Bill Murray on Comic Delivery

But you asked how you get the comic pitch. Well, obviously a lot of it is rhythm. And as often as not, it's the surprising rhythm. In life and in movies, you can usually guess what someone is going to say—you can actually hear it—before they say it. But if you undercut that just a little, it can make you fall off your chair. It's small and simple like that. You're always trying to get your distractions out of the way and be as calm as you can be [breathes in and out slowly], and emotion will just drive the machine. It will go through the machine without being interrupted, and it comes out in a rhythm that's naturally funny. And that funny rhythm is either humorous or touching. It can be either one. But it's always a surprise. I really don't know what's going to come out of my mouth.

Bill Murray Will See You Now

The Golden Age

I've been watching TV comedy pilots because I'm writing a spec pilot. I went to the library and went through a whole bunch of '70's pilots (THE JEFFERSONS, CHICO AND THE MAN, etc.).

A lot of it was unwatchable. Or at least, I couldn't watch it. Man, most old TV doesn't hold up any more. It's slow and the jokes seem obvious. The situations seem forced and the characters seem cartoonish, without being full of cartoonish life.

(To be fair, I don't watch THE NEW ADVENTURES OF OLD CHRISTINE either, for the same reasons. It feels like old TV.)

M*A*S*H holds up, though these days it would probably be an hour drama with banter, not a half hour, I think. LUCY holds up. What old TV comedy holds up?

If you're looking for a Golden Age of TV, it has got to be now. Single camera comedies like 30 ROCK and EXTRAS and THE OFFICE and ARRESTED DEVELOPMENT and CURB YOUR ENTHUSIASM ... actually, there are a fair number of single camera comedies that aren't really "like" anything. Same goes for dramas like MAD MEN and ROME and SOPRANOS.

Pilots often suck. 30 ROCK didn't really hit its stride for me until about episode 9 of season 1. (1.09, in the parlance.) What TV comedy pilots really knock your socks off?

A Couple of Thoughts from the Comedy Writing Panel

My buddy Rob Sheridan (the one with the horns, right) kindly invited me to watch him pontificate as the "token Canadian" (his words) in a panel of comedy writing luminaries at the Just For Laughs Comedy Conference.

The thought that jumped out at me came out of a question about how it's different breaking into comedy writing now. Back in the day, you'd write a spec. These days, you still need a spec, the panelists felt. (And there's no real point being a p.a.) But what you really need to stand out is a short comedy film. The reasons being that (a) comedy works best when it's brought to life by an actor and (b) what's your excuse not to do a short? Back in the day, making an 8 mm or 16 mm film was a serious chore. Now getting your hands on a decent camera and Final Cut is not too difficult. And you have to find a way to stand out.

(Photo courtesy Matthew Cope)

Writing Television Sitcoms

If you're working on straight-ahead comedy, Lisa highly recommends WRITING TELEVISION SITCOMS by Evan S. Smith. It has the usual stuff on careers, but what's gold is the explanation of how to write jokes and comic scenes, even unto what sort of mix of characters you need. Check it out.

Oh, the Humanity

Ezra Klein blogs about a recent movie:

I liked it too, but it was unrelentingly depressing on these issues. It was a film during which the lead female character realized her husband was a senseless brute who would always put his happiness before her own, and where her son realized the father was an abusive drunk who was continually denying him the emotional support and family environment he needed. And ... both characters recognized these truths fully, and abandoned [him] to begin new lives elsewhere. And shortly thereafter, both took him back, tossing away their opportunities for personal growth and fulfillment despite there being no evidence of an enduring change in their tormentor's psyche. It was a tremendous demonstration of the self-destructive mentality of the abused, and in that, quite unsettling.

He's talking, of course, about The Simpsons Movie.

That's the problem with comedy. If you connect with the characters -- they're in pain. Imagine being one of the Stooges. You'd be in NO EXIT. Stuck for eternity with two other guys who devote their lives to sticking their fingers in your eyes.

The Marx Brothers, on the other hand, generally torture other people, not each other.

As Aristotle said in the second book of his Poetics, comedy is tragedy that happens to your mother in law.

Funny, Not Funny

One of the hardest things in editing a comedy is to trust that the jokes you laughed at originally are still funny. After you've seen a joke ten, twenty times, you start stressing about the delivery, about the cinematography, the choreography, and everything else. And then you want to cut the joke.

It's important to remember your original reactions, so that you can remind yourself that yes, this is funny. The most dangerous thing is to start cutting things that seem obvious or boring or unfunny to you after you've lost all taste for them. You may find yourself cutting the meat.

Ellen Sandler, Part Tres

CS: I was discussing a comedy script once, and I proposed a much more over the top scene where the main character would embarrass himself. They felt they had to "honor the character," which I took to mean not having the main character look too bad. Is that important, do you think?
ES: Well, you definitely have to protect your character. Ray [on EVERYBODY LOVES RAYMOND] was really good at this. He really knew who his persona was. And he was very careful going over the scripts not to let comic situations go past a line where he felt it was too far out of the realm of possibility, where it didn't come from a real place.
CS: But in a comedy, you do want your character to make a fool of himself?
ES: You want your lead to have a flaw and get himself into trouble that's his own mistake. Take Grace in WILL AND GRACE. She's always charming and delightful, but so often wrongheaded and made huge gaffes. Or to go to the classics, Lucy is always totally committed to what she's doing. If you tried to protect her from looking bad, you wouldn't have an engaging character. The line you're drawing is, can the character commit believably. Take CURB YOUR ENTHUSIASM. Larry is committed to what he understands as the logic of what he's doing, no matter how offensive he is. His character believes he's doing the right thing.
CS: What do you do if you're on a show where you disagree with your boss?
ES: If your boss is headed over Niagara Falls, is it your job to tell him? Or is it your job to row faster? And the answer is, row faster. But wear a life jacket.
CS: Should you ever say, "I think this is a mistake?"
ES: I don't think it's wise to use the word "mistake". What you should do is offer an alternative. You can say, "What if we did this?" And the showrunner can say yes, that's good, or, No, I don't want to. It's your job to come up with alternatives. If the showrunner says, "I don't think this is working," you don't even have to agree. You just come up with alternatives.

The Times Says the Sitcom Ain't Dead

Discuss.

UPDATE: As Ken Levine points out, NBC has ordered exactly zero new comedies this season.

Ellen Sandler, Part Deux

CS: Jane Espenson divides comedy writers into those who make jokes instinctively and those who construct them analytically. Which are you? Do you find there are certain techniques for generating a joke that you use?
ES: I am completely instinctive. I look at the situation, the character, the circumstances, and try to see what's funny there. I have an improv background, so it just sort of comes. There are people who can construct a joke from nothing. Jokemeisters. I am in awe of them. But at the same time, they want to write to the joke. I want to write to the character. They can pitch ten jokes on one spot. Two or three jokes a minute. They don't have to think too much. But they need me, because you can't write everything to the joke, just as I need them. Hey, you should interview them. Anyone who works on The Daily Show, or Jay Leno.
CS: How do you know something's funny when you're writing alone? Can you ever judge your own scripts without prejudice?
ES: Well that's why comedy is so often group-written. Things you think are hilarious are barely amusing, and things you think should be funny just don't play, and people think some things are great that you don't think are that funny. So it's always good to work in a group. Funnier things occur to you when you're competing with other people to make a joke.
CS: Okay, but that's easy to say when you live in LA. If you're in Schenectady, how do you find people to work with?
ES: Everybody should have a writer's group. And you can always find writers who want to get together with you. [Ed. Note: Ellen has never been to Schenectady.]
CS: But obviously if you're working on your own on a comedy spec, how can you compete with real sitcom scripts, where the punch-up is done in a room full of a dozen writers competing to come up with the best joke? Is it just a question of time and reworking it endlessly?
ES: You're never going to be as funny on your own. You can get a bunch of friends together, though, and have them pitch jokes to replace the jokes you've got -- or the placeholders, the like-a-jokes, the "jokicles" I call them, that are holding a place where you think a joke should be. But what's really most important is that the story has to work. If you have the funniest jokes in the world on page 6, but the story doesn't work on page one, no one's going to read page 6. Showrunners want to know you have a comic sensibility, yes, but the most important thing is, can you tell a story with jokes. If your story flows and you have some comic abilities, it will be funny.
CS: How do you judge someone else's joke when you've been living with the current joke too long?
ES: That's tricky, because different will be funny. Personally, I like to read the jokes out loud. Or you can have actors get together and have a reading. I have a whole chapter in my book about actor readings.

I think, too, pick the joke that serves the character, the relationship, or the story best. If one joke moves the story forward, and the other doesn't, or not as much, then you know which one to choose.

Also, in a spec script, don't depend on a visual joke. It might play, but it might not read. And since your script is going to be read, go for the verbal joke in a spec.

Straight from the Horse's ... Mouth

Straight from Ken Levine's blog:

You can now sign up for my two day comedy writing workshop, the Sitcom Room.

It will be held in Los Angeles on July 21-22. For two days you’ll experience what it’s like to actually be in a writing room. I’ll have actors to perform your scene and drive you crazy. I’ll have studio and network notes. Instruction and guidance. Camaraderie and much laughter. When you’re not pulling your hair out by the roots you will be having a helluva time.

For details and sign up information please click on our website Sitcomroom.com

You could learn a lot from Ken Levine. He wrote on M*A*S*H and Cheers.

You know how I'm down on film schooll? This is different. This is a short seminar with a guy who does this for a living.

If I were in LA, I would probably go and take his class.

What are you waiting for?

Confirms My Suspicion

I just got A Bit of Fry and Laurie in the post. The book, actually, not the DVD. Did anyone else know that Hugh Laurie starred in a sketch comedy show? (Not talking to you, Stephen.) (All right. And Denis. And everybody at the Hugh Laurie FAQ) But this explains a lot. I've always suspected that the scariest thing in the world is a comedian playing it straight and showing his pain...