I have this astounding ability to watch a lot of sitcoms and pitch the jokes mere seconds before the actors say them, almost verbatim. It’s an amazing skill. Houdini never could do that. Audiences are mystified. Talk about magic.
Of course, the truth is that after years of writing comedy I just can identify the most obvious punchlines. And there are shockingly way too many sitcoms that are guilty of this.
You might think this is a byproduct of multi-camera shows where rhythms have become stale and predictable, but single-camera shows are sometimes worse. They often resort to irony so it’s not even jokes. It’s catch-phrases or “Gee, THAT went well.”
If I can predict a joke it’s just lazy writing. Either that or the staff is just not very good. So I choose to believe it’s laziness.
What’s keeping me out of the Magic Castle is that by now you’ve seen so many sitcoms that you too can probably perform this psychic skill.
I blame the showrunners. Someone has to approve these clams. Someone has to say, “Yeah, that’s good enough.” Someone has to say, "Fine. I've got Laker tickets."
On CHEERS we had the rule of 2’s. If the writing staff was working on a joke and any two writers pitched essentially the same punchline we automatically discarded it. Didn’t even matter if it was funny. Our feeling was that if two writers could come up with the same joke so could some audience members. And so it was quickly jettisoned. There was no debate. Ever.
When you’re trying to come up with a joke sometimes your first punchline might be the obvious one. Especially if you came up with it quickly. Learn to dig deeper. Is there a better joke? Is there a fresher joke? Is there something more unexpected? Maybe even something from out in leftfield?
Because sitcom audiences are more sitcom savvy your job is much harder now than it was back when we were writing CHEERS. And yet, I bet if you watch a CHEERS today there will still be jokes that surprise you and make you laugh.
Now I realize that not every show is CHEERS or is even going for the type of humor we went for. But you can strive to be the best in your genre, whatever it is.
I know it sounds like a real contradiction. Comedy writing is a highly competitive business and yet high-priced comedy writers often get away with being lazy. I suppose it’s a matter of personal pride. Just consider this: The last thing you want is for me to thank you for getting into the Magic Castle.
20 comments :
Not clear on the Magic Castle references here, but I have been there twice. A good friend went to kindergarten with a member/performer. I will tell you it is hot, crowded, and uncomfortable. You must have a suit and tie for entrance, and all I could think both times I went was getting out of there, taking my tie and jacket off, and cooling down.
The reverse can also be true however - when you know something a character doesn't.
While waiting to see how they will react -
You can find yourself laughing at how you think they may react, before they actually react.
And sometimes you end up laughing more at how you imagine they will react, to the character's actual reaction.
(PS: Don't need the rule of 2's to figure how Darwin's Ghost will react on political issues)
Many years ago, I planned a sitcom titled "Under Your Spell," about a young screenwriter who's also a witch. He secretly gets a job on a sitcom about a witch to make sure their portrayal is accurate and positive. (My intent was to blend the wit of "Frasier" with the whimsy of "Sabrina, the Teenage Witch.") I wrote six episodes, as well as a bible and first-season arc. In retrospect, I should've made the ability to predict jokes one of his magic powers.
It isn't just jokes and it isn't just comedies. There are all sorts of statements that appear over and over again, across shows: police detectives promising victims they'll find the killer, or arrangements to meet that won't happen, or "you only get one shot" predicting the shot will be blocked, or "yes I'll do that" and you know they won't.
I can do that with Friends, but people keep telling me it's a heartbreaking work of staggering genius.
KL “The last thing you want is for me to thank you for getting into the Magic Castle.”
So long as the accompanying tip is sufficient once I’ve snuck you in after parking your car, I’m fine.
And/but — to get less-hilariously back on point — other bugbears are the established character traits, catch phrases, or entrances, that — through over-repetition — become writer’s crutches, or — eventually — the equivalent of stale predictable punchlines:
Jack Benny Maynard G Krebs Ralph Kramden Mork Archie Bunker Lucille Ball The Fonz Lenny and Squiggy Allen’s Alley Jimmy Walker Laurel and Hardy .... when, if ever, did their phrases and actions become stale?
Thank you, N. Zakharenko. I aim to please.
Funnier than most current sitcoms was the roast delivered by the judge who sentenced Jussie Smollett. In his sentencing statement, the judge described how Smollett orchestrated the hoax attack, saying "It's a script that you wrote. Now, it's not a good script." Ouch!
The Beloved Spouse and I recently watching every CHEERS episode. I don't think there was ever a more consistently funny and entertaining show, though right now we're watching FRASIER and it's giving CHEERS a run for its money.
I recall reading that when Carl Reiner was reviewing a script for The Dick Van Dyke Show, he would circle anything lazy or ill-suited for the character, and mark it "RR" (Rotten wRiting).
Yeah, I've watched way too much TV: not just jokes, I am getting pretty good at knowing the next line in dramas. And I'm a pro at saying 'wait...what?!' in sync with the character saying it. And boy do I say that one a lot these days!
Ken, possible Friday question here: Given everything you said about discarding jokes if they're too obvious or common, have you ever had a joke or even just a punchline you liked so much you kept it in your back pocket then tried to reverse engineer a scene around it? I think of the Aristocrats joke or Norm MacDonald's moth joke where there are very simple punchlines but they only work with the proper setup.
The one I hate is what I call The Triple S or the Sinister Shoes Shot. Frame: bottom 12 inches of car or other door. Action. Door opens, a shod foot appears. Consequence: something icky happens. Come on people, this is beyond cliche.
CHEERS always threw curve balls, which is what made it fresh and funny. Even more astounding is the way the show could make it work with the characters and plots without seeming forced, formulaic or gimmicky.
Well, aside from "Norm" entrances, but even those were worth it.
The Norm entrances are so ingrained in my memory that I kept wanting to shout "Norm!" whenever Mr. Moore said "[good] morning, everybody" as he walked into the IHP classroom on Head of the Class.
Speaking of the Aristocrats joke, I just started watching the Gilbert Gottfried documentary, Gilbert, and was surprised to learn his act was clean until he started telling that joke.
Oh man. William Hurt. One of the best dramatic actors of his generation. So many great performances.
RIP
It's not just sitcoms. A few years ago I was watching...I think it was "Mission Impossible 2" with my cousin. We got to the "end" of the movie where Tom Cruise kills the bad guy. I told my cousin that this isn't really the end. (Spoiler Alert) I said this guy is going to pop back in at the last second and Tom will have to kill him again. That's exactly what happened. My cousin was surprised and asked me if I had seen "M.I.2" before. I told him no. But, that scenario was already a cliché and I could see it coming a mile away.
I tend to disagree with Ken that the problem is "laziness." His first assertion that the staff is no good is probably closer to the truth. A lot of these people are where they are not because they are particularly funny or talented. But because they worked harder than, or out lasted their competition. Sort of a form of attrition. Don't get me wrong. I'm not denigrating hard work. That's part of what it takes to be successful. But that's not the only thing. So,these are the people who wind up as writers.
One example. When I was in college one of the guys at the radio station was very skilled and talented. He could been very successful in radio. But broadcasting was his "fun" elective. His major was business or something more traditional. He didn't go into radio while others with less talent did.
Plus I know a few actors that aren't that good, but they get parts because they go on auditions and network and do the leg work. Meanwhile, better actors aren't getting those roles because they don't hustle like the afore mentioned others.
M.B.
P.S. PLEASE excuse the length of this comment.
"And yet, I bet if you watch a CHEERS today there will still be jokes that surprise you and make you laugh."
I can vouch for that. I watch Cheers on the Decades channel every night before I go to sleep. I've seen every episode before, most of them twice. And yet I still laugh out loud, more than I do for modern sitcoms. The jokes are still fresh, and the lines are still unpredictable.
Or maybe I'm just losing my memory.
Bloodworth is not the only one who can anticipate clichés/tropes/etc.
My daughter, who had written 200,000 words of prose fiction (by age 16), has consumed thousands of hours of film and TV, and made three actually-competent short films (by age 18), tells me she can tell her friends what's going to happen at the movies.
Even "dad" can do this. I knew Mrs. Maisel was in trouble when she "riffed" on Shy's closet (its contents) and "Judy Garland" get up.
What's funny?
The first episode of MURDERVILLE, though most of the laughs come from the premise that the guest star doesn't know the script and the adlibs which follow.
Several chuckles can be obtained out of GHOSTS and HOME ECONOMICS. I'm looking into SHINING VALE at the moment for much needed emergency extra laughs. I'll report on that later. Maybe.
All this is to say it just sadly means I need three to four shows to get one funny show.
Post a Comment