Over the last few weeks, Mullet and I have been spending a lot of time discussing web video, and I realized haven’t written about it here very much.
When I started buying video gear seven years ago, the 3 major players in web video were QuickTime, Real Player, and Windows Media Player. All three played a range of codecs, but there weren’t easy ways of moving between the three formats. Being a Mac user, I used QuickTime by default, but I did have the other two players on my computer.
The players were all clunky and finicky. It wasn’t uncommon to see reduced frame-rates, lowered resolution, and even minimal action to make things look better.
Back then, I didn’t have a website or even an internet connection. The main means of delivering video was by running the signal from my capture card to my VCR. VHS was king—everyone, amateur or professional, used tape.
When I upgraded and got my G4, I suddenly had a DVD-R burner, and that led me to supplement Final Cut Pro with DVD Studio Pro (a couple months later, the Final Cut Studio bundle came out at a lower price than what it cost me to buy FCP and DVD-SP separately—thanks, Apple!).
Thus equipped, in 2003 I made history at the late, great Second Ciné video show by being the first to submit a video on DVD. But it was still a VHS world, and I backed up that DVD by exporting my clips to my VCR.
When I traded in my G4 for my G5, the new PCI expansion slot arrangement rendered my capture card useless, so I dropped the VHS option completely. By then, DVD burners were cheap enough that the indie world had shifted away from VHS.
DVD seemed to be the new king, unbeatable with its portability and flexibility. You could play it on your TV with a regular DVD player, or you could put it in a DVD-equipped computer. DVD sprouted in rental stores and retailers, offering special features and all the things impossible on VHS (subtitles and audio tracks in different languages, commentary tracks, alternate endings, etc, etc). The disks didn’t wear out like all tape-based technologies do—with care and handling, you would see the same image quality on the 1000th play as you would on the first play.
For an indie producer, you could easily crank out a DVD (maybe not the DVD-9 dual-layer format, but something that worked in most players and nearly all computers) that looked and played the same as the big boys’ disks.
I bought the 3rd edition of Chris Gore’s excellent film festival book in 2005, and we started to base our video efforts on the advice given. Film festivals were still king, and most of the ones that encouraged indie contributions readily accepted all the digital formats.
I bought Gore’s follow-up book on producing indie DVDs and used it as the main guide for our first appearance at the San Diego Comicon in 2006.
But it was at San Diego that I saw the future, and its name was not DVD but web video.
The big 3 players were still in the game, but Apple had introduced a new wrinkle—the iPod and iTunes. With incredible ease, you could download podcasts and listen to them on your Mac or iPod. The arrival of video-capable iPods sparked video podcasting. Flash video had arrived in force, with the help of some serious web video sites like YouTube. The big three media players changed membership, with Real player becoming a distant fourth. In fact, by 2006, I didn’t even have Real installed on my G5 as nobody was putting out video that QuickTime or WMP wouldn’t handle.
Gore and Mark Bell from Film Threat hosted a couple of panels at the con’s film festival (where my costumed appearance got some nasty looks from the black-clad filmistas—clearly a line is drawn in some people’s minds between the film fest and the convention itself!), and I attended a couple of them.
In one panel, Gore and Bell introduced the two guys behind Ask a Ninja as well as a couple of people from Hope is Emo, two of the most popular podcasts. I was still sans-internet at home, so I wasn’t aware of how big podcasting and web video had become. More people were watching these online videos than hundreds of film festivals put together.
But the indie aspect of these productions—Ninja was shot in the star’s apartment (painted up for green-screen production)—made it clear that you didn’t need a lot of money, just enough technology and, of course, a good idea well executed, to build an audience.
DVD suddenly looked less essential, just like VHS. Apple introduced its TV interface, and with flatscreen TVs and computer monitors becoming essentially the same, the average consumer realized they didn’t need a disk or tape to watch movies, TV shows, and indie video. The messy blue laser fight didn’t help, with the traditional market split into 3 different camps—DVD loyalists, Blu-Ray, and HD-DVD. Even with HD-DVD losing the fight, most people I know aren’t rushing into the blue laser world. After seeing CDs largely replaced by web music, most people are expecting the same of video.
So… in the 9 years I have been dabbling with indie video, I have seen it change completely. A physical product is no longer the primary goal since you can find a larger audience thorugh the magic of internet pixels.
Mullet and I are prepping our old feature, Babysitters, for web in small chapters. Our long-in-development DVD project is now a web video project with a DVD version also available. We’ll follow the footsteps of successful web video people like Rob Schrab or the guys behind Chad Vader and put the videos online and make a full-quality DVD available for sale.
More on web video to come. After all, it’s Tuesday. There’ll probably be some new development on Wednesday….
Showing posts with label TV. Show all posts
Showing posts with label TV. Show all posts
Tuesday, July 22, 2008
Thursday, June 26, 2008
Thank you, Ed & Red’s Night Party
Ed & Red’s Night Party will go off the air in August. The new owners of CITY-TV here in Toronto are ridding the station of everything that made it unique in Toronto: Speaker’s Corner, Ed the Sock….
This is a shame—CITY was the fun station, sometimes annoyingly pretentious like Queen West can be, but never boring or entirely predictable like its buttoned-down, blandly corporate competitors.
Ed the Sock started out on the cable access channel with the nefarious Rogers Cable in 1992. Stars on press junkets through Toronto started to stop by a talk show hosted by a puppet who pulled no punches. I never saw the show on cable as I was still an over-the-airwaves viewer, but I knew about it by way of the media and friends who did have access to it.
A mere two years later, the Sock got called up to the big leagues at CITY. The show was a must-see on Friday nights. There were a few sidekicks along for the ride (Humble Howard of CFNY being the first one at CITY, and Craig Campbell in either the 3rd or 4th season). But as talented as they were, the Sock was still the main draw as he insulted guests, the show, the audience….
Ed’s Night Party was, for a long time, the only night time talk show in Toronto and Ontario (probably Canada, too).
The leading national networks, CBC and CTV, both launched high-profile, late night talk shows, the CBC doing a weekly show and CTV doing 5-nights a week. Both efforts were clones of the big US shows, down to the placement of the desk and the guest chairs (with the requisite funny musical director and the house band to one side, of course). Both were entertaining in their own way, but they broke no new ground and both efforts eventually left the air after ratings slipped away due to boredom.
But the Sock was refreshingly original. You never knew what was going to happen on the show next, something that even Letterman couldn’t claim. You couldn’t jump into the middle of the show and know exactly where the show was (opening monologue/comedy bit/first guest… they’re still following this calcified format).
After turning into a day-job wage slave, my nights began to end earlier and earlier, and I stopped watching Ed the Sock, Letterman and the rest at some point. Heck, I even stopped watching Saturday Night Live and missed that whole Tina Fey revival. I didn’t start watching Ed the Sock again until we met Ed and Red at a comic-con here in Toronto.
Ed & Red’s had evolved into a different show from the what I’d watched the first 3 years he was on CITY—the interviews were usually done in the field, and the bikini quota went way up. The comedy remained edgy, however, and Ed & Red are tremendous improvisers, ranging from groan-out-loud puns to edgy barbs aimed at society’s sacred cows. The show self-mockingly went for the young male demographic with spring break footage of wet t-shirt and bikini contests, topless hot tub girls, and some of the dirtiest jokes ever told on Canadian TV.
The show is less predictable in this late incarnation, breaking away from the monologue-sketch-guest-guest-guest format that has solidified the genre into an indistinguishable ritual—only the host, the set dressing, and onscreen graphics distinguish the big American shows (Jimmy Kimmel providing a breath of fresh air but not as popular as a result). Ed the Sock, meanwhile, marching to his own drummer , made his cast of dancers, tub girls, DJs, and his co-host Red into a complete repertory company capable of doing anything.
I hope we haven’t seen the last of Ed the Sock, but I do know that Ed and Red will do well in their next step, whatever form that takes.
CITY-TV, meanwhile, won’t be the same with all the fun tossed out like yesterday’s garbage. I fear the one station that embraced the great city of Toronto will become another bland corporate entity, indistinguishable from the safe, generic, predictable dullness of the other Toronto stations.
Maybe it’s better that the Sock is now free of the new CITY—it would be sad to see him sanitized into something he is not.
This is a shame—CITY was the fun station, sometimes annoyingly pretentious like Queen West can be, but never boring or entirely predictable like its buttoned-down, blandly corporate competitors.
Ed the Sock started out on the cable access channel with the nefarious Rogers Cable in 1992. Stars on press junkets through Toronto started to stop by a talk show hosted by a puppet who pulled no punches. I never saw the show on cable as I was still an over-the-airwaves viewer, but I knew about it by way of the media and friends who did have access to it.
A mere two years later, the Sock got called up to the big leagues at CITY. The show was a must-see on Friday nights. There were a few sidekicks along for the ride (Humble Howard of CFNY being the first one at CITY, and Craig Campbell in either the 3rd or 4th season). But as talented as they were, the Sock was still the main draw as he insulted guests, the show, the audience….
Ed’s Night Party was, for a long time, the only night time talk show in Toronto and Ontario (probably Canada, too).
The leading national networks, CBC and CTV, both launched high-profile, late night talk shows, the CBC doing a weekly show and CTV doing 5-nights a week. Both efforts were clones of the big US shows, down to the placement of the desk and the guest chairs (with the requisite funny musical director and the house band to one side, of course). Both were entertaining in their own way, but they broke no new ground and both efforts eventually left the air after ratings slipped away due to boredom.
But the Sock was refreshingly original. You never knew what was going to happen on the show next, something that even Letterman couldn’t claim. You couldn’t jump into the middle of the show and know exactly where the show was (opening monologue/comedy bit/first guest… they’re still following this calcified format).
After turning into a day-job wage slave, my nights began to end earlier and earlier, and I stopped watching Ed the Sock, Letterman and the rest at some point. Heck, I even stopped watching Saturday Night Live and missed that whole Tina Fey revival. I didn’t start watching Ed the Sock again until we met Ed and Red at a comic-con here in Toronto.
Ed & Red’s had evolved into a different show from the what I’d watched the first 3 years he was on CITY—the interviews were usually done in the field, and the bikini quota went way up. The comedy remained edgy, however, and Ed & Red are tremendous improvisers, ranging from groan-out-loud puns to edgy barbs aimed at society’s sacred cows. The show self-mockingly went for the young male demographic with spring break footage of wet t-shirt and bikini contests, topless hot tub girls, and some of the dirtiest jokes ever told on Canadian TV.
The show is less predictable in this late incarnation, breaking away from the monologue-sketch-guest-guest-guest format that has solidified the genre into an indistinguishable ritual—only the host, the set dressing, and onscreen graphics distinguish the big American shows (Jimmy Kimmel providing a breath of fresh air but not as popular as a result). Ed the Sock, meanwhile, marching to his own drummer , made his cast of dancers, tub girls, DJs, and his co-host Red into a complete repertory company capable of doing anything.
I hope we haven’t seen the last of Ed the Sock, but I do know that Ed and Red will do well in their next step, whatever form that takes.
CITY-TV, meanwhile, won’t be the same with all the fun tossed out like yesterday’s garbage. I fear the one station that embraced the great city of Toronto will become another bland corporate entity, indistinguishable from the safe, generic, predictable dullness of the other Toronto stations.
Maybe it’s better that the Sock is now free of the new CITY—it would be sad to see him sanitized into something he is not.
Tuesday, June 10, 2008
Dance of the Sugar Plum Scaries
Our 3rd appearance on Ed & Red’s Night Party aired on Friday (June 6), with the repeat running on Sunday, June 8. As I wrote back on April 24, this was an appearance in a sketch rather than being guests plugging something on the show.
Should Ed & Red post the clip, I’ll link to it here as I think we did some of our best work so far on that sketch.
That leaves one more appearance yet to air. Our fourth appearance is just a cameo, and it should last a few seconds rather than minutes.
You’ll get a chance to meet Ed & Red, as well as Miller & Mullet, at the Paradise Toronto Comicon, which runs July 12-13 at the Holiday Inn on King. This show is dedicated to comic books, so if you’re a fan of sequential art, drop by and say hello.
Should Ed & Red post the clip, I’ll link to it here as I think we did some of our best work so far on that sketch.
That leaves one more appearance yet to air. Our fourth appearance is just a cameo, and it should last a few seconds rather than minutes.
You’ll get a chance to meet Ed & Red, as well as Miller & Mullet, at the Paradise Toronto Comicon, which runs July 12-13 at the Holiday Inn on King. This show is dedicated to comic books, so if you’re a fan of sequential art, drop by and say hello.
Thursday, April 24, 2008
Two More Socks for Miller & Mullet
This past weekend, we completed two more appearances, our third and fourth, on Ed & Red’s Night Party. Back in December, I had written about our second appearance and our experience in a multi-camera situation.
Our third appearance is a cameo, at the end of an episode where Ed the Sock has decided to sell his studio and has allowed potential buyers to look at the place while they’re shooting. We cap this gag with our arrival with our bags packed at the end of the episode, and we may appear in the closing credits, fighting beside the desk. As in our earlier appearances, the producers gave us a very loose description of what we were to do (a cue line and the instructions to fight beside the desk), so we went out and did it. It was fun, but I don’t think it was as good as our earlier appearances. Maybe the editing will prove me wrong—I’m going on my gut response to what we did without having seen the raw or edited results. I think I wasn’t fully prepared for the cameo, and I think it will show. Mullet said he wasn’t comfortable with it, either. But it’s in the can, and the only thing to do is learn from the experience and move on.
Mullet has plenty of improv experience, so he’s more adept at winging it. But I’ve always worked better in situations where I plan things out in advance, like with a script. As a duo, we realized after the cameo that collectively we work better with a plan.
Our fourth appearance is our first appearance in a sketch rather than as part of the show itself, so the producers gave us more structure this time. Without giving too much away, we were part of a parody of high culture, ballet to be specific.
The producers shot it before the actual episode as an isolated segment. This meant we didn’t have to worry about any cues outside of the sketch itself. After the dinner break, we went into the studio to work it out and shoot it.
They’d told us the day before what we were to do in the sketch, so we’d had time to start thinking about what we were going to do. We talked over what I would do and what Mullet would do and what our motivations would be. We came up with a pretty good idea of the beats we’d follow, who would do what and when. If the sketch was to change, we’d have to rethink things, but we were prepared, at least, to adapt our plan or come up with something new, if needed.
We weren’t alone in the sketch—there were 6 others appearing on-camera (Liana K., 3 of the bikini girls, and 2 dancers)—so we had some logistics to work out on top of the beats of the sketch itself.
At first, we went with the two dancers to the studio floor with the director and the crew. The dancers worked out their moves with the music and then Mullet and I walked through what we had planned. Everyone laughed at the right times, so we knew we’d made the right plan.
We had to change one thing—I was facing away from the closeup camera, so I had to turn to my left instead of my right. Not a big deal—Mullet helped by approaching me on my left side. A few more walkthroughs and we were ready to go.
We got to use breakaway props for the first time. We had enough props to do one take, so we didn’t even rehearse with them. When the props were unpacked and placed on the set, the producer made sure cast and crew knew where they were and that they were fragile. Fortunately, the props broke in the sketch and not before.
I liked one of our final rehearsals—it got a laugh from the rest of the people on the floor, and it felt good. We did one more to make sure the cameras were in the right place, and then it was time to go to work.
Liana and one of the girls introduced the segment, the dancers danced, the other bikini girls heralded my entrance, I did my thing, Mullet came out and did his thing, we broke the props, and it was done. All in one take with all four cameras on our set. I ended the sketch on the floor, trying not to breath hard after a bit of a workout, until they’d made sure everything in the trailer was okay. Then we were done.
I liked that second-last rehearsal better than the actual take, but I was working to the audience of cast and crew in the rehearsal—that laughter wasn’t there during the take because they’re all doing their jobs when the tape is rolling. We did get applause backstage from the other people there, so it must have looked good on the monitor there.
I’m looking forward to seeing both performances. Watch our website www.millerandmullet.com or join our Facebook page for updates on airdates.
Our third appearance is a cameo, at the end of an episode where Ed the Sock has decided to sell his studio and has allowed potential buyers to look at the place while they’re shooting. We cap this gag with our arrival with our bags packed at the end of the episode, and we may appear in the closing credits, fighting beside the desk. As in our earlier appearances, the producers gave us a very loose description of what we were to do (a cue line and the instructions to fight beside the desk), so we went out and did it. It was fun, but I don’t think it was as good as our earlier appearances. Maybe the editing will prove me wrong—I’m going on my gut response to what we did without having seen the raw or edited results. I think I wasn’t fully prepared for the cameo, and I think it will show. Mullet said he wasn’t comfortable with it, either. But it’s in the can, and the only thing to do is learn from the experience and move on.
Mullet has plenty of improv experience, so he’s more adept at winging it. But I’ve always worked better in situations where I plan things out in advance, like with a script. As a duo, we realized after the cameo that collectively we work better with a plan.
Our fourth appearance is our first appearance in a sketch rather than as part of the show itself, so the producers gave us more structure this time. Without giving too much away, we were part of a parody of high culture, ballet to be specific.
The producers shot it before the actual episode as an isolated segment. This meant we didn’t have to worry about any cues outside of the sketch itself. After the dinner break, we went into the studio to work it out and shoot it.
They’d told us the day before what we were to do in the sketch, so we’d had time to start thinking about what we were going to do. We talked over what I would do and what Mullet would do and what our motivations would be. We came up with a pretty good idea of the beats we’d follow, who would do what and when. If the sketch was to change, we’d have to rethink things, but we were prepared, at least, to adapt our plan or come up with something new, if needed.
We weren’t alone in the sketch—there were 6 others appearing on-camera (Liana K., 3 of the bikini girls, and 2 dancers)—so we had some logistics to work out on top of the beats of the sketch itself.
At first, we went with the two dancers to the studio floor with the director and the crew. The dancers worked out their moves with the music and then Mullet and I walked through what we had planned. Everyone laughed at the right times, so we knew we’d made the right plan.
We had to change one thing—I was facing away from the closeup camera, so I had to turn to my left instead of my right. Not a big deal—Mullet helped by approaching me on my left side. A few more walkthroughs and we were ready to go.
We got to use breakaway props for the first time. We had enough props to do one take, so we didn’t even rehearse with them. When the props were unpacked and placed on the set, the producer made sure cast and crew knew where they were and that they were fragile. Fortunately, the props broke in the sketch and not before.
I liked one of our final rehearsals—it got a laugh from the rest of the people on the floor, and it felt good. We did one more to make sure the cameras were in the right place, and then it was time to go to work.
Liana and one of the girls introduced the segment, the dancers danced, the other bikini girls heralded my entrance, I did my thing, Mullet came out and did his thing, we broke the props, and it was done. All in one take with all four cameras on our set. I ended the sketch on the floor, trying not to breath hard after a bit of a workout, until they’d made sure everything in the trailer was okay. Then we were done.
I liked that second-last rehearsal better than the actual take, but I was working to the audience of cast and crew in the rehearsal—that laughter wasn’t there during the take because they’re all doing their jobs when the tape is rolling. We did get applause backstage from the other people there, so it must have looked good on the monitor there.
I’m looking forward to seeing both performances. Watch our website www.millerandmullet.com or join our Facebook page for updates on airdates.
Friday, March 14, 2008
The Young Ones
Ask us who our biggest influences are, and we’ll likely include The Young Ones near the top of the list, along with the Marx Brothers, Laurel & Hardy, Abbott & Costello, Rush, etc.
We often have to explain who The Young Ones are—the show didn’t run here in Canada until the 1990’s, long after they’d left the air in the U.K., and only on MuchMusic, Canada’s music video channel, at weird hours. The show centred on four college roommates (a revolutionary poet, a punk, a hippie, and a con artist) who, for me, personified the punk aspects of the new wave of British comedy in the late 70’s and early 80’s.
For more information about the show and its place in the history of comedy, check out this Wikipedia article.
I once worked with a real-life anarchist, and he was the one who recommended The Young Ones to me. I bought a VHS tape of the first 3 or 4 episodes, and I loved it. I eventually got all four tapes to complete the collection.
So why The Young Ones?
First, the show is very funny. I still laugh after many repeated viewings. Like all great comedy, it’s not predictable, and the inherent friction between the four main characters drives the show and the comedy. The Young Ones was my first forays into the 80’s new wave of British comedy, so it was as refreshing to me as Monty Python’s Flying Circus was when as a kid I saw the reruns on PBS.
Second, for a TV show, there was a lot of physical comedy. TV relies heavily on the verbal branch of comedy, so I’m always pleased when I see good physical comedy on a TV show (Three’s Company, for instance, is one old show I’ve rediscovered as a great source of slapstick—John Ritter was one of the greats). In its day, the usual grim types criticized The Young Ones for the cartoonish violence, as was Rik Mayall and Ade Edmundson’s earlier work with as the Dangerous Brothers. But the violence is so over the top that a small child can tell that it wasn’t real or to be emulated. Rick embeds a pick ax in Vyvyan’s skull, yet Vyvyan survives. Vyvyan is the most violent, frequently using his trusty cricket bat to restore or destroy order, but he resorts to using frying pans and even a window to punish Neil, the hippie, for being himself. The Young Ones were so physical that there were a lot of master shots and medium shots to capture the action, and very few closeups as you find with most verbal comedy. As a result, the show often feels like a filmed stage play rather than a sitcom.
Third, the structure of the episodes was disjoined and surreal. The A-plot revolved around that week’s adventure with the four main characters, but it the writers weren’t afraid to make the plot somewhat non-linear, such as “Bambi” where the boys conduct a mission to the laundromat, then hop on a train to be on a gameshow. The writers also interrupted frequently with cutaways and brief b-plots. The diversions varied, ranging from live action scenes to the use of puppets (including Vyvyan’s pet hamster Special Patrol Group as well as skating vegetables, a shark, filmmaking flies, and cannibalistic rats). The live action scenes usually segued between scenes of the main plot and had nothing to do with the rest of the show. My favourite is the Narnia parody in “Flood.” Alexei Sayle would also appear, as their landlord Jerzy Balowski or one of Balowski’s relatives, and do a standup bit, sing a song about his Doc Martins (“Oil”), or even become part of the A-plot. The structure reflects how they wrote the scripts: Ben Elton would take the material Rik Mayall and Lise Mayer had written together and incorporate it into the material he’d written, making for a melding of styles, plots, and ideas. This was no American sitcom with a strong A-plot supported by a comic-relief B-plot.
The Young Ones was a big influence on our first video effort, Babysitters. We wrote the script separately—Mullet was two time zones away that summer—so we unknowingly emulated the way the writers worked on the show.
The Young Ones’ spirited anarchy puts it in the same part of town as the Marx Brothers. They attack the status quo with a glee and energy that draws the audience in—you find yourself rooting for them. It’s classic outsider humour—us versus them—and we identify with the outsiders in this case. The four leads are all poor (except maybe Mike who seems to be running some sort of underworld empire at times), and they end the series as homeless bank robbers on the run. They follow the tradition of the Marx Brothers, who frequently played penniless immigrants who conned their way into the halls of the wealthy.
Even when they are shown amongst their fellow students, the Young Ones maintain their outsider status. The party they host in “Interesting” reveals Rick to be awkward in a social situation. Later, Rick is mocked by a bomb-plotting anarchist after he discovers Rick is just a posturing rebel. Vyvyan’s friends are violent punks, the extreme outsiders, yet he admits he’d like to join the police force. Neil’s hippy friends seem the most like him, but in another episode, “Cash,” he becomes a police officer and arrests them at another party. Mike is the only one to not have outside friends shown in the episodes, but he seems to be the most connected of the group (has employees running a roller disco, got Bambi a TV commercial job, and is blackmailing the dean).
The Young Ones has a strong political streak, with frequent references to Margaret Thatcher’s government. Being Canadian, I can easily substitute “Thatcher” for “Mulroney,” and I immediately remember a time when a conservative government polarized the country during the economic and political turmoil as well as the Cold War rumblings of the 1980’s. The show contains the uncertainty and pessimism of the early 80’s quite well.
When The Young Ones first aired in 1982, the top sitcoms here in North America were Family Ties and Cheers, alongside existing shows like MASH, Buffalo Bill, and Webster.
When the second series of The Young Ones ran in 1984, Who’s the Boss, AfterMASH, and Night Court were starting out here. None of these shows were anything like The Young Ones, so it’s little wonder that the show didn’t air here until long after—and on specialty cable channels. Fox apparently made a pilot for an adaptation of the show with only Nigel Planer crossing the Atlantic, but the network decided not to make it a series.
Next time, a rambling look at another Mayall/Edmondson collaboration, Bottom.
We often have to explain who The Young Ones are—the show didn’t run here in Canada until the 1990’s, long after they’d left the air in the U.K., and only on MuchMusic, Canada’s music video channel, at weird hours. The show centred on four college roommates (a revolutionary poet, a punk, a hippie, and a con artist) who, for me, personified the punk aspects of the new wave of British comedy in the late 70’s and early 80’s.
For more information about the show and its place in the history of comedy, check out this Wikipedia article.
I once worked with a real-life anarchist, and he was the one who recommended The Young Ones to me. I bought a VHS tape of the first 3 or 4 episodes, and I loved it. I eventually got all four tapes to complete the collection.
So why The Young Ones?
First, the show is very funny. I still laugh after many repeated viewings. Like all great comedy, it’s not predictable, and the inherent friction between the four main characters drives the show and the comedy. The Young Ones was my first forays into the 80’s new wave of British comedy, so it was as refreshing to me as Monty Python’s Flying Circus was when as a kid I saw the reruns on PBS.
Second, for a TV show, there was a lot of physical comedy. TV relies heavily on the verbal branch of comedy, so I’m always pleased when I see good physical comedy on a TV show (Three’s Company, for instance, is one old show I’ve rediscovered as a great source of slapstick—John Ritter was one of the greats). In its day, the usual grim types criticized The Young Ones for the cartoonish violence, as was Rik Mayall and Ade Edmundson’s earlier work with as the Dangerous Brothers. But the violence is so over the top that a small child can tell that it wasn’t real or to be emulated. Rick embeds a pick ax in Vyvyan’s skull, yet Vyvyan survives. Vyvyan is the most violent, frequently using his trusty cricket bat to restore or destroy order, but he resorts to using frying pans and even a window to punish Neil, the hippie, for being himself. The Young Ones were so physical that there were a lot of master shots and medium shots to capture the action, and very few closeups as you find with most verbal comedy. As a result, the show often feels like a filmed stage play rather than a sitcom.
Third, the structure of the episodes was disjoined and surreal. The A-plot revolved around that week’s adventure with the four main characters, but it the writers weren’t afraid to make the plot somewhat non-linear, such as “Bambi” where the boys conduct a mission to the laundromat, then hop on a train to be on a gameshow. The writers also interrupted frequently with cutaways and brief b-plots. The diversions varied, ranging from live action scenes to the use of puppets (including Vyvyan’s pet hamster Special Patrol Group as well as skating vegetables, a shark, filmmaking flies, and cannibalistic rats). The live action scenes usually segued between scenes of the main plot and had nothing to do with the rest of the show. My favourite is the Narnia parody in “Flood.” Alexei Sayle would also appear, as their landlord Jerzy Balowski or one of Balowski’s relatives, and do a standup bit, sing a song about his Doc Martins (“Oil”), or even become part of the A-plot. The structure reflects how they wrote the scripts: Ben Elton would take the material Rik Mayall and Lise Mayer had written together and incorporate it into the material he’d written, making for a melding of styles, plots, and ideas. This was no American sitcom with a strong A-plot supported by a comic-relief B-plot.
The Young Ones was a big influence on our first video effort, Babysitters. We wrote the script separately—Mullet was two time zones away that summer—so we unknowingly emulated the way the writers worked on the show.
The Young Ones’ spirited anarchy puts it in the same part of town as the Marx Brothers. They attack the status quo with a glee and energy that draws the audience in—you find yourself rooting for them. It’s classic outsider humour—us versus them—and we identify with the outsiders in this case. The four leads are all poor (except maybe Mike who seems to be running some sort of underworld empire at times), and they end the series as homeless bank robbers on the run. They follow the tradition of the Marx Brothers, who frequently played penniless immigrants who conned their way into the halls of the wealthy.
Even when they are shown amongst their fellow students, the Young Ones maintain their outsider status. The party they host in “Interesting” reveals Rick to be awkward in a social situation. Later, Rick is mocked by a bomb-plotting anarchist after he discovers Rick is just a posturing rebel. Vyvyan’s friends are violent punks, the extreme outsiders, yet he admits he’d like to join the police force. Neil’s hippy friends seem the most like him, but in another episode, “Cash,” he becomes a police officer and arrests them at another party. Mike is the only one to not have outside friends shown in the episodes, but he seems to be the most connected of the group (has employees running a roller disco, got Bambi a TV commercial job, and is blackmailing the dean).
The Young Ones has a strong political streak, with frequent references to Margaret Thatcher’s government. Being Canadian, I can easily substitute “Thatcher” for “Mulroney,” and I immediately remember a time when a conservative government polarized the country during the economic and political turmoil as well as the Cold War rumblings of the 1980’s. The show contains the uncertainty and pessimism of the early 80’s quite well.
When The Young Ones first aired in 1982, the top sitcoms here in North America were Family Ties and Cheers, alongside existing shows like MASH, Buffalo Bill, and Webster.
When the second series of The Young Ones ran in 1984, Who’s the Boss, AfterMASH, and Night Court were starting out here. None of these shows were anything like The Young Ones, so it’s little wonder that the show didn’t air here until long after—and on specialty cable channels. Fox apparently made a pilot for an adaptation of the show with only Nigel Planer crossing the Atlantic, but the network decided not to make it a series.
Next time, a rambling look at another Mayall/Edmondson collaboration, Bottom.
Labels:
Ade Edmondson,
comedy,
inspiration,
Rik Mayall,
TV,
Young Ones
Monday, December 17, 2007
Ed & Red’s Night Party: Our Adventures in Multi-Camera
A couple of weekends ago, we shot an episode of Ed & Red’s Night Party, the great Canadian TV show hosted by a sarcastic sock. I won’t go into detail about the show’s history because the Wikipedia entry does that better than I could. Nevertheless, to see a homemade show from cable access channel become a Canadian late-night institution is encouraging to anyone who picks up a camera hoping to give up the day job.
I don’t know where I could verify this, but I suspect that Ed’s show is likely the longest running Canadian late-night talkshow. If it’s not the Canadian champ, it’s definitely the Toronto and Ontario champ. The national networks have both created and abandoned talk shows—CTV most notably with Open Mike with Mike Bullard, Global with subsequent The Mike Bullard Show, and CBC’s infamous Friday Night with Ralph Benmergui—but Ed the Sock has fended off all of them, probably by not trying to appeal to as broad an audience as the others did. He knows his audience and gives them exactly what they want: edgy late-night humour, a healthy dollop of pop culture’s highs and lows, and plenty of sex-related humour and features.
The current version of Ed’s show, partnering him with Liana “Red” K., doesn’t have the traditional guest interviews where the guest comes out and is interviewed, but in our two appearances, we’ve been interviewed while in the hot tub and lounging on a couch where we were watching the show. The interviews weren’t conventional by any means, but we managed to plug our stuff.
I’ve never taken a TV production course, so my exposure to multi-camera shooting has been limited to a couple of occasions where we happened to have 2 mini-DV cameras on shooting day, and we used both at the same time to speed things up. It wasn’t true multi-camera shooting—the 2nd camera usually shot the same angle but at a different focal length so that we could get the closeups done at the same times as the master shots.
When we appeared in the hot tub on Ed & Red’s, there was only one camera assigned to cover us, so it was a single-camera situation and we worked to just one camera.
For our second appearance, we had 3 segments during the show, with at least 3 cameras on us (one across the floor for a head-on angle, one beside the couch for a side view, and a third somewhere in the middle). We weren’t required to work towards any one camera, so it was similar to a stage appearance where you only have to be aware of a general zone to work to. Mullet, sitting on screen right, had a camera directly to his left with the others spread out in front of him, so he couldn’t really turn to face me without turning away from the audience. I, on screen left, was looking almost directly into a camera when I faced him, so I made sure I turned to my left (screen right) when we were seated during the 3 segments so that Mullet wouldn’t face away from the camera best positioned for his closeups (but, rest assured, I was also pointing my face at that camera, so I wasn’t doing him a favour—I was doing us both a favour).
We got progressively more physical through the 3 segments, so not having to worry about where the camera was definitely freed up how we worked.
For no-budget filmmaking, multi-camera likely isn’t an option. You need at least 2 cameras of the same quality, video format, etc., etc. Hollywood always drags out extra cameras for those thigns even they can’t afford to do more than once (I recall a making-of doc on the Indiana Jones & the Temple of Doom DVD where Mr. Spielberg had 14 cameras rolling for the one-time-only destruction of a footbridge), but the same could apply on a no-budget scale. If I were shooting something where I had to get a lot of coverage done in a limited time (a well-known actor is giving you a break by doing a scene for you but can only give you an hour, for example), or you’re shooting something that can only be done in one take (like having your character jump into a parade), I would definitely budget for a 2nd camera and an extra person. Likewise, if I were shooting a scale model’s destruction, I’d have to weigh the costs of making multiple copies of said model for repeated takes or renting a 2nd camera to shoot it once.
Another aspect of multi-cam shooting is that the lighting has to be designed for multiple camera setups. This means a lot more work at the beginning of the day, but the lighting guys only had to make minor adjustments here and there during the shoot. This also means you can move the cameras, zoom in for a closeup, etc., on the fly. Our area was pretty well lit, and the crew defined our working areas for us, so your talent can be given an area to play in rather than being stuck on a mark. I think you could adapt this type of thinking for single-cam shooting on a set, and you’d be able to go from setup to setup without keeping warmed-up actors waiting for lights to change. It wouldn’t work in every situation, of course, but if you didn’t need special lighting, you could probably get away with it.
We won’t be using multi-camera for our DVD, but doing Ed & Red’s was still a good experience, and I’d recommend to any no-budget filmmaker that they check out a traditional 3-camera TV shoot if they ever get the chance—watch those cameras work!
I don’t know where I could verify this, but I suspect that Ed’s show is likely the longest running Canadian late-night talkshow. If it’s not the Canadian champ, it’s definitely the Toronto and Ontario champ. The national networks have both created and abandoned talk shows—CTV most notably with Open Mike with Mike Bullard, Global with subsequent The Mike Bullard Show, and CBC’s infamous Friday Night with Ralph Benmergui—but Ed the Sock has fended off all of them, probably by not trying to appeal to as broad an audience as the others did. He knows his audience and gives them exactly what they want: edgy late-night humour, a healthy dollop of pop culture’s highs and lows, and plenty of sex-related humour and features.
The current version of Ed’s show, partnering him with Liana “Red” K., doesn’t have the traditional guest interviews where the guest comes out and is interviewed, but in our two appearances, we’ve been interviewed while in the hot tub and lounging on a couch where we were watching the show. The interviews weren’t conventional by any means, but we managed to plug our stuff.
I’ve never taken a TV production course, so my exposure to multi-camera shooting has been limited to a couple of occasions where we happened to have 2 mini-DV cameras on shooting day, and we used both at the same time to speed things up. It wasn’t true multi-camera shooting—the 2nd camera usually shot the same angle but at a different focal length so that we could get the closeups done at the same times as the master shots.
When we appeared in the hot tub on Ed & Red’s, there was only one camera assigned to cover us, so it was a single-camera situation and we worked to just one camera.
For our second appearance, we had 3 segments during the show, with at least 3 cameras on us (one across the floor for a head-on angle, one beside the couch for a side view, and a third somewhere in the middle). We weren’t required to work towards any one camera, so it was similar to a stage appearance where you only have to be aware of a general zone to work to. Mullet, sitting on screen right, had a camera directly to his left with the others spread out in front of him, so he couldn’t really turn to face me without turning away from the audience. I, on screen left, was looking almost directly into a camera when I faced him, so I made sure I turned to my left (screen right) when we were seated during the 3 segments so that Mullet wouldn’t face away from the camera best positioned for his closeups (but, rest assured, I was also pointing my face at that camera, so I wasn’t doing him a favour—I was doing us both a favour).
We got progressively more physical through the 3 segments, so not having to worry about where the camera was definitely freed up how we worked.
For no-budget filmmaking, multi-camera likely isn’t an option. You need at least 2 cameras of the same quality, video format, etc., etc. Hollywood always drags out extra cameras for those thigns even they can’t afford to do more than once (I recall a making-of doc on the Indiana Jones & the Temple of Doom DVD where Mr. Spielberg had 14 cameras rolling for the one-time-only destruction of a footbridge), but the same could apply on a no-budget scale. If I were shooting something where I had to get a lot of coverage done in a limited time (a well-known actor is giving you a break by doing a scene for you but can only give you an hour, for example), or you’re shooting something that can only be done in one take (like having your character jump into a parade), I would definitely budget for a 2nd camera and an extra person. Likewise, if I were shooting a scale model’s destruction, I’d have to weigh the costs of making multiple copies of said model for repeated takes or renting a 2nd camera to shoot it once.
Another aspect of multi-cam shooting is that the lighting has to be designed for multiple camera setups. This means a lot more work at the beginning of the day, but the lighting guys only had to make minor adjustments here and there during the shoot. This also means you can move the cameras, zoom in for a closeup, etc., on the fly. Our area was pretty well lit, and the crew defined our working areas for us, so your talent can be given an area to play in rather than being stuck on a mark. I think you could adapt this type of thinking for single-cam shooting on a set, and you’d be able to go from setup to setup without keeping warmed-up actors waiting for lights to change. It wouldn’t work in every situation, of course, but if you didn’t need special lighting, you could probably get away with it.
We won’t be using multi-camera for our DVD, but doing Ed & Red’s was still a good experience, and I’d recommend to any no-budget filmmaker that they check out a traditional 3-camera TV shoot if they ever get the chance—watch those cameras work!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)