Quote: Rob0 @ July 5 2009, 1:18 AM BSTI quite understand why you'd want a trained professional acting out your scripts, as that's the whole point of having 'em. But suppose you were loitering in a pub or at a bus stop and saw/heard someone who was the embodiment of a character you'd created?
There's some parts I wouldn't hesitate using my brother for; in looks and ability he's perfect for certain characters.
Quote: Dolly Dagger @ July 5 2009, 1:21 AM BSTThere's some parts I wouldn't hesitate using my brother for; in looks and ability he's perfect for certain characters.
And if he can perform as such with a camera/audience in his face, then why should it matter - in my opinion.
If you need a vague Harry Potter lookalike I can do a passable impression, including the acting style (early years at least). Do accents/(bad) impressions and clowning around in character that family and friends seem to enjoy/tolerate, but have a terrible fear that under pressure my timing and natural movement would resemble my first effort with that Xtranormal software.
Also I suppose it's usually hard enough watching something you wrote let alone having to act in it too.
Quote: Dolly Dagger @ July 4 2009, 11:35 PM BSTOkay, I think Lee and I are going to argue now.
Nah. Debate, possibly. Argue, never. 
Quote: Griff @ July 4 2009, 11:37 PM BSTI also have trouble idolising The Two Ronnies (best of is great, the rest not so much) and a lot of Morecambe and Wise.
Agreed. The Two Ronnies pumped out a vast amount of weak material IMO, as did (to a lesser extent perhaps) Morecambe & Wise.
The thing is though, the good stuff they did was SO good that we tend to forget about the unmemorable gash that made up a lot of the shows.
Quote: Rob0 @ July 5 2009, 1:36 AM BSTAnd if he can perform as such with a camera/audience in his face, then why should it matter - in my opinion.
If you need a vague Harry Potter lookalike I can do a passable impression, including the acting style (early years at least). Do accents/(bad) impressions and clowning around in character that family and friends seem to enjoy/tolerate, but have a terrible fear that under pressure my timing and natural movement would resemble my first effort with that Xtranormal software.
Also I suppose it's usually hard enough watching something you wrote let alone having to act in it too.
I like to think I can write, in a general sense. I've had short stories and poems published in sites and magazines so minor not even the creators can remember their names. I also like to think I'm funny, but looking at the stuff on critique - lots of which is shit, but I wouldn't have even thought of the idea for it - I realise I have a lot to learn. Anyway, bringing this all vaguely back to topic, I like o think that decent actor could polish the turd that I'd written. I, meanwhile, would have no chance.
Plus I is bare ugly.
Quote: Lee Henman @ July 5 2009, 3:12 AM BSTNah. Debate, possibly. Argue, never.
Agreed. The Two Ronnies pumped out a vast amount of weak material IMO, as did (to a lesser extent perhaps) Morecambe & Wise.
The thing is though, the good stuff they did was SO good that we tend to forget about the unmemorable gash that made up a lot of the shows.
Similarly, I thought that three quarters of Monty Python was awful. The rest was very funny, and that's the stuff you remember.
Same with the first series of Little Britain and most of the Fast Show. I know that the majority of it wasn't funny, but I don't remember what wasn't funny, just what made me laugh.
Quote: Rob H @ July 5 2009, 3:18 AM BSTSame with the first series of Little Britain and most of the Fast Show. I know that the majority of it wasn't funny, but I don't remember what wasn't funny, just what made me laugh.
I'm with you all the way on The Fast Show. Great cast, great concept, and a lot of really shit characters tempered with moments of sheer brilliance. For instance, Ted and Ralph were fantastic. Billy Bleach (sorry mate, someone's sitting there) wasn't. Swiss Toni, superb. Jesse, not so good. In fact Jesse was crap. Come on...how is a guy stepping out of his shed and going "This week I've been mostly eating bourbon biscuits" funny? Can you ever imagine sending that idea into the BBC and getting a commission out of it?
Quote: Lee Henman @ July 5 2009, 3:35 AM BSTI'm with you all the way on The Fast Show. Great cast, great concept, and a lot of really shit characters tempered with moments of sheer brilliance. For instance, Ted and Ralph were fantastic. Billy Bleach (sorry mate, someone's sitting there) wasn't. Swiss Toni, superb. Jesse, not so good. In fact Jesse was crap. Come on...how is a guy stepping out of his shed and going "This week I've been mostly eating bourbon biscuits" funny? Can you ever imagine sending that idea into the BBC and getting a commission out of it?
Dammit lee, you were doing so well!! I thought Jesse was ok, but if you apply your rationale on that to the whole series you can pull all of it apart. I loved Ted and Ralph and if they'd left it unresolved and ambiguous I think it would have been even funnier. For me, the pathos there was brilliant. also loved 'which was nice'; the guy who went mental when the word 'black was mentioned; and the Brummie family running (again with the pitch!).
I'm sure there was lots of unfunny stuff, including examples of those sketches, but overall it was great. More it than miss, which is pretty much all you can ask fro a sketch show.
The first play wot what I wrote and and produced and directed and that for the Edinburgh Festival - I also gave myself the lead part. The second I only gave myself a cameo role - but I like to think I stole the show. If my book, which I may have mentioned elsewhere, ever gets made as an audio book I want to do the reading. It's not vanity it's sheer conceitedness. And I reckon there must be a fee in it. If I ever get a sitcom made I would consider playing a part in it as seriously as I would consider demanding that Scottidog was the casting director.
Quote: Rob H @ July 5 2009, 4:05 AM BSTDammit lee, you were doing so well!! I thought Jesse was ok, but if you apply your rationale on that to the whole series you can pull all of it apart. I loved Ted and Ralph and if they'd left it unresolved and ambiguous I think it would have been even funnier. For me, the pathos there was brilliant. also loved 'which was nice'; the guy who went mental when the word 'black was mentioned; and the Brummie family running (again with the pitch!).
I'm sure there was lots of unfunny stuff, including examples of those sketches, but overall it was great. More it than miss, which is pretty much all you can ask fro a sketch show.
I loved Higson's Johnny Nice Painter guy, he was very funny indeed. I despised Jesse though. It just seemed so damn lazy. I hated Brilliant Kid as well. Just didn't get it at all.
But again, the highlights were so high that the dodgy material doesn't matter. For that reason I think I'd rather write a sketch a show that had one or two really memorable, funny characters in it and the rest sub-par, rather than a show where all was mediocre.
Bloody hell, let's no start this up again!
I've seen you acting haven't I Marc?
Quote: Marc P @ July 5 2009, 9:19 AM BSTThe first play wot what I wrote and and produced and directed and that for the Edinburgh Festival - I also gave myself the lead part. The second I only gave myself a cameo role - but I like to think I stole the show. If my book, which I may have mentioned elsewhere, ever gets made as an audio book I want to do the reading. It's not vanity it's sheer conceitedness. And I reckon there must be a fee in it. If I ever get a sitcom made I would consider playing a part in it as seriously as I would consider demanding that Scottidog was the casting director.
Actor as well? What's this one called - Marek Poisson?
This is a loooong thread, but surely writers put something of themselves into their works anyway, and so to push that further and make it more concrete would be superfluous, and just a bit egotistical?
Quote: Scatterbrained Floozy @ July 5 2009, 1:09 PM BSTThis is a loooong thread, but surely writers put something of themselves into their works anyway, and so to push that further and make it more concrete would be superfluous, and just a bit egotistical?
But then isn't writing egotistical anyway?
I don't think any writers would take on a part just because they want to be seen, rather they think they could do the part as muc - if not more - justice than someone else.
I don't think all the writer/performers, Gervais, The League of Gentlemen, Steve Coogan, etc, etc are being egotistical and would be just content with having something of themself in their writing only.
Well maybe not egotistical so much as...I dunno...not being able to separate life and 'art'? I only know from literature rather than sitcoms etc, though, so I'm almost definitely totally wrong.
Quote: Badge @ July 5 2009, 12:45 PM BSTActor as well? What's this one called - Marek Poisson?
I'll go with that.
And yes Dolly I do believe you have!
Quote: Dolly Dagger @ July 5 2009, 1:41 PM BSTI don't think all the writer/performers, Gervais, The League of Gentlemen, Steve Coogan, etc, etc are being egotistical and would be just content with having something of themself in their writing only.
Bless you, St Dolly. 