Quote: SlagA @ July 8, 2007, 11:00 AMComedy is subjective but it's still good to see the differences in 'opinion'
Good point
Quote: SlagA @ July 8, 2007, 11:00 AMCopernicus and the modern Flat-Earthers.
I think I saw them at Glastonbury in 98.
Fireman? Page 3
This thread is locked. No further replies can be posted.
big train sketch - http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=jG03joaqrcc
Poor old Paul (or cosmos100) as I know him... ahem!
He didn't know what he was starting with that one!
What we can all agree on is:
His sketch was either funny or it wasn't, depending on the perception of the reader!
The golden rule of comedy - If I laugh it's funny
The golden rule of comedy and tragedy - If you fall down a manhole, it's funny... If I cut my finger, it's tragedy!
Just watched the Big Train sketch (very good too) but you need to help me see the difference.
In that sketch a man who speaks English pretends he can't. In this sketch, a man who is a fireman pretends he isn't.
In the Big Train sketch, no reason is given as to why he pretends he can't speak English but why is it given as an example to support the idea that the fireman also needs a reason?
More light please.
Quote: ShoePie @ July 8, 2007, 10:50 AMI am almost amazed that people are not agreeing with my point. Maybe I'm wrong, that's entirely possible, but I honestly don't see how I am. To me the jokes incomplete.
If the Big Train sketch was
Woman:
"Do you speak english?"Simon
"no, sorry"Then it would match up with the fireman sketch. I agree with Ajp that the absurdity makes the sketch work. Because he's demonstrating that he blatantly can speak English.
And the shopkeeper doesn't want to give a refund because he'd rather have the money than a dead parrot.
So we'll have to agree to disagree
I too am a little surprised you don't see the counter arguments! :-) But not in an angry way OK!!! So let's agree to disagree then... and here's some more disagreement!!
The fireman doesn't just say "no,sorry" he says "no, sorry I'm going to a fancy dress party"... which is the reason he gives and which we can tell is not true... his 'phew!' says it all, he's a lazy fireman and this is why it's funny... it's absurd, no fireman in uniform is gonna do that (we all hope...)
Also, I don't recall the Pythons explaining that the shopkeeper would rather have had the money than the dead parrot! Perhaps that was because they didn't feel it needed explanation, which is where I'm coming from with the firemans reason for not helping... it doesn't help us to know exactly why because there could be no valid reason that would add to the joke UNLESS you want to give him another funny line as well or different funny lines than "no, I'm going to a fancy dress party... <aside> phew!"
such as,
"No sorry, I left my fire engine in my other trousers",
or
"No sorry, I'm off duty and only put the uniform on to do a strip-show at the local pub"
or
"No sorry, I'm allergic to fire"
or
"No sorry, that other lady asked me to put HER fire out first, and yes she is my mum but that's not the point..."
but
"No sorry, I'm on my way to a fancy dress party... <aside> phew!" does it for me!
*Honestly no more posts from me on this ... you've done my 'ead in you BSG lot... if there are any nits needed picking, we would be the champions on this site I reckon!
Gosh what excitement ... nobodys even logged on to 4laughs yet this morning, they're all still in bed scratching their a****s!!
*N.B. 'Honestly' in Frankie-speak means something completely differently akin to 'not-honestly' in normal speak...
Sorry to hijack this thread but
The funniest sketch I saw on Big Train is where Simon Pegg, as a condemned man, is writing a farewell letter to his sister.
My head hurt for hours with the pain of so much laughing.
Does anyone remeber or have a link to it? had a quick look but couldn't find it on Youtube.
The slags are right - again. The sketch is perfect as it is. Fetching a cat down just makes him into a bastard and the gag vicious - which impacts the humour.
It's obvious why the fireman wouldn't want to risk his life. The 'joke' is essentially that the fireman is a coward which is the opposite of what we expect.
Good work Paul.
In my post I was giving a reason why I felt that the sketch needed an addition. I was and never would be claiming to have a more valid opinion than anyone else and the best ant ultimat judge is Paul himslef. I just felt that without a vlaid reason the audience may not know whether to laugh at it or not tiss all.
In that sketch a man who speaks English pretends he can't. In this sketch, a man who is a fireman pretends he isn't.
In the Big Train sketch, no reason is given as to why he pretends he can't speak English but why is it given as an example to support the idea that the fireman also needs a reason?
More light please.
[/quote]
There is a clear difference. I suppose, like the Parrot Sketch, the Big Train sketch is absurd comedy. The Big Train sketch contains some absurd one liners, like 'I suppose I should have learnt it in school'. In the Parrot Sketch the shopkeeper goes to absurd lengths to deny the death of a parrot - itself an absurd scenario - returning a stiff parrot to a shop. There is nothing absurd about a fireman not wanting to put out a fire; that fact alone is just confusing and, IMO, comedically redundant.
My real point here is that firstly Paul has a sketch that is potentially gold dust and is a very good writer. But watching sketch shows IMHO is often frustrating and sketches need to stand out if they are to get under people's skin or make them laugh out loud.
Quote: Blenkinsop @ July 8, 2007, 1:52 PMSorry to hijack this thread but
The funniest sketch I saw on Big Train is where Simon Pegg, as a condemned man, is writing a farewell letter to his sister.
My head hurt for hours with the pain of so much laughing.
Does anyone remeber or have a link to it? had a quick look but couldn't find it on Youtube.
especially for you !
Thanks, Nick. Love that sketch so much.
Thanks Nick
You've made my night!
Quote: Frankie Rage @ July 8, 2007, 11:27 AMPoor old Paul (or cosmos100) as I know him... ahem!
He didn't know what he was starting with that one!
What we can all agree on is:
His sketch was either funny or it wasn't, depending on the perception of the reader!
The golden rule of comedy - If I laugh it's funny
The golden rule of comedy and tragedy - If you fall down a manhole, it's funny... If I cut my finger, it's tragedy!
Can open... Worms everywhere!
I liked it too. It`s a good sketch and very visual.
Quote: Fred Peters @ July 8, 2007, 8:56 PMThere is nothing absurd about a fireman not wanting to put out a fire
Tell his employers that when he's on a disciplinary. They wouldn't agree that it isn't an absurd situation.
Re: the parrot sketch, I've known plenty of shop assistants who fought to avoid giving me a refund to the point where other customers gather to watch (even violence was threatened once by a mechanic with a monkey wrench) so to me that's an observation on a real-life situation taken to extremes rather than plain absurdity.
If an assistant had a customer bring back a dead bird, he doesn't know if the parrot died after purchase or before so trying to avoid a refund isn't then absurd. But if the customer was so stupid as to buy a dead parrot how would he be bright enough to be able to find the shop ever again? Clearly the customer is so dense that all his eloquence is now out of character?
I suppose this debate just shows how diverse the approaches to comedy are, and how diverse the endings that a basic setup can conjure (ref: Frankie Rage's excellent alternative endings). As he points out, everyone is actually right. Some people didn't laugh so the sketch is to them unfunny, some did, so the sketch to them is funny.
God bless comedy and all who sail in 'er.