Comedy Analysis: Japanese Game Shows

Gaki no Tsukai DVD Cover

The Japanese are a people like no other. Their game shows are world-famous and unmatched. And with good reason, their unique mix of utterly terrified guests, loud, crazy, larger-than-life hosts, colourful challenges and brilliant interaction between the audience and the guests is brilliant.

Gaki no Tsukai

THE game show in Japan is Gaki no Tsukai (translates: "This is no task for kids”), which has been going for 25 years and over 1000 episodes. It has four rounds, where contestants try to survive weird challenges in order to win the grand prize. The contestants are often b-list celebs and are generally forced into humiliating acts or outfits. The show has different elements including:

•        Wall of Blocks, where contestants sit on a wall of blocks and have to pick a number from 1-20. Every number carries a punishment which will damage or completely destroy the wall. The last person to be sitting on their wall wins. These punishments have included vengeful exes. American football teams, sumo wrestlers, a small tank, a drum band and rollerskaters.
•       Team Fight Dodge ball, where the contestants play dodge ball by throwing a ball trough a hole behind the other team. This triggers all sorts of stuff to come flying and rolling over the field. Thing hurled at the contestants have included dogs on tricycles, clowns, dodge balls flying at over 100mph, bowling balls, vacuums, office chairs, gymnasts and lots more. People who are hit generally go down and crawl off the stage, although on occasion a contestant is removed by stretcher prior to the game continuing.
•         Batsu games, punishments where the contestants have to perform ridiculous or humiliating tasks in order to prevent further punishment.
•         Silent Library, where contestants have to undergo a series of tasks and tortures in a public library. As it is in a library they have to remain completely still, because if they laugh they risk being hit by baseball bats, having nose-hairs pulled out or having a clamp attached to their septum which is then pulled by a rope, or being slapped repeatedly by a slapping machine.
•       Chinko achine, where contestants have so say a tongue-twister without pausing or making a mistake. Any Mpause or mistake results in the Chinko machine whacking the unfortunate contestant in the testicles.
•        Marshmallow Rubber Band, where a contestant has to eat a marshmallow dangling from a string, without using his hands. He is further restricted by a rubber band across his face. His teammates can try to straighten the strings the marshmallow is attached to, but no other help is allowed.

DERO! Length of Plank

 DERO! and EXIT

Another hilarious Japanese game show is Dero (translates to “You Try, You Die”), a fast-paced game show where contestants are put under huge pressure to solve puzzels. The humour in this show is largely derived from the interaction of the contestants with each other, as they are often away from staff and audience. The look of genuine terror can sometimes be seen as well, which makes for good TV. Some of the ridiculous challenges in this show include:

– Length Of Plank, where contestants have 3 small planks to stand on above a seemingly bottomless pit. If they answer a puzzle wrong, or think for too long, the plank will start retracting into the wall, causing them to be eventually pushed off.

-        Water Room, where contestants are locked in a room quickly filling with water and have to solve puzzels to save themselves from drowning.

Dasshutsu Game DERO! was inspired by escape-the-room flash-based games. Although some challenges involve some CGI, such as the bottomless pit, the contestants often find themselves fearing for their lives. Their apparent fear of dying is highly entertaining, as is watching them encourage and push the other contestants by shouting at them. Syfy's game show EXIT is based on DERO! and mimicks the show quite well.

These and other Japanese game shows make for hilarious TV and although EXIT doesn't do a bad job, the original is still way better. If you're like me and you don't speak Japanese, there are tonnes of excerpts and full shows available on the Internet with English subttiles. Google is your friend here, you will find them easily enough. 

Comedy Analysis: Parody

Parody is one of the oldest forms of humour and can be traced back to the poetry and literature from Hegemon of Thasos, who lived around 420 B.C. He slightly altered existing poetry's wording to transform sublime poetry into ridiculousness. Ever since parody has been around in different shapes and sizes and it's only becoming more popular. Especially with the rise of the Internet and television series like Family Guy, parody has become more and more mainstream.

Aristophanes

Classic parody

Aristophanes wrote a play titled The Frogs around 405 B.C. This featured parody and ridicule of even the gods, describing as a Glutton and the God of Drama Dionysus as cowardly and unintelligent. It parodies the traditional journey to the underworld, as Dionysus travels to the underworld, disguised as Heracles in order to bring back the poet Euripides back from the dead to save Athens. A storyline like this could even today be found in a parody film or play, with many aspects of contemporary parody already present in this classic play.

Don Quixote Book Cover

Later parody

Parody continued to be written throughout the ages. Sometimes a parody actually far outlives its original. A prominent example of this is the story of Don Quixote, about a deranged wannabe-knight trying to fight windmills, believing them to be giants. This story is still well-known today, whereas the novel it was based on, Amadis de Gaula, is known by hardly anyone today.

Modern and Post-modern parody

During the 20th century parody developed itself to one of the most prominent forms of art around. Re-contextualizing became a more common form of parody, where an existing story or characters were put in a new context for comic effect. A prominent example of this is T.S. Eliot's poem The Waste Land which follows the storyline of the legend of the Holy Grail, but incorporates texts like Dante's Inferno and a Sanskrit mantra.

Robin Hood: Men in Tights

Parody in modern media

In today's media parody has a prominent presence. It can be found in film, music and – of course – on the Internet. Some prominent parody films include: Dracula: Dead and Loving it; Young Frankenstein; Robin Hood: Men in tights; Scary Movie and Dr. Pyckle and Mr. Pryde. In most cases it is obvious from the title which film, story or genre it seeks to ridicule.

Humor in Music

In music parody is increasingly common, with some artists gaining most (or all) of their fame from parody. Possibly the most famous parody musician is “Weird Al” Yankovic, who parodies mainly contemporary hit songs, sometimes including a link or reference to the original artist, sometimes incorporating links to films or other music, or sometimes just writing a comedy song to the music of an existing song.

With the rise of the Internet an abundance of parody films and songs have come into existence. The easy access to popular music and the fast and easy sharing of content have inspired many people to make parodies. Youtube channels like How It Should Have Ended parody well-known films, often pointing out inconsistencies and weird plotlines. The Key of Awesome is a comedy ensemble active on the Youtube-channel Barely Political that creates parody songs and music videos and the Epic Rap Battles of History often parody characters from history or fiction by having them face each other in a rap battle.

Parody is as alive as ever and it's definitely more than just poking fun at an original work. Most countries have some exception in copyright law to allow for parody work to be created, which indicates it is generally recognized as a legitimate art form. Check out some of the works mentioned if you haven't seen them yet, it's worth your while.

Comedy Film Review: Eternal Sunshine Of The Spotless Mind

(Warning: If you haven't seen it yet, there are spoilers in here.)

With Jim Carrey and Kate Winslet in leading roles, Elijah Wood (famous for his portrayal of Frodo) in a major supporting role, also starring Mark Ruffalo and Kirsten Dunst, and having received over a hundred awards and nominations, including an Oscar and a Movie of the Decade Award, it's safe to say this film was a success. On Wikipedia it's listed as a dramedy (a form of comedy) and Netflix outright categorises it as Comedy. Therefore we can now talk about this distinctly unfunny film.

This film follows Joel Barish (Jim Carrey) who tries to erase his past relationship with Clementine Kruczynski (Kate Winslet). The film starts with the two meeting on a train, and immediately being drawn to each other, despite Joel being a withdrawn, egocentric, and Clementine being whimsical free spirit. At this point they don't remember having been together for two years. After a huge fight, Clementine had the entire relationship erased from her memory to be able to move on. When Joel received a note from the memory erasing company, he was devastated and had the same procedure done. The film then goes on to show the process of erasing his memories. In the last few scenes we see Joel and Clementine finding out they erased each other, and they were miserable together. At first Clementine refuses to get back with Joel because they'll just be miserable again, but when Joel accepts the misery, she gives in and they go on to live miserably ever after.

The first issue we run into with this film, is the usage of a blue filter over the camera. This gives the film a depressed tone. Blue filters like these can work very well to create a setting and a certain emotion to a scene. A prime example of this done right, is Disney's UP! where the colour use becomes more cheerful as the main character becomes happier. In this film however, the blue filter is used on virtually every scene. This makes the entire film depressing, which immediately removes all comedic value. Even a joke which could have been funny is made depressing by this blue filter.

The second issue is with the characters in this film. The characters are not developed in any way. For instance when Clementine is introduced we need to feel she is a whimsical free spirit. Therefore her hair is blue. Now she's whimsical. Done. Joel is introduced as an emotionally withdrawn person. Therefore he wears all black and has a bit of a beard, not too much, and he acts like a jerk to others. Done. Here's how deep our characters go, there are only superficial character traits with no depth and no multi-dimensional character development. As a result, there is no chemistry between the characters. Even in memories which are intended to show deep emotions such as love, happiness, anger, sorrow and even hate, there is no real chemistry between the actors. This makes it hard to become really involved with the characters and the story as a whole. Also there is a lot of cursing in this film. Although this in itself doesn't have to be a problem, but in this film it is. Why? The cussing doesn't feel 'real'. It is obviously scripted and feels incredibly forced. The cussing seems to be provoking just to be provoking. This is not 'deep' or 'art', it is just bad writing.

I just wish I could erase this horrible waste of time

The bad writing both in character development and the obviously scripted cussing prevents the characters to develop a proper personality. This is a shame, as the actors in this film are all good actors. Although Jim Carrey is generally more of a comedy actor, he has shown to be able to deal with heavier subject matter as well, such as in The Truman Show, which is a brilliant film. In Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind however, none of the actor's talent is really put to use. As a result, the acting isn't particularly memorable or intriguing. Also much of the dialogue between characters seems incredibly forced, mainly due to the lack of chemistry. If the viewer doesn't believe the conversation would happen in real life, the dialogue is pointless.

At times, the main characters (both Joel and Clementine) are shown to have a wire loose somewhere. Joel attempts to attack a young boy who used to bully him as a child. He looses, which is an attempt at comedy, but the joke falls flat as I was busy feeling horrified by the thought of a grown man deliberately attacking a child. Clementine shows her crotch to a fiveish-year-old Joel. She sees him as the adult Joel, but his behaviour is that of a small child. Therefore I found it incredibly inappropriate to show him her crotch. To sum up, one of them attacks a child, the other shows her genitals to one. Also Clementine, being a whimsical free spirit and all, convinces Joel to break into someone's house and drink their wine. What's wrong with these people?

In addition to the superficial characters, there are several proper attempts at comedy. Unfortunately, most – if not all – of these fall flat. Not because there's anything wrong with the joke itself, but because it just feels out of place in this film. For instance someone falling over and getting up saying 'ouch my ass' may work in an Adam Sandler film, but not in a dramedy, let alone in a heavy drama such as this.

As is demonstrated by many comedies in different genres, drugs, alcohol and marijuana use can lead to comedic situations. In this film however, the abundant use of narcotics seems yet another feeble attempt at creating a persona for the character. Something which the writers seem to have missed, is that a weird outfit and the fondness of drugs do not a character make. In this film it falls into the same category as the cussing, as a pointless, at times frustrating, trait.

Another issue with this film, which easily could have been avoided, is the sound editing. In many scenes the music and sound effects overpower the dialogue. Maybe this is an attempt to hide the poor writing, but in any case it takes away from the intensity of the film. This may be due to Gerry Robert Byrne's involvement, as his other big project Brokeback Mountain suffers from the same problem.

As mentioned, this film doesn't feel 'real' in many places. This includes the main plot point: the erasing of one's memory. The techniques used in the film would not work in real life to erase people's memories. The film uses science fiction-logic to explain the process, which just doesn't work if the equipment used is 20 years old. This film was made in 2004, yet the computers used are from the 1980s or maybe the early 90s. This just doesn't work. The process of erasing memories from the brain would be a futuristic technology, so the equipment used should at the very least be contemporary, preferably futuristic.

Possibly one of the most obvious and recurring problems with this film is it's randomness. Frodo wears glasses with eyes on springs, Joel fakes a suicide as a joke, there's a random underwear dance on Joel's bed (while he's sleeping on it, which is both disrespectful and inappropriate), there are random emotional or violent outbursts with no build-up to justify them, and the list goes on. Legendary film critic Roger Ebert even said the film “[jumps] through the deliberately disorienting hoops of its story”. 'Deliberately disorienting'. That's exactly the feeling I had while watching this film. Disorienting can be good, fooling your audience can lead to hilarity (think Monty Python or Tommy Cooper), but deliberately disorienting and confusing your audience does not automatically make your film good, funny or deep. This film completely misses the mark and is just confusing for no reason, which isn't funny.

That's not to say the stylistic choices in this film are all bad though; the relationship between Joel and Clementine is shown in reverse, which makes sense. After all, a recent memory would be easier to access than a first memory. With the science as it is explained in the film, it makes sense to remove memories in a reverse order. This choice is actually pretty clever and works really well in the film.

Unfortunately that doesn't make up for the huge number of stylistic mishaps in this film. For instance having Clementine slide away into darkness may seem a clever way to symbolise loss, but it is too obvious. In addition, she is suddenly back around 2 seconds later, which takes away all mystery and symbolism the film almost had. Also, I felt happy during those two seconds after she vanished, because I though the torture of the film was nearly over. Sadly, I was wrong and the film went on for quite some time after that.

The story behind this film isn't bad at all. In fact, I can see why this film got an Oscar for best screen play, and I think it would make a brilliant book. However, to list it as a comedy is an insult to any comedian. Besides that this film is full of holes and it is a prime example of the fact that, even though a film can make you think, that doesn't necessarily make it good. In addition, the message this film sends is clear, but disturbing: If you've made mistakes and felt horrible, just erase your memory, remove all lessons learnt and start over, ready to make all the same mistakes again!

As mentioned, the film has a solid idea, with great potential behind it. Also we can see actual effort was made, this wasn't a project anyone took lightly. However, the film misses the mark and as such is mainly a waste of 108 minutes you're not going to get back. The question the film poses is good, but can be summed up less than 30 words:

It is a good idea to erase your memory of a relationship, and should you get back with someone of whom you erased all memories?

Think about those questions, but don't watch this train wreck of a  film.

As always, this review portrays the author's personal opinion only. There is no intend to hurt anyone and everybody is entitled to their personal opinion. If you like this film, that's great, you just have a different taste than I do and it won't make me think any less of you. All feedback is welcome, but please respond in a civil manner to this review, and to other comments.

Comedian Bio: George Carlin

George Carlin in 2008

With nearly 50 years on stage, George Carlin is one of the longest-running stand-up comedians ever. He managed to achieve this by adapting his act over the years and evolving along with the times (and often just ahead of them).

The beginning

When Carlin first entered comedy in 1959, it wasn't as a solo stand-up comedian but as part of a comedy duo with Jack Burns whom he met while working with KXOL radio in Fort Worth, Texas, USA. After successful shows in the local coffeehouse they moved to California and worked together for another two years on shows for stand-up as well as radio and television.

At that time, Carlin presented a very different act than the one people nowadays often remember. He wore a suit, never knew where to leave his hands and he didn't sport a beard yet. Also his material was more 'pg', focusing more on imitations and ridicule of characters, rather than having a clear political or religious motive.

Later

During the 1970s Carlin changed his appearance. He started sporting a beard and long hair, paired with faded jeans and t-shirts. At first this cost him a few television bookings since the norm was clean-cut, well-dressed comedians, but the public quickly caught on to his style and he regained his popularity.

George Carlin in 1969

This was also the era Carlin's act became more controversial. A famous example is his routine “Seven words you can never say on television” which got him arrested on one occasion in Milwaukee, but the judge ruled he was allowed to say the words as long as they didn't cause disturbance.

“Shit, piss, fuck, cunt, cocksucker, motherfucker, and tits. Those are the heavy seven. Those are the ones that'll infect your soul, curve your spine and keep the country from winning the war.”

-        George Carlin, Seven words you can never say on television

Over the years Carlin became increasingly critical of current politics and religions. This caused controversy again, but as before, the controversy actually benefited his career. An attempt was made in 2003 by a Californian politician to introduce a bill to ban the broadcasting of the Seven dirty words routine, but that never made it through the subcommittee for the constitution.

The end

Carlin continued to perform right up to his death in 2008, dying one week after his last performance. His wishes were honoured and as a result he was cremated, his ashes were scattered and there were no public memorial services held.

Carlin leaves behind a legacy to be remembered. His recordings are still widely available both on- and offline, he has a star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame, has received numerous awards, including the first ever posthumously awarded Mark Twain Prize for American Humour. 

Comedy Film Review: Sharknado

Yes, it's really come to this. With a 'solid' 3.3/10 IMDB score, and an 'amazing' 35% audience feedback on Rotten Tomatoes, this flick redefined the so-bad-its-good-genre. First let's address the Elephant in the room: Sharknado is a terrible film. The effects are horrible, the acting is bad, the entire film is incredibly over-the-top and the story is completely ridiculous. So why are we talking about it anyway? Because it's fabulously hilarious.

Concept of Sharknado

The concept of hundreds of sharks being sucked up by a hurricane, only to then be thrown onto the streets, still trying to eat everything and everyone, is absolutely absurd. As you've read elsewhere on this blog though, absurd situations often lead to hilarity and absurd/surreal humour is one of the most difficult types of humour to get right. And this film does.

Main Characters in Sharknado

The main characters try to fight the sharks using everything from chainsaws to shotguns as well as by throwing bombs into the hurricane from a helicopter. Using explosives in a shark-infested hurricane proves as bad an idea as it seems. It leads to plenty more over-the-top awfulness and hilarious scenes including one where someone cuts an entire shark in half in one go with a chainsaw. Also there's one of the last scenes where Fin jumps into a shark with a chainsaw and then cuts his way out trough the shark's skin. The obvious impossibility of this scenario doesn't seem to stop the film though and this again leads to hilarity.

Sharknado's Scientific Base 

It also seems highly unlikely that sharks could survive being sucked up by a hurricane and being thrown to the streets like this. Let alone still being able to swallow people whole. Sharks generally don't attack people unless they feel threatened or mistake people for seals and other prey. Even in most actual shark attacks the shark doesn't try to eat its victim as it soon finds out it's not the tasty seal it was hoping for. In Sharknado however, sharks just keep eating and eating, swallowing entire people like they were breath mints, with several people actually being retrieved from the Shark's stomach, completely unscathed.

A Gem of Horrid Films 

This film is one of the gems of horrid films. Despite being an awful film, it has a strong 82% critic rating on Rotten Tomatoes, which is usually reserved for above-average films. Most critics say although the film is bad, it is really enjoyable. If you're in the mood for a serious, heavy film with a complex emotional storyline and strong character-development, this may not be the best choice. If you're up for a simple, over-the-top, lighthearted and pleasant film, Sharknado is the way to go. 

Comedy Series Review: 3rd Rock from the Sun

“As most intelligent people know, aliens are among us.” 

This is how 3rd Rock from the Sun starts. This American sitcom focuses on a group of alien scouts, trying to learn about earth. Winning dozens of awards and being nominated for many more, this show was a true television hit. Come join us, as we take a look at 3rd Rock from the Sun.

This sitcom is a gem of American comedy. It's absurd, hilarious, fast-paced, popular and it survived for more than 100 episodes. First, let's look at the premise.

The series follows a group of four extraterrestrials named Harry, Sally, Tommy and Dick. They are on Earth on a mission to study Earth life and, so as not to attract attention, they disguise themselves as humans. Since their original alien bodies were asexual, it is quite hard for them to figure out their roles as males or females. Especially Sally, being the only female in the group, has a hard time adjusting. The awkwardness brought about by their lack of understanding of Earth, gender, race etc. often leads to hilarious situations.

The high commander of the group is Dick. Although he is the youngest one as an alien, he is given the oldest human body. Because he really is young he often behaves childish and innocent, which either scares or endears people. He takes a job as a physics professor and, although his understanding of physics is basic compared to his planet's standards, he becomes highly respected as a physicist on Earth. One joke involves Dick laughing hysterically at Stephen Hawking's description of virtual particles.

Sally is the second-in-command to Dick and the security officer. She had to take the female role because she lost a contest or draw of some kind. She isn't all too happy about this at first, although over time she decides she likes being a woman. She does keep struggling with her femininity all throughout the series. Also her role in the 'family' isn't always clear: she has been named Dick's sister, Tommy's sister and Tommy's mother, although she was never Dick's daughter or wife.

The cast of 3rd Rock from the Sun

Tommy is the information officer and third-in-command. Although he has received the body of Dick's adolescent son, he really is the oldest and smartest of the group. He makes sure to bring this up again and again throughout the series. He is forced to enroll in high school, but his vast knowledge of Earth's culture and history makes him a straight-A student. He is charged with gathering as much information as possible on Earth, something he does mainly by watching television and films.

Harry was not actually supposed to join the mission, but was allowed to come because there was a seat left. He has a chip in his body (presumably his brain) which allows him to receive communications from the Big Giant Head; the king of the galaxy. This generally happens without warning and is very noticeable as Harry starts shuddering, garbling and assumes a pose with his knees bent and his arms up, announcing “Incoming message from the Big Giant Head” (or sometimes something similar) and then calling the message in a voice different from his own.

The absurd, out-of-this-world humour combined with the alien's awkwardness and Dick's constant attempts at a relationship make for an amazing show which is still popular and rightly so.

Comedian Bio: Seth Rogen

Seth Rogen in 2013

This is the Canadian comedian, actor and director who described fellow actor Zach Efron as the “sexiest motherf***er alive”. At only 31 years of age, this comedic genius has already won several awards and received over a dozen nominations including for a Primetime Emmy.

Besides his obvious love for Zach Efron, Seth is known for his acclaimed performance in The 40 Year Old Virgin, and his work on Knocked Up, Horton Hears a Who! and Superbad which he co-wrote at age 13. Even though he is a high-school dropout, he became the main wage earner in his family at 16.

His appearance is unmistakable, with his curly brown hair and deep voice, this (somewhat heavy-set) guy is average enough to be identifiable, but still makes for an instantly recognisable figure. In his acting he often portrays a somewhat unkempt man child who makes you want to laugh along because of his trademark infectious laugh.

He has sparked some controversy by making statements in favour of communism, which is considered a dirty word in the USA and he has accused nerds of having a love of complaining, in response to the harsh criticism of his work on The Green Hornet. Also he has admitted to fantasising about kicking Paul McCartney in the crotch. He has however managed to survive all that so far and he remains mostly known for his work on film, stand-up and television.

He has collaborated on some quite famous series, including Arrested Development where he plays the young George Bluth and The Simpsons where he voiced several characters, including himself. He has also played himself on several other occasions, however his portrayal of fictitious characters is the most well-known.

This rising star in comedy seems to have a bright future. He is going strong and has worked on a couple of really good films and series. We are eager to see where he goes from here.