Characters in Focus [UN] (the non-eyesore version) -- Saturday Night You Bull Sessions

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, [8], 9, 10 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 21:41:50 06/17/04 Thu
Author: CCS
Subject: Characters in Focus [UN] (the non-eyesore version)
In reply to: Patrick Lonergan 's message, "REVIEWS: Uma Thurman 06/12/04" on 18:04:01 06/12/04 Sat

I was thinking about what to do with this review, if there could be a focus to make it a bit different than the typical feedback that comes through. I feel safe in assuming that as writers here, most of us are concerned with details beyond simply whether or not a piece was funny. We're interested in how so. As such, I enjoy finding a certain thing to focus on in a review, and look at that aspect in the sketches. Although I can hardly say one way or another if my review where I posed alternate endings was useful, I can definitely say I enjoyed writing it. This time, I'm going to focus on character, and on how they add, or subtract from a sketch. Can't promise reviewing gold, but we'll see how it goes.

Later note: Heya, if it seems like I'm over analyzing, you're quite likely right. I got in far deeper with this thing than I intended.

----off with a bang----

Jimmy Fallon - Starring in the sketch, he was there to get duped. As a slapstick character you paint him well: energetic, enthusiastic, a tad childish and rather oblivious. You didn't risk the reader's acceptance of the situation by giving him exceedingly stupid lines to overemphasize his oblivity (new word), but at the same time he doesn't really have any jokes to say.
Lorne Michaels - The antagonist of this sketch, he's there to dupe Jimmy. We're used to seeing him deadpan, like you have him doing at the very start with the "Yes, that's nice." Towards the middle you start to lose this and have him actually using exclamation points! I feel also you could have done more using his disposition of insensitivity towards Jimmy to draw out humor.
Finesse Mitchell - He adds to the feeling that there's a conspiracy against Jimmy, but other than that doesn't really do anything but take up space. You needed to find something he could do, for example, ask if he could take over one of Jimmy's now-defunct characters.
Uma Thurman - As the actual host, she's the reveal to Jimmy that he's getting bamboozled. However, this isn't much of a comic reveal to the audience because we already realize Uma and not Jimmy is hosting. Like Finesse, she's kind of a walk-on who's utility disappears as soon as she's done walking on.
Mexican - He's only on for one line, and has no chance to truly develop a character. It is my belief that in this case, all bets are off and something really outrageous should be coming out of his mouth. Concerning the role in this sketch, he's just a placeholder for "very far away place" and therefore could change to whatever need be. Grecian Construction Worker, Japanese Businessman, Amazonian Warrior, anything would work really and so I'd recommend running with whatever you can write the funniest one line remark for. I wrote way more than I should have on this character, so I guess you could shorten all the babble into, "He should have said something funny, not ordinary."

All in all, the dialogue was good and cohesive, but lacked the unexpected, and therefore, rather low on the jokes.

----uma thurman's monologue----

I hate critiquing my own sketches. There's just no safe way to do it. I'd just like to apologize to Jim Bevan who I thought for sure had other pieces available for the update (what happened to the pretty good diner piece you were working on?).

----the torturer----

Announcer - There's really no need to list who's doing the announcing. Typically, movie promo sketches are chopped up into really short scenes with announcer interludes rather than being one whole sketch with the fact that it's a promo being a surprise. This allows you more freedom in the timetable between events in the sketch, which I felt could have been of some help.
Torturer - Sadistic beast, he's obviously here to torture Mr. Jacobs. The fact that he goes by "Torturer," sans "the" in most cases, is a little odd, but irrelevant. Other than delighting in pain and misery, he doesn't seem to have much going on, no ticks that move him beyond an ordinary torturer. Frankly, a tad more enthusiasm and delight in the pain and gore might have helped the comedy, but so far as the story line is presented, he plays his part well enough. And while I'm usually against the cameos, I think this one is fair enough and called for.
Mr. Jacobs - Given a straight-aced torturer, for the most part, I think we needed a wacky Mr. Jacobs. Someone to complain about how guillotines and poison brownies don't actually hurt that much (see below). While he shows Black Knight-style resilience in the beginning, he just doesn't have the brilliant dialogue that went with that classic scene. Even worse, this whole aspect of the sketch is dropped almost as soon as it's gotten off the ground. You could have played upon the torturer having run out of body parts to cut off, or other things, but instead you dump the line and start with the collateral damage. And then once that picks up, its drop it favor of silly torturing, by burning a valuable comic book - a fine comic device for sure, but a complete change of pace from the grotesque opening. And then you give away the secret. Ok, surprise ending, kind of funny. But then you turn around with the movie promo. Now, if the secret was just given out, the major focus of the movie being to extract that one secret, why would it be in the promo? Basically, I'm saying you need to chose one for your surprise ending and not both. If you went the non-surprise-promo-route, then you could get a quick joke in about how it was a mistake to show the audience that in the promo, come see the movie anyway.
Rocko - Just a mechanism for the transport of other characters, there's nothing really funny about him. He could be replaced with a curtain that the torturer drops. In fact, dropping curtains might make for more sudden reveals than having Horatio cart people in. He doesn't take up space though, and for Horatio that's a feat in itself.
Rover - Licking the bloody stumps may be straight from Massive Head Wound Harry, but it's funny nonetheless. Brownie of poison is a boring way to go.
Grandmother - Did you know the guillotine was created not as a torture device, but the exact opposite? It was supposed to be a humane way to kill people - quick and with minimal pain. Far superior to the axe of a headsman. Still there's something spooky about people losing their heads that can be torturous for others to watch. Her beheading heightens the stakes, somewhat. Like the poison brownie, it's so fast, over and done with, that there's very little tension, just shock and blood. Her dialogue is good, but could possibly use a pinch of irony.

----escort to strange----

Man(Gary) - The foil for most of the sketch, he's not completely on his rocker himself, providing an interesting contrast of characters that absorbs all the plot twists with strong dialogue. Gary has more conscience than he'd like, and this makes for great comedy as the escort pulls his heartstrings with sob stories. He's repulsed, but trying real hard to be nice, and this leads to very funny moments such as when he offers the condoms. I think one thing that might have helped solidified the premise of this sketch, however, is if he knew he was getting a hermaphrodite, but thought it meant something else.
Escort(Ginger) - Hooker with a penis. You created some funny dialogue for her and all-in-all characterized her well. I especially liked the southern belle accent you gave her. A prostitute who adopted her kids - hilarious. There were a few spots that weren't working quite so great. First off, I think you misused the word "typecast" about halfway down, as it usually refers to actors and actresses, not people. "Stereotype" might be what you're looking for, or possibly something more like "pigeon-hole." Secondly, I'm not sure I like the silly needs, versus the normal ones. I like the idea of her creating the costs for herself, such as by adopting the kids, but the TiVo just doesn't work as well and almost kills the comic sympathy we feel for her. Finally, I think it would have been really funny if when she's on the defensive about the whole penis thing that she compares her's with Gary's. Nothing too involved, just a quick comic jab.

----the search for the next action star----

Announcer - Not much of a player in this sketch, he mostly adds credibility as a parody by >making it more like the real thing.
Judges - The two seemed more or less interchangeable, but having them double up once again helps with that credibility as a parody thing. Mostly they're set-up for the silly, slightly slapstick contestant responses. Their manipulation of Uma is funny.
Auditioner #1 - They already have a fat guy somersaulting in the commercial for the real thing, but it's al right that it's not a big laugh because he's there to set the tone, which he does.
Auditioner #2 - Small laugh, does its job.
Auditioner #3 - Reads all right on paper, but somehow I feel these are the kind of lines Kenan can really deliver on. We're getting into the real wackos now.
Auditioner #4 - Good stuff, but it doesn't fully top the spiritual kick ass powers Kenan was wielding. I think a more exaggerated character is called for.
Auditioner #5 - Great quick one-line.
Finalist #1 - Silly, but the announcer lead in promises pain on her part, and in spades.
Finalist #2 - Funny, especially cause it seems like Seth trying to threaten someone would come off as hilariously non-threatening.
Finalist #3 - Role is good, but I would have liked to see stronger, funnier insults come out of her mouth.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

A comment on my sketch's review -- JPIII, 13:47:10 06/18/04 Fri
- Glad you're enjoying the review -- CCS, 23:07:13 06/18/04 Fri
Characters in Focus [DEUX] -- CCS, 20:09:42 06/25/04 Fri
- Characters in Focus [TROIS] -- CCS, 01:35:24 06/29/04 Tue
  - Re: Characters in Focus [QUATRE] -- CCS, 15:36:51 07/02/04 Fri