Christmas Funnies

So before I start actually posting again about, you know the things I post about, I thought I'd share a little holiday story about my grandmother. You see my grandmother is one of the sweetest and earnest ladies I know and every Christmas she gives me the most wonderful gift of all: the gift of puzzlement. She's downright unpredictable. I mean we aren't talking like a sweater no 22 (wow) year old would wear, we're talking about a gift with no precedent in law, in history, or in conceivability.

A necessary preliminary though: when my family was opening up presents Christmas morning there were five tubes all exactly the same under the tree--one for each member of the family. My parents already knew what was inside and once my sister and I picked up the tubes we knew immediately as well. My Dad had won a 5 pack of Pringles and instead of just putting them in the cupboard we each got one wrapped. I was amused because the dog had gotten one.

Later my grandmother came over for dinner, bringing with her the presents I had been anticipating for a few weeks. You see last year, my grandmother had, among several other very nice things, wrapped and gifted me a twelve pack of puddings. The sheer randomness of this gift (especially do to my large disinterest in pudding as a whole) had filled me with joy. That same year she had also purchased my cousin an inflatable camouflaged seat cushion. I was/still am sick with envy.

I tore into the this years presents and discovered a 5 pack of Pringles, providing me in total with more than a year's supply of Pringles. But this was only an appetizer. Next she handed me a grocery bag. She apologized: "I forgot your birthday until this morning, so this is just some stuff from around the house." Now I was stoked. The first of two small packages was a deck of Uno cards. "Have you ever played that before?" I had. In fact one of the most prevalent memories I have of my grandmother are afternoons full of raisins, Racko, and Uno. Often vicious versions of all three. All this of course is nothing compared to the final package: a homemade cardboard box containing all the small change she had around the house. "There's some shiny ones in there."

I love my grandmother and don't think for a minute she's simple--she's the opposite. She's cunning. At her age I can only hope to be half as wily. No longer able to skateboard, skydive, DDR, or compete in the UFC, I too will amuse myself with the bewilderment of others. Perhaps dress up as a sea captain, spend my day at the local Walmart incorrectly using nautical terms, and eventually get forcibly removed by security, giving me the rest of the evening to sew the next day's carrot costume. For instance.

But that's the future. Right now I need to go eat some Pringles and roll some coins.

Now Santa Clause 3: What a Holiday Classic

Surprisingly, there has not been a whole slew of Christmas postings on my part despite both the abundance of time I have on my hands and the ammount of Christmas cheer I'm pounding back every night.

Apologies but I really have nothing biting or insightful to say regarding Christmas laughs. Unlike Halloween, which is not known for yucks, Christmas is a time of year when people do want to be all jolly like, so there are dozens upon dozens of painfully obvious quality comedies. I feel a little lame because I don't have any sort of obscure or indie comedy to suggest, but I thought I'd list the things I like to watch just because my Halloween entry was ever-the-so-popular.

Futurama Xmas Story and A Tale of Two Santas. Xmas Story is one of the finest Futurama episodes available, and because of my reluctance to watch it at any other time than Xmas, all the jokes stay unwarn. Seriously there is a good joke every 4 seconds. Then A Tale of Two Santas, well, has this:I'm also quite a fan of Merry Christmas Mr. Bean. The toy manger and band conducting scenes are pretty chuckle worthy whether you loathe or love the guy. There's also the Muppet Christmas Carol which is funny enough and makes my heart grow a little with nostalgia. And The Venture Bro's Christmas special is both brief and funny, so if you have ten minutes you should check it out.

Then obviously if you still haven't listened to me, maybe you should watch the Extra's Christmas special and while your at it the British Office's Christmas special aswell.

Regarding the classics, my favourites have always been The Grinch and Peanuts. The Grinch is funny enough, has some classicly amusing Doc Suess lines, and that wicked Grinch theme song. Peaunts isn't all that funny but makes up for it by being the fucking peanuts special. And who doesn't like that little dude on the piano hating on Lucy? Also the music is absolutely killer--every year before Christmas break we'd watch this in music class. My teacher loved him some Vince Guaraldi.

So those are my recommendations for your Christmas viewings. I hope you have something to watch with a little more comedy obscurity cred. Perhaps Father Ted or Blackadder? I really wish I had a punchline here.

Whatever. Merry Crimmas!

MIT... a guy...

I found this interesting little video on ill doctrine (a pretty sweet hip hop vlog) where Jay Smooth talks about the ethics of satire.



He's right about it being very easy to just make fun of someone for a laugh. We've all been there (humour me please) where we've said something sorta mean about some random person to get a laugh and then the person turns out to be like no armed or something. But that's really a different issue than mocking celebrities who do make their lives very much part of their ad campaigns (check out the Extras Christmas Special). So it becomes a little trickier, like he says, to know if the respective star has forfeited their right to not be comedically objectified by, you know, saying things like this.

If you got time also check out the ill doctrine video on CNN and WWE.

Walk Hard looks like Shit

Sorry, it does.

When I saw Darjeeling Limited (along with the monkey) they had a few other previews: Juno, which I want to see; Margot at the Wedding, which I probably will see; The Savages, which I really want to see; and Walk Hard, which looks like shit.

Sorry, it does.

And that represents the duality of comedies in my mind. The indie comedrama which offer genuine characters with real moments and then Talladega Nights. I guess Walk Hard has a bunch of people I like from Apatow films and Jack White as Elvis which is pretty cool but a world of muh. I don't plan to see it but this little viral marketing video is actually funny.

This, like everything I usually post, is nsfw.



"Last time I saw Judd run that fast somebody dropped a quarter."

If you haven't already seen the failed casting vids for Knocked Up: Cera and Franco. Also if you're familiar with Undeclared he's used that Mortal Kombat joke before (though it's still a goodin).

ty Stereogum.

Christmas Extras

"Well I was pissed because you called me in early--I was watching a movie."
"Get over it."
"What movie?"
"Oh um, do you know the show Extras? Its Christmas special."
"Ha! You watch celebrity gossip?"
"No no its a British comedy by the guys that did the original British Office. No? Well. The american Office is a remake of a British show created by Stephen Merchant and Ricky Gervais. It only ran for two six episode seasons but they concluded it with a Christmas special and, uh, you're just walking away from me in mid-sentence."
"I'm still listening to you Cam."
"Thank you Jay."
"If only out of politeness."

Extras was a fantastic show, just like its predecessor The Office. If you haven't watched Extras, I don't know why you're wasting your time with my blog, you have more important things to do. Both shows are top-notch comedies not only because they're hilarious but because they use that hilarity to build towards an honest-to-god touching emotional climaxes.

And, just like original Office, Extras was concluded with a feature length Christmas special (just this Sunday) and I was again surprised at how I actually felt those weird human "feelings" as it concluded. The beginning of the special was a little frustrating as it turned Millman into more of a jerk than usual--revealing a pretty petty core personality--and I was afraid the eventual epiphany regarding the error of his ways would just be trite, but I was pleasantly surprised. The necessary "oh I'm a prick" occurred in a non-cliched manner and in a way that's fairly biting of celebrity culture.

I'm continually impressed by how Merchant (who's absolutely brilliant) and Gervais create hilarious TV programs filled with relatively realistic characters and are able to turn all the humour in on itself to be more dramatic than Law & Order tries to be every week.

All in all I'm quite pleased with how this special concluded the series. I actually hope these guys put out something lackluster just so I can have some sort of perspective. I feel weird saying only good things about them.

Also, the show used Sufjan Christmas music. Instant bonus points.

Just a Note on Blog Wars

After his nasty post I thought perhaps I should retaliate in kind, with words drudged dredged up from the most acerbic and condescending part of myself, but then I realized, heh, no one has actually read it but me, why confuse my readers?

*snap* *less of a snap*

Learn to Speak Turkish in Seconds Flat

I saw this over at The Sneeze. It wasn't a post or anything, just an ad on his site.


This makes no sense to me. In what world is this service needed?

Quick! I need to learn Turkish ASAP or else the Earth will be destroyed. If only I could learn like a spy.

Maybe if this was selling Russian or Chinese? I don't mean to be racist but Turkish isn't normally associated in my mind with international espionage. Also I'm left considering the demographic for such an ad. Are blog readers more inclined to purchase speed language learning services?

Why?

You've made a Cuckold out of me

So Dan beat me to the punch on an I Am America (And So Can You!) book review. This could be due to the fact I still haven't read it all yet. I can blame my slow consumption on school work and my secret vampire slaying life, but it's really more of not being overly impressed by it. I agree with most of what Dan says in his review. A lot of what makes Colbert funny is his presentation and reading him just isn't the same. I had the same issue when I read Lewis Black's Nothing's Sacred. You really need to listen to these guys to enjoy their material, reading leaves out a crucial element of their comedy styles.

Another issue I have with the book (and with Colbert actually) is the constant use of satire. Satire is tricky--if you go too far you can come off as pedantic or just eye-roll worthy. I like Colbert, I just prefer the way Stewart lampoons politics and media without overt parody. Both Colbert and Stewart are funny, but Stewart would actually be someone you'd want to have over for dinner. And Colbert's book likely suffered because I enjoyed America the Book so much. Because of its congeniality and varied comedic tone, America the Book is both consistently hilarious and very effective as a piece of political writing .

All that said the book is funny enough. If you like Colbert you'll probably want to read it just out of interest and if you're like me you'll want to own the first edition hard-copy to get that sweet sweet ribbon bookmark.

An Arguement Against Causality

There's nothing I can say to make this right.



What was Alf thinking?

Thanks Shortpacked.

Cuff the Clark and ... George Michael

I was apparently totally screwing around at the beginning of this television season. I'll blame this miss-portunity to Clark and Michael not actually being on TV. The show is hosted online by CBS and stars Michael Cera (Arrested Development, Superbad) and Clark Duke (friend of Cera). Defining the show is a little tricky as it seems to be a documentary crew (hired by Cera and Duke) following the two as they make and attempt to sell the show they are currently filming. Obviously a mocumentary though still a snake eating its own tail. There are ten approx. ten minute episodes that comprise the entire season.

The show centers around Cera and Duke, so their interaction is critical to the success of the show. Both play oddball characters that react unpredictably and without any ounce of social awareness. There is plenty of the awkward humour Cera is so adept at playing (honestly I think he plays awkward better than any actor I've ever seen) and a copious amount of funny guest stars like David Cross, Tony Hale, and Andy Richtor. Also it's cool to see Sam Weir has grown up into quite the young man. Finally it has the best title sequence of any show I've ever seen.

The show isn't the bees-knees of comedy though, it falters more often than it succeeds in the beginning, but as the show progresses it certainly becomes quite enjoyable. My favourite is the penultimate episode and it's certainly worth a gander if you don't feel like watching the show from the start. Check it out.

Thursday Bonus Content (TBC): I had an argument with my cousin regarding Superbad a while ago. My cousin thinks Jonah Hill is going to be the next big comedy star and I unfortunately agree. Hill is capable of funny but so often resorts to bombastic cursing for his laughs, which will likely serve him quite well in his future. However, in that movie and all his other roles, Cera is able to act with such subtlety that his comedy comes not just from his lines but from his idiosyncratic mannerism. This makes his acting and comedy quite engaging for me, unlike the humorous yet relatively unchallenging fuck-yeller Hill who will no doubt be appearing in theatres near you soon enough. That being said, Juno comes out this December if I'm not mistaken.

The Bible is Full of some Badass Mofos

I was trying not to just post links to things that are funny but, hey, the semester is almost over, this is funny, and I've got other things to do than blog at length about the Top 9 Badass Bible Versus. But a quick sample regarding Moses' Egyptian incident in Exodus 2:

"Moses, seen here, is about to murder the hell out of an unsuspecting Egyptian."

"Moses later defeated the Egyptian Pharaoh, who, if we remember correctly, had been using Hebrew slaves to construct a 40-foot-high armored battle suit capable of launching nuclear missiles to anywhere in the world."

Found via Boing Boing. And obvious thanks to *sigh* Cracked.com.

Amiss to Push some Daisies

As I approached my 10am class this morning cancelled notices coalesced in my sleep-blurred vision. My body hit the wall in a last ditch effort to keep from collapsing. I used my head to force myself off the cold brick wall and roll back to a stand. A classmate swore and asked if anyone wanted to go for a beer. Alas society's laws against such a thing.

So I find myself in the student centre, listening to Dub Side of the Moon, and without the book I so crucially need to be reading at the moment. Might as well get off another entry though, the only other thing I could do is school work.

When I was home last so long ago (sorry mom) my mother showed me a television show called Pushing Daisies. I wasn't a big fan, perhaps because my mother was so adamant that I would love it (sorry mom). Even so, the quirkiness lingered in my subconscious. I'm not too sure what triggered the renewed interest but it may have had something to do with having nothing else to watch due to this damned writers strike. I ended up downloading the entire season thus far. My mother turned out to be on to something after all, though I still hate every brand of CSI under The Who (again, sorry).

These are the facts: Ned (the pie maker) has the unique ability to bring dead people back to life. However if he touches them again they re-die, and more severe, if he doesn't re-die them in a minute someone else will die to take their dead-place. Logically he ends up partnering with a PI and waking up murder victims to find out who killed them to collect rewards. When he finds his childhood crush (Chuck) dead and brings her back to life to ask after her murderer, he can't bring himself to kiss and thus kill her. It's very romantic, except they can't ever touch or cause Chuck to let loose her mortal coil, again. Elaborate at first, yes, but essentially it feels like a cross between Desperate Housewives and Dead like Me.

As you can guess the show is pretty damn quirky. It exists in a world not real, but perhaps a world so influenced by mystery novels and unapologeticly sappy romances that things like love at first glance and murder by scratch-n-sniff are perfectly common place. I say this but the wonderful thing about Pushing Daisies is it's ability to acknowledge itself. The PI, Emmerson, is usually there to make a sarcastic comment about how odd the murder is, or how lame Ned and Chuck's conversation is (indeed hanging the lantern I'll admit). Besides the quirky world, the dialogue is some of the most clever on TV. I wouldn't toss this around lightly, and later I'll put my comments in perspective, but the stuff they say on this show is often so clever I get mad that the Office is what it is currently.

In the end I'm surprised. There were all these comedies I was looking forward to this season and have been relatively disappointed by all of them (fyi BNL now provides the theme for the lame duck Big Bang!) and along comes this show I paid no heed to at first and yet proves to be the best new comedy of the season, perhaps even the best show on TV period. Chuck is mediocre, Office faltering, and SVU, well, child abuse and rape can only be funny for so long.

So if you haven't already, watch some Pushing Daisies. It'll make you believe in love again, or at least necrophilia.

Bored Girls and Comedy (Hott!)

Thought I should put up a link to this. I'll keep my opinions on Dane Cook to myself but definitely encourage anyone to check out their local stand-up scene.

Bender Bending Rodríguez's Back, Baby

Shut up friends!, I was cruising around IGN's TV reviews a few days ago. Boy, do they have my ass kicked in review quantity. Though seeing the giant scores they're giving some pretty mediocre Office episodes, I feel somewhat appeased that I'm a fair bit more elitist. *notch*

Anyways I stumbled upon a review of the new Futurama movie, Bender's Big Move. "Shit, they were making those weren't they!" I'd forgotten but started my download almost immediately.

I was hesitant. I loved and do still love Futurama, but that ex-girlfriend who was torn away by moronic TV execs is never the same when she walks back into your life. I mean the beret was cool in high school but when you're pushing 22 it looks a little silly. Also, Family Guy sure has sucked since it came back on the air. Each episode is like a bunch of chimps trying to approximate what Family Guy used to be. Maybe orangutans.

So I watched it. And it was sorta disappointing. I mean it wasn't terrible but it wasn't awesome either. Bender was the source of most of the laughs, which is abnormal as I tend to like the Professor, Zap, or Zoidberg more. Zap was pretty funny but was on screen for about 3 minutes. Some of the oddity has been lost which was always my (everyone's) favourite.

I was also worried that the "movie" would play like four episodes of Futurama pasted together. *cough cough Stewie Griffin: The Untold Story cough.* And surprisingly the plot held up pretty well. I don't want to give too much away but there's time travel. I love multi-layered time travel narratives, especially ones involving time-cops. The story was actually engaging and even had some moderate surprises. I've read some complaints about the Leela-Fry dynamic as tired but frankly has there ever been a television show without the will-they-or-won't-they get-together couple? And if that's been the driving force of the show why wouldn't it be the driving force of the movie? Yes, it's in there and it's sorta lame, but this means to me that the next three Futurama movies will likely be light on the issue. Get it over with first I guess? Whatever. I'm pumped Futurama's back.

In brief: if you like Futurama you were going to watch this anyways, if you don't, then this wont change your (obviously malfunctioning) mind.

But let's face it, comedy's a dead artform. Now tragedy, that's funny!

Comedy for People into Sonic Youth

I found this article via Stereogum. If you like David Cross, Demetri Martin, and indie rock then you'll probably love this article.

That may be untrue. I love those three things and was totally underwhelmed funny wise. I was tickled but I didn't laugh. I was more surprised to find out Keanu Reeves was in a band. I remember hearing about that but the deliciousness must have alluded me at the time because I forgot. I think I need to download a few albums, Willie Shatner is getting a little dusty. (I lie. I still love that WOW pimpin' fool.)

The prospect of getting these two comedians together to listen to music, then provide this sparse two page "interview" certainly seems like a missed opportunity to me. Why not ask Cross why he still thinks The Strokes are cool or Martin about when his new Grapes album is being released? Or at least get them to star in like a Grizzly Bear video? They're the critical darlings of the moment aren't they?

Whatever. Thought you might be interested.

John Hodgman on Boing Boing TV

Honestly what are the odds you read my blog and not Boing Boing? I however am not going to miss an opportunity to pimp John Hodgman.

From the moment I saw Hodgman (or Hodgie as I like to embroider onto pillowcases) in his first Daily Show interview, I've been enamoured. I was pumped to see him even get a much deserved re-occurring role as a their resident expert (here doing a bang-up job explaining net neutrality). Joy springs eternal when his beautiful punim appears on my TV screen. Blah blah blah mac commercials.

The original appearance was actually to promote his book The Area's of my Expertise. It's one of my favourite books, and one of the very few I find LOL-funny. This almanac of complete knowledge is essentially one giant fabrication. Off-hand my favourite parts may be the lobsters (not to be confused with "lobsters") section, the hobo signs section, and typical cyborg mischief. Read this book if you haven't. It's out in paperback now with an expansion of the original 700 hobo-names (which if you want you can listen to Hodgie reciting them all).

Anyways, Boing Boing TV has posted a pseudo-interview with Hodgman in his hotel room. He talks about his new book. Enjoy.



"It did not lead people to worry that I was insane."

He's on strike right now. Bollucks.

Writer's Strike and my Lack of Solidarity

I've been forced to keep writing despite the WGA strike because a) I'm Canadian, b) I'm not a member of the WGA, and c) I don't expect any of my professors to take "I'm on strike" to be a valid reason for an essay not being handed in on time.

Anyways here's a relatively unfunny video from a Daily Show writer about the strike if you haven't seen it yet. (I'm so late to join the party because the internet and I are seeing other people at the moment.) Thus far I'm on the side of the writers. More reading may change my mind but currently it seems like giant corporations could survive reimbursing their writers for what goes online.



They make a good point. However, I find it odd that a lot of the writers are still blogging, especially since the hooplah (how do I know how to spell that?) is actually about online content. I guess they're only striking against writing that makes other people money.

Goodnight, and good luck.

The Darjeeling Limited: If I mispronounce it once more I may be racist

When did Phil Collins become cool? Sorry, lingering confusion.

So this Tuesday I went to see The Darjeeling Limited, because I'm a big fan of Wes Anderson, but not a big enough fan to spend more than $4.25 on a theatre ticket. What do you want?

Anyways, I thought I was going to be pretty disappointed with this movie. My initial reaction to Life Aquatic was disappointment despite my now current and overwhelming tendency to gush about it. Then there was also the relatively mediocre reviews. Critics are pompous and I thought they'd be right behind this film, if they weren't it might actually blow. Apparently I got critics confused with hippsters. Bill Murray isn't really in this one either. I like Bill Murray. Finally, it just seemed like time for him to release a stinker.

But yeah, it was pretty enjoyable. I could chalk it up to low expectations but why ruin a good thing? This makes my heart... feel?

The stand-out feature of all Anderson flicks is that odd aesthetic of his. His movies seem to exist in parallel universes, not like cowboy universes, but universes with strange dialogue and odd ways of speaking. If you've seen one of his movies you'll know what I'm talking about. And that aesthetic is certainly present in this film.

Most of the actors do an admirable job in the film. Owen Wilson is always great in his Anderson roles and he's great in this one too. He's unpredictable and hilarious. Jason Schwartzman's dry acting is normally perfect for Anderson's film, and in Darjeeling he often seems at home, but sometimes he sticks out a little. However, I often need to see an Anderson film a few times to really get into it and so I imagine my complaints with Schwartzman might fade away in after another viewing. Anjelica Huston's performance, however, left a lot to be desired. Her role is pretty important (I won't spoil it) and her rather bland performance hurts the emotional climax of the film. Adrian Brody, though, that dude really surprised me. I've never really cared much for him, as I shy away from big budget academy award seeking movies about Nazis but Brody was absolutely fantastic in this film. He was by far my favourite character and doesn't seem out of place among the Anderson veterans. I hope to see him in further projects.

Ultimately I guess I should discuss whether this film is actually funny or not. It is. Often I was the only person in the theatre laughing (or at least my roommate and I) and so perhaps my sense of humour is part derangement but like all of his films (again) there is some awesome dialogue. I love the way people speak in Anderson films: blunt, concise, and drier than a Zellers clubhouse sandwich. Darjeeling is no different. And humour is used nicely as a contrast to the more somber nature of the character's problems. You feel worse for them because you just laughed at them.

I think the obvious conclusion for this review is that if you like Anderson films then you'll probably like this movie. There isn't anything strikingly new here but I'm not sure if that was what I wanted. Maybe some people are finding his aesthetic tired, but I think this is an issue of how overt it is and thus such an easy criticism. Is evolution about changing your style or is it in improving it? I'm happy with the current state. Ask me in another six films.

P.S. They play the short film made as a pre-cursor to Darjeeling Limited before the movie. This little film includes a very racy seen with one Natalie Portman. So if that's your thing, it's a giant screen man.

I'm not concerned about the monkey, it's the Phil Collins.

So I went to see Wes Anderson's new flick, The Darjeeling Limited. Never mind about that though, I'll blog about it in a few days. First, here's a preliminary:

We were a little late, my roommate and I. As we approached the door we heard Phil Collins' "In the Air Tonight" and on the screen I may have seen a gorilla. My roommate made a grunt of hesitation; so, as we walked into the theatre I commented, "The gorilla is a little much."
"It's not the gorilla but the Phil Collins."
"That's what was off putting for me at first too, but then I saw the man in the gorilla suit."
"To each his own."

Well, we picked a seat and watched the rest of the ad.



Apparently this came out in August, so apologies if this is old news for you. I just saw this tonight and it's seriously "the crazy." That said, it may be one of my favourite commercials of-all-time despite the fact it advertises not for drums, Phil Collins, or rhythmically inclined grey back gorillas, but chocolate bars?

Beckett would have been confused.

For those who wanted to own this as I did, I've got a high quality download right here. Enjoy.

The Bloggies

Blog + Dundies (The Office S02E01)

I figured everyone was wondering which blog I was voting for in the funniest blog category for the 2007 weblog awards. Don't worry, daddy's here.

I'm voting for The Sneeze. Check out his post on Dominoes Pizza. Quite amusing.

For best comic strip I actually voted for Penny Arcade. An obvious choice, I know, but they are continually funny in both post and comic. Currently the leader is xkcd, which is I used to really dig but hasn't made me really laugh in a while. So I voted with consistency.

Do your cyber-civic duty and go vote. Or don't.

Crisis of Faith (that sounds so emo)

So I had a conversation with a gentleman on Friday in which my authority as a comedy critic was contested. The argument boiled down to whether I, as someone who has not watched Cheers or The Honeymooners extensively, had the right to be a critic regarding sitcoms. Obviously I argued that I did, but I may have also lost the argument.

My friend, who I'll call Tim, argued that since I was not well versed in the history of the sitcom, or at least the successes and thus formative influences, I would not be fully aware of what new sitcoms were doing inside the sitcom genre. This was likened to literature. Could a writer respectively analyse a work of literature without studying the works which were of direct influence, or even further could a writer respectively analyse a work without reading the major works in literature? Those studying literature are specifically taught surveys of canon so that they can (at least to some degree) better analyse/understand/contextualize any piece of literature. Tim did not deny me the right to have and support an opinion, but merely that I do not necessarily have the authority to offer an educated critique of sitcoms. This is a very strong point.

I, however, would still like to argue my case. This is of course unfair to Tim as he will not be able to offer a response or even clarify my potentially unintentional strawman-ed rendition of his argument. But I will anyways.

The problem with his argument to me is the requirement of a historical background of a genre to evaluate new instances of it. I don't disagree that a knowledge of the past can greatly help your analytical abilities, but I don't think this is absolutely imperative. I think you can construct an analyses divorced of a great deal of context (of course not all context, as would humour even work in a vacuum?). That said, Tim is very right in the quality variances in evaluations with and without context. In academic articles it is very important to discuss the context of one's arguments (why they're such a chore to read). The context provides authority. The author has read and engaged the historical and critical backing of the issue s/he is now writing about, thus his/her argument is proven to be (hopefully) well informed. There is no reason this concept shouldn't be applied to comedy.

But the issue comes down to this for me. I don't find Cheers all that funny. Neither do I find The Honeymooners too enjoyable. And I've seen enough episodes to make these judgement calls. More so, I am not writing my critiques in vacuums. I haven't ignored these foundational shows. And the pluralization is the key. This isn't a few writings, movies, or albums, this is multiple seasons of a television show. Cheers had almost 250 episodes. That's a lot of hours to spend watching a show I don't like so I can know a little more about the sitcom genre. And here's the thing--I don't think it'd matter. I've watched many other sitcoms, ones that weren't on when I was 7, that were heavily influenced by Cheers. And that goes even more so for The Honeymooners. Yes, Seinfeld is greatly influenced by The Honeymooners, but what aspect of the show have I not picked up on from other shows (in content and form) and from watching the freakin Flintstones?

Ultimately though, I think we need to consider critiques and analyses in terms of a conversation. When I engage a sitcom, a comedian, or a movie I offer my analysis, which is by no means definitive. And I would not expect any worthwhile critic to say otherwise. When we write about any topic we are engaging in a conversation (one that perhaps takes place over some length of time). When someone writes a book on Milton, s/he engages in a conversation about Milton. Other writers will then engage those ideas. This may not happen as much in comedy analysis, merely because there is yet to be vast academic work in the area, but this does not mean that the project is not the same. So Tim with his greater knowledge of Cheers could offer an argument about The Big Bang, and reveal elements of the show I, with my "ignorance" of Cheers, would miss. This would not at all be unlike the conversation that occurs about Milton. (Okay it's way different, but not in terms of project.) Anyone can be a critic here, it's merely how good of a critic. Tim might be a better critic about comedy, but he doesn't maintain a blog on the topic. I wish he would, then we could blargue until our fingers were raw. And the comedy community would be the better for it. If even slightly.

I don't intend this post to be about me winning an argument, it is supposed to be about me trying to figure out how I (or anyone) can discuss comedy on a critical level. Do the same issues of literature or music apply to comedy? This is a difficult question, even more so with this broad definition of comedy. Perhaps you can construct necessary canon pieces with comedy films, but in television, with shows involving more than an hour total watch-time, can you still construct that same idea about canon? And then certainly with the cultural pervasiveness of some of the television comedies you have to consider how viewers acquire a comedy education. Everyone, whether a comedy scholar or not, gets a great deal of I Love Lucy references. Further, so much of how sitcoms are made is built upon previous success--so by watching Home Improvement, I've watched Family Ties. And all this hasn't even begun to address how these issues relate to stand-up.

I don't necessarily have any concrete answers to the issues I've raised despite the lengths I've gone to above. Unfortunately these issues seem to be argued about at 1am in apartment buildings rather than in any written text, denying me that conversation I believe leads to better answers than the above. Bummer.

Here's a link to something actually funny.

Spinal Tap meets Gen Y

Or is it Z at this point? My youth pastor was unclear.

Now I've never been a big fan of musical comedy. I mean Barenaked Ladies were cool for a bit (yes they were!) because their humour was silly and their music folky, but now they're some rock-pop band that sing about absurd chimpanzees. And then song parodies. Ugh. Worse is a comedian with a guitar and comedy songs! When I see a comedian grab a guitar I immediately have my finger over whatever button will silence his/her tired bit. There are of course exceptions to every rule. Demetri Martin uses a guitar in his act and is consistently hilarious, but he's really punctuating jokes with the guitar rather than composing funny songs.

But My Chemical Romance, they shatter all my preconceptions.

MCR (yes I'm hip) is musical comedy at its best. Instead of trying to make jokes in song, their entire body of work and personas are the joke. Irony is the strangest thing, you can take garbage and bring it up to a level of appreciable quality by simply placing your tongue firmly in cheek. MCR does this to a tee.

I was confused at first with MCR. I'll embarrassingly admit I didn't get it. I just thought they were lousy. But when their sophomore album, The Black Parade, came out I finally "got it." Their video for the title track is what swung me. Watch it not as a pretentious emo video but as a group of self-aware guys making a pretentious emo video. Then you have a comedy masterpiece. The song brilliantly starts off with soft/sad piano music, then after the mention of a "marching band" a snare march beat is added. This all occurs underneath Gerard Way singing about pseudo-christ imagery. Then there's an obvious Queen-stealing ramp-up with Way singing his heart out and finally, at like a minute and a half, we get the fast emo-punk business. And that's just the song. The video has black and white cinematogrophy, circle wipes, futuristic macabre imagery, dramatic slow-motion band performance, and my favourite--hand reaches to the sky.

Of course for this sort of thing to work the acting has to be impeccable. And it is. Not once do I see the ounce of self-awareness that would ruin the entire joke--the only thing you see in Way's eyes are a dude desperately trying to project overwrought emotion. Check out the video for Famous Last Words. This video really features Way's ability. He spends the entire video an inch away from the screen screaming his heart out ("I am not afraid to keep on living / I am not afraid to walk this world alone"), tearing at his face, and smashing his mic stand to the sand. The rest of the band does a great job too, being way too into the music, swinging their guitars around or flipping their hair dramatically as they hit the crash. Also!, there is fire everywhere. It's a metaphor for the fire raging inside their heart sleeves.

Despite what the critics said, MCR really evolved on their second album. They grabbed a hold of their silliness and took it to a new level of pretencion--the concept album. You can't get more pretentious than concept albums. (Okay you can, if you're already a prog-metal band. I'm looking at you Dream Theatre!) And further, it's a concept album about death. You might judge them for being obvious with their choices. Yes it's easy to do a sophomore concept album about death as a ironic emo band, but since when would an emo band not be obvious? These guys have to keep up with actual emo bands, like The Used, that are taking this shit to unprecedented levels of pretentiousness.

Pick up/download their albums and hit up all their videos on youtube. They're full of laughs by some of the smartest comedy musicians of our generation. I'm interested to see where these guys go when this whole emo fad sputters out. I'm hoping for overproduced mega-indie-bands. These guys need to be taken down a few notches.

Scary Movie wasn't Funny.

I dislike horror movies. In fact I don't like terror in any form. Probably just a disposition developed from having my family killed by a mask wearing serial killer in front of my very eyes when I was six... I miss you mommy.

Still, I do love the Halloween. I love to dress up and act a little silly. Given my love/hate relationship with the holiday I thought I’d list some not so obvious things you could watch this Halloween to keep you in the spirit but don't render you incapable of taking out the garbage at 3 in the morning. I hate the fucking Ring.

But yeah. After you’re done with Shaun of the Dead, Evil Dead II, Young Frankenstein, and the Simpsons Halloween Specials, maybe you might consider something off this list:

Monster Squad – I loved this movie when I was a kid. A bunch of kids take on all the classic movie monsters. I haven’t seen it in years as I lost my of TV recorded VHS copy, so I’m not sure it’s actually good or not. However I do remember this line which is enough for this movie to make it onto the list: “Wolfman’s got nards!”

Big Trouble Little China – Kurt Russell as a self-aggrandizing anti-hero who finds himself mixed up with magic, monsters, kung-fu, and Victor Wong. You might guess this one’s cheesy.

Bubba Ho-Tep – Okay: Bruce Campbell, as an old man convinced he’s Elvis Presley, teams up with an elderly (and black) JFK to save their retirement home from an ancient mummy who sucks souls out of residents’ rearholes. … Yeah.

Little Shop of Horrors – Rick Moranis stars in a musical comedy featuring a giant man eating plant. There are also hilarious appearances by Steve Martin as a masochist dentist and Bill Murray as the sadist that can’t get enough dental work. Did I mention Rick Morranis sings?

Not a movie but the episode called “A New Man” is a pretty great episode of Buffy that is often overlooked. Some of the comedic timing in this show is genius. It was neither written nor directed by Joss Whedon so there’s little lecturing.

And finally you gotta check out the first movie I had to be taken out of crying. (For your information the second was Jurassic Park because, well, there was a giant man eating dinosaur running around eating Jeff Goldblum. The third was Holy Man which had a cringe inducing Eddie Murphy running around eating at Jeff Goldblum's career.) But yes, the first movie I had to be taken out of was, honest to god, Ernest Scared Stupid. I remember (i.e. construct) the look of utter befuddlement on my cousin’s face. “Wait he’s scared of Ernest? We’re leaving? You have to be joking.” My cousin and I don’t speak anymore.

But seriously that movie freaked me out and I still find it a little chilling. Goblins are scary okay. I learned to love the movie later, likely having nothing to do with proving that I was becoming “a man.” Again I haven’t seen this one in years but I’m sure there’s some decent simple slapstick and good natured life lessons in here that we can all enjoy. Or you could just laugh at how much of a sissy I was to be taken out of the theatre crying at an Ernest movie.

If there’s anything I missed why don’t you post a comment? We could be like buddies.

Comedy Network Low-Jacked Comedy Central.

So I read on Stereogum that The Daily Show has posted a new website disconnected from Comedy Central. Alright let's blog about that. First maybe I should check out the site though. Oh no we won't. Things are involved.

Seriously try out this link to www.thedailyshow.com. Note the address that appears in your bottom status bar. Now click on it. Well it seems like you've been re-directed to a site you had no intentions on visiting. Strange.

Hmm. Let's try www.comedycentral.com. Hey look that's re-directed too.

Just a quick explanation: The Comedy Network is a Canadian cable television channel that plays various funny (and often unfunny) shows. Comedy Central is an American cable television channel that does the same. The Comedy Network syndicates a lot of shows off Comedy Central (like The Daily Show). Up until recently one was able to access either network's websites to watch streamed content. No longer. Here's a CTV news story about the issue (be aware that CTV owns The Comedy Network).

So what's going on here? This has happened to me before when trying to gain access to a certain site hosting bittorrent files. The site blocked my access because of the different laws in Canada in regard to copyrights. I wasn't really aware sites were able to block sites based on country of origin. And now this is what The Comedy Network is doing. They are re-directing Canadian traffic to their own site--essentially blocking Canadian access to Comedy Central on the net.

So what's the deal with this? I don't want to rant but where does The Comedy Network get off blocking perfectly reasonable access to Comedy Central? Blah blah blah Google and China, but like Comedy Central is an American channel that can only be accessed through illegal methods in Canada. Their website, however, was a way to watch Comedy Central content not available on The Comedy Network and further had a greater selection of streamable content.

According to the deal The Comedy Network will have access to all of Comedy Central content but will they be hosting that all on their site? For instance can I stream content from a show The Comedy Network doesn't air but is still aired on Comedy Central? And am I going to have access to the archives that The Daily Show's new site hosts? This was an awesome feature that I don't see on The Comedy Network. Also I'm not really able to stream any of the content because it requires a plug-in that won't install correctly onto my computer (that one's probably on me though).

But beyond these issues of comparable content access, I think this whole tactic is a rather cheap way to promote that their "website doesn't suck anymore." I don't really care that it doesn't suck. I may not use it regardless because, yeah, I too am that petty. So, please don't block my access to websites whether you claim to offer the same content or not. This is America dammit and I should be able to go wherever I want on the internet. Be that porn, porn, or porn.

Segues and Louis C.K.

Oh yeah remember your blog? Shit.

The plan was a segue. Lucky Louie to Louis C.K. but then I sorta got distracted and 12 days later yay new post. But apologies.

So, Louis C.K..

My first Louis C.K. experience was the sudden discovery of what I'll look like when I'm middle-aged. Once I got past his dashing good looks I realized that C.K. was also a pretty funny comedian. What makes C.K. at first so appealing (i.e. hilarious) is his natural presentation. If, for example, you found yourself at shrimp-fest with Louis his routine might seem like a pleasant (i.e. hilarious) conversation. In fact, only after becoming more familiar with his routines did I realize a lot of the funny things he said during interviews were just jokes he uses on stage.

This natural delivery not only keeps C.K.'s comedy from seeming contrived but also compliments nicely the matter he discusses. C.K. talks frankly (seriously frankly) about his marriage and his family. He says things about his daughters that I've never heard from a father before, but things which immediately seemed like that which a parent thinks but never says. "My daughter is an asshole." Anyone that's ever spent time with a child knows that this is too often true, but who has ever heard someone on TV say it? I cringe to use the cliché that it's funny because it's true but, seriously, kids are assholes. I was.

I heard or read an interview with C.K. in which he said his earlier comedy was clever but that it didn't really matter at all. And he's not being cocky, his jokes are moving past the tired comedy clichés about the family into a discussion about family (that at least to me) seems pretty honest. I laugh because C.K.'s jokes are new and shocking, but further I think about the topics a little differently after. I grow!?

Aaron posted a link in a comment to my last post that's a great sample of C.K.'s comedy (as usual: beware of content). Also he has a new HBO special you could probably acquire through bittorrent.

Lucky You

Another sitcom? I'm hoping you are not yet completely exhausted by my current TV comedy fixation because I've got one more sitcom to talk about (promise.). My motives today however are not to review a new sitcom though, it's to finalize (ha!) my discussion on sitcoms in some way. So why don't we start talking about Lucky Louie?

Lucky Louie isn't a new show this season, in fact the show's actually been cancelled for a while now, but I want to mention it as a contrast to all the sitcoms strewn across your television channels. Lucky Louie actually aired on HBO, making it the first sitcom to be produced by the channel, and upon watching any episode of the show you'll understand why its HBO and not CBS, Eric. In brief: Louie and wife deal with the problems of their marriage and 4yr old daughter. Sounds like a generic sitcom but... well watch this clip. This little scene sums up the show for me. It starts out deceptively like any sitcom with the set and pan in, then even sort of a familiar joke, but then as the conversation continues we start to go further than a regular sitcom would normally go. His daughter's incessant questions almost lead to a monologue of self contemplation for Louie. This is the very first scene of the pilot, brilliantly introducing the show.

The show gets a lot filthier as well. Lucky Louie takes on issues that sitcoms skirt around because they aren't wide viewership friendly and discuss them blatantly with copious amounts of cussing. I can remember conversations about Louie's eating problems, masturbation, and a lengthy scene between the couple regarding anal sex (seriously beware of content). A large driving force for the show is the problems with Louie and Kim's marriage and provides moments of honest realism and yet still moments of great comedy.

I discussed the racy nature of the show but I think I need to stress this point further. This show is absolutely filthy. If things aren't getting dirty at home, the moment his friend Rich walks on screen you're guaranteed to hear some things that will make you uncomfortable to be watching it with your mom. (Seriously this is how I started watching the show, with my mom. My mom and dad actually became fans of the show--an unexpected outcome and one that has required near limitless numbers of mental blockings.) Sometimes this perversity is a strong point for the show. In an argument about having another child Louie explains "my dick is too aware that your pussy is a chamber of financial ruin." This line was the reason I started watching the show: honest, crude, and funny. However!, sometimes the perversity just goes on without a point. Just a long conversation about masturbating with his friend which isn't particularly funny and, what?, shows us that men talk about masturbating? I saw that on The Drew Carey Show.

The show is very interesting in how it takes the sitcom genre and exploits it to be sometimes movingly honest, yet still manages to be consistently funny. The writing however really kills Lucky Louie. The writers (mainly Louis C.K.) didn't know the strong points of the show and so for every scene of hilarious reality inside the most unrealistic television show form, we had long uncomfortably dirty and unfunny scenes. HBO didn't renew the show and it's a shame because a second season can often drastically improve a show (remember the first season of Seinfeld?). I would have been interested in seeing the show Lucky Louie could have been. But alas.

Check it out if you aren't too bashful and if your mom's out of room.

Return of The Office

I wanted this to be a positive post. For earnest I swear. However, I got home today planning on writing today's blog and found not the new Iron and Wine CD I ordered in the mail-box BUT my roommate's damn Scary Go Round book. Also!, I wasn't overly impressed by The Office last Thursday.

I watched The Office's (hour long!) premier after the (hour long!!) premier of My Name is Earl. And this was actually the problem for me. MNiE is trying something new this season that actually has me looking forward to the next episode. They've thrown Earl in jail and thus the show's formula has been tossed about too. I hand it to the show, they've shown a fresh willingness to renew their format. This might be something The Office could learn from?

Now I'm not ignorant. The Office has had some shake-ups, like relocating Jim in the start of season 3. This was a good move, one I thought they could have milked a little longer. I enjoyed the alt. branch a lot and the scene that occurred between Jim and Pam over the phone was quite touching. But the two offices merged and Jim came back with Karen which was essentially a reversal of our old love triangle. This isn't really the dynamic that troubles me though. Pam and Jim have always been The Office's strong suit and more and more the rest of the cast is becoming increasingly fleshed out and hilarious. Just take a look at Creed and Darryl. Oddly the problem I'm having with The Office is its root: Michael Scott.

Indeed. Michael's antics started to wear on me a little last season, his character seeming to become sort of a caricature of itself, and this season's opener didn't show any signs of relieving the problem. I know it may be an odd move to cite the main character and premise of the show as its main problem but that's what I'm finding consistently makes me reserve all out praise for the show. For instance: this new episode's nude scene. Honestly, this joke was lame. Pam walks in on Michael changing after he told her to come in. I didn't even smirk at this joke. Blurred out man parts aren't really funny on their own, especially not in a show that is pretty good about avoiding tired humour.

After all this though, the episode was pretty decent. There were plenty of good (humorous and sweet) moments between Jim and Pam, and the rest of the cast had some pretty good moments too (taking off for a beer during the run), but Michael was unforgivably annoying. Yes, he drove the story forward, but he used to do that while still making me laugh. Michael used to be a doofus that was trying hard to be cool but now he's this zany clown that the writers seem to be trying to have out-do himself each episode. I think they should take a hint from MNiE's writers (did I just write that!?) and try to mix things up a little more by focusing on other secondary characters or by having Michael be the straight man for once.

Remember though: this was just the first episode of season 4; there is still so much to like about The Office; I didn't get my CD.

Not with a Bang but with a Whimper

The next sitcom I downloaded was The Big Bang Theory on CBS. This show is created by the dude behind Two and a Half Men as well as Dharma and Greg. I was surprised to find the pilot was directed by the same cat who directed the pilot for Back to You, making for a heavy James Burrows slant to Now that's Comedy. In brief: TBBT throws two nerdy geniuses into social interaction with (you guessed it!) a generic hotty from across the hall. I went into this show with low expectations as I saw it metacritiqued in the yellow. And after watching the pilot I do agree with this consensus but I will admit, however, that this show has a lot going for it (even if only potentially).

First off, this show needs to ditch it's laugh track or risk having me watch the show closed-captioned. It was honestly distracting/annoying/grating/sob-inducing. As a society I think we've moved beyond the need for laugh tracks but, as this is a sitcom, I guess it's to be expected? If we can't rid ourselves of these antiquated techniques then for god's sake at least use a live studio audience. This provides some semblance of proportioned laughs forced upon a viewer. Moving on!

The majority of jokes in TBBT are pretty obvious and really only function on a familiar level. Oh yes nerds like Star Wars, hi-larious. At one point our duo are debating interaction with the new move-in. Leonard comments on their closed circle of friends. Sheldon defends himself by saying he has 318 friends on myspace and Leonard "quips" that he does but has never met a single one. These lines led my roommate (ignorant of the show's origins) to ask "who are these guys the Dharma and Greg of nerds?" Too many jokes simply play off nerd cliches and the attempts at physics references usually come off as obvious or wikipedia-ed.

That all being said however! the dialogue in the script is actually quite well written. The manner in which Sheldon and Leonard talk is engaging and makes me wish for funnier jokes. Secondly, the acting is pretty superb. Sheldon in particular nails his wordy lines and adds plenty of sarcastic disdain sending my heart all a flutter. The characters probably flirt with familiarity but I think the acting brings them past that mostly. It's the acting that really saves this show, elevating mediocre jokes into laugh-earners!

So, I'm conflicted. Too many lame easy jokes to call TBBT good but such deftly acted and engaging characters to write off immediately. What's a boy to do? I wish perhaps they could hand the show over to some people that are willing to move beyond humour mined from library joke books, but I've learned wishing does nothing in regards to the fate of comedy shows. I really want this show to get better. I'll tune-in likely to only find heartbreak.

Ditch the damned laugh track though, yeesh.

The Show's called Chuck

I was really looking forward to this new show Chuck. In brief: charismatic and comical nerd gets involved with secret agent nonsense and some generic smoking hotty. I missed it on Monday night the same way I missed Heroes. What the hell was I thinking? Oh yes, I was hoping to see Emily Haines dance. I (again) was disappointed.

And! the trailer was quite promising: ninja jokes, computer jokes, Batman jokes, videogame jokes, CHiPs jokes... But I just finished my downloaded pilot and honestly, what the hell NBC?

I'm not going to say there weren't any good jokes, in fact those jokes listed above were all pretty respectable, but most were in the trailer. (When did TV shows start having trailers btw?) If you watched the trailer there's a moment where Chuck is beat-boxing "Vicky Vale!" but looks up to see the "smoking hotty" and so stops the beat-boxing and drops the phone all so suddenly--a well acted and timed physical comedy beat. The full length show also has a pretty funny follow up joke that's not included in the trailer. So there are for sure some quality moments in the show but this quality isn't all that consistent. For instance, the whole buddy aspect, which is a main element of the show, fails pretty much outright.

The buddy system is just as important in comedy as it is in... bench pressing I guess? But I mean it's a pretty standard mechanism, two characters playing off each other to generate the laughs. This particular instance has a wise cracking lead and the more-of-a-loser-than-the-lead foil. But this foil, named Morgan, is more of a loser than the lead, but he's never really funny. The jokes involving him fall flat 95% of the time. Not since Kanye and Myers have we had such dead weight in a team (Myers here being the dead weight of course).

My therapist(s) say that I need to work on being more optimistic though, so I am willing to come back to this show a few more times in hopes things will tighten up. It won't be hard for Chuck to set itself apart from the new comedies this season so I may find myself downloading it consistently out of plain boredom. Also there could be more ninja jokes. I love ninja jokes.

I don't have a clever sign off line, dammit.