Comedy Formula

solo1

1. Do you think that a comedy is better with or without a laugh track?

2. Do you think a comedy is better with one or two writers, or a team of writers?

Elmo

1. Do you think that a comedy is better with or without a laugh track?

It depends on the Comedy, Malcome in the Middle and Scrubs don't need it. Arrested Development and Crub Your Enthuaism could do with it IMO. I am not a big fan of the Office so I won't comment.

2. Do you think a comedy is better with one or two writers, or a team of writers?

The american's do comedy well in large teams, and they have great successes with it. The american's will right their scripts on the spot if the audience doesn't laugh enough.

However the translation of teams of writer in Britain hasn't worked that well, e.g. My Family.

The British have some great comic script writers, Fawlty Towers. But these shows generally don't last too long and become classics.

Crumbs

Elmo wrote:

Arrested Development and Crub Your Enthuaism could do with it IMO.

No, no, no, no, no, no, NO!
Laughter tracks suck.



No.

SoupyNorman

1. laughter tracks only annoy me when the show is not funny (like when the audience took to convulsions every time jeremy beadle cracked a joke). if the show is funny im too busy laughing to notice. the new series "joey" is the prime recent example of a laughter track trying to cover a brutal show.

2. on a whole i prefer comedy with 1/2 writers as they usually have much more thought put into the work e.g 'the office', 'father ted', 'black books', 'scrubs'.....shows like 'friends', 'will+grace' which are produced in boardrooms are written in a way that you can tell where they rushed it so they could get out for lunch. although i do like 'frasier'.

to sum up yes and no to both questions......!*&*#

TCamen

It depends on the Comedy, Malcome in the Middle and Scrubs don't need it. Arrested Development and Crub Your Enthuaism could do with it IMO. I am not a big fan of the Office so I won't comment.

Laughter tracks would DESTROY 'Arrested Development' and 'Curb Your Enthusiasm'. These comedies work for me because they don't try to force me to laugh at things that are 'funny' and leave out the laughter track to let me know that I shouldn't be laughing. I won't say that I like them because they're higher brow comedy (though they are), but frankly I prefer to make up my mind as to what is funny, and from watching 'AD' and 'CYE' with friends, it's interesting to see how people react differently to things sans a laughter track.

Sitcoms like 'Friends' and 'Will and Grace' are designed around a laughter track/ live audience. 'Arrested Development' and 'Curb Your Enthusiasm' are designed to be 'real life' comedies, and in AD's case, it's supposed to be a fly on the wall look at the Bluth family, so a laughter track would fatally damage the main premise of the series.

I'm curious as to why 'Scrubs' doesn't need a laughter track? Could it be because you like this show, and therefore don't want to tamper with it? I don't like 'Scrubs' but I wouldn't even contemplate trying to force a laughter track upon its audience (what's left of it).

kinkstr

Canned laffing would ruin Curb your Enthusiasm imo, its more fun to sit back in your seat and call larry david an azzh0le(the most entertaining azzh0le on tv i think)

Basq

I "funking" hate laughter tracks!

Probably why all my favourite comedies have no laugh track... such as:

- Scrubs
- Arrested Development
- The Office
- Phoenix Nights
- Spaced

These shows are good because they don't rely on telling the audience when to laugh. It really is the most irritating thing in a sitcom.

And i remember reading a review of Little Britain DVD (which i enjoy even though it has a laugh-track) where the reviewer commented that the BBC should have removed the laugh track. (will try and dig up that review)

To put it simply... laugh-track's are inserted for morons who don't know when to laugh!

segadreamcast

"And i remember reading a review of Little Britain DVD (which i enjoy even though it has a laugh-track) where the reviewer commented that the BBC should have removed the laugh track. (will try and dig up that review)"

Well if a reviewer said it, it must be true! Does this mean that "Showgirls" actually *could* be considered "one of the most honest satires of recent years."?

Basq

NoelRock wrote:

"And i remember reading a review of Little Britain DVD (which i enjoy even though it has a laugh-track) where the reviewer commented that the BBC should have removed the laugh track. (will try and dig up that review)"

Well if a reviewer said it, it must be true! Does this mean that "Showgirls" actually *could* be considered "one of the most honest satires of recent years."?

Uhhh.... no!

What i actually meant by this is it's strange to see a reviewer even bothered in considering that a laugh track should be removed. It's not exactly a deciding factor when reviewing a DVD.

That is all!..

PS - 'Showgirl' rocks! :P

Pigman II

If it's funny then ... either.

If it's not funny then ... without.

Elmo

If it's not funny then ... without.

I don't think it matters either way, If its not funny its not funny.

And the show that is not funny with a laughter track is the most annoying.

Canned laffing would ruin Curb your Enthusiasm imo, its more fun to sit back in your seat and call larry david an azzh0le(the most entertaining azzh0le on tv i think)

No offence to CYE, I like the show. However I do think that it is pretty much the same formual as One Foot In the Grave. I personally can see a Laughter Track suiting the show, but I don't think it really matters.

I'm curious as to why 'Scrubs' doesn't need a laughter track? Could it be because you like this show, and therefore don't want to tamper with it? I don't like 'Scrubs' but I wouldn't even contemplate trying to force a laughter track upon its audience (what's left of it).

I don't think JD's rambling thoughts would go well with a laughter track, that's all.

1. laughter tracks only annoy me when the show is not funny (like when the audience took to convulsions every time jeremy beadle cracked a joke). if the show is funny im too busy laughing to notice. the new series "joey" is the prime recent example of a laughter track trying to cover a brutal show.

That animal show with Tara Palmer Tonkinson (or what ever her name is), or those America's Worst Criminals :mad:

Pigman II

Elmo wrote:

I don't think it matters either way, If its not funny its not funny.

And the show that is not funny with a laughter track is the most annoying.

Your second sentence there is the precise reason for my point. 'Friends' for example would just be unfunny without its metronomic laughtrack. With it, it manages be both unfunny AND annoying.

TCamen

I don't think JD's rambling thoughts would go well with a laughter track, that's all.

Ignoring the rest of the debate, I wonder how having canned laughter over Ron Howard's voice-over for 'Arrested Development' would somehow be different? :rolleyes:

Elmo

Ignoring the rest of the debate, I wonder how having canned laughter over Ron Howard's voice-over for 'Arrested Development' would somehow be different?

You Win. Sorry forgot they had a voice over on that show. I rarely get to see it.

smuckers

1. Depends on the type of comedy, in the cases of Seinfeld and Frasier, then a laughter track does suit them as there are lot of good one liners and punchlines, but shows like Sanders and Curb don't need this.

2. if the writers and creators are only doing about 6 or 7 eps, then a comedy doesn't need team of writers.

sceptre

Elmo wrote:

I don't think JD's rambling thoughts would go well with a laughter track, that's all.

JD singing while listening to his walkman

"Well I guess it would be nice if I could touch your body... Er, Not you sir!"

(cue laughter)

Naw, wouldn't work well

mycroft

solo1 wrote:

1. Do you think that a comedy is better with or without a laugh track?

It depends I hate a canned laughter track (pop quiz, on Mash they had a laughter track, but ditched it for jokes in the OR) But for studio comedy with a live audience, laughing with the audience in fawlty towers, or Red Dwarf (remember the polymorphy ep in red dwarf, the audience laughter means the cast need to re time the jokes to have them heard. That ads something to it.

2. Do you think a comedy is better with one or two writers, or a team of writers?

Depends, it's a question, which do you prefer a bentley or a porsche? Both are great cars, but different rides.

The simpsons is an argument for and aganist teams of writers, at the start they played off brillantly, but towards the end it's overkill, it's writing by commitee.

Now faultly towers, two writers, every episode makes me laugh, but theres only a handful of them. So it's not a inexhaustable mine you get a finite amount of golden scripts.

dahamsta

I'd be another "depends" voter. A recent documentary I watched about MASH reckoned that Alan Alda battled to get the laugh track removed from the show for years, with success at the end. Since most of the shows came with the track I had difficulty seeing how it would work, until I remember the classic episode where Hawkeye is injured and spends most of the show with a Vietnemese family that don't speak any english. AFAICR that show didn't have a track and although it was very poignant at times, it was also extremely funny.

Plus there's shows like Benny Hill and Dick Emery, which imho would be nothing without a laugh track. Can you imagine Dick Emery saying "Ooh you are awful... but I like you" without a laugh track? It just wouldn't be funny.

adam

mycroft

dahamsta wrote:

I'd be another "depends" voter. A recent documentary I watched about MASH reckoned that Alan Alda battled to get the laugh track removed from the show for years, with success at the end. Since most of the shows came with the track I had difficulty seeing how it would work, until I remember the classic episode where Hawkeye is injured and spends most of the show with a Vietnemese family that don't speak any english. AFAICR that show didn't have a track and although it was very poignant at times, it was also extremely funny.

Plus there's shows like Benny Hill and Dick Emery, which imho would be nothing without a laugh track. Can you imagine Dick Emery saying "Ooh you are awful... but I like you" without a laugh track? It just wouldn't be funny.

adam

So we're agreed

Good writing + Good acting = funny comedy.

Eureka, the trick is patent this ground breaking formula, and then pick a tahtian island to buy.

byte

Like everyone else, it depends.

For DVD's (eg Little Britain as mentioned above) would it be that difficult to have the canned laugher as an option? So the viewer could choose to disable the canned laugher if they so wished.

solo1

It looks like everyone's sitting on the fence here. Cowards.

In general, I prefer one writer and no laughing track.

The simpsons is an argument for and aganist teams of writers, at the start they played off brillantly, but towards the end it's overkill, it's writing by commitee.

Now faultly towers, two writers, every episode makes me laugh, but theres only a handful of them. So it's not a inexhaustable mine you get a finite amount of golden scripts.

Is this not essentially the same point that you're applying to both?

mycroft

solo1 wrote:

It looks like everyone's sitting on the fence here. Cowards.

You can cite cheers, fraiser, the simpsons, monty p as a selection of writing by commitee works.

You can give fawlty towers, porridge, red dwarf as the other.

There is no one clear path to foolproof comedy. Thats the point.

Comedy is objective and subjective, citing one is better than the other ignores that fact.

Oh and follow the link in my sig if you feel like arguing this point with me, you'll see it's pretty easy to wipe the floor with someone who things one way is better than the other.