Quote: David Chapman @ September 28, 2007, 11:33 PMOh f**k! How stupid are some people.
Look Dale - it's a joke! It doesn't have to be real
I agree that it does need a certain grounding in reality before the surreal aspect is added, however. Thankyou very much for the compliment though.
Quote: zooo @ September 28, 2007, 11:34 PMAre you putting man/woman because you can't decide?
It's a bit distracting!
No, just because it didn't matter...so I made it more complicated...
I liked it.
Although I've been selling fags all day at work. 
I've been smoking them...I had to celebrate the three legal days remaining...
AND BY GOD, WE WILL ALL DIE TOGETHER!
Oh bless. You'll have to get some fake ID.
I asked a 31 year old for ID today. I went a bit red.
Don't worry; underage people want to look older and overage people want to look younger.
True. I love being asked for ID! Makes my flipping day.
I liked it.
If I were to steal the idea, I would dispense with Muscles (and the logistics of his arrival). The assistant would read from a card:
"I am legally required to inform you ......"
Starting in the uninterested tones of the people who read out such stuff to you over the phone and building to the crescendo of Muscles' speech.
Off-critique, I am reminded of a lovely joke I heard a while ago - probably on a Radio 4 6:30 comedy.
Someone is examining the Health Warning writ large on a packet of cigarettes.
"I knew cigarettes gave you cancer; I didn't know they make you go blind."
I liked it also. It's been interesting reading all the posts but despite all the opinion and recommendations the fact remained that this sketch was short and very much to the point. Nothing wrong with editing of course but, for instance, take away Muscles and it's a different sketch with the dynamics of the sketch changing beyond its original form. It still remains a good piece but the emphasis has changed. At the end of the day this is still your sketch so stick with what your gut feeling tells you.
I liked it. I'm not sure changing Muscles' speech to be so 'on the nose' was a good idea though - I thought your intention was laid out well enough in the original. Other than that there are just a few tweaks I would make:
Never refer to a character as man/woman - it denotes uncertainty. If you want to remain ambiguous in this instance, I'd recommend you go with CUSTOMER.
Also, I agree with the poster before me who says the Newsagent should be reluctant to have muscles disrupt his trade, so maybe some sort of involuntary alarm that goes off when the cigarettes are rung up. The Newsagent would be forced to stand by as Muscles offered his caution (which should be delivered like pro-wrestler smack talk).
Quote: David Chapman @ September 28, 2007, 11:33 PMOh f**k! How stupid are some people.
Look Dale - it's a joke! It doesn't have to be real - and Adam - you should be ashamed of yourself!
Very funny - needed no rewrite or explanation.
Hold the phone David. Firstly there was no explination and secondly to people who don't smoke like me the connection is not easy to make as we are not use to having health warnings on the products we buy. Thirdly Muscles appeared to be personally threatening the guy as if he was going to kill them. These three things would point the audience in the wrong direction I was simply saying that the connection should be made more obvious. Jesus Jefforson Christ!
Quote: David Chapman @ September 28, 2007, 11:33 PMOh f**k! How stupid are some people.
Look Dale - it's a joke! It doesn't have to be real - and Adam - you should be ashamed of yourself!
Very funny - needed no rewrite or explanation.
This post is an example of a rather rude post. I think this poster has an hidden agenda. It may be that he has just got out of bed and trod on a drawing pin. Or similar. 
I don't think I'm all that stupid, I actually liked the idea and said so. I was simply suggesting an alternative take on it. Nothing wrong with having a discussion on it is there?
There isn't, no, I valued the input.