• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Stand-up Comedy

Praetor Adele

Commodore
Commodore
A friend of mine and I are preparing for a stand-up bit at a Star Trek themed comedy and burlesque nerd night. Would this be a good place to possibly post our script and get some feedback? Or would anyone in particular be interested in reading it at all?

Thanks
 
I'm a working improv comedian. Not quite the same brand of comedy, but always game to see some genre material. B-)

Mark
 
I'd love to see a script, but honestly, I feel comedy that's meant to be spoken loses something if it's read. Maybe read the script and post a Youtube video instead, if possible?
 
Re: Angry Fanboy

I'd love to see a script, but honestly, I feel comedy that's meant to be spoken loses something if it's read...

An entire industry devoted to comedy and joke books would seem to disagree. :)

Comedy books are written in a very different format than scripts that are meant to be spoken aloud in front of an audience.

Rubbish. Tons of comedy books are in prose form that is not intended to be spoken aloud.

You're just strainin' to do some explainin'.
 
Re: Angry Fanboy

An entire industry devoted to comedy and joke books would seem to disagree. :)

Comedy books are written in a very different format than scripts that are meant to be spoken aloud in front of an audience.

Rubbish. Tons of comedy books are in prose form that is not intended to be spoken aloud.

You're just strainin' to do some explainin'.

...you literally just restated my actual point.

Comedy that is meant to be read is different from comedy that is meant to be heard. Reading a transcript of some George Carlin routine is not nearly as funny as watching him perform it.
 
Had I said restated word-for-word, you'd be right.

I did not say word-for-word. You literally restated my original point with different words, so no, I'm right again.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/restate?s=t

re·state [ree-steyt] Show IPA
verb (used with object), re·stat·ed, re·stat·ing.
to state again or in a new way.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/restate

re·state (r-stt)
tr.v. re·stat·ed, re·stat·ing, re·states
To state again or in a new form.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/restate

Definition of RESTATE

: to state again or in another way

Emphasis all mine.

Nice try though!
 
Firstly, sorry for the delays, I often go days without logging in. Apologies.

Secondly, sorry for interrupting the discussion.

Thirdly, the working draft for tomorrow is unprintable at this point. I had no planned to go quite so dirty with our humour, but I do appreciate everyone's offers for feedback.
 
Had I said restated word-for-word, you'd be right.

I did not say word-for-word. You literally restated my original point with different words, so no, I'm right again.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/restate?s=t

re·state [ree-steyt] Show IPA
verb (used with object), re·stat·ed, re·stat·ing.
to state again or in a new way.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/restate

re·state (r-stt)
tr.v. re·stat·ed, re·stat·ing, re·states
To state again or in a new form.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/restate

Definition of RESTATE

: to state again or in another way

Emphasis all mine.

Nice try though!

Yawn...

Please try to counter me using your own intellect and knowledge or don't bother, no one is interested in reading quote after quote you've had to look up on the internet.
 
Please try to counter me using your own intellect and knowledge or don't bother, no one is interested in reading quote after quote you've had to look up on the internet.

Fair enough.

No.

"Literally" restating your actual point would mean a person restating your point word for word as it was written.

That is what "literally" means.

I understand what 'literally' means.

But what you don't seem to grasp is that 'restate' does not actually mean that you are using the same words. It actually means that you're simply making the same point (whether or not you are making said point using different words), which means in turn that I used every word correctly in my previous post(s).

You are proving that you not only misunderstand what words mean, but also are seemingly too lazy to read three incredibly short quotes from online dictionaries that were cited as references so you wouldn't think I was making things up. I am, after all, nothing but words on a screen to you, because I believe that this is our first interaction ever. I'd cite my reasons for believing these two things, but you seem to prefer I argue with my own intellect, so I won't.

In conclusion, I respectfully submit that I am winning this conversation.
 
I've found that there are some things that work fine when on the page that don't work well when being performed, and vice versa.

So I have to agree with Elias here. Something can be the funniest thing in the world if it's being performed by actors, but put it into a prose format and it can lose something. Likewise, a book can be very funny, but the instant that it is put on the screen or on a stage, it can lose something.

As a case in point, check out Red Dwarf. I've watched the episodes and also read the books. The books take events of the episodes (albeit in a slightly different order) and turn them into prose. THe books are funny, yes, but in a very different way to the episodes.

For example, take the scene in which Rimmer appears dressed in a gingham dress with a penguin hand puppet called Mr Flibble.

flibble3.jpg


Funny as hell when he comes on the screen, but if you have to put it in prose, you're in trouble. It's because on the screen it hits you all at once and you are practically slapped in the face with the absurdity of it all. On the page, it would take a paragraph to describe it, so it can't possibly hit you all at once. Thus it loses the impact that makes it so funny on the screen. And there are things that can't possibly be described in a book. How do you convey the silly cock-eyed-ness of the puppet you see in that picture? The seriousness with which Rimmer takes the whole thing? The tone of his voice? All these things are what make the screen version so funny, and yet they are difficult if not impossible to translate into prose while still keeping it funny.

In any case, Sandoval, I think Elias was right when he said that you were making the same point as him. he said, "Comedy books are written in a very different format than scripts that are meant to be spoken aloud in front of an audience." In other words, comedy PROSE is very different from a comedy PERFORMANCE."

Then you came and said, "Tons of comedy books are in prose form that is not intended to be spoken aloud." In other words, comedy PROSE is different to comedy PERFORMANCE.

I honestly don't see where your disagreement with him comes from.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top