If Crashing is a late-in-life coming-of-age story, this
week’s lesson is that for all its wonderful camaraderie, there’s an inescapable
dog-eat-dog element of comedy. All of capitalism for that matter. And hey, if
you want to minimize that kind of stuff, sure, but don’t go into a roast battle
expecting to keep that blissful ignorance intact.
But while it’s bad for Pete’s romantic life and moral
compass, it plays to one of the show’s main strengths which is give us a
rose-tinted inside look into the world of comedy. The roast battle (where
people insult one another for comic points) can seems like a mean-spirited
exercise to outsiders, and it can seem like lazy comedy (if you see the same
jokes being used regardless of the opponent). There is a faction, mostly led by
Jeff Ross (who cameos in this episode as one of the judges), who sees it as a
unique art and niche format within stand-up that’s worthy of expansion. To give us the full roast experience, the show features snippets of people we don't know (I'm suspecting d-list friends of Holmes who enjoyed the free exposure here) doing their thing alongside Pete and Ally. Pete's first match first comes off as a pleasant-looking man who we soon learn is playing for blood. As soon as Leif and Jess show up, he barges into their conversation in an effort to get ammuunition to use against Pete. It's a funny moment that provides a world-building detail in a flash.
One can understand the roast’s appeal for an episode of this show. The nastiness of the process contrasts so well to Pete’s self-image as a nice guy with a firm set of principles. Or at least that’s the Pete we used to know. His willingness to sell out in the last episode and the increasing proliferation of cursing in his language have suggested a slight erosion.
One of the weaknesses of this episode is that we desperately
needed to see the aftermath of Pete selling out. Is he now starting all his
routines with “Gas it Up”? Granted, those leftover plot threads didn’t fit in
the framework of a “rap battle” but this is the second show this Spring season
(the other being Silicon Valley) that made the mistake of placing its most
pivotal development marker in the season’s penultimate episode.
Instead, the season finale offers another major plot development, because, well, that's the law governing season finales. In this case, we have the break-up of Pete and Ally which, while sufficiently big news, is entirely unfulfilling. For one, what's not to like about Ally (both in terms of being a great character and what her relationship does to Pete)? For another, it seems inorganic and shoehorned in to give the finale oomph. More importantly, it's thematically muddled. If Pete's evolution is toward becoming less of a goody two-shoes, how is dumping Ally because she was a meany head in an entirely appropriate setting consistent with that? If Pete's attempting to take control of his life and independence had to do with being on his own, why not state that rather than dump someone for reasons that made no sense?
I can understand Pete being wrong and the show acknowleding that, but season finales in which the character makes a crucial decision in the closing minutes have a way of portraying a character avoiding reflection for the foolishness of their decision. The end result is making him more dislikeable. Sure, maybe he'll redeem himself months from now when this show returns but it's a sour note to go out on.
In the face of such a wonderful season, one sour note is a minor quibble, because Pete is one of the sweetest characters on TV. Here's hoping there's more of him
