Jumper (a sketch) Page 3

Quote: SlagA @ November 19 2009, 4:29 PM GMT

If a woman is on a ledge with cops loudhailing her below, she's hardly going to indulging in chat with people in windows, or is she?.

View original

I see what you mean.

No, she isn't chatting with the people inside the window.

When I say "FROM A NEARBY WINDOW, PEOPLE ARE TALKING TO HER", I mean she's out on the ledge and people are talking to her (i.e. saying things to her) from a nearby window - perhaps they're appealing to her to come back inside or to stay still or not to jump or whatever. I don't mean to suggest she and they are having a cosy chat.

In my mind, as the action unfolds, I see the people inside appealing to her to come back inside then the policeman speaks on the loudhailer, at which point the people inside shut up and let her listen to the policeman.

Nice sketch Roodeye.

Quote: Roodeye @ November 19 2009, 5:56 PM GMT

I see what you mean.

No, she isn't chatting with the people inside the window.

When I say "FROM A NEARBY WINDOW, PEOPLE ARE TALKING TO HER", I mean she's out on the ledge and people are talking to her (i.e. saying things to her) from a nearby window - perhaps they're appealing to her to come back inside or to stay still or not to jump or whatever. I don't mean to suggest she and they are having a cosy chat.

In my mind, as the action unfolds, I see the people inside appealing to her to come back inside then the policeman speaks on the loudhailer, at which point the people inside shut up and let her listen to the policeman.

View original

If you have to explain it or defend it it's not working. Keep it simple Roodeye. I know you are saying you don't want to sell it but just want to post it here, so of course you won't take advice so why worry abut it?

Quote: Marc P @ November 19 2009, 10:28 PM GMT

It's not working.

View original

You wish, Marc.

You wish!

Agreed, keep it simple. The sketch works perfectly well with just the woman and the two police officers. You don't need any additional extras/cast and only require minimal stage directions. The scene (and the gag) is obvious to the reader from the bare essentials.

Quote: Roodeye @ November 19 2009, 10:32 PM GMT

You wish, Marc.

You wish!

View original

Facts please?

Quote: Roodeye @ November 19 2009, 10:32 PM GMT

You wish, Marc.

You wish!

View original

Well, unless your intent it to deliberately wind-up people who are trying to offer helpful criticism, then Marc is right.

Bloody Hell, Tim - you've changed your tune.

At 3.07 pm today, you said:

Quote: Tim Walker @ November 19 2009, 3:07 AM GMT

Good, efficient, funny sketch.

View original

and now you say:

Quote: Tim Walker @ November 19 2009, 10:33 PM GMT

You don't need any additional extras/cast and only require minimal stage directions. The scene (and the gag) is obvious to the reader from the bare essentials.

View original

What happened in the meantime?

Did somebody tell you off for complimenting my work?

Come on, clique members!

Start kicking me now!

Roll up! Roll up!

Er I asked the question not Tim, and I am sure you will find I am not in any clique.

Quote: Roodeye @ November 19 2009, 10:37 PM GMT

Bloody Hell, Tim - you've changed your tune.

At 3.07 pm today, you said:

and now you say:

What happened in the meantime?

Did somebody tell you off for complimenting my work?

View original

It's not really that much of a contradiction. When I first read the sketch and posted that comment, I'd pretty much skipped through the preamble (almost subconsciously) to get to what the sketch was about. That stage direction wasn't memorable because it was irrelevant.

I only really noticed the bit about people talking to her from the building when others started commenting on it. On reflection, it does seem an unnecessary bit of stage direction, that's all. It's a funny, neat sketch. If you were going to submit it I'd agree that it's the one thing to change as scripted, that's all.

Cool it with the conspiracy theories.

Quote: Tim Walker @ November 19 2009, 10:41 PM GMT

It's not really that much of a contradiction.

View original

At 3.07 pm you described the sketch as 'efficient'.

Now you tell me it contains irrelevant and unnecessary stage directions.

That's a HUGE contradiction.

One unnecessary stage direction?

I've said my piece above. Nice sketch. That's it.

Roodeye if you have such a low opinion of everyone on here as you repeatedly like to point out, why do you put your sketches up for our comment, and why do you seem to worry so much about what is said?

Bigfella prepares to chalk up the prices on the board once again!

Quote: Griff @ November 19 2009, 10:55 PM GMT

Roodeye if you have such a low opinion of everyone on here as you repeatedly like to point out, why do you put your sketches up for our comment, and why do you seem to worry so much about what is said?

View original

See?

Here they come!

As predicted and right on cue.

It's a the depth of snideyness to suggest I have 'such a low opinion' of everyone on here. That's trouble-making and trolling of the worst kind.

As I think my many critiques have made abundantly clear, I have a high opinion of some people on BCG - particularly some of the newer writers - but I have a low opinion of people who regularly seek to cause trouble for me when they hear the clarion call.

If you wish to discuss this sketch, please do so.

If you wish top discuss me, please do it in PM with other people who want to discuss me.