|
|
Chris Becker Veteran user New York, NY 371 Posts |
Sue & Tim,
You are funny guys, so what else is new? The question I have stems from an observation I made when I saw you perform and - later - reviewed your published material over and over again: It seems to me that your comedy relies less on funny patter, i.e., "jokes" in the ordinary sense, but rather focuses on visual/situational/acted comedy. I lack better terms in English but perhaps you get the idea. Most magicians just collect jokes but what makes your routines funny in a more unique way is that they are not just - or even mostly - based on "funny words". With many other magicians, I feel you don't even need to see them perform, you could listen to their performance on the radio and it would be just as entertaining. Do you think you consciously draw a distinction here or am I getting it totally wrong? What is your view on such a differentiation? What kind of comedy is easier, more effective, more appropriate for magicians? Thanks in advance for your thoughts, Christof
- - -
<BR>Cards don't cheat people. People cheat people. |
Tim Ellis V.I.P. Melbourne, Australia 1234 Posts |
Christof, you are absolutely correct.
Almost all of the comedy in our shows is situational, and there's a very good reason for that - neither of us can tell a joke to save our lives! I agree that some magicians are far more verbal, with joke after joke, some telling jokes between the action of the tricks to keep the whole show pacey. There's nothing wrong with this technique, but it is actually very rare to see it done correctly. Some magicians just stick any old jokes in there, and it actually detracts from the magic. Then there are the magicians whose comedy relies on their character: Jeff Hobson, Tom Ogden, Chuck Fayne, Mac King... because they establish exactly who they are at the start of the show, they can tell jokes that - in the hands of others - are not nearly as funny. The last time we saw Jeff Hobson, not only did every single line he delivered get a laugh, but the moments BETWEEN the lines got laughs too. Why? His character was so clearly defined the audience was laughing at what he was THINKING. With us, our shows have comedy, but we don't think of them as very funny when compared to many other comedy magic acts. It's interesting, one agent here in Melbourne says he sends us out when clients are requesting a more "traditional" magic act. On further enquiry he explained that the other two magicians he sells have more emphasis on the comedy (and consequently less on the magic) while our show is more magic-oriented. In a sense, I'm very pleased with that. Magicians always pride themselves on being entertainers, and of course we should be entertaining, but often we try to be comedians with props. Ideally, the audience should be going from uncontrollable laughter during the show to stunned silence with a "What the...?!" attitude when the magic takes place. Well, that's our aim anyway...
www.MagicUnlimited.com
www.timellismagic.com Visit our online shop for instant downloads and ebooks https://shop.timellismagic.com/ Blog - www.magicunlimited.typepad.com |
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » The March 2006 entrée: Tim Ellis & Sue-Anne Webster » » Situational Comedy versus Funny Patter » » TOPIC IS LOCKED (0 Likes) |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.02 seconds requiring 5 database queries. |
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic. > Privacy Statement < |