Comedy Plays - theatrical merit?

I'm very much of the juxtaposition-of-happy-with-sad-camp (no-one will print our banners) but, having seen the funniest thing of my life, I have now written two plays purely aimed at eliciting the most laughter from the audience possible (to the best of my ability), foregoing any resonant themes unless they assist.

Up until now, the pick of my plays was a tragi-comedy in an old peoples' home. But Aeneas Faversham Forever, by the Penny Dreadfuls (reminiscent of the League of Gents Mikey, so look out for them) was beyond farce. A play where I regularly found I had stopped breathing; so as not to laugh, so as not to miss any of the dialogue.

My point is, one of my new plays is to be produced in the new year and I'm wrangling with the literary editor about making it about SOMETHING.

Yes, that's how drama originate but it's all telling a story - and sometimes, a funny story is just what we want.

What d'ya reckon?

You can't beat a good farce... well you can but it will make your arm ache...

It's really horses for courses, you can go total farce no content, No Sex Please, Boeing Boeing, etc or you can take the Dario Fo route, Accidental Death of an Anarchist, etc.... Or... you can plumb for the middle line and be the next Stoppard...

Thing is only you know what you want to write and why you want to write it...

kjs

Quote: Griff @ December 16 2008, 5:58 PM GMT

the longer the piece is, the more it needs to be about something. Ninety minutes is a long time to be delivering random gags with an inconsequential storyline

View original

Griff nailed it for me. Random gags without a storyline is just stand-up with a bigger cast. To me, once you stray from sketch territory and get into longer form, everything should have a story with a satisfying arc for the customer. How often have you watched a film and felt absolutely cheated if you didn't understand the end? And in contrast, how often have you admired a show where the plot lines were pulled in masterfully to clash at the last scene?

Rick, your post confused me a little - especially the last section.

I'm a little staggered that a piece is being produced after the author tells the bods involved that maybe it could be about something; or that the bod didn't notice the absence of a plot when he read it. So obviously I must be reading your post wrong. Adding a plot isn't like adding gags. It's major structural work, not tampering with the paintwork. However if you mean in the last section that you tell a funny story, then that would count as plot.

Ah, the same bods also claim it to be a 'rollicking piece of theatre'.

Your final paragraph shows I haven't explained myself clearly - of course there's a degree of plot, or I'd be an absolute tit even registering for this site, but rather than sacrificing a funny bit for the good of the plot - I will amend the plot to suit 'the funny'.

Plot is borne from character decision for me - so I realise it's structural - by the fact that that's exactly what it is - but I'm not trying to make a statement, I'm not trying to answer the inevitable 'but what's it really about' and suchlike.

Maybe what I should've said is 'Is it ok to skimp on sub-plot as long as it's heavy on jokes?'

Do you mean subtext rather than subplot?

I had the misfortune of studying The Importance of Being Earnest at A level, the misfortune being to endure having those wonderfully crafted gags dissected in search of meaning: "yes, but what was Wilde really trying to say?"

Yep - and I agree with that to a point - it's certainly how I used to feel - but now, having seen something a bit different, I don't subscribe to the 'I'm going to the theatre - therefore I will see resonance and and a reflection of the self'.

As great and valid as that it, I also think there is room for pure farce which is only about purely entertaining the audience. A view thrown out by most avid theatre-goers that I've broached the issue with.

A friend of mine claims that resonance and depth are the only thing to be considered when optioning a play - but the magic of the theatre, for me at least, isn't that but rather the palpable excitement of tangible events unfurling before me.

Ah, Rick, I knew I'd misread what you'd posted. My apols, although I did try covering my ass by saying that if you were telling a funny story, it counts as plot.

Personally if it makes the audience laugh and sends them home with a clear story from a to b, you've done your job.

I'm becoming swiftly aware that people think they're offending me.

You bastards.

You didn't misread - I wrote like a twerp (my plays are far superior to my forum posts.)

I'm coming up against a fair bit of theatrical snobbery (though I've made some great contacts too) through this pursuit of mine. Not on here, but in various theatres I've been talking to.

Theatre's a lot more divisive than I've ever given it credit for.

<3

I would love to see The Penny Dreadfuls live, having become fans of the radio series The Penny Dreadfuls Present.... For those interested, the second series currently being repeated on Radio 4 and is on the iPlayer.

When I first developed my interest in comedy as a boy, I went to see a comic play. It was "The Ghost Train". For those unaware of it, it is written by Dad's Army star Arnold Ridley. Interestingly, when I went to see it, one of the parts was being played by Ian Lavender. It was very good.

Ian - I like their radio stuff but their visual dynamic is staggering - you can subscribe to their Facebook page - they do bits and bobs in Brighton and London

Quote: Rick Allden @ December 16 2008, 9:25 PM GMT

Ian - I like their radio stuff but their visual dynamic is staggering - you can subscribe to their Facebook page - they do bits and bobs in Brighton and London

View original

I'm already subscribed to it. Sadly, gigs in Brighton and London are little far away for me. I'll have to see if they will do one of their shows at the Fringe in 2009.

I'll try to keep you posted - they've been the past few years. Hopefully telly will pick them up soon!

If they do move to TV, then I think they would be the first BBC 7 show to do so (that is if they do "The Brothers Faversham").

People tend to be cynical today about Shakespeare's comedies, but in the right hands they can still be funny today. I saw a production of "Much Ado About Nothing" which starred Tamsin Greig in the lead role of Beatrice and it was brilliant. It was also slightly strange because the audience seemed to be split between fans of Shakespeare and fans of Tamsin Greig (I'm the latter).

It was a very good production. For one thing, Tamsin Greig won the Olivier Award for her performance, and as a result gave possibly the funnies acceptance speech ever, as can be seen here.