The Green Room - What makes a good comedy?

Reply #10 - Jun 21^st, 2008 at 10:49pm

Tshep Offline
Ingenue
It made me feel sad, and
just a little bit dirty.
Beebe, Arkansas

Gender:
Posts: 723

Quote:

This is true. But there's a difference between a $1000 a night call girl and some $10 dollar bimbo you'd pick up on State Street.

Now we're stretching the the metaphor a bit, aren't we?

I don't think we are stretching the metaphor too much at all (no more than we'd be capable of doing the same to said callgirl or bimbo).

Actually, getting back to the thrust of your OP... You set up the premise that simply "getting laughs" need somehow be justified.... and you make clear that you find this a lesser form.... not "the smart person's POV" (heheh, and you call me condecending).

Personal taste aside, the historical foundations of comedy are a wealth of simply "getting laughs". The brilliance of Commedia d'ell Arte; which along with the Roman low comedy is the alter at which all modern comedy comes back to genuflect... is "simply getting laughs". Stock characters, comic scenario, schtick, pratfalls, slapstick, timing, burlesque, etc, etc, etc..... nuthin' deep, nuthin' "smart".

They say, best men are moulded out of faults; &&And, for the most, become much more the better &&For being a little bad.

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #11 - Jun 21^st, 2008 at 11:14pm

The Dark Knight Ex Member

Tshep wrote on Jun 21^st, 2008 at 10:49pm:

Quote:

This is true. But there's a difference between a $1000 a night call girl and some $10 dollar bimbo you'd pick up on State Street.

Now we're stretching the the metaphor a bit, aren't we?

I don't think we are stretching the metaphor too much at all (no more than we'd be capable of doing the same to said callgirl or bimbo).

Actually, getting back to the thrust of your OP... You set up the premise that simply "getting laughs" need somehow be justified.... and you make clear that you find this a lesser form.... not "the smart person's POV" (heheh, and you call me condecending).

Personal taste aside, the historical foundations of comedy are a wealth of simply "getting laughs". The brilliance of Commedia d'ell Arte; which along with the Roman low comedy is the alter at which all modern comedy comes back to genuflect... is "simply getting laughs". Stock characters, comic scenario, schtick, pratfalls, slapstick, timing, burlesque, etc, etc, etc..... nuthin' deep, nuthin' "smart".

If you're going to use temrs like "alter" and "genulfect", you're still the condescedning one. Wink

Public excecutions were a historical foundation of live entertainment. Some things can be improved.

Honestly, I think there's room for comedies that mean to do nothing but be be funny. But, I think there's a difference between cheap laughs and quality laughs. A good comedy, like any other play, is ABOUT something (that doesn't mean it has to be deep or have a message).

There is place for just telling jokes. It's called stand-up, and it can be GREAT.

Absolutely, what you're saying there is the BASIS for great comedy. But if you don't elaborate on it, you're just rehsashing what's been done before, and there's nothing creative about it. And don't coming crying to me if you get gonoreha.

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #12 - Jun 21^st, 2008 at 11:38pm

The Dark Knight Ex Member

I freely admit I'm being pretentious and snarky, and I'm also being a bit facetious when I say things like "smart people".

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #13 - Jun 22^nd, 2008 at 8:08am

Tshep Offline
Ingenue
It made me feel sad, and
just a little bit dirty.
Beebe, Arkansas

Gender:
Posts: 723

Quote:

Tshep wrote on Jun 21^st, 2008 at 10:49pm:

Quote:

This is true. But there's a difference between a $1000 a night call girl and some $10 dollar bimbo you'd pick up on State Street.

Now we're stretching the the metaphor a bit, aren't we?

I don't think we are stretching the metaphor too much at all (no more than we'd be capable of doing the same to said callgirl or bimbo).

Actually, getting back to the thrust of your OP... You set up the premise that simply "getting laughs" need somehow be justified.... and you make clear that you find this a lesser form.... not "the smart person's POV" (heheh, and you call me condecending).

Personal taste aside, the historical foundations of comedy are a wealth of simply "getting laughs". The brilliance of Commedia d'ell Arte; which along with the Roman low comedy is the alter at which all modern comedy comes back to genuflect... is "simply getting laughs". Stock characters, comic scenario, schtick, pratfalls, slapstick, timing, burlesque, etc, etc, etc..... nuthin' deep, nuthin' "smart".

If you're going to use temrs like "alter" and "genulfect", you're still the condescedning one. Wink

Hey man, if you can't play with the big lexicon; then feel free to stay on the linguistic porch.

Quote:

Public excecutions were a historical foundation of live entertainment. Some things can be improved.

Hardly an apt comparison.... more like simple sensationalism (but, then, you are a Speilberg fan).

Quote:

Honestly, I think there's room for comedies that mean to do nothing but be be funny. But, I think there's a difference between cheap laughs and quality laughs. A good comedy, like any other play, is ABOUT something (that doesn't mean it has to be deep or have a message).

Anything and everything can be "about something"; you're arguing the relative again. Your OP didn't propose relative valuation, it implied a clear dichotomy of value as opposed to lack of worth (good as opposed to the opposite). The objective answer to your OP is yes, there certainly can be (and still is) comedy that is all about getting laughs (and I've given you the historical precedent)..... now, if the conversation has degraded into your personal whiney-ness about the lack of gravitas in low-comedy.... then there isn't a whole lot of room for further discussion

Quote:

There is place for just telling jokes. It's called stand-up, and it can be GREAT.

From this, and other statements, I believe you have a limited and narrow view of the genre...... but, to each his own

Quote:

Absolutely, what you're saying there is the BASIS for great comedy. But if you don't elaborate on it, you're just rehsashing what's been done before, and there's nothing creative about it. And don't coming crying to me if you get gonoreha.

But that's really the point... comedy has continued to elaborate on its low-comic foundation... AND modern comedy continues to use elements of early comic classicist form... and you and most of us continue to laugh.

They say, best men are moulded out of faults; &&And, for the most, become much more the better &&For being a little bad.

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #14 - Jun 22^nd, 2008 at 8:28am

The Dark Knight Ex Member

This Herculean stuggle of comedic ideologies (getting off the "linguistic porch" Wink

) �is rapidly deteriorating into a battle of who can be more pretentious. �The "Spielberg Fan" comment, was, frankly, well beneath you. But, again, I'm not going to take a compliment as an insult, even if it was feebly intended as such. I'm reminded of my earliest online argument, wherein I was derisively reffered to as "Mr. 'I like Henry V better than Lethal Weapon.'" �My "public execution" argument was, admittedly sensationalistic, but my point is that if we idealized the point where ideas began as the direction in which we should still be heading, we'd believe the Earth was flat. I'm arguing that comedy can and should evolve from where it began. Fine, you've made the point that's where comedy began. Bravo.

You're a accusing me of making a statement I never made. You're arguing WHAT IS COMEDY, when my question was WHAT MAKES A GOOD COMEDY? I am disucussing degrees of quality, and you are arguing the minutiae of defining what comedy is. A worthwhile endeavor, to be sure, but not the point of the conversation. Adam Sandler and Christopher Guest and Christopher Guest both make comedies. This fact is undeniable. The disparity in quality between the two is immense. You're saying that I said Adam Sandler (which, to be clear, I'm using as a metaphor for "lowbrow") isn't comedy, which is not what I said, or implied. I implied that comedy can aspire to more, and that we can judge comedy by a higher standard than ONLY whether we are laughing, just as we can judge musical theatre by a higher standard than whether we're whistling the music as we walk out of the show. "Historical precedent" doesn't change that. �I never denied comedy did, could or should use elements or early classicist form. I asked whether a good comedy (my original post makes it clear I am talking about the specific genre of the comedic play, not about the wide variety of all that qualifies as comedy. If we were talking about the entire comic medium, my view there is extrememly broad) is ONLY about getting laughs. Like the musical, the comedy is more as art form than a simplistc view would lead us to believe.

I admit, the comic exaggeration of "smart people's point of view" was an extremely poor choice of words, wherein my attempt to get a cheap laugh detracted from the overall value of what I was presenting. Which is, metaphorically, my whole point. Because I went for the cheap laugh, this discussion became far less than it could have been. And it wasn't really that funny, anyway.

I will try to read between the lines and see your point, and I concede that you are right: there ARE good comedies which are only about making us laugh. I concede that you have in essence won this debate, due in large part to my extremely poor choice in how I began it with a lame parody of message board pretense. Now, let us get on with the long, painful process of rebuilding our lives . . .

« Last Edit: Jun 22^nd, 2008 at 9:49am by N/A »

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #15 - Jun 22^nd, 2008 at 11:00am

Tshep Offline
Ingenue
It made me feel sad, and
just a little bit dirty.
Beebe, Arkansas

Gender:
Posts: 723

*sigh* Oh DK; you're getting as easy to rile as Toddy and Amilicious...... but to your credit, you do retain your reason a good deal better. There is a valid discussion to have here, but first we should get past the pissing-match.

Quote:

This Herculean stuggle...... beneath you. But, again, I'm not going to take a compliment as an insult, even if it was feebly intended as such.

I don't claim it as beneath me.... I root in the merde as happily as the rest of the pigs.... That being said, there is much that is accurate in the comment.... which, by the way, wasn't intended as an insult.

Quote:

........ but my point is that if we idealized the point where ideas began as the direction in which we should still be heading, we'd believe the Earth was flat. I'm arguing that comedy can and should evolve from where it began. Fine, you've made the point that's where comedy began. Bravo.

Yes, we are approaching detante on this point... albeit with detours. Some clarification though, referring back to my most prevois post:

comedy has continued to elaborate on its low-comic foundation... AND modern comedy continues to use elements of early comic classicist form... and you and most of us continue to laugh.

So, clearly I have extended the discussion beyond historical foundations. What we could well get into here are examples of how comic form has evolved while retaining much of what Terrance, Plautus, Gozzi and Goldoni created.

Quote:

You're a accusing me of making a statement I never made.

Nope... here's the OP verbatim for later reference:

Quote:

Is it all about getting laughs, or should it still have a compelling story and characters like any other play (what I call "The smart person's point of view"). Thoughts?

Quote:

You're arguing WHAT IS COMEDY, when my question was WHAT MAKES A GOOD COMEDY?

Your OP hypothesis has nothing that explicitly asks a value question, however it certainly implies a valuation and your stance on value. You ask if comedy is all about laughs or should have yaddayaddayadda like any other play. Even getting away from the "smarter person" snark, your personal stance on value is clearly imposed. If there is any explicit question being asked, however, is IS the "Is it?" premise... You open the conversation asking all and sundry 'what comedy is'.... but you couch this in 'what makes comedy good' and can comedy be good if it doesn't "have a compelling story and characters like any other play"... according, of course, to your relative valuation.

Quote:

I am disucussing degrees of quality

Yes.... and now you're doing so explicitly.

Quote:

and you are arguing the minutiae of defining what comedy is. A worthwhile endeavor, to be sure, but not the point of the conversation.

Not really arguing minutiae... yet. And the base definition of whatever we are debating the value of is most certainly, if not the goal, then an integral part of the conversation.

Quote:

You're saying that I said Adam Sandler (which, to be clear, I'm using as a metaphor for "lowbrow") isn't comedy, which is not what I said, or implied.

Not at all.... please, if I've mislead, show me where you've come to understand this.

Quote:

I implied that comedy can aspire to more, and that we can judge comedy by a higher standard than ONLY whether we are laughing, just as we can judge musical theatre by a higher standard than whether we're whistling the music as we walk out of the show.

Agreed.

Quote:

"Historical precedent" doesn't change that. I never denied comedy did, could or should use elements or early classicist form. I asked whether a good comedy (my original post makes it clear I am talking about the specific genre of the comedic play, not about the wide variety of all that qualifies as comedy. If we were talking about the entire comic medium, my view there is extrememly broad) is ONLY about getting laughs. Like the musical, the comedy is more as art form than a simplistc view would lead us to believe.

Um, yeah.

Quote:

I admit, the comic exaggeration of "smart people's point of view" was an extremely poor choice of words, wherein my attempt to get a cheap laugh detracted from the overall value of what I was presenting. Which is, metaphorically, my whole point. Because I went for the cheap laugh, this discussion became far less than it could have been. And it wasn't really that funny, anyway.

It might've been funny... or at least recognizable as an attempt at humor.... but you were missing tone to give the statement context. As it is it simply reads like a straightforward editorial remark.... not funny at all; and indeed contributing to your personal valuation.

Quote:

I will try to read between the lines and see your point, and I concede that you are right: there ARE good comedies which are only about making us laugh. I concede that you have in essence won this debate, due in large part to my extremely poor choice in how I began it with a lame parody of message board pretense. Now, let us get on with the long, painful process of rebuilding ou...

Hell man, the premise is a good one... and there are probably many out there who feel the same way. No reason to abandon it yet.

They say, best men are moulded out of faults; &&And, for the most, become much more the better &&For being a little bad.

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #16 - Jun 22^nd, 2008 at 11:05am

The Dark Knight Ex Member

Honeslty, I wasn't meaning to get riled. But, as a Spielberg fan, I am a bit emotional. Wink

That may have been partially what you meant, and if so, you're right )in my defense, not tone or qualifier there either, so I misunderstood. I freely admit my Spielbergian views color my perception of EVERYTHING. As an observation, that was correct).

I enjoy our banter, Tshep. If I didn't, I'd just walk away from the conversation. Sorry if it seemed otherwise. I'm all for a productive discussion. Perosnally, I rather enjoyed the sex/prositution metaphor.

Your latest post makes me understand your points a lot better. Honeslty, I think we disgaree less than I thought, and most of the fault is mine for communication poorly. I take your jibes as part of the debate process, and usually enjoy it.

Maybe I should include more smilies. I tend to think of them as dumbing down a post, but the fact is, without them, tone is so unclear. AGain, I acknowledge my bad choice of words there.

Perhaps you did not mislead. Perhaps I merely misunderstood. I honeslty don't know. The important thing is, NOW I know what you mean.

We're cool here. I'd be happy to continue the discussion. I admit my mistakes and look forward to further insights. Please give me an example of a stage comedy you admire, on any level. I would love to hear it. Now that we each have a better understanding of each other, this could become a great thread, and I honestly do value your insights. You are correct that I should have left my perosnal biases and thought out of my original question.

Let's join hands and sing "Kumbaya" . . . (to clarify, that was a joke. Not a very good one, but a joke nonetheless)

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #17 - Jun 22^nd, 2008 at 11:32am

Tshep Offline
Ingenue
It made me feel sad, and
just a little bit dirty.
Beebe, Arkansas

Gender:
Posts: 723

NP DK... I'm cool with it.

I'll get back to you on the examples. Maybe this calls for another list. First I'd refer you to, as a modern reference, the absolutely brilliant work of Bill Irwin.

Another example I give my students is the sitcom Fraiser. Very contemporary, literate, "smart person" humor that nonetheless found its best moments of comic performance in the historic basics of minstrel burlesque (Tambo and Bones), Commedia scenario, and late neoclassic French farce.

They say, best men are moulded out of faults; &&And, for the most, become much more the better &&For being a little bad.

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #18 - Jun 22^nd, 2008 at 2:17pm

kitchensinger Offline
Ingenue
in my kitchen

Gender:
Posts: 912

Tshep wrote on Jun 22^nd, 2008 at 11:32am:

First I'd refer you to, as a modern reference, the absolutely brilliant work of Bill Irwin. �

I have no idea WHAT you guys are talking about, but...in regards to Bill Irwin...I would like to say (at the risk of dumbing-down this post *lol*)...

...and may I add O/T...he is in the cast of Shyamalan's "Lady in the Water." (not in a comedic role, but he's still grand) �AND he's on the Sondheim DVD I've mentioned in two other threads (he's the HILARIOUS host of the concert).

"I have noticed that nothing I never said ever did me any harm."--Calvin Coolidge&&&&"Some families go water skiing together; others go camping.....our family does THEME PARTIES." --my brother Ben

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #19 - Jun 22^nd, 2008 at 2:51pm

The Dark Knight Ex Member

kitchensinger wrote on Jun 22^nd, 2008 at 2:17pm:

...and may I add O/T...he is in the cast of Shyamalan's "Lady in the Water."

Well, I still like Paul Giamatti, Bob Balaban, Geoffrey Wright and Bryce Dallas Howrd, so I can't hold one lapse in judgement against Irwin, either. Wink

Back to top

IP Logged

BackStage Utah