TILT - topical Radio 7 comedy Page 10

You need to step back for a moment and look at this show in context.

‘Tilt’ is the first topical comedy show accepting work from new and non-commissioned writers in years. ‘Week Ending’, which used to run for 40 weeks a year on Radio 4, was scrapped in the late 90s, and ‘Parsons & Naylor’, which was largely written by the cast, was dropped by Radio 2 about three years ago. The Writers’ Guild has been hassling BBC Radio for years to bring back shows that use new writers, and BBC Radio have responded so well done BBC Radio.

This show is not aimed at us comedy anoraks, except in the sense that if you want to become a professional comedy writer then you should be trying to get stuff on it. The vast majority of people who listen to radio comedy hear it differently to us. Some will be pleased to hear a comedy show that refers to stuff they actually read about this week. Others will have it on in the background and come away happy if they laughed out loud three times – and I bet loads of people will say ‘I really love that news for two year olds.’

As Dan pointed out, show one was several weeks in preparation. Show 2 had one week, and there are now just four days to go before the deadline for show 3. All the writers are either very new or relatively new. It’s one thing to be a genius in your bedroom, as we have all been at some stage in our heads, but then you get a commission, and suddenly you have to produce stuff every day, which you then have to re-write and re-write – only for the actors to perform it on the night and it not get a laugh. That’s part of the learning curve. And thank God we still have, just, the BBC, who make ‘Tilt’ not because they expect it to be the next ‘Little Britain’, or because they are contractually required to make topical comedy shows, but because they’re prepared to spend money on training writers, and comic actors and producers for the future.

Instead of saying ‘why do I bother sending stuff when they put that rubbish on’ you need to say ‘this is what the show sounds like, how do I make the three sketches that I send jump off the page when the producer reads them?’

Okay, rant over. Now get writing!

Dave Cohen

Quote: Anorak @ April 4 2008, 10:48 AM BST

Instead of saying ‘why do I bother sending stuff when they put that rubbish on’ you need to say ‘this is what the show sounds like, how do I make the three sketches that I send jump off the page when the producer reads them?’

Okay, rant over. Now get writing!

View original

You're absolutely right of course, however I think it's good if people think their stuff is better than the output, even if they might be delusional! In any sort of writing industry, you have to be thick skinned and have confidence; if you believe your stuff is inferior then you won't bother to send it and so are defeated at step one.

I think having that arrogance to say 'I'm better than that, I can write something to blow them away' is essential. That said, it shouldn't descend into openly criticising other writers.

Hi Dave,and thanks for your rant. Fair play, however, parsons & Naylor only finished last year. I went to many of those shows had stuff performed on it, andat the very least I think there are lessons to be learnt, if only in terms of the performers prompting the audience at sketch end in order to avoid the very many pregnant pauses and sometimes total silence that followed a few of the sketches on Wednesday. After week one, what I gleaned was that it was pretty fast pace, and a blend of ads, sketches, news items and trailers. The statebook ad, the lawyers phone in, the parkinson interview, to name but three, were all very good. This week however, it was a much different pace, the atmosphere was flat, the material very hit and miss and the topics in places, lame. Me and a friend walked out of there agreeing that it was the worst recording we had been to in many a year. Gone were the quickfire, fast delivery spoof ads and nowhere to be seen (again) were the one liners they asked for in the original brief (instead we had the under two's news again and a couple of 11 second news items). Some of the one liners posted on here are very funny. Certainly funnier than a loot of the stuff that made the show. To be honest, I was baffled and bemused by the show this week. A total contrast to last week's success. I genuinely feel that I, and others on here are justified in feeling a bit frustrated if that's set the bar for the rest of the series.

Quote: Anorak @ April 4 2008, 10:48 AM BST

Instead of saying ‘why do I bother sending stuff when they put that rubbish on’ you need to say ‘this is what the show sounds like, how do I make the three sketches that I send jump off the page when the producer reads them?’

Okay, rant over. Now get writing!

Dave Cohen

View original

Surely it's possible to do both? Have a rant and try to write brilliant sketches that stand a chance of getting used? Surely one of the reasons for a forum like this is that we can all blow off a bit of steam every now and then?

listening to it now. I think it's better than last weeks. Some nice laugh out last moments, though after reading the posts on here I was expecting something terrible.

I like it. Am completely baffled about the headlines aspect though. Especially as the writers email this week specifically asked for them again.

Quote: jdubya @ April 4 2008, 11:15 AM BST

listening to it now. I think it's better than last weeks. Some nice laugh out last moments, though after reading the posts on here I was expecting something terrible.

I like it.

View original

creep ;-)

I can only assume some jiggery pokery with the laughter tracks has enhanced the end product. I have yet to listen to it, but laughter a the time a sketch is being performed does engender more spontaneity from the audience throughout a show. That was very lacking this week at the recording. As I say, they need a prompt. Maybe bring back the flashing 'laughter' and 'applause' signs

Quote: chipolata @ April 4 2008, 11:02 AM BST

Surely it's possible to do both? Have a rant and try to write brilliant sketches that stand a chance of getting used? Surely one of the reasons for a forum like this is that we can all blow off a bit of steam every now and then?

View original

Indeed. Like I did just then.

I agree there's some top stuff on this forum. And, as we've seen, BSG writers who have managed to get their sketches broadcast on these new non-commissioned shows. But there's maybe one or two people at the Beeb sifting through hundreds of submissions that will make up maybe five minutes of the whole show. The producer has to rely on the commissioned writers to provide the backbone otherwise she'd get to noon on Tuesday and have precisely no minutes to record the next day. Give those new writers, who are only marginally more experienced than you, time to work out how to get it right.

Next series, if you plug away, that could be you. It's not about being arrogant enough to think you can write better stuff, as believing you have the ability to contribute.

I think people are being a bit harsh on the show. It's difficult to judge a show if you're hoping the next sketch is going to be yours because then you want every sketch to hurry up and end. I thought there were some funny bits in it. The Sausages sketch being my favourite and the Clarence House joke was genius.

Quote: ShoePie @ April 4 2008, 11:24 AM BST

I think people are being a bit harsh on the show. It's difficult to judge a show if you're hoping the next sketch is going to be yours because then you want every sketch to hurry up and end. I thought there were some funny bits in it. The Sausages sketch being my favourite and the Clarence House joke was genius.

View original

I honestly don't think people are, we ALL know comedy is subjective and I like the majority of stuff but found this weeks very flat... the sausage sketch went on to long by far. I did titter at the first 11 second news (saw it coming though) but it is only a 1 joke sketch so hope they don't do more. And I did raise a smile at the dean gafney sketch but the rest I felt was distincly flat.

D

Quote: ShoePie @ April 4 2008, 11:24 AM BST

It's difficult to judge a show if you're hoping the next sketch is going to be yours because then you want every sketch to hurry up and end.

View original

That is very true though. Good point!

Well I've often said comedy isn't about being the funniest, seriously it isn't it's about meeting the needs of the show. You may have the funniest necrophilia pet joke, it won't get on Blue Peter.

I think from listening to Tilt what they are looking from us non-coms
is
1 Silly jokes, 2 None topical, 3 Fairly inoffensive (I didn't hear any swearing I remember, and Mosley was the only sex gag), 4 Quite quick 1-2 minutes of material, 5 Actually reminded me of Crackerjack.
6 Colorful bordering on the surreal.

As such this weekend I'm going to write 6 skits on critique that roughly fit these guide lines, and would really appreciate feedback. I'd reccomend other aspirant skit writers do the same.

Yes, that's what I decided after listening to the show.

Probably won't be abe to do that either, but I'll give it a good go.

I agree with Dave's pro-active points and certainly don't feel discouraged by what I've heard, but if this isn't the place to critique comedy I'm not sure where else is.

Of course its early days for this show and it is a great opportunity for a credit and progress.

Listened to the show for the first time today. It was alright, I actually laughed a fair bit at the Sausages sketch. There were some flat bits and I really don't like the "George Bush is an idiot" voice samples, it has been done so much and is also an obvious stereotype which I thought this show wasn't going to use.

Anyway the show is decent enough and it's still finding it's feet, think people are been a bit harsh on it, plus the one liners I've seen on here haven't been funny at all, just sub-On The Hour/Day Today style stuff that isn't at all original. My opinion of course.