2 Quickfire Sketches

Just two quickfire sketches.

*~*~*~*~*~*~*
SKETCH 1:
INT. TUDOR HOUSE. DAY.
A beardy man dressed in full Elizabethan garb including neck frill sits at his writing desk, quill in hand.

POET
Shall I compare thee to a summer's day?

He sits deep in thought for a moment.

POET
Nope.

He scrumples up the paper and tosses it over his shoulder.

*~*~*~*~*~*~*
SKETCH 2:
EXT. RIVERBANK. DAY.
A man in a renaissance period frilly floaty shirt and pantaloons lounges by a river bank, puffs away on an opium pipe, and listens to the birdsong.

POET
A thing of beauty is a joy forever.

Pause.

POET (cont.)
(swelling with poetic inspiration)
It's loveliness increases.

Pause.

POET (cont.)
(sternly)
It will never be a dirty slag.

CUT AWAY to 15 year old girl in modern clothes, tarted up: slapdash make-up, her breasts bulging out of her shirt, a mini skirt so small it might as well be a thong, and pink and yellow highlights in her peroxide frizzled hair.

POET
I hope you've learnt your lesson. This time.

DAUGHTER looks at him ruefully, nods, looks at her feet in shame.

POET swings a baby -- pink, rubbery, screaming, rat-like -- around his head and tosses it into the stream with a splash and a glug-gurgle. Screaming ceases.

He wipes his hands.

POET
Like it never happened.

First one would perform well

Second is a bit random

Quote: sootyj @ July 5 2011, 7:55 PM BST

Second is a bit random

View original

It was an ironic and knowing skewering of the romantic poetic movement and the baser reality that they faled to recognise, to wit, that nature is a destructive force not fighting man's corner, so to speak, and that man in his natural state is a brute after all.

This attempt was cleverly executed by the wry disregard for life shown by the main character, comic effect caused by the juxtaposition of his assumed views as an icon of the romantic poetic movement, and his infanticide of his grandchild, which blah fnrrrrrgh zssggsgsgsggsgsgs

See why the first one is better, rather than defend the first?

nu?

que? no comprendo.

oops I mean defend the second

Shakespeare as a regular bloke works well without embelishment

First is a bit simple, lacks any depth, second is utter balls.

Lady Laughter why don't you put some stuff up so we can all see where we are going wrong?
This would help people gauge whether your shit hot or just shit!

Quote: Lady Laughter @ July 6 2011, 8:24 AM BST

First is a bit simple, lacks any depth, second is utter balls.

View original

Hi LL,

I know the first one lacks depth, hence "quickfire". That is, a quick sketch filling space between other longer ones.

Sorry you didn't like the second one But I found it funny, at least, so that's one person, anyway... ha!

Quote: Teddy Paddalack @ July 6 2011, 8:42 AM BST

Lady Laughter why don't you put some stuff up so we can all see where we are going wrong?
This would help people gauge whether your shit hot or just shit!

View original

I don't know that she (he? tranny? crossdresser?) needs to post her own stuff up in order to criticise. However, the key is to be constructively critical. Is she this...? Yeah, why not?

The reason 'It' should put up stuff is to establish bona fides, is this person actually interested in comedy? or is 'It' simply being bitter for the sake of it?

Quote: Teddy Paddalack @ July 6 2011, 10:05 AM BST

The reason 'It' should put up stuff is to establish bona fides, is this person actually interested in comedy? or is 'It' simply being bitter for the sake of it?

View original

Very interested in comedy, for over 35 years now - stand up, sketch, TV, Film.

So yes, I have an interest. There is no need to write your own stuff to critique others, although I have put a few sketches on here.

Teddy doesn't like me because I had a go at him about some horrendous posts he made on another forum. he bahaves himself on here, which is nice.

The thing is, you put something on here, you will get all sorts of answers. If I see a way to improve something, I will make suggestions. I don't out everything down, but would say that 70% of stuff posted here is below average. The internet has made it really easy to spread pish about, and I tell it like it is (in my opinion, naturally).

Your first sketch was very throwaway (literally), and really a love it or hate it thing. Nothing special but I could see it working in the midst of a fast paced show. The second was not worth going into depth about. It just wasn't funny to me.

Hi LL,

Lest there be any doubt, I didn't have a problem with your critique/opinions.

I will write a hilarious sketch later. Maybe...

Make no mistake I don't like you at all, I think you're creepy.
As for 35 years in the'Biz' I have to presume you started off in Jan 1975 then got life in prison and you got out a few months ago, its the only explanation, because you're not in the slightest bit funny!

The first one wasn't as bard as the second, or was it..?