Close
Penguins
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, roscoff said:
Two penguins sitting at a table in a very posh restaurant. There is romantic music playing in the background
Penguin 1 looks around restaurant and taps table with flipper as he hums an inane tune.
Penguin 2 sighs and looks longingly into her glass.
Penguin 1 clears throat.
Penguin 1:
So......hows about those fish then?
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, David Bussell said:
I liked it. Might work even better if you established that they're on a blind date though.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Mouse said:
David how do you know it's a blind date. Could it be a match.com date in which case the line could be 'how funny we both like fish?'.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, David Bussell said:
Quote: Mouse @ March 27, 2008, 2:17 PMDavid how do you know it's a blind date. Could it be a match.com date in which case the line could be 'how funny we both like fish?'.
View original
We don't know that they're on a blind date, it was a suggestion. Personally I'm a fan of the 'struggling for a conversation' angle. In any case, setting up the premise a little better will avoid the ambiguity in the punch.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, roscoff said:
First of all thanks guys for taking the time crit my stuff and I've enjoyed reading all your suggestions. Just a point of reference but David hit it on the head when he mentioned the ambiguity of the sketch. Its absolutely true, This one and if you scroll back the 'Virgin' are both ambiguous because you have to fill in the detail. Now some may hate this style of sketch and I'm a fan of a well written punch line as anybody else. But what I do like to try and create is a backstory. Are they on a blind date? Is it an old marry couple? How would you tell with a penguin anyway and of course there's the absurdity of it all. But please keep your crits coming cos they tell me if I'm barking up the right tree and also when I hit a lame duck. Which is another story!
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Bad dog said:
I think it helps to put the audience on the path to a joke, even if you don't actually take them there. Let them get there themselves. I felt this was too ambiguous, there wasn't anywhere to go to. You have to pave the way, if you see what I mean.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, roscoff said:
Yep. And perhaps I haven't got the balance right yet but I trust you guys to tell me when/if ever I get there!!!!
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Jake How said:
Quote: roscoff @ March 27, 2008, 1:38 PMTwo penguins sitting at a table in a very posh restaurant. There is romantic music playing in the background
Penguin 1 looks around restaurant and taps table with flipper as he hums an inane tune.
Penguin 2 sighs and looks longingly into her glass.
Penguin 1 clears throat.
Penguin 1:
So......hows about those fish then?
View original
It is not very good sorry and I did not get the joke.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, EllieJP said:
Jake, that's not very constructive criticism is it? Think about what you're writing before you write it please.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Jake How said:
Where did you come from ? and I have changed what I said.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, wayne lewis said:
I quite liked this. Tho the end line for me doesn't work. "Hows about those fish then" make it sound like he's talking about a football team (is he?). Apart from that it was ok.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, EllieJP said:
Quote: Jake How @ March 28, 2008, 3:51 PMWhere did you come from ? and I have changed what I said.
View original
I am everywhere.
I liked it Roscoff. I could imagine it simply animated.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, F Green said:
I like the idea of a restaurant sketch featuring penguins,
It opens up a whole medley of one liners...
"Waiter I asked for this of the bone".
"Only one vegetarian option?"
"Oh bugger its all fish,I fancied a T-bone steak".
None of them especially funny BUT its got me thinking...
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, thing said:
With the greatest respect for anyone who posts their material here I have to say that I am completely bemused.
Not being the 'sharpest tool in the box' I concede that I may be completely missing the point but I really don't see it?
Please can someone explain the joke and please take into account that I might be dumb.
Thanks
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, roscoff said:
For the benefit of Thing and Jake it plays on the idea basically Penguins 'aint got much to talk about in their lives but its doubled up in a situation where in a dating or lets say an old married couple people sometimes don't really have a lot to say to each other either. Though the fact that you don't understand is fine.
By the way F green. I like 'Oh bugger its all fish'. I'd stop there with that one. Less can be more.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, thing said:
Quote: roscoff @ March 28, 2008, 11:21 PMits doubled up in a situation
View original
that's the bit I suspected was there but didn't see for a while.
Since I'm, maybe, 'average' in perception might I suggest you consider what percentage of people might understand that in a fast media environment?
In fairness, maybe the actual delivery of the lines would actually assist that and I do understand how that is difficult to reproduce in just plain text here.
Regards.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, roscoff said:
I don't mind if people don't get it. Its fine. In fact to be honest I like the fact some people don't get it. But then explain 'The Argument Sketch' in Monty Pyhton. Not that I'm comparing myself to the great and the good of that bunch but 'not getting it' is sometimes good because at least it gets you thinking about it. And we've discussed a lot about penguins which surely can never be a bad thing! 
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, thing said:
Quote: roscoff @ March 29, 2008, 12:01 AMI don't mind if people don't get it. Its fine. In fact to be honest I like the fact some people don't get it. But then explain 'The Argument Sketch' in Monty Pyhton. Not that I'm comparing myself to the great and the good of that bunch but 'not getting it' is sometimes good because at least it gets you thinking about it. And we've discussed a lot about penguins which surely can never be a bad thing!
View original
From what I've read elsewhere, someone is going to love this: Not directly relevant to this thread but quite important to anyone writing a sketch - English and punctuation! Sorry for the interim hijack.
There should be a colon or semi colon between either, ''It and ''Its'' or ''fine'' and ''In''.
There is some debate as to whether, had you used such, a capital letter should have followed the punctuation but in this case, as it would be 'I' in either scenario it becomes irrelevant.
That first ''Its'' needed an apostrophe.
Staring a sneteccewith ''And'' is a colpmete no-no - puinctuation is allabot how people breathe so yuo hav eto tthink how it will be deliverd virbly. The erlier senence starting ''Not'' was also open to contentiun on the grouunds it shuold have been preceded with colon .
The final semi clonon is a mystery!
I like your use of inverted commas/apotsrephes as I use them mysel but frequently disputd bny my language expert frien, They actually mean 'not quite the truth' but I, like you , use then to highlight expressions.
My own use , above, of - and ! are also contensheeeeeee contnetious but I see them as 'expressions'.
debate please the value of punctuation in a written shetch to enable performers to produce the original intention and the value of contentious, inaccurate, punctuation of expression/
Ta and regrads
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, David Chapman said:
Quote: thing @ March 29, 2008, 12:49 AM
Staring a sneteccewith ''And'' is a colpmete no-no - puinctuation is allabot how people breathe so yuo hav eto tthink how it will be deliverd virbly. The erlier senence starting ''Not'' was also open to contentiun on the grouunds it shuold have been preceded with colon .
Ta and regrads
View original
Ehhh???????///
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, thing said:
Oh lordy, it's all too eesy.yep i said eesy.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, zooo said:
He's clearly suffered a stroke mid-post.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, roscoff said:
Ok I've tried to be polite but you want to play rough. Fair enough. The fact that you don't get the sketch marks you down as just teensy-wheensy bit thick. Your punctuation might be smack on but your level of general intelligence is pretty fucking low. So in future I suggest you stay well away from my stuff because it is far and above anything you can comprehend. So in the words of one great philosopher- fuck off!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, ian_w said:
Quote: roscoff @ March 29, 2008, 1:30 AMSo in the words of one great philosopher- fuck off!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
View original
You've made me afraid of Fozzy now, it's just so wrong
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, roscoff said:
I know. He just gets cwazy!
Edit: By the way it was your avatar that set me up for this sketch. Love it or hate it. The sketch that is.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, ian_w said:
Yey, I'm a star!!
Oh yeah, and the sketch made me LOL. It's true though, life is so dull as a penguin - ignore all that glamour you see in Pingu is all just a big exaggeration!
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, thing said:
Quote: roscoff @ March 29, 2008, 1:30 AMOk I've tried to be polite but you want to play rough. Fair enough. The fact that you don't get the sketch marks you down as just teensy-wheensy bit thick. Your punctuation might be smack on but your level of general intelligence is pretty fucking low. So in future I suggest you stay well away from my stuff because it is far and above anything you can comprehend. So in the words of one great philosopher- fuck off!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
View original
Oh, I didn't think that was allowed on here. Not to worry. Actually, my punctuation is far from ''smack on'' as some people love to remind me but that's another story.
Play rough? Who are you kidding? I read the rules about this part of the forum and I understood constructive criticism to be allowed. Too much backslapping goes on in forums like this and I really wanted to offer an honest, neutral opinion so that people (and I have no idea who you are or your aspirations) can move forward.
I couldn't even begin to find the time to write sketches, etc. so I really do appreciate others' efforts. That said, I've been a bit disappointed with what I've read so far through 'Critique'. I don't doubt peoples' intentions but the worst of it boils down to '' A man walked into a shop and the door fell on him, hahahahaha.''
For your original post, the one in question, I really did not fully get it but maybe sort of half got it - sorry if I was slightly dishonest. Maybe I WAS and am quite thick but why do u take it personally? I thought the point I made about how well it might work in a fast media environment was very valid and isn't that what you aspire to?
Please don't intimate threats to me on-line again because my intentions are genuine even if my style might be a bit direct.
Good luck with your writing.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, ajp29 said:
Sorry to club this sketch like a baby seal but I didn't think it was very good. It wasn't funny and it wasn't that original.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, roscoff said:
Thing I have no probs you writng a critique on my sketch. Loathe it or love it. I draw the line at you writing a sarcastic and just plain bloody rude critique of my response to you which was a genuine reply. You asked it to be explained so I did. I took the time out to do it but what I got back was basically an insult. If you're going to write critique's of peoples work stick to the sketch. That's why they're written.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, sootyj said:
How about in a second version, she stares at him.
And he says,
"For the last the car broke down,"
"You blew a seal,"
Oldie but worth of resurrection?
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Paul W said:
Quote: thing @ March 29, 2008, 2:31 AMOh, I didn't think that was allowed on here. Not to worry. Actually, my punctuation is far from ''smack on'' as some people love to remind me but that's another story.
Play rough? Who are you kidding? I read the rules about this part of the forum and I understood constructive criticism to be allowed. Too much backslapping goes on in forums like this and I really wanted to offer an honest, neutral opinion so that people (and I have no idea who you are or your aspirations) can move forward.
I couldn't even begin to find the time to write sketches, etc. so I really do appreciate others' efforts. That said, I've been a bit disappointed with what I've read so far through 'Critique'. I don't doubt peoples' intentions but the worst of it boils down to '' A man walked into a shop and the door fell on him, hahahahaha.''
For your original post, the one in question, I really did not fully get it but maybe sort of half got it - sorry if I was slightly dishonest. Maybe I WAS and am quite thick but why do u take it personally? I thought the point I made about how well it might work in a fast media environment was very valid and isn't that what you aspire to?
Please don't intimate threats to me on-line again because my intentions are genuine even if my style might be a bit direct.
Good luck with your writing.
View original
A lot to go over here...
1. Sort your own spelling out before correcting others maybe?
2. Sarcasm isn't "Constructive criticism".
3. As for "Backslapping", Adams post just after yours was a negative opinion on the sketch in question... And we also have talented writers on the forum, what can I say?
And sorry we haven't impressed you so far, maybe you could post some of your sketches or sitcoms?
Good day
Quote: roscoff @ March 29, 2008, 1:30 AMOk I've tried to be polite but you want to play rough. Fair enough. The fact that you don't get the sketch marks you down as just teensy-wheensy bit thick. Your punctuation might be smack on but your level of general intelligence is pretty fucking low. So in future I suggest you stay well away from my stuff because it is far and above anything you can comprehend. So in the words of one great philosopher- fuck off!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
View original
Take it easy Roscoff, no need for it dude. Lets just stick on the topic of why you started this thread.
PS - while I'm here it wasn't my cup of tea mate, might work if it was two guys in suits
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Charley said:
Short & Sharp. I liked it!
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, roscoff said:
Quote: Paul W @ March 29, 2008, 6:33 PM
PS - while I'm here it wasn't my cup of tea mate, might work if it was two guys in suits
View original
Tuxedo's. Yep. Nice take.