Yeah, that too!

Hi Jude,

I've always assumed that during the first read-through, a comedy sketch should reach out and grab the reader. Sketches are, after all, to be performed... and a performance will obviously resonate more harmoniously with an audience if the concepts etc. are understood right there and then.

This assumption doesn’t always work though, since a good production, performance or interpretation can sometimes render even the most scant text as developed and rich. Similarly a bad production, performance or interpretation can sometimes choke a great script.

I’m certainly no expert but I’d imagine that for a writer, the objective is to create a script or sketch that allows producers, directors and actors/actresses and so on to ‘see’ or at least extrapolate to the final product. It’s a process… with the writing as foundation. How this is actually done, however, is another matter…. consensual formatting aside, it’s the where the writer’s experience and skill/craft is tested.

Ultimately; writing this stuff is HARD… especially when it’s not simply an adaptation of an old joke.

I like the style of this, Jude. It didn’t scan all that well for me initially but further reading does reveal a deeper mood that I think would work brilliantly on-screen. I was a little confused, at first, about the comments the parrot was making and whether the policeman actually understood what was going on or not. On reflection, I’m not sure it matters unless you were planning on a definitive punch line? So much can depend on delivery and shooting style and so on…

I’m not sure if this sketch is planned as part of bigger environment (it doesn’t seem to have the self-contained attitude of a lot of sketches) but I reckon that this is where is might work best. I’d love to see your original ending!

I’ve got a couple of questions:

1) How/why did the policeman get to be there? When he asks about the exotic plants, you get more of an idea… but I wonder if it might be a good idea to explain his presence earlier on?

2) I must be getting thicker in my old age but can you explain why the bits: ‘making some extra cash…’ and ‘…tried to point him in the right direction…’? These confused me as to their inclusion.

3) Again, perhaps it’s down to my poor excuse for a brain… or I’ve just missed something obvious… but where did the parrot get the spliff from? Did he have it all along and was hiding it from the policeman? If that’s the case, is there a connection to the plants in the garden? I’m assuming not, since the policeman didn’t find what he was looking for…

Sorry… I realise that’s more than a couple of questions!

Overall, I liked it. I don’t know if you’ve read any Robert Rankin, but it reminds me of his style a bit… particularly his character interaction in 'The Brentford Trilogy'. Something slightly dark and sinister…

Can't wait to see some more...

Hi Darren, thanks for your indepth critique, much appreciated btw

The whole piece does have a darker mood & will be part of a bigger project as I`m planning on using Charlie as a character in his own right.

It`s really about a couple trying to earn a bit of extra cash by growing weed. They`re not v. bright hence the hubbie going to the garden centre, but they`re also playing dumb too. It`s the dud parrot who is v. bright & resourceful.

Good points, which I`ll take on board as I`m currently taking it all apart & rewriting.

Oh & I love (but not in a kissy way) Robert Rankin

F*ck me Darren. What was all that about? An explosion of verbal diarrhoea?

Who mentioned pots and kettles?

Quote: David Chapman @ May 24, 2007, 8:43 PM

F*ck me Darren. What was all that about? An explosion of verbal diarrhoea?

Who mentioned pots and kettles?

View original

eh?

Sorry Darren.