Graham ([info]tao_) wrote,
@ 2007-04-15 18:50:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
You. Will. Die.
Here's an interesting sketch. The first half works, the second doesn't. I don't know if you remember Alan Alda in 'Crimes and Misdemeanors' saying "If it bends, it's funny; if it breaks, it's not funny." This was supposed to show his character up as an arse, but the thing is, he's right. The 'magic' in the first half bends reality in a very funny way. The magic in the second half breaks reality, breaks your 'belief' in the joke and leaves you with just a thin layer of 'Meh'. That said, it's still worth watching.


(Post a new comment)


[info]jack_ketch
2007-04-15 06:34 pm UTC (link)
I think part of the problem is that the Illusionators are conceived as a specific parody of the magician Criss Angel and while the first sketch (they are split into 2 sketches on the TV show) works without knowing that, the second seems to be more about parodying the ridiculousness of Angel's magic, than in having the ridiculousness itself being the humour.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

[info]tao_
2007-04-15 09:19 pm UTC (link)
Ah. That might be it. I thought it was a more generic parody, certainly.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

[info]bergenboi
2007-04-15 10:13 pm UTC (link)
I think this one was the best sketch of that episode:



The "Shutterbugs" sketch was filmed in my friends' apartment.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

[info]tao_
2007-04-16 07:22 pm UTC (link)
Funny! But I distrust sketches that need to explain their premise so exhaustively before they get going. "Oh, this is that famous woman who lifted the car off her son because she got such a burst of adrenalin etc etc etc." If you can't do it in a line or (maximum) two, then maybe you shouldn't do it at all...

That said, I'm sure I've been guilty of it somewhere along the line.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

Create an Account
Forgot your login?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…