Quote: Rough Justice @ January 3 2010, 4:37 AM GMT
I found it surprisingly funny. I'm not sure if the other crits had read the version that I saw (you said that you updated it).
The characters did have some depth, in that I got a sense of who they were, and could anticipate their responses, and that's quite difficult to convey in a 15 minute pilot.
My only advice is DON'T listen to criticisms from women about anything related to comedy. It was mainly females that criticised you for putting "swear words" in your script. I thought that the swear words were necessary, not that they added to the comedy, but they made Sid's character more realistic. There is no way a man like that would say "bloody" or "flipping" instead of "f**king". What you have to ask yourself is: how many funny, actually funny, women are there in the comedy world.? The answer is of course zero. Have you ever found a female stand-up in any way funny? neither have I. I am not Sid, I love women, but whenever I see their lame jokes on TV (2 packets of lager, written by a woman. Miranda, written by...a woman (sort of) = I rest my case). Contemporary women are not creative, and have too many boundaries to be actually funny. They can do "silly" but not intelligent or self depricating humour. That is why their critiques will tend to advise you to clean up your language, or give your character a sympathetic side like Grace from Will and f'ing Grace. Again I use the proviso "contemporary" women, there have been creative women in the past, ones that weren't all about make up and heat mag, and didn't just tell jokes about men's fear of "commitment" and "periods".
Apologies, I digress. So to wrap this baby up:
1) I liked the fact that Sid was a solid character;
2) I liked the way that you used the setting, especially for the humiliation of Lidl boy (i got the impression that Sid came of as a bit of a hero there, saving his friend from a possessive ex, who looks like a reflection in a spoon)
and 3) I liked the creative jokes (the lock and key).
The only things that I didn't like (i'm a man of extremes, so I'm gonna say "hated") were the monologues. They work only when used as a narrators voice, but you didn't do that. In your script, the monologues were completely out of place, and the thought of Sid directly addressing the audience was just cringe worthy. This isn't f**king Shakespeare, and Shakespeare used such scenes only to let you know what was on the characters mind, and not as some sort of pantomime (i.e. Buttons (TURNS TO AUDIENCE) "Oh yes he did") or to pointlessly llabour a joke (Sid is direct, he doesn't need to go off screen). Peepshow's Mark is the opposite, and so the internal monologue tels you what he is really thinking (but niether he nor Jez "turn to audience" ooooh).
But in conclusion, better than my entry, which was about how men can't commit to relationships and are afraid of pre menstraul tension. You bastard. Good luck.
Well thank you for your positive comments. As for good British female writers, I would say there is a paucity. The best ones that come to mind immediately are Caroline Ahern (although I was never really taken by the Royle Family), (Jessica Hynes nee Stevenson (co-wrote Spaced, but she's done little since) and Victoria Wood. In the US I like Tina Fey (30 Rock) aand Sarah Silverman (The Sarah Silverman Program). But I digress as well.
Come to think of it, re: the setting I think Renegade Carpark was quite off when he said it "could have been set anywhere." One thing I think I did alright on was using the setting (the constant references to products, the cleaning lady, the crisp lady etc). And those are mostly based on my own experiences, if heightened and caricatured.
As for the monologues I was going for more of a Woody Allen post-modern flourish rather than a Shakespearean soliloquy. I really love Shakespeare, but his comedies are about as funny as cot death, or Woody Allen's output since about 1995.
Quote: Chris Forshaw @ January 3 2010, 5:21 AM GMT
Erm, yeah. Let's ignore this. As far as I can see all of the comments from the ladies have been spot on.
Now then, I thought it was a very funny read and well written. My main points would be that it could do with more action in there and also that those monologue bits really do stick out. Maybe you could try and work some of them in in a similar way to Scrubs? But instead of cutting away to something, just have Sid's mind wander a bit. Obviously they would need rewriting to fit that style but the kind of jokes in them at the minute I think would really suit that method.
The swearing wasn't too bad and was mostly justified where it was used so you must have done a good job in your edit there, although I think you could probably go without it in a few more lines yet.
One thing that I couldn't help but notice, and this is the best way I can think to word it, was that it felt quite contrived and not very natural. This is probably to do with the lack of action I think, but also as Mr Carpark said, that a lot of the gags are very set-up/punchline-y.
But yeah, definitely something worth working on here.
A similar way to Scrubs? I kinda see what you mean, but that wouldn't have been possible given the format we had to fit. It has to be staged, so that's why I simply have him turning to the audience rather than over narration. Plus I really dislike Scrubs so I shan't be borrowing from it...
I will be adapting this script for the screen sometime, and obviously it'll be longer and I'll have more freedom to play with the setting.
Interesting people think the jokes are set up and punch line-y. I didn't go in with the intention of writing it like that, but I certainly see what you mean.
Quote: Kevin Murphy @ January 3 2010, 12:40 PM GMT
I'll echo some of the earlier comments. There's some funny stuff in there. I rarely chuckle reading sitcom scripts, but I did with this one.
I've read the edited version, but there are still some speeches in there that are way too long.
Have you timed the whole thing by reading it aloud? It's currently over 4,000 words, which seems like way too many for a 15-minute script.
Take Sid's speech about the crazy crisp lady, for example.
I timed this bit at almost two minutes, just reading aloud with no dramatic pauses or emphasis or any "acting". That's 2 out of your 15 minutes lost on some random anecdote that doesn't serve the plot. And I haven't even quoted the whole thing. To be brutally honest, I don't think there are enough laughs in it either.
The other two chunky bits -- Gary Mabbutt and Sid's final threat to Vincent -- at least have the benefit of leading into definite punchlines that would very probably get laughs.
If I were you I'd chop the whole crisp lady bit and write a quick bit with Lee meeting Cat before Vincent shows up. That at least would give Vincent an extra reason to be pissed off. Lee seems a little underused in your final scene.
Lengthwise you could well be right. I haven't read it out aloud, I know I should of but this script was knocked off in the 2 or 3 days spare I had in the holidays between family, going out and uni work.
The anecdote does serve the final plot in that Sid uses it to vanquish Vincent, pouring the crisps at his feet. Kind of...
But yeah it's far too long. I suppose I was too reticent to edit it out, simply because it happened to me and I found it utterly hilarious at the time. But yeah I will probably have to cut it out. It reads more like stand-up at the moment, rather than a conversation between friends. It is kind of in character however, I see Sid as the kind of bloke that would reel off lengthy anecdotes (probably embellished beyond recognition).
Do people think it's funny at all? The crisp lady anecdote that is? If it fails on that basic level then I will whip it right out.
Lee is underused yeah. His only real use is to be there as Cat's potential suitor (which would obviously annoy Vincent) but that is somewhat underdeveloped for sure. There is the line "wait I thought she was single?/she bloody isn't". I had some more stuff along those lines but cut it out cos I thought it wasn't particularly funny.
I'd be very careful about labelling the women on this thread as being useless as I know for a fact that some of them have had previous Sitcom Trials success and that they've sold material to the BBC. Perhaps you would care to explain what makes you an expert on women and sitcoms and what kind of success you've had in the world of comedy writing?