Russell Peters is to comedy what Franzia is to fine wine.
Why?
haha!
memorise a lot of yo mama jokes. When you land an interview in the U.S., use as much jokes as you can in a fast pace. Then take a pen, stand up, extend your arm , and drop it.
^ haha
Russell Peters has pretty much one joke…
Because Franzia bastardizes the notion of wine, and Peters bastardizes the notion of comedy. Clear?
I do think you can learn to be a funny. Comedians have to write jokes for stand-up, so why can’t you?
However, being funny day-to-day, such as an office environment, is different from being funny in stand-up. To be funny in day-to-day you really have to understand your target audience as what’s funny to one person isn’t funny to another. Also, you have to build prior rapport with your audience; if you start telling jokes to random people, you’ll probably just creep them out.
I think this is what makes stand-up harder to do than just being funny around the office. Generally, in the office you have a more homogeneous group, or at least there are enough commonalities that people can indentify where the humorous situation is because of common experiences and common frustrations.
In stand-up routines, you have to connect with an audience that is much more randomly selected. Different backgrounds, intelligences, experiences. So the area of common experiences that can generate a laugh is often narrower and harder to identify.
People that need this explained = People suited for Russell Peters “comedy”
On a related note, Daniel Tosh: Funny or Not
The funniest man alive is Al Gaddafi
I see your point and I agree to a certain extent.
However, in stand-up, once you get the audience laughing, other people tend to join in as well. Also, in stand-up you can touch on racist/sexist/shock and other hairy subjects.
Humor in the office setting tends to convey the feeling of “i’m socialable and willing to take things lightly”. Most jokes in the office setting aren’t really funny at all. How many times have you heard “Happy Monday!” or “so, here are the smartest folks in the firm… and here they are on google”; neither of the phrases are funny, but they do break the ice and release tension.
You know, this one is a bit tougher. I catch the last few minutes of Tosh.0 since the DVR begins recording Inside Amy Schumer a few minutes early. Every now and then, I’ll watch those few minutes and think, maybe I should record his shows, since these few minutes are mildly amusing. But I just can’t bring myself over the margin to commit. So I would say, funny, but not funny enough.
At this point, you may be asking why the hell I would be recording the Schumer show. And for that one, I place the blame on others in my household.
For me, very very funny!
I find that Tosh goes into potentially offensive and mean material but mostly does not deliver a punch line that makes it worth doing. It ends up sounding like the bully in junior high who figures it’s funny to say mean things to people who aren’t able (for whatever reason) to fight back.
If you’re going to go to those subjects, then pull out a punch line that’s clever and original, and not just something a 7th grader might say. Otherwise it sounds like you’re asking us to laugh at “so I saw this girl, and she was really ugly, ha ha ha ha ha!” Why would that be funny, Daniel???
That one’s definitely better than Tosh. It uses a lot of misdirection and reference point shifts. I personally like those techniques. It also is driven by this attitude of bitterness and anger that is palpable. If he didn’t act out that attitude that shows that he’s being excessive because he’s bitter, the material wouldn’t fly.
Amy Schumer is painful to watch, have no idea how she’s getting so much airtime.
This guy is pretty intriguing, he’s going to be replacing Jon Stewart.
Black Americans, Aids and Jacob Zuma.