Clairity on Charity Page 2

For me on reflection the responses to this sketch seem to show both sides of this forum.

First Stonked and Playful saw it as an obvious pun but thought that it was well crafted and complemented me on that.
This cheered me up as I know both of them post regularly in Critique and have said things about other people sketches that I thought fair and relevant.

And to be honest I also like most got that little buzz you get from a good reply.

Then Steve Sunshine came down from General Thread and reviewed it.

Sadly he thought that the concept of a plumber raising money for charity on the biggest charity fund raising day of the year was too farfetched and so for him the sketch made no sense.

Disillusioned by the unrealistic nature of a fund raising plumber, Steve then returned to the General Thread possibly to read one of his many Dr Who posts.

Whilst I have nothing against Time Lords or Daleks , I would have to say that the Yellow Pages is full of them and not one ever mentions that they charge call out fees, but they all do honestly!

Anyway after Steve Sunshine's reply I got that little bump that you get after a bad critique but hey ho.

After that Scartledge came on and gave it a thumbs up so I was still upwardly trending as they say

Then Beaky came on and paid me the kindest compliment I've had on these boards
Make no mistake I was now totally flattered and proud, as I know from reading his posts Beaky is no rogue flatterer.
(Although he does come across as someone capable of 'Carrying on shocking' around females at house parties).

Then Gappy came on and conceded that he could see a plumber raising money for charity by dressing up but for him it simply wasn't funny.

That was an honest critique, he never found it funny and others had.
We have all been there and it is a really common feeling so I had no problem with that.

Then Ben came on. Now he agreed with Steve that the sketch was unrealistic, however he then stated that a sketch being unrealistic wasn't an issue, so it was nice to f**king clear that up?

Then despite after saying it was ok for comedy to be unrealistic, his problem with the sketch was that there was no type of logic in the world that the sketch was set.

This is another Dr Who fan by the way, who has happily conceded that space and time travel is a perfectly common mode of transport, he probably checks bus shelters to see if Time Travellers can alight at that stop.

Sadly he couldn't grasp the concept of a Plumber called John Wayne dressing as a cowboy for charity on the biggest charity day of the year.

So all in all it was mixed response:

I got positive feedback in relation to my ability to disguise a basic pun.

I got a perfectly understandable dislike of the actual joke its self

Then I got a roaring endorsement as 'The best Writer' on these boards

And I was lambasted for creating a wholly unrealistic scenario involving fancy dress, water and a plumber. This was by two lads who can probably speak Klingon.

So after all that I am none the wiser, I personally thought that my Transvestite Free Range Farmers was my best sketch this week so I have no idea myself.

But the truth is I feel that Gappy was honest in his dislike of the sketch

But for me both Ben & Sunshine tried to put the boot in. I'm not arsed and they will pass it off as me being unable to accept criticism.

But at this present time I think that there is a really negative vibe toward comedy writing on this site, it seems to want to remain stale and talk about what happened not what could happen.

There is also a lot of collective attacking of a certain poster till they crack, it happened to the young lad James Cotter he was hounded by the idiot Bussell and continues t be hounded by his lackies.

In relation to David Smith, who can honestly say that it wasn't evident from the get go that he was struggling? But by the end some posters even hopped onto other sites to make things worse for him.

Now I'm not arsed as I know I'm not liked anyway but I like what I do and will continue to do it.

And if you want to make a comment about one of my sketches you're free to do so, that's why I put them up.

But don't expect me to develop a f**king stammer if I can see it's just the bile from a vented spleen.

So in short, you can say my stuff is shite all day and I will accept it as to much of it is to the many that read it, but bogus bile will be rebuffed with extreme comedy you have been warned !

To be honest it's an old gag about cowboy plumbers. The right actor would make it funny on screen no doubt. Cotter is doing ok.

I don't think you need all the explanation at the beginning Teddy, I find the 'we see' a little distracting in your sketches, if you're writing to give directions for filmimg then I suppose it would be necessary, it's your directors eye maybe.
I liked the sketch though as you painted a funny picture and I found the idea of John Wayne appearing in my kitchen funny, as Marc said it would do well filmed.

Quote: Teddy Paddalack @ 15th November 2013, 11:27 PM GMT

But for me both Ben & Sunshine tried to put the boot in.

View original

Sorry Ted, but that's skewed on your part, get yourself down to a meet and you'll see these are not the type of guys to play tactics like that, though you might get some stick if football comes up in the conversation.

I liked it, I thought when I seen plumber and J Wayne it was going to end up with Dwayne Pipe glad it didn't but that is probably something I would have done.

As for the plumbers not doing work for charity on children in need I think that is a daft thing to say considering it being children in need everything and anything is possible. We had members of the local gym serving tea and coffee in our office yesterday the women were loving it and some of them were plumbers and brickies and even accountants.

Critique is good here it is very valuable but sometimes as in every stand up routine you get a few hecklers, you need to recognise who they are.

You are writing and writing lots and it is not bad stuff at all so keep at it, I enjoy reading your sketches.

Thanks for the feedback Shan but in this instance I don't see my view as skewed to be honest.

I can see a clique of posters on this site who are at their worst when there's a weak poster for them to buzz off. But every now and then they have a punt at posters like me to see if they can get away with it, but I'm not having it.

The same people wait in cat like readiness for an opportunity to pick holes in Critique yet show little desire to post their own work as an example of how its done.

People using this site as a hub for to talk about life and everything in it is fine by me. But as far as I'm concerned outside of the site owners there should be no perceived hierarchy.

For me you're only as good as your next joke that's why I never bring old sketches up as I'm interested in whats next.

Technically I have been given some great advice in Critique contained alongside practical indications that really enhanced what I had written.

But sometimes when you get snide remarks or bogus reviews you have to spit back otherwise you end up doubting your own a ability as a comedy writer.

It comes from posters who feel as though longevity supersedes everything, they feel these boards should run at their pace and to their agenda.

I have seen them praise one of their owns shit sketches to high heaven
Then circle like crows around someone who shows weakness, its pathetic, it really is.

I wouldn't say it's every bodies aim, some people probably hate me because I'm so f**king annoying others because I'm a Scouser and a few because I can't spell propperly, properly.

In conclusion I posted about ten or so sketches up this week and I was getting decent feedback. Then I got the best feedback I have ever had.

Five minutes later a poster comes on who hasn't touched on anything I have done for months and surprise surprise he set out to rubbish the sketch.

Now seeing as I knew that the last time this man posted a sketch was during the summer and seeing that he normally talks about Dr Who or what he had for his tea and what his f**king cat had, I was surprised he commented.

His comments almost seethed and had no genuine content, so I responded and will continue to do so.

All I want is for my comedy to be seen, I dream and live for the day I may get discovered, Like all writers I want my words read and I dream of them being spoken on either stage, screen or radio.

So if what I write is crap tell me and I'll have it, but I doubt that their is a person on this board that doesn't have an idea of who are the 'Untouchables'

Well let me tell you, they're not! They're just holding people back because they can't keep up. and their watch word is 'Pure F**king Envy'

Teddy I gave my honest opinion on three of your sketches
I like some of what you write, and want you to improve as you go.

The bald one I liked, as it made sense & had a certain truth to it & was funny.

The Bird one I didn't understand so I said so. I thought it might be hgelpful, if an audience doesn't understand what you are trying to convey then it might be worth taking such critique on board. or even explain to the poster what the sketch was about.

With this sketch the premise didn't ring true at all. people try to raise money during comic relief they don't knock on someone's door & offer to do their boiler for a cuppa.
I disagreed with the praise you got for this, and didn't think it was helpful.
If people tell you your stuff is brilliant when it isn't then it's not going to help you improve

I had no agenda other than to try to be helpful. certainly not to put the boot in or whatever.
I'll think twice next time I consider giving an opinion of your work.

You can think three times if it helps.

As far as the sketch goes the actual joke is as old as the hills and if you had pointed that out, then fair play.

You could have even said it wasn't funny like Gappy and I would have believed you as I know comedy is subjective.

But your claim that no plumber in this country would dress up for charity on Children In Need day is in all honestly pathetic and it made you look small and very petty in my eyes.

I had you down as a funny guy not as a sniper, so you withholding your comments suits me, you'll be joining the back of a f**king long queue.

Quote: Teddy Paddalack @ 16th November 2013, 1:17 PM GMT

But your claim that no plumber in this country would dress up for charity on Children In Need day is in all honestly pathetic and it made you look small and very petty in my eyes.

I had you down as a funny guy not as a sniper, so you withholding your comments suits me, you'll be joining the back of a f**king long queue.

View original

Ok I've re read it.
And of course people dress up for Children in need
I think I understand the skit a bit better.
What initially confused me I think is that the Children in need part isn't really relevant, apart from as a device to have the cowboy costume confusion.

She thinks he's dressed as a cowboy for children in need
He is not dressed as a cowboy for children in need, he is just dressed as a cowboy for some other reason. perhaps that he is a real cowboy, who is also a plumber (not quite sure)

I disagree with the people who gave it praise, not because I am envious or want to snipe but because I don't think this is a good sketch at all
It's poor in my opinion and not only because it relies on a weak contrived punchline.

Do you only want people who like your sketches to comment?
Or do you wish to hear a wider spectrum of opinions & comments?

If it's the former then I don't think it's going to help you improve as a writer.

I think a couple of your comments towards myself & Ben were a bit unnecessary but I don't mind
I can only reiterate that I have no agenda or other motivation apart from giving my opinion
& I still maintain that people telling you stuff is brilliant when it isn't is not going to help you much in the long run.

.

Posted before I saw Steves response.

Quote: Steve Sunshine @ 16th November 2013, 12:59 PM GMT

The bald one I liked, as it made sense & had a certain truth to it & was funny.

The Bird one I didn't understand so I said so. I thought it might be hgelpful, if an audience doesn't understand what you are trying to convey then it might be worth taking such critique on board. or even explain to the poster what the sketch was about.

With this sketch the premise didn't ring true at all. people try to raise money during comic relief they don't knock on someone's door & offer to do their boiler for a cuppa.
I disagreed with the praise you got for this, and didn't think it was helpful.
If people tell you your stuff is brilliant when it isn't then it's not going to help you improve

View original

I agree with your assessment of both the Bald & the Bird sketch, but was a little baffled with your comments re this one. Putting aside the fact that neither Stonked or myself described it as 'brilliant' - (and whilst not wanting to speak for him) we both in fact mainly expressed our surprise that Teddy had managed to spring such an old gag on us without our seeing it coming. I therefore expressed my agreement with Stonked that it must by definition have been written (or crafted) well.

As to your suggestion that no plumber would wear fancy dress for Children in need a) far more bizarre events do occur and b) in any event he had not done this in the sketch, she mistakenly assumed he had (which was in fact the cause of the distraction that worked on me).
Then I find it entirely credible that a Plumber named John Wayne might have a delusional fantasy persona.

And finally (Sorry Teddy) this is not the best sketch I have ever read but I do think it is a decent one. Hence my comments.

Nuff said.

Steve what your saying is that your negative opinions count more than anyone else's positive opinions?

I can only apologise as I had no idea of your true omnipotence in the field of comedy.

As for your overriding concern about me being subverted by false praise you need not worry too much, I seldom get great feedback and when I do there's plenty waiting in the wings to stamp it out.

As for Ben he can post his own take on events and I in turn can issue him with a pertinent reply. This way it's not a slanging match and we can break down events and get to the nub.

I think it's best best doing it that way, as it saves anyone having to back track in the face of facts

Playfull I stated clearly that I agreed on your assessment and that the slight praise you and Stonked issued was for the craft not the caper and I was made up with that I really was. So thanks for that and I fully understand your stance.

What's burning my head out is that two Si Fi buffs claim the can't visualise a f**king plumber called John Wayne wanting to dress as a cowboy for charity. Thats a load of shite simple as!

So for me it was an attempt at sticking the boot in, nothing more and this site does not need that on top of all the other hurdles us writers face.

I don't think anyone would say they thought the sketch was good and not mean it...what would be the point of that? I for one when commenting on a sketch say if it amuses me, if it doesn't I either say so and why or else ignore it completely.

If we're talking about 'technical' critique then that is a different matter as I for one lay no claim on having a technical mind, I go with the gut.

I've always thought perhaps it would be useful if we had a professional/s on the board who could really strip posted sketches apart and give feedback...in the absence of that we only have each other, some more experienced and credited than others so it's up to the individual what they make of the feedback...it's all subjective folks!

I agree to an extent Shan

Take Lazzard, he gives great technical input and in doing so points out the things that you need to change or add and you can see it right away so it works. So you know he is no phoney.

But a lot of it is guff, people who have never written on the back of a f**king post card come on and talk about things like 'exposition', when the sketch is about a f**king invisible cat!

I wrote a sketch featuring Road Runner and Wil E Coyote and one person came on and questioned ACME ,a f**king cartoon companies sales policy toward Coyotes!

Ironically the man was being serious while writing the funniest thing he'll ever f**king think of.

I have read technical advice on here at times that was no more than a thinly veiled pop at the sketch.

So I'll read any reply and take it in if it works and I'll love the praise,be saddened when I miss the target and angry when someone thinks they can vent their spleen through envy

Quote: playfull @ 16th November 2013, 2:11 PM GMT

Posted before I saw Steves response.

I agree with your assessment of both the Bald & the Bird sketch, but was a little baffled with your comments re this one. Putting aside the fact that neither Stonked or myself described it as 'brilliant' - (and whilst not wanting to speak for him) we both in fact mainly expressed our surprise that Teddy had managed to spring such an old gag on us without our seeing it coming. I therefore expressed my agreement with Stonked that it must by definition have been written (or crafted) well.

As to your suggestion that no plumber would wear fancy dress for Children in need a) far more bizarre events do occur and b) in any event he had not done this in the sketch, she mistakenly assumed he had (which was in fact the cause of the distraction that worked on me).
Then I find it entirely credible that a Plumber named John Wayne might have a delusional fantasy persona.

And finally (Sorry Teddy) this is not the best sketch I have ever read but I do think it is a decent one. Hence my comments.

Nuff said.

View original

Fair enough

I took critique of my critique on board (ignoring the personal stuff) & had another look.
The scenario didn't ring true for me & perhaps I didn't explain myself properly
I'm also not the biggest fan of sketches that rely on a well worn pay off
But that's just my personal opinion

With the Children in need set up I expected it to have some relevance further on
And when it didn't the sketch fell flat for me.

If thee was a delusional fantasy persona angle then that may have been more engaging, but It's not really made clear why he is a Cowboy.

The Critique did seem overly positive to me. but perhaps I misunderstood so apologies for that.

I do personally think that my Critique is more relevant than everyone else's but that's because it's the only Critique I always agree with.

Steve

No problem at all though I do think you are wrong about the most important critique - you are getting confused with Sooty...