older fans would disagree with me), I think that he's done his best work from the early '90s to the present. He's Richard's peer, and apparently, he LOVES Richard's stand-up work. But his own style owes very little to Richard's, other than its irreverence and boldness (which could just as easily be traced to the Lenny Bruce influence). Pryor and Carlin are like apples and oranges--they're both different, but both are great. And Carlin is undoubtedly a comic genius.

At the end of the day, though, Richard is and always will be the king in my book.

ClarkWashington,
Tell your ignorant buddies this:

"[/i]There are many different kinds of comedians...the observational humorist, the impressionist, the character creator, the physical comedian, the self-deprecator, and the dirty-joke teller. What made Richard Pryor so brilliant is he was able to incorporate all these styles at once.[/i]"-Damon Wayans

Might be a little wordy but it always works when I want to get the point across...;p

Also tell them if you asked Chris or Dave who was the best they would immediatly tell you Rich comes before them......

"[/i]Richard Pryor is the greatest comedian of all time.[/i]" -Chris Rock

Amen to that! Bingolong u hit the nail dead Center on that and i belive the only other comedian i like that kind of ( and when i mean kinf of i mean alittle bit like richard is george Carlin) but George Carlin is pretty good too!

ClarkWashington,

The Holy Trinity of American Stand-Up Comedy is Lenny Bruce/Richard Pryor/Steve Martin. Mort Sahl is riding the pine ready to come on at any time though.

Bruce broke the ground. Most people think it was just about being able to swear. Nope, he challenged thinking and made a lot of people in officious circles mighty nervous. And the rhythm of his stand-up is jazz influenced, something RP took hold of too.

RP is unsurpassed by any black comic and is one of the funniest men of all time. Eddie Murphy's Raw is a bad imitation of RP. Chris Rock is funny but he and most others don't have the insight, the soul, the honesty of Richard's stand-up.

Steve Martin broke the US out of a Nixon/Carter induced straight-jacket of blandness. Rich said, that niggers crazy. Steve said, wild and crazy guy. He brought another dimension to stand-up. They called it drug-humour. Nope, its surrealism, lateral thinking etc. Guess that's what happens if you do philosophy at college.

There is a long list of other great comedians, but they don't have a capital G.

Orwells cousin.

ClarkWashington,

Why is it that Chris Rock is always compared to Rich? Is it simply because they are both black???? They both are different in approach yet almost always paired together. It is probably more analogous to compare Rock with Lenny Bruce, yet you never hear this. I'm only echoing what Rock himself has complained about. And Chapelle's different from both of them.

Chris Rock is primarily an observational comic. Richard Pryor's stand-up comedy was much more multi-faceted (observational, storyteller, autobiographical, theatrical, etc.)--so much so, that he is in a league of his own. But, to me, it is obvious that Chris is very much influenced by Richard's observational side, with a comparable level of insight into racism, social issues, sexual issues, and plain old, mundane, everyday human behavior. And I'm sure that Chris has been influenced by other comics as well. What sets him apart from most of his peers is that he transcends his influences and puts his unique, brilliant personal stamp on his stand-up comedy--in other words, he assimilates but doesn't imitate. Like all of the greats, he uses ingredients of what's already been done, and does something else with them until it becomes uniquely his own. Of course, Chris and Richard are clearly different, in the same way that The Rolling Stones and Muddy Waters are clearly different--but in both cases, the former is an undeniable spiritual forefather of the other.