A good jazz musician knows the rules of music. They choose which ones to bend and which ones to break. When a couple of rules are broken here and there it’s pleasurable and exciting.
The core of humor is doing something unexpected. “Willy Wonka makes turnips” is unexpected. The same is true with “Charlie doesn’t like what Willy Wonka makes”.
The problem is that both of those things are telegraphed really early, thus defusing any surprise they could have delivered. By the last frame we expect Charlie to have a bad time at Willy Wonka’s factory, and he does.
This comic is making animal noises into a microphone and Chuck Berry wants to slap the shit out of it.
Have you ever seen like anything from Monty Python? i’m genuinely curious I know comedy is, obviously, subjective, but this comic has a distinctive quality and it’s hard for me to see it labeled as “shitty”.
Yeah, I’ve seen all of Flying Circus and all of their movies.
Monty Python did absurdist stuff, but they didn’t violate core principles of timing and surprise. Jokes recurred or dragged at times without overstaying their welcome.
A piece of absurdist humor still needs to be humorous. Being weird doesn’t absolve something from being boring or pointless.
I don’t know what to tell you, if Monty were to do this it’d be dragged longer, the stern granpa would be histerically yelling and beating Charlie the whole way through and 8 minutes into the sketch an oompa loompa would walk in a suit and reference a line from 6 sketches before.
But I guess everybody truly is different and that’s ok, I guess. Maybe.
Yeah, and there would have been a bunch of punchlines throughout.
Storytelling of any kind is about setups and payoffs. The comic has two actual, decent setups and zero payoffs. In fact all of the praise for the comic comes from people (including you) who explicitly said what made them laugh was what they "imagined*.
It’s the creator’s job to actually provide a good payoff at the end. Yes, threads can be left hanging. Yes, things can be left to the imagination. But in this case specifically both of those strategies are abused to the point that the only way this comic is even passable is if readers are extremely charitable and provide their own ending.
“Subverting expectations” is like jazz.
A good jazz musician knows the rules of music. They choose which ones to bend and which ones to break. When a couple of rules are broken here and there it’s pleasurable and exciting.
When too many rules are broken, it’s Yoko Ono.
Sure, but I think this is not Yoko Ono.
The core of humor is doing something unexpected. “Willy Wonka makes turnips” is unexpected. The same is true with “Charlie doesn’t like what Willy Wonka makes”.
The problem is that both of those things are telegraphed really early, thus defusing any surprise they could have delivered. By the last frame we expect Charlie to have a bad time at Willy Wonka’s factory, and he does.
This comic is making animal noises into a microphone and Chuck Berry wants to slap the shit out of it.
You are not thinking with portals.
Yep, it’s definitely that and not the fact that this is a dogshit comic.
Nosiree.
Have you ever seen like anything from Monty Python? i’m genuinely curious I know comedy is, obviously, subjective, but this comic has a distinctive quality and it’s hard for me to see it labeled as “shitty”.
Yeah, I’ve seen all of Flying Circus and all of their movies.
Monty Python did absurdist stuff, but they didn’t violate core principles of timing and surprise. Jokes recurred or dragged at times without overstaying their welcome.
A piece of absurdist humor still needs to be humorous. Being weird doesn’t absolve something from being boring or pointless.
I don’t know what to tell you, if Monty were to do this it’d be dragged longer, the stern granpa would be histerically yelling and beating Charlie the whole way through and 8 minutes into the sketch an oompa loompa would walk in a suit and reference a line from 6 sketches before.
But I guess everybody truly is different and that’s ok, I guess. Maybe.
That’s the thing, I feel like this comic didn’t drag on long enough. It ended too early to tell us the full joke.
Yeah, and there would have been a bunch of punchlines throughout.
Storytelling of any kind is about setups and payoffs. The comic has two actual, decent setups and zero payoffs. In fact all of the praise for the comic comes from people (including you) who explicitly said what made them laugh was what they "imagined*.
It’s the creator’s job to actually provide a good payoff at the end. Yes, threads can be left hanging. Yes, things can be left to the imagination. But in this case specifically both of those strategies are abused to the point that the only way this comic is even passable is if readers are extremely charitable and provide their own ending.