conspiracy by bad comics?
Moderators: bingolong, Jennifer, tamra
Forum rules
Spam is not allowed. All spammers will be blocked and reported to appropriate agencies.
Spam is not allowed. All spammers will be blocked and reported to appropriate agencies.
conspiracy by bad comics?
I've noticed a trend in norcal comics, that there is a group of really non funny, no charasimatic comics who go around calling any comic who get's a laugh a hack. We have one really bad comic like that in sac who has been doing it for years and still only get's titters. Then I've been noticing comics like that actually getting tv time (don't get me wrong, not saying all comics getting tv time are like that). And I wonder if it's some kind of evil sucky comic conspiracy. It sort of reminds me of the book the Fountainhead. Not to say that deadpan comics can't be funny, because allot of them are awesome, I'm talking about really bad comics who aren't funny, and it's never their fault, it's always that the audience is stupid etc etc. These are the same guys who actually do hack material that's been done to death on top of it all.
Shane God Damned Murphy
shanescomedy.com
shanescomedy.com
Re: conspiracy by bad comics?
Murphdogg,
Many factors play into booking comedians on television. The producers already have a preconcieved idea of the persona they wish to promote. Funny is a plus...but not always the deciding factor. You can be freaking hilarious, but too blue or too fat or too controversial. We comedians like to believe that talent conquers all, but it clearly doesn't.
And to those comedians hatin' on you because you get laughs -- sour grapes. Dont' worry about other comics dissing you, worry when they stop doing it! Envy is a great barometer for the progress you're making...If everybody says nice things about your act, chances are -- you're not funny!
One more thing about hackdom and the art of stand up. Every genre of art has a certain structure or formula to it. Hence, it being classified as a genre. The trick is to stay within that framework and be original at the same time. Expand the genre....that's what Richard Pryor did.
Pryor didn't create the concepts of set-up and punchlines. Nor was the call-back uniquely his. Those have been around for ages. W.C. Fields and Bert Williams were doing it during vaudeville and other comedians years before that. What Pryor did do, however, was take the genre -- the artform and used it to make social commentary! That was his genuis. Before Pryor, comedy was a diversion from our problems. Afterwards, it became a means of confronting them. But I digress.
You dont' have to be like Pryor. You have to be you. I'm just trying to make a larger point. Mixing the traditional with the unconventional is one surefire way not to be a hack. And considering the fact you referenced Ayn Rand and comedy in the same post, something tells me you're a long ways off from hackdom....
Now, if you'll excuse me...its' time for my meds...
Many factors play into booking comedians on television. The producers already have a preconcieved idea of the persona they wish to promote. Funny is a plus...but not always the deciding factor. You can be freaking hilarious, but too blue or too fat or too controversial. We comedians like to believe that talent conquers all, but it clearly doesn't.
And to those comedians hatin' on you because you get laughs -- sour grapes. Dont' worry about other comics dissing you, worry when they stop doing it! Envy is a great barometer for the progress you're making...If everybody says nice things about your act, chances are -- you're not funny!
One more thing about hackdom and the art of stand up. Every genre of art has a certain structure or formula to it. Hence, it being classified as a genre. The trick is to stay within that framework and be original at the same time. Expand the genre....that's what Richard Pryor did.
Pryor didn't create the concepts of set-up and punchlines. Nor was the call-back uniquely his. Those have been around for ages. W.C. Fields and Bert Williams were doing it during vaudeville and other comedians years before that. What Pryor did do, however, was take the genre -- the artform and used it to make social commentary! That was his genuis. Before Pryor, comedy was a diversion from our problems. Afterwards, it became a means of confronting them. But I digress.
You dont' have to be like Pryor. You have to be you. I'm just trying to make a larger point. Mixing the traditional with the unconventional is one surefire way not to be a hack. And considering the fact you referenced Ayn Rand and comedy in the same post, something tells me you're a long ways off from hackdom....
Now, if you'll excuse me...its' time for my meds...
Re: conspiracy by bad comics?
mojones,
I heard a bay area comic had been talking smack about me and some other sac comics around the bay area, which can shut doors for you before you have a chance to knock on them, my first reaction was to confront him and slap him like a Indiana pimp, but I couldn't find a corn husk. I agree with you, I think it's about finding your voice. I think I'm slowly but surely finding mine. By the way I know what your thinking I look like the love child of (place any two celbrities here). and what's the deal with (place generic topic here).
I heard a bay area comic had been talking smack about me and some other sac comics around the bay area, which can shut doors for you before you have a chance to knock on them, my first reaction was to confront him and slap him like a Indiana pimp, but I couldn't find a corn husk. I agree with you, I think it's about finding your voice. I think I'm slowly but surely finding mine. By the way I know what your thinking I look like the love child of (place any two celbrities here). and what's the deal with (place generic topic here).
Shane God Damned Murphy
shanescomedy.com
shanescomedy.com
Re: conspiracy by bad comics?
Murphdogg,
Corn husk? You wouldn't be related to Jim Gaffigan by any chance
Corn husk? You wouldn't be related to Jim Gaffigan by any chance
