Maybe I was wrong about two of those shows, but they did have their moments where they were like that.
Is the modern TV sketch show lazy in its writing? Page 3
I suppose another factor is marketing. It's far easier to sell a DVD or T-shirt overseas which has a catchphrase or recurring character instead of a one-off sketch. Obvious exceptions include Monty Python, of course, but by and large, it's repetitive ones all the way.
Reading this again, the begining of this thread does also mention the cost of filming a sketch show. So out of curiosity, as sketch shows do tend to mix pre-recorded sketches with ones filmed in a studio, which of thoose two is more expencive? And sorry if it's off topic.
I don't claim to be an expert but location filming is a much more expensive way to shoot stuff.
The studio offers a much more controlled environment, and also many of the extraneous costs incurred in getting technical crews, actors, gear and obtaining shooting permissions and sometimes paying for locations themselves, are negated with a studio set-up.
Quote: Blenkinsop @ March 22 2011, 5:28 PM GMTI don't claim to be an expert but location filming is a much more expensive way to shoot stuff.
The studio offers a much more controlled environment, and also many of the extraneous costs incurred in getting technical crews, actors, gear and obtaining shooting permissions and sometimes paying for locations themselves, are negated with a studio set-up.
This is correct. Plus you get rained on outside.
Quote: Griff @ March 22 2011, 5:43 PM GMTI think I've been told that audience sitcoms are actually more expensive to make than studio ones, since sets have to be built from scratch, TV studios have to be hired (even if these are internal costs/cross-charging they are still a cost), and there are a lot more crew to be paid than on a single-camera location shoot.
All sitcoms require studios and sets. My feeling is that OBs cost more as you have to transport the actors, crew and catering.
Quote: Tim Azure @ March 24 2011, 4:39 PM GMTAll sitcoms require studios and sets.
That's really not true at all. Some are shot on location. Off the top of my head, Curb Your Enthusiasm.
It all depends. In simple terms, for a short series, say 6 or 8 eps, it's cheaper to shoot on location, particularly working single camera with a small crew. If you're going to build and maintain sets, use multiple cameras, you need a longer run to amortise the cost.
It's my belief that there is no new sketch shows because there are no new comedy groups, it's all individuals that collaborate sometimes. The last one I saw was The Peter Serafinowicz Show. He made it with his brother and the main problem was stretching ideas thin. If they had more people with their humour they could bounce off more.
The best sketches have come from groups in the past, or performers and their group of friends (my favourite being Vic and Bob's group which started loads in the 90s).
Quote: Griff @ March 24 2011, 10:09 PM GMTThere are loads of sketch groups on the comedy circuit.
Yes but what about telly? No good on the circuit in relation to the subject. I'm on about proposals from groups coming forward e.g. The Fast Show premise proposed by Paul Whitehouse to the BBC.
As all the modern sketch shows originate in different sources and are by different writers (usually) I think calling them 'lazy' is too much of a generalisation. If anything I'd say today's writers have it harder as it's all been done before so it's harder to capture an audience's attention for long and the pressure is on to keep characters interesting and funny. The Fast Show for example repeated the same characters each week but this succeeded because they were really good funny sketches and funny characters, and they built on that week by week. I'd assume this is a good way to do it, nothing lazy about that.
I don't think comedy 'formatting' is a new thing. Keeping Up Appearances ran for 5 years where the format of each show was pretty much identical. Hyacinth tries to social climb, her son is gay and nobody has the heart to tell her. Richard is a doormat for a quiet life, Elizabeth is intimidated every time she is summoned 'for coffee' (including the Royal Doulton cups with the hand painted periwinkles). Emmet keeps getting sang to, Daddy goes missing, and sister Daisy (that's not the one with the Mercedes and room for a pony) is desperately trying to reignite husband Onslow's passion, who is more content with watching the racing on TV with a can of beer. Rose is intent on chasing any man that would give her the time, that on occasions includes the vicar who is more intent on avoiding the 'Bucket woman' who invites everyone to a candle lit supper which falls flat on its ass for some reason leaving Hyacinth's hat dishevelled across her face [end credits and theme tune].
Send my fee to the usual address 
Actually, it might not just be the consistancy of recurring sketches, but also the style of humour. Sketch shows seem to be a bit dumbed down and in your face, when a while a go the humour used to be quite intelligent and subtle. At least that's what I think.
I think there needs to be some new sketch duos/teams coming to the fore in sketch comedy. Mitchell/Webb/Armstrong/Miller/Whitehouse/Enfield are all very good, but where are their replacements? You get the occasional pilot from people who have gone down well at Edinburgh e.g. Pappy's Fan Club, but they never go on to whole series'.