If I was criting this, I'd have to say it appears to be a conscious effort on behalf of the writer not to write anything funny. Children aren't into dark and sordid. They're more into farts and slapstick, aren't they?
Comedy for Children Page 2
Quote: Sebastian Topp @ July 2 2009, 3:30 PM BSTTell me what you think. And in light of recent reactions, be genital. http://sebastiantopp.blogspot.com/
Sebastian, I'm sure I'm not the only one who is intrigued at the apparent lack of comedy in your work.
Please explain why it's funny, if only to make us look like ignorant female genitalia.
Even though I really want to know myself (lol) I don't think he should explain. If this was being broadcast, you wouldn't get the chance to explain to each, individual viewer of what it's about.
Throw your material out there - if it's well received and gets you where you want to go - great! Somebody likes it.
If it doesn't go anywhere, maybe it'll be better after you're dead, or sommink?
Quote: Geoff Mutton @ July 2 2009, 6:13 PM BSTPlease explain why it's funny, if only to make us look like ignorant female genitalia.
It seems that only Stephen Birch, Rob H and myself are able (or willing) to constructively criticise Sebastian's sketch.
For instance; I think that 'TWO OLD LADIES, DRESSED AS SNAILS FIGHTING OVER A LOAF OF BREAD' is funny - and would be even funnier if filmed in slow motion, to the tune of Pink Floyd's 'Wish You Were Here' - with this ending:
STEVE LOOKS DIRECTLY TO CAMERA
STEVE: Now I wish I wasn't here.
He's posting in character. Clearly this is the wrong place to be posting as a comedy character as it's about getting feedback on work, if you don't clue people in on the intent of your work then the feedback will be skewed so it's pointless posting here. So he deserves to have eyes rolled at him on those grounds, but I think everyone is being unfair on his humour.
From what I can surmise, his character is a odd man whose attempts at writing childrens television are thwarted by his rather peculiar, squalid mind. I didn't get it after the first post, I just thought he was just winding people up for his own amusement by juxtaposing 'childrens humour' with a bleak and depressing scene. But his revised go with his attempt at a punchline really made me laugh, not because it's a good punch-line, but because it's just a really confused, addled and unnessecary addition to the sketch that sets up another anti-punchline. It read to me as the cack-handedness of it was the joke, not the sketch itself.
I liked what I glimpsed at on the blog aswell. It's a nice idea for a character. I'll give it a thorough look, I just glanced at it earlier and the Beth at he bus-stop poem caught my eye and made me laugh. But that's all I read really.
Handbags down, please. We're calling it as we see it, i.e. critique.
I got the joke that you're posting an anti-sketch, and a dark anti-sketch at that, for children. The line of mucus made me laugh. But it might become a bit tiresome?
Quote: evelynblake @ July 2 2009, 7:01 PM BSTFrom what I can surmise, his character is a odd man whose attempts at writing childrens television are thwarted by his rather peculiar, squalid mind.
That could be pretty good, if that's what it is. 
Quote: zooo @ July 2 2009, 7:33 PM BSTThat could be pretty good, if that's what it is.
If it isn't then everyone can feel free to post up any old shit and I'll feverishly try to justify it. I've just finished an art degree, it's second nature to me now.
Haha!