By Chris Head and Steve Whiteley

I’m Chris Head, and in this blog Steve Whiteley and I will be discussing online comedy sketches and shorts. I’m a comedy director, coach, script-editor and author of “A Director’s Guide to the Art of Stand-up”. Steve (pictured above on “Swiped” shoot) is an actor, film maker and the man behind comedy urban poet Wisebowm. Steve also runs Offkey World, an award winning comedy content production company, and produces BuzzFeed’s comedy branded content ‘Presents’ series which has reached over 10 million online views.

As Steve’s new short “Swiped” (that I script-edited) is released (watch here) we discuss sketches and shorts in a kind of sandwich format: Steve/ me/ Steve. First up, so you know the kind of work we’re talking about, Steve reveals some of his favourite online sketches and why he likes them.

Steve Whiteley on his favourite sketches:

I loved this ‘Too Many Bags’ BBC Quickies sketch, performed by the Massive Dad sketch group. It’s so well observed, relatable and heightens with a lovely punchline.

‘Fiery Hawk’ from Cardinal Burns is still one the best. It’s again so well observed in terms of highlighting how ridiculous some auditions can be (particularly commercials – some still give me sleepless nights to this day). It’s brilliantly silly and builds and builds, ending with a hilarious throwaway line.

Key & Peele are in my opinion the kings of online sketches and ‘Flicker’ is my all time fave.

It looks great, they find the device in the sketch and repeat and build it to surreal proportions and it feels like a short film in a sketch.

Chris Head on Steve’s sketch picks and writing techniques:

The “Too Many Bags” sketch is a lovely example of taking an observation from everyday life and then exaggerating it to absurd degrees. This has an absurdist feel but performed quite naturalistically. This naturalism colliding with absurd content is a common quality of online sketches and comedy shorts and is a great technique. A lot of the humour here is coming from the incongruity of the things the customers are doing in the cafe. I love the scientist with the test tube and the throwaway gag of the Georgian looking pie seller, which nicely echoes people who do go into cafes to sell things for charity or beg. It’s also a great example of my model of the classic sketch structure. Set-up/ reveal/ escalation/ payoff:

Set-up: A woman is entering a cafe with a couple of bags and is coming to meet a friend.

Reveal: She hits someone with a bag blatantly in the face.

Escalation: She keeps on hitting people and to keep it building they up the ante each time and bring in absurd people and activities.

Payoff: This is a false dawn/ new character enters ending. The false dawn is at last it seems like the madness is over – she sits down with her friend. But then the new character comes in with a huge rucksack and we are right back in the madness.

Keeping this structure in mind will really help when writing your own pieces. Then we come to the Cardinal Burns sketch which is also performed naturalistically but this time the absurdity is simply in the images and the behaviour of the director rather than incongruous details you wouldn’t find in the situation. The sketch is billed under the name of their original sketch trio Fat Tongue (which they were in alongside Sophie Black who appears here as the director’s assistant). This is also an exaggeration of an everyday experience – at least for jobbing actors. Even if we’re not in that category we still get the idea of auditions and the power imbalance therein so it’s as recognisable as the cafe situation.

It also follows the classic sketch structure I discuss above. It sets up the situation (which takes longer than the Too Many Bags one but as it’s so well made, performed and observed we’re willing to give it time). The reveal is the director is going to get him to act out stupid things. (Probably the “more thirsty than that” is the moment it’s revealed he is going to push it to absurdity). Then it escalates through increasingly bizarre instructions that the actor (desperate for the work) complies with. Then the payoff is the abrupt turning down of the actor.

Notice that both these sketches are basically working through one central comic idea. It’s important to be clear what your idea is and to be focussed and disciplined in working through that one idea: not introducing other ideas that may be funny but are off the point and confuse the focus.

And finally Key & Peele are great and an example of sketches that were made originally for a TV sketch show but have a massive audience and afterlife online. Their sketch ‘Flicker’ while playing out across a longer length still follows the set-up/ reveal/ escalation/ payoff structure and is relentlessly developing one central comic idea. The escalation here happening across a series of steps and the whole covering more time than the classic sketch format which has a unity of time and space (they tend to take place in one main location and unfold in real time across the duration of the sketch). Both Too Many Bags and Fiery Hawk do this.

The Key & Peele sketch is also doing something more than observing and exaggerating a real life situation. This is one I describe as a ‘big/small’ sketch. It’s taking all the familiar filmic, narrative and acting devices from the BIG world of TV or movie thrillers and bringing it into the small world of office pranks and banter. This kind of transposition from big to small is a great device for comedy. Another great example is Simon Pegg and Edgar Wright’s movie Hot Fuzz where US cop show action is transposed into a small English village.

Another aspect of the Key & Peele one is that they are able to convincingly recreate the look and feel of the dramas they are transposing into the small world of office pranks. It can be hard for low budget film makers producing online sketches to achieve this. It can be done to a degree with skill, imagination or creativity of course – and more budget – but if not you can make the low production values part of the comedy. Or you can draw on a style like mockumentary that is much easier to achieve on a low budget.

And speaking of the practicalities of making sketches back to Steve…

Steve on making sketches and shorts:

It’s a great time to be making these kinds of online sketches and shorts. You can now shoot and edit a sketch and then distribute it all on your phone. Gone are the days when you needed an expensive camera and lighting to film something. And now with so many online platforms available there are plenty of opportunities to grow an audience.

If you’re shooting sketches or shorts on your iPhone you don’t need much extra kit to do a good job. You could buy some additional lenses, a couple of LED panel lights, sound recorder and some mics and you’re away. Sean Baker the director of The Florida Project shot his breakout indie film ‘Tangerine’ on a trio of iPhone 5s.

In terms of looking for cast and crew it varies from project to project. I started off in comedy by going to improv classes with Hoopla and then performed in a troupe before deciding to launch a YouTube channel called Offkey World, where I collaborated with other improvisers, comedians and film makers to create sketches and then made silly music videos. When I first started making sketches I was very inexperienced and had a friend who would double up as gaffer and sound recordist; it was all hands on deck.

But there are plenty of online platforms where you can find crew such as Shooting People and Facebook groups such as Film London Talent Connect. Once you’ve got into the rhythm of making content regularly you often find you start working with the same crew who are at a similar experience level to you. So ultimately you all come through together and everyone benefits. For more on this and to get some all round inspiration watch Mark Duplass’ SXSW speech/advice on how to become a film maker.

My own latest short ‘Swiped’ is a mockumentary that I worked on with Chris that follows Jordan and his friends Ryan and Talia on a London estate. Alarmed by the detrimental effect smartphones are having on those around them, they launch an initiative ‘Swiped’, which aims to make people more present by stealing their phones using mopeds. It parodies real crime documentaries whilst also shining a (hopefully) comedic light on a current and controversial subject matter. It had a launch screening for industry, cast and crew, and friends at the BFI last month and is now released online.

Releasing it is only the first step. How do you actually build an audience? That’s the million dollar question! Creating and releasing content regularly helps. If your sketch has a theme or subject matter that you think will be relevant to an online community, reach out to them and see if they are open to posting it to their audience. Collaborate with other individuals/groups and cross promote, hopefully helping each other and building your audiences in the process. Once you’re confident that you’ve created ‘the one’ – that sketch you feel has viral potential – and you already have a back catalogue of content, reach out to bigger online publications and ask if they’ll share it with their audience. Then if it does go down well it will hopefully have a knock on effect on your older sketches already online. And I should probably mention Comedy Crowd’s own Comedy Crowd TV channel! It’s a great new place to showcase your sketches, build an audience and meet collaborators.

Chris is the author of “A Director’s Guide to the Art of Stand-up” (Bloomsbury Methuen. As director he has had shows at Soho Theatre, Assembly, Gilded Balloon, Pleasance, Bloomsbury Theatre and international comedy festivals. As a coach he runs stand-up comedy courses in Soho, London and also delivers sitcom and sketch comedy courses. He has run comedy writing classes for the BBC and Channel 4 and teaches sitcom and stand-up at Bath Spa University where he helped develop the new BA (Hons) Comedy degree. He also works one-to-one as director, mentor, script-editor and coach.

Steve Whiteley is an actor, character comedian and film maker. He launched his YouTube channel Offkey World in 2014, which was nominated for ‘Best Internet Programme’ at the British Comedy Awards. His 2017 Edinburgh Fringe show  ‘Wisebowm: The Struggle Is Real’, received 5 star reviews and was one of Scroobius Pips ‘Top 6 picks of the Fringe’. In 2018  ‘Wisebowm’ was commissioned as a BBC Radio 4 sitcom pilot, which will be broadcast in Summer 2019. Steve’s debut short film ‘Swiped’, which he wrote, directed and starred in was recently nominated for the 2019 Edinburgh TV Festival New Voices Award for best pilot and is online now..

By Chris Head

I coach and direct stand-up and am the author of “A Director’s Guide to the Art of Stand-up”. Meanwhile I have an annual gig working with undergraduates at Bath Spa University to develop a multi-cam studio sitcom, I coach writers and I am about to script-edit a BBC Radio 4 sitcom pilot. One thing that looms large in all this work on sitcom is plotting which I discuss in this piece looking at the ‘set-pieces’ method.

I also deliver coaching and script/pitch consultations with former BBC commissioner/ head of comedy at Sky and now TV producer Lucy Lumsden. We have an online course coming up on creating, writing and pitching sitcom where we’ll work on your characters, situation, plotting and your pitch. More info here).

Qualities of a good plot

I always think that a good sitcom plot has some or all of these qualities:

– A clear goal for the central character and obstacles that stop them achieving it

– bad decisions

– a plot that escalates with every scene upping the ante

– dramatic irony (where the audience know things character(s) don’t)

– lies and secrets

– misunderstandings

– a false dawn (it seems like everything is sorted… then it isn’t)

– a winner / a loser

This is a good check list as you work through your own developing plot. How many of these does your plot feature? Taking a step back, how might you build a plot in the first place?

One approach is simply to give your characters a plausible problem and then the comedy comes from the dysfunctional way they set about dealing with it. (For instance there is a dead body in the hotel that needs removing sensitively). Or you might think of the biggest embarrassment or disaster and work backwards from that climactic point to the start (Peep Show writers Bains & Armstrong were geniuses at this approach.) Or, as Graham Linehan is wont to do, you might plot around set-pieces.

Plotting using set-pieces

Set-pieces are the big funny scenes that the narrative revolves around. In this method of plotting you set about writing as many of these set-pieces as you can think of. It’s essentially like writing a series of sketches for your characters. David Renwick made good use of this approach in plotting One Foot in the Grave. Think about scenes like Victor going to buy some second-hand shoes and discovering they’re still on the feet of the deceased former owner. Or Victor discovering the dog he has been preparing to adopt is in fact dead and stuffed. These are essentially sketches.

Once you have your set-piece scenes, you can then pick one and think about how it might form part of a wider narrative. To illustrate this, here is a set-piece scene from a notional sitcom that I have written for illustration (using my model of how scenes and sketches unfold):

SET-UP: Middle-aged, theatrical Sadie is confirming an appointment on the phone to have her nails done. As she hangs up her daughter Mel enters. (Note the dramatic irony – we know about the nail appointment but Mel doesn’t). Mel asks if Sadie can stay at home and wait for the new fridge to be delivered as she needs to go out and meet a possible investor for her business idea.

REVEAL: Sadie says no because she has an important appointment herself and anyway only Mel is capable of making sure the fridge is the right model and that it has come with all the parts.

ESCALATION: Mel argues that surely Sadie would be capable. She offers to show her the specification of the fridge and all the questions to ask. Sadie plays dumb and struggles with the simple information. In the end Mel gives up and says she’ll stay at home and will rearrange the meeting.

PAYOFF: Sadie’s friend Trudy comes in to take her to the nail place. Mel is aghast at how she’s been manipulated and how her mother’s nails take precedence over her business idea.

This is a set-piece scene. So I have established in this scene that mother and daughter live together. We know that Mel has a business idea, so let’s say Mel is living at home to save money while she attempts to get a business idea off the ground. The only problem being that her self-obsessed mother keeps ruining things for her. In this way I am discovering more about the situation by writing scenes.

Now we have this set-piece we can think about what happens before and after it. For instance, here I have written outlines of scenes to take place either side of the set-piece.

BEFORE

Scene 1: Mel is having breakfast, looking at messages on her phone. Sadie enters. Mel starts telling Sadie that she has been messaged by a possible investor for her new business idea. Sadie retorts that anyone would be mad to invest in her idea; who needs an app to tell them how long they’ve cleaned their teeth for? Mel (for the umpeenth time) starts explaining how it’ll improve dental hygiene and how it’s part of the ‘gamification’ of life, when Sadie freaks out because the fridge is broken. She simply cannot have warm orange juice at breakfast time!

SET-PIECE

Scene 2: The set-piece described above where Sadie gets her daughter to stay in to receive the new fridge (thus missing the meeting with her potential investor) while she, Sadie, has her nails done.

AFTER

Scene 3: Mel is on the phone to the investor. It’s clearly a delicate matter to reschedule the meeting. She’s only in the country for two days and wants to meet face-to-face. Then the doorbell rings and Mel has to open the door to the fridge delivery guy. As per Sadie’s instructions Mel has to unpack the fridge and check the contents of the package; much to the annoyance of the delivery man who has a tight schedule. This also makes the discussion with the investor more complicated as Mel tries to juggle the two things. Mel discovers one of the shelves seems to be missing and starts to check the rest of the (massive amount of) packaging. She hands the phone to the delivery guy and he and the investor end up having a nice chat about fridge models.

Notice here that we’re figuring out the plotting first. Actually writing the scenes will be the next stage and is much more effective and efficient with this scaffolding in place.

Plot lines

Notice how in the above we also have two plot lines: the A plot and the B plot. The A plot is the main story and takes the lion’s share of the screen time (in this case Mel chasing an investor). The B plot is a secondary strand that has less screen time and unfolds alongside the A plot (the fridge situation). Here there also seems to be the beginnings of a C plot which I might develop; namely the mother getting her nails done. So this is how our plot is breaking down:

A PLOT – Mel’s teeth cleaning app business idea and the courting of an investor

B PLOT – the fridge

C PLOT – Sadie’s nails

Classically in sitcom plotting, the plot lines collide at the end of the episode. With this in mind I’m already starting to wonder how these threads collide. Having set up that the investor – let’s call her Stephanie – has an interest in fridges, maybe in the final scene Mel and her at last meet – in Sadie and Mel’s home – and just when the meeting about the app seems to be going well, Sadie breezes in and starts going on about how wonderful the fridge is. Stephanie’s interest switches. Sadie explains it’s a new company with an innovative design. Stephanie says she has thought of investing in fridges – hence her earlier interest. She thanks Sadie and decides to invest in a fridge start up instead of in Mel’s app.

This feels like a good finish. I now need to answer the question: why does the meeting have to happen at home? One answer could that yet again Sadie has forced Mel to stay in for some reason and so this time (thinking she has at last got round this issue), Mel invites the investor to their home. This is a false dawn. Mel thinks she has at last solved the problem of meeting the investor but as we’re about to discover it’s all going to go wrong for her.

But why is the mother so uncaring about the development of her business? Does she simply dislike her daughter? Or – in a reverse of the usual sitcom trope of the parent trying to get rid of the adult child – is she sabotaging her to keep her around? Why does she need her around? It’s in asking and answering these kinds of questions that more scenes will suggest themselves as this plot and this sitcom evolve.

Working on (or wanting to work on) a TV sitcom script? Chris is working with TV producer, former BBC Comedy Commissioner/ Head of Comedy at Sky Lucy Lumsden. Together they’re leading an online course on the art, craft and business of TV sitcom. Great writing coaching, script development and invaluable horse’s mouth industry insights:

https://www.chrishead.com/events/the-art-craft-business-of-tv-sitcom-with-chris-head-lucy-lumsden-3

And you can read chapter 1 of Chris’s stand-up book for free here:

https://bloomsburycp3.codemantra.com/viewer/5b6331436b2f0700011dd33b

Or buy your own copy of the book here:

A Director’s Guide to the Art of Stand-Up

By Chris Head. So you want to create a comedy character. Perhaps it’s a character for you to perform or for a sitcom/comedy drama script. In this blog I am particularly thinking of narrative comedy script characters, but these thoughts can be equally useful for sketch characters and so on. Here are some ways you can explore and develop your characters to make them as rich and comedic as possible.

Base your characters on real people

Characters are fleshed out and made individual by drawing on the qualities of real people you know or have encountered. Whether they’re neighbours, bosses, colleagues, friends, family members or even spouses, real life offers up an abundance of eccentric and dysfunctional people who can become comedy characters. When you have a real model behind the character they become more individual, believable and idiosyncratic.

You might base a character on someone close to you, your nearest and dearest, however, if you’re basing a character on someone you know less well, or even have only seen fleetingly, there’s a lot you don’t know and you are fee to invent to fill in the gaps. If you don’t have a real-life model (or models) in mind you are more likely to draw on stereotype and cliché.

You can draw on a number of real people to flesh out your character picking up on their mannerisms, speech patterns, attitudes, beliefs as well as their biography and life experience. Since you’re fictionalizing, do feel free to do them a terrible disservice and focus on and exaggerate all their worst qualities. And in terms of their biography, if they’ve done three really stupid things in the last five years, your character version of them will have done those three stupid things in the last three weeks – of if they’re a real klutz, in the last three days. Then once you have identified the kinds of stupid things the real person does, you can invent more in a similar vein for your character.

Positives and negatives

Let’s think about basing a character on a bad boss you have had in your working life. Maybe you have one now! It can be brilliantly cathartic to take these dreadful people and turn them into comedy characters. Your characters have a problem or a goal and they set about trying to get what they want with their limited skill set. They don’t have the skills, knowledge or ability to effectively achieve their goals, but still they try. (Just like your bad boss). A first question to ask of your boss is: What’s wrong with them?

This will be where the comedy lies. All their negative qualities, failings and shortcomings. Have a clear, short list of these issues. This is enough to get started. A next step to ask is: Who else do I know who’s like this? Now you are drawing on bad qualities of other people to make this character even worse.

Then having considered your boss’ negative sides ask: What’s right with them? If you really despise them or find them totally contemptible, this can be tricky! They must have some positive qualities. What are they? A balance of positives and negatives makes the character more rounded and engaging – even if the negatives are likely to dominate with many characters, that bit of humanity is important. For instance with Basil Fawlty (who was based on a Mr Sinclair who ran the Gleneagles Hotel in Torquay with his terrifying wife):

Basil Fawlty

Negatives: Petty, vindictive, snobbish

Positives: Witty, resourceful, intelligent

We so enjoy the comedy of his negative qualities it’s easy to overlook the positives but they are there. Sybil loved him once! Like Basil, your character might also use their positives to negative ends. For example, Basil’s biting wit is often deployed at the expense of the guests he should be deferential to. His resourcefulness meanwhile, which could be employed in improving the hotel, ends up being channelled into managing the increasingly absurd situations he creates.

Note that it’s absurd situations that he creates. I see a lot of early drafts of scripts and a common shortcoming is that stuff just happens to the characters. As a rule, it’s so much stronger when the comedy comes from characters making bad decisions, or making bold decisions they are ill equipped to deal with the fallout from. For example, in the pilot of Friends, Rachel walks out on her wedding rather than being left at the altar by the groom.

With positive and negative sides, the negatives will be why we find them funny but the positives will be why we warm to them nevertheless. A dialogue exercise you can try is to start an interaction with another character in one of their positives and the flip to one of the negatives. In the opening minutes of Friends, Joey says to Ross (in response to hearing about his painful breakup):

Joey: Alright Ross, look. You’re feeling a lot of pain right now. You’re angry. You’re hurting. Can I tell you what the answer is?

(Ross gestures his consent.)

Joey: Strip joint! C’mon, you’re single! Have some hormones!

Here we see Joey start off in an empathic, caring tone… before he flips to being crude. This is a key part of finding funny moments in dialogue. The first sentence misdirects as to where he is going and the second sentence flips our expectation. And it’s a flip from positive to negative. Here’s a made up example from a teacher character speaking to a student: “I see you’ve produced your homework on time which I appreciate. Just a shame it looks like it was written by a monkey”.

You can do this selfsame process of exploring the negatives and positives with a difficult or ridiculous friend, relative or co-worker. Or a relative, spouse or sibling. Or even… yourself. Yes you can become a character in your own narrative. To help come up with positives and negatives, I have produced a table for 108 positive qualities and 108 negative that is on p.5 – 6 of my ‘Creating Comedy Narratives For Stage & Screen‘ book.

Two perspectives on your characters

Here’s another way of looking at your character from two perspectives: firstly, describe how they see themselves and secondly how others see them. If there is very little difference between these two perspectives then that would be a self-aware, functional person. The bigger the difference the more comic and/or tragic the character. Steve Coogan’s appallingly brilliant Alan Partridge, for example, was based on a number of real-life British TV presenters. Many potential models for Partridge have been identified but (fortunately) there isn’t one single person who embodies all of Partridge’s traits, so it’s very much an amalgamation of different individuals and Coogan says there is a lot of himself in Partridge too. Here’s how you might describe Alan Partridge in this way:

How Alan Partridge sees himself: Charming, funny, relaxed, professional, friendly, popular

How others see him: Petty, vindictive, neurotic, incompetent, loathsome, moribund

When you’re developing a character, think in terms of the first list as how they see themselves when they’re at their most self-regarding and the second list as how others see them when they are most critical. This creates a persona and a shadow. List 1 is the persona they try and project, list 2 is the shadow that undermines and contradicts the persona. Think about THE GAP between how characters see themselves and how others see them – the bigger the gap, the greater the comedy (and tragedy) of the character.

Here’s an example from Alan Partridge where he flips from positive to negative as Joey does above:

“I’d just like to fly a helicopter all around Norfolk. You know, swoop down over a field….” So far it sounds like a love of the landscape and natural beauty… but then it flips: “Scare a donkey so that it falls into a river. Hover over one of those annoying families that go on holidays on bikes. And shout at them “get out of the area!” and watch them panic!”

To explore this in action, try writing a scene where the character is trying to embody a quality or qualities from the first list while their efforts are undermined by qualities from the second list. In order for this to happen, think about a situation that will bring out their worst sides. Here is an example from Alan Partridge where he is DJ’ing on Radio Norfolk. On the one hand in his DJ role he is wanting to project professionalism and knowledgeable enthusiasm for the music… but he can’t help being petty and judgemental.

“That was ‘Big Yellow Taxi’ by Joni Mitchell, a song in which Joni complains they ‘Paved paradise to put up a parking lot’, a measure which actually would have alleviated traffic congestion on the outskirts of paradise, something which Joni singularly fails to point out, perhaps because it doesn’t quite fit in with her blinkered view of the world. Nevertheless, nice song.”

Likeability of characters

Often writers get feedback that their characters aren’t likeable enough and yet at the same time there are often sitcoms with characters who behave badly and aren’t obviously likeable. And yet so many viewers have an appalled fascination with the truly dark characters, for example Julia Davis with Jill from Nighty Night. Returning to the point made about basing characters on real people, even Julia Davis’s horrific creations are, as she says, based on people. She described Jill as the ultimate extreme narcissist and sociopath, and acknowledges they’re traits she’s interested in and that run through a lot of her characters. She says she does see such people around and continues to be shocked by their behaviour and wants to keep looking at it from a slightly different perspective each time.

You couldn’t however have a cast made up entirely of these extreme types. Imagine if Jill, Basil and Alan Partridge were all in one show! They’d cancel each other out. You need the reasonable and normal people around them for contrast but also to create a way in for the audience. We sympathize with those people. And indeed we need characters who are holding it together.

Developing an ensemble of characters

Once you have one clear character with strongly defined positives and negatives, to create another character – simply make them the polar opposite of the original character. Comedy thrives on opposites. Spontaneous, brave, outrageous Fleabag is paired with a total opposite in her sister Claire who is uptight, cautious and anal. When I was growing up I used to love watching Ever Decreasing Circles where dour, controlling, obsessive Martin is contrasted with his neighbour, the dashing, freewheeling, charming Paul. In fact, all of your characters should be strongly contrasting, with no two characters having the same characteristics.

When putting together your ensemble of characters, it helps to think in terms of BOSSES, STRIVERS, FOOLS and FOILS. I have developed my own Boss/ Striver/ Fool – and foil – model of sitcom characters. It’s a useful way of looking at sitcom when you’re setting up your own group of characters. And it’s a useful model to apply when considering an existing script. Try and identify whose who in the script and see if you’ve got a missing character or if the ensemble is unbalanced.

The BOSS is the one with authority, from whatever source (job role, position, social status, family role). Note that an actual manager or leader in name may not have real authority; usually the authority figures in sitcoms are incompetent or dysfunctional in some way or exercise their authority badly. The STRIVERS are the central characters who want to improve themselves or their situation, they are striving after something. The FOOLS… are self-explanatory. But they needn’t necessarily be stupid (although they often are.) They could be intelligent but still be a fool due to being naive or their social ineptitude.

The main character in your sitcom will be a STRIVER. It is that central striver’s behaviour and attitudes that create comic problems for those around them. They are the comic PROTAGONIST. It is a common strategy to have a FOIL for who is a normal, reasonable person – or at least they are the one who is most affected by the antics of the striver. Often, they are the one the audience can relate to and we see the world through their eyes.

In summary, most successful sitcoms have this dynamic (and some unsuccessful ones lack some element of it):

BOSS – A character in position of power over the striver/ protagonist and others – it may be a role or rank or just social status or family seniority. They may have real power or it may just be vested in them by their position but they are inept in some way.

STRIVER (PROTAGONIST) – The main comic character with all their flaws and failings

FOIL – The more reasonable normal one (usually also a striver) who has to deal with the main striver. Often protagonist and foil are basically on the same side but they can be rivals. Usually the foil is the one the audience can identify with but sometimes they are less obviously likeable.

FOOL – Self-explanatory – the stupid or naive and awkward one. Often happy with their lot, they tend to be able to bounce back from the indignities heaped on them.

Some examples:

There will be other characters in these shows (who will also tend to fall into one of these slots) but here I am focussing on the central ensemble.

Fawlty Towers

BOSS – Sybil (and sometimes a guest like the American man.)

STRIVER/ PROTAGONIST – Basil

FOIL – Polly

FOOL – Manuel (and others – eg the Major)

The (UK) Office

BOSS – Neil Godwin. And Chris Finch; a social status boss who has authority over Brent

STRIVER/ PROTAGONIST – David Brent

FOIL – Tim

FOOL – Gareth (and others – eg Keith)

Blackadder 4

BOSS – General Melchett (and his boss Field Marshall Hague)

STRIVER/ PROTAGONIST – Blackadder

FOIL – Captain Darling (also a rival)

FOOL – Baldrick & George*

One working class/ one upper-middle class. One uneducated/ one educated; but both fools.

Friends

BOSS – Monica

STRIVER 1 – Ross

STRIVER 2 – Rachel

FOOL – Joey/ Phoebe

FOIL – Chandler

Having used this model with many writers and students I have found it to be a very useful framework to consider when planning your own ensemble of sitcom characters and for analysing an existing script where something is not working with your characters. Chapter 8 in my ‘Creating Comedy Narratives’ book explores creating ensembles of characters in this way and I speak with Hollywood comedy guru Steve Kaplan and TV producer and the former Controller of BBC Comedy Commissioning Lucy Lumsden for their insights into putting a group of characters together. Elsewhere, picking up on topics from this blog, chapter 1 is about basing characters on you and your nearest and dearest, and chapter 2 is all about basing characters on people you have encountered in life. Plus in later chapters I go into detail about writing and structuring scenes and sketches and ultimately build up to structuring narratives of 30 minutes and longer. And throughout I draw in stand-up and improvisation too, to make it an inspiring cross genre guide to creating comedy narratives.

For more on creating characters, writing scenes and sketches, constructing plots see Chris Head’s brilliant and unique new book “Creating Comedy Narratives for Stage and Screen”

And Chris runs online courses in sitcom/comedy drama, sketch and stand-up.

www.chrishead.com

By Marysia Trembecka

We have just passed the midway point of Edinburgh Fringe (it runs for three and a half weeks in August) and all us Fringe performers are feeling the constant pressure of the shows, late nights, the stresses of ensuring we have audiences that day. Plus there is the need to smooth over the rollercoaster of the Fringe audience and reviews: perhaps a great but tiny audience, a pointedly nasty review, venue and cast dramas, drunken audience members who will not shut up and keep speaking at the punchlines. Also many performers now are feeling the pressure on their voices and health, with the shows, the flyering and celebrating after.

I am doing two solo shows every day at Edinburgh Fringe 2017, one comedy/cabaret “The Singing Psychic Game Show”, the other a political theatre cabaret piece “Queen Of The F*cking World”, so Comedy Crowd asked me to write a survival guide to get through the last 10 days of Edinburgh Fringe.

Your Voice
Many comics are not trained performers but even some of my trained actor friends find by mid-point of the Fringe that they are losing their voices. So here are some tips to get you through the Fringe. I have been training daily vocally for a few months as I sing as well but still I am using all these tricks to keep the voice going.

Sleep! You need for your voice and general health to get as much rest in where you can. I always go for a cheeky disco nap in the afternoon where possible. Even 20 minutes will help your head space and get your voice rested.

Alcohol… It is not that bad for you actually in moderation, yes it does dry your throat out but you can counteract it by drinking more water etc. What is bad for you though is yelling in the bar after your show at your friends. Trying to get heard over a crowd of people means you push your vocal chords, and that is far worse than drinking a bit. Of course the more you drink the more you forget to look after your voice as you talk loudly to your friends. Find quieter bars where possible. I only drink once a week at the Fringe as I am doing two shows a day and they are both solo shows and I sing. It is hard especially when friends and family come and see the show and want to celebrate but you will lose or at least tire out your voice if you drink too often. The last week of the Fringe I do let that once a week rule slip …

Steaming: this is old skool but still works. Boil a kettle and pour the boiling hot water into a bowl, breakfast bowl size upwards. Put a towel over your head and breathe in the steam for a few minutes. Be careful not to knock boiling hot water over yourself… Steaming immediately rehydrates the vocal chords so I do it last thing at night when I get home from my gigs and also first thing in the morning. I also inhale the steam and sip mugs of hot water in between my two shows, they are two hours apart. I am a complete coffee addict but Edinburgh Fringe is an emergency so the hot water has to take precedence. You will often see me with a mug of coffee and a mug of hot water.

If all else fails and you are losing your voice, shut up. A entire day of vocal rest will really help. Do not whisper, it is terrible for the voice.

Mental Health
The pressure to sell your show to audiences, indifferent responses to flyering and getting press in is immense. We all have to remind ourselves daily that we are one of over 3,800 shows at this 70th Edinburgh Fringe Festival, being here with a show is a massive success in itself. There is always the brilliant show you performed last night but tonight you have a third of the numbers and a reviewer in, the million things you need to do. Having two very different shows for me makes my morning to do list insane. Separate the flyering from your shows, what happens on the Royal Mile has nothing to do with how good your show is. Do not let anyone’s response to your flyering or indeed your show affect how you get out on stage each day.

If you get the crazy negative voices in your head, stop them and think of something positive. Learn to switch the negative thoughts off and focus on gratitude every time, from being thankful you are getting to partake in the world’s largest arts festival to taking time out for a walk (or in my case a sneaky cup of coffee). If you meditate or find time to exercise, do as much of it as possible.

Audience Numbers
I know of a great show here this year that has been nominated for awards and yet has had to cancel three performances this year due to no shows. I have never had that happen (currently praying it never will) but it must be so difficult to not be effected by it. I have focused on really great marketing images in the run up to try and lift my shows to be noticed.

I am doing PBH Free Fringe again (they are amazing!) and so I never have an idea how many people are going to turn up til I get out on the stage as it is unticketed. We do a bucket collection at the end. It can be so easy to walk on stage, see your audience and think oh there are less people in tonight and let that affect your performance from the off. Remember even an audience of one is someone who is giving you an hour of their precious time, they chose your show not the other few hundred that they could be in instead 😉 . Word of mouth is the magic that happens at Edinburgh, if you bring the best work you can, you will see the numbers growing. I saw it last year and this and it is magic. Plus there is bound to be one night where for some mystic reason the audience drops. Relax about it.

The other issue is expectations, both my shows are doing very well, standing room only some nights. However I want to be full every show twice a day, and I am at the Voodoo Rooms for my Singing Psychic show, so a bigger room than last year. However big your room gets you will always be wanting to get bigger, it is human. Just do not let it get in the way of enjoying the shows you have got and the audience you have in front of you.

Reviews
Some years no matter what you do, you do not seem to get the reviewers in, other years they turn up anyway. My only rule here which I am very strict about is not to read any reviews whilst I am doing the shows. I have got my mum or friends to read them and tell me if there is a quote or stars I can use on the flyers. Good reviews (of which I have had many four or five stars for my Singing Psychic) do not help me get out the next day and perform to the audience you have that night who want to determine their own opinion. Bad reviews will stick in your head forever and can affect the performance.

I currently have had only two reviewers in for my Queen show, neither have yet written anything, though my audiences are growing and telling me how they love it. I want reviews so I can tour it but beyond asking politely again, I am just focusing on the fact I have a niche show on sexual politics and those who turn up are turning into mad advocates for the show.

Marysia Trembecka
www.marysiatrembecka.com
Twitter @marysiat

The Singing Psychic Game Show – Trailer: https://youtu.be/247goJVrhp4

Ed Fringe Info link Singing Psychic https://tickets.edfringe.com/whats-on/singing-psychic-game-show

Venue 68 – The Voodoo Rooms 21.30-22.30 Sat 5th to Sun 27th Aug (not 16th)

…………………………………………………………………………………………..

Queen Of The F*cking World – Trailer: https://youtu.be/d2Y6ZBUKq94

Ed Fringe Info link  https://tickets.edfringe.com/whats-on/queen-of-the-f-cking-world

Venue 239 –  The Street, 18.30-19.30 6-26^th Aug (not 16th)

P.S. You can also read Marysia’s 8 tips for performing at the Fringe here

We asked renowned comedy coach, director and script editor Chris Head to give some advice for people writing Chorts comedy scripts.

But first, for those not down with the latest comedy lingo, you might be wondering what Chorts are exactly.

Chorts are teaser videos, max 2 minutes in length, that showcase a comedy character or characters. They should be funny in their own right, and show potential for further development. They are the new way to test out your comedy ideas.

The best Chorts are screened at festivals and events. You can check them out here

So back to the advice.

We asked Chris some questions that crop up for many creators when writing a Chort script. The advice is fantastic and very detailed. This is worth a read whatever type comedy script you are writing. Or even if you just want to learn some comedy writing essentials.

Here it is.

How can I create a comic character?

Think about developing comedy characters from these starting points:

INDIVIDUALS
TYPES
YOUR SELF

INDIVIDUALS
Here you are basing your character on a specific person. A real person whom you think has rich comic potential. You’ll be looking at people with:

Hypocrisy
Neuroses
Incompetence
Delusion

You start with someone real then fictionalise and exaggerate. Remember that it is the negatives and dysfunctional aspects of the character that are the funny stuff. And remember to distance your version of the person from the real starting point. Often this can work if they are the wrong person to be in a particular role or if they are behaving badly for their situation.

TYPES
Here you’re creating a character that is a recognisable type in society. Eg: Bouncer, cab driver, university lecturer… You are probably amalgamating a number of examples of the type that you have come across in the real world; people that you have encountered or seen in the media etc… It needs to ring true with how the audience view that type.

The danger of starting with a ‘type’ is that it ends up being a one-dimensional stereotype.
Three dimensional stereotypes are okay! By this I mean that people do exist who are basically stereotypes. As long as your character is as fleshed out and rounded as a real person then it doesn’t matter if they are a stereotype and comedy often uses stereotypes. It’s also a quick way into the joke of the character as we get what they are about already.

The major opportunity here is that if you nail the type you can get big laughs of recognition.

YOUR SELF
Here you are using yourself as the starting point for the character. It is a similar process to the individuals process, but instead of shining the light outwards, you are shining it within. This needs a lot of self-awareness and an ability to laugh at yourself and show your dysfunctional sides.

What do you need to consider when writing for a single actor and a single camera?

Remember the shot is likely to be framed quite tightly on the upper body. So picture your character in a portrait setting. Write in some physicality that will come across within those confines. For example, say how they’re sitting or if they keep running their hands through their hair.

Make sure you write speech. Don’t write it like a short story or a newspaper column. Try and capture the feel of someone speaking spontaneously. A way to approach this is to write a draft of your monologue (or of their dialogue responses to the off-camera voice), turn it into bullet points and then record yourself speaking it aloud with only the bullet points to guide you. Play back this recording and you will have a more natural sounding, spontaneous version. Use this recording as a basis to rewrite the original text.

Ask yourself:
What is the context in which the character is speaking?
Who are they speaking to?

Context:
The viewer needs to know very quickly where the piece it taking place. Here you need to set up the context in the words. Don’t assume the piece will be filmed in a relevant location so giving us visual pointers. (It might be, but don’t rely on it.) Make sure the words give us the context. Don’t leave the viewer confused as to where it is.

They could be:
In a social context, just talking as if to a friend or family member.
In a work context, as if addressing colleagues or a client.
In a media context where they would address a camera – eg, reality TV, news, sport, documentary.
Or it could be a dating video or a charity appeal or a Skype call, or a phone call…

Who they are speaking to:
There needn’t be a second voice – but if there is, it needs to have minimal input and for the focus to be on the main character. A simple approach would be if we the viewer don’t hear the off-screen voice (as in a phone call). But you need to be clear in your own mind what they are saying and what your character is responding to. It also opens up the potential for jokes when we discover through your character what the other person has just said.

If it is just a monologue, still think about who they are talking to. Even if they are just addressing the viewer ask yourself how they are speaking; is it as if to a friend or to a professional colleague.mAnd crucially ask yourself what they want. Why are they speaking? They must want something. Be clear about what they are trying to achieve, even if it’s only to get something off their chest. Whatever it is, being clear where they are, who they are speaking to and why will help enormously.

Any tips or “must dos” for showing off a comedy character in 2 minutes?

Be clear about what the central comic idea is; what is the game of the character? Eg, they are a nerd who is trying to be really cool. Or they are a teacher who doesn’t know anything about their subject. Structure your two minute piece in this way:

SET-UP – preparing the ground – the who/ where/ what
REVEAL – where the central comic idea is revealed – you need to be clear what the main joke is about the character and introduce it here. This is the ‘game’ of the character.
ESCALATION – You now build the absurdity of the central comic idea.
PAY-OFF – Give it a twist at the end.

For example:

SET-UP – The person is a therapist. They are doing a phone consultation.
REVEAL – They don’t listen and are not at all sympathetic.
ESCALATION – They get more and more dismissive and unsympathetic
PAY-OFF – We discover they are talking to their spouse.

A key thing thing to keep in mind is the gap between how the character sees themselves and how the audience see them. Essentially the character has a better opinion of themselves that they are projecting. So in the above, the therapist will think they actually are helping but we the audience clearly see they aren’t. This is dramatic irony – we the audience get something the character doesn’t. You can think in terms of persona/shadow. The persona is how they want to come across and their shadow is all the negative things that leak out and undermine the impression they are creating. This is a key to comedy characters. The bigger the gap, the more absurd they are. A classic example of this is Alan Partridge.

One way to achieve a persona/shadow effect in writing is to switch abruptly from a positive to a negative statement, or from nice to rude switching. Dame Edna is a great example of this. And she is also projecting friendliness and bonhomie (persona) but this is constantly undercut by snide comments (shadow). You could think about switching from/to:

Nice/nasty
Clever/stupid
Informed/ignorant
Sophisticated/crude

The end result you’ll try and make look chatty but with a pretty tight rhythm of setting it up (statement A) and paying if off (statement B).

Common mistakes when writing a monologue for a character

The main mistake to avoid is making it unclear or confusing. I watched some of the films from the original Chorts initiative with a group of students. We picked a small random selection. We discovered that some didn’t work because they were simply confusing. The performance was often okay, even intriguing. But we didn’t understand where they were, what they wanted, who they were and what the joke was meant to be. The ones that worked had a clear set-up and a clear comic idea. It showed how important it is to be clear with the set-up, then reveal the joke (or the game of the character), then escalate the idea, then finish it crisply.

By Lorna Woolfson (@lolcov)

When I went to The Craft Of Comedy Conference in Llandudno in April, I expected, at best, to hear from some people in the comedy biz about how it all works. What I didn’t expect was that I would come away with an opportunity to submit jokes to HIGNFY every week and get incredibly detailed feedback on each submission from the brilliant Ged Parsons. But that’s exactly what has happened.

The contest was part of a welcome package for the conference. It seemed like just a bit of fun. It was such a packed conference that no time was available to focus on it. Each person was asked to come up with up to three set up lines (not captions….whatever you do, do not call them captions) for a selection of 6 photographs. We handed them in on the Friday and went through some of them, with Ged, as the very last session of the Conference on Sunday.

A couple of mine were singled out and here I am.

What amazes me each week is what a craft these jokes are. In Ged’s feedback notes, he might tweak one word or rearrange the sentence to make it flow better or to make it funnier and each time he does, you can see that he’s right.  He’s very honest too; if it doesn’t work or it’s not funny he says so.

There are five of us from the Conference who take part and a couple of guys Ged had been teaching on a course. He gives us our feedback all together so that we can see what the others are getting right and wrong as well as ourselves. He told us from the start that it is very unlikely that any of our jokes will make it on to HIGNFY as it involves not only a great photo and setup but also a hell of a lot of luck. That said, last week, one of the guys did actually get their joke on the show.  So there is hope for us all…

Notes from Ged Parsons on writing jokes for images

Lorna and Ged have kindly shared their jokes and feedback for a series of amusing images. This is a brilliant read for anyone wanting to write jokes for satirical TV, magazines or websites. In each case Lorna’s entry is first, followed by Ged Parson’s feedback and the image in question.

---

Theresa May has hit back at critics who have accused her of not being enough like Margaret Thatcher

See image here

Very good. Nice idea, well expressed. Just a couple of tweaks. Use the present tense. And ‘hits back’ could maybe be changed – if we make her sound positive, that will then increase the contrast with the ‘far-from-positive’ photo. This was one of several very good ones you did. My edit:

Theresa May attempts to win over critics who have accused her of not being enough like Margaret Thatcher … 

---

North Korea’s new Women’s Institute has celebrated the appointment of its democratically elected new leader …

See image here

Very good, with a couple of tweaks. Hide ‘North Korea’, because it gives away too much, and we then know, almost always, who it is who’s about to appear. Avoid repetition of ‘new’. Maybe overstate the electoral ‘fairness’ for comedy effect. And use the present tense. This was one of your several very good ones. My edit:

A foreign branch of the Women’s Institute celebrates the appointment of its entirely democratically-elected new leader …

---

Prince Harry has received a response from the Queen and Prince Charles after requesting a blessing for him to propose to Meghan Markle …

See image here

Very good, but we can tweak what’s already here. Try to get the joke’s key word, ‘response’, as close as possible to the reveal of the photo that actually shows that response, i.e. put it at the end of the set-up line. Saying ‘their’ blessing is not only more usual, it also personalises their unkind reaction more, and makes it more funnily callous. Add some objective, but telling, detail about Meghan, for clarity, and comedy effect. ‘Official’ would add some nice wrong-footing. Use the present tense. This was one of your several very good ones. My edit:

After Prince Harry asks the Queen and Prince Charles for their blessing for him to propose to American commoner Meghan Markle, he receives their official response …

---

Ahead of the June General Election, the Liberal Democrats seek to attract disillusioned UKIP voters.

See image here

Good photo, good joke, well-written. I’d make a bit more of Farron’s uncertain, ‘less-than-comfortable’ facial expression. It matters less in this case that we’re told what the emotion in the photo will be, because the exact nature of what they’re adopting, (the beer), remains a surprise. Submitted as:

As preparation for the Election continues, there’s evidence that the Liberal Democrats are half-heartedly adopting the same strategy as UKIP …

---

At the races this week, one pensioner hopes for an upturn in her fortunes …

See image here

Good photo. I don’t think we need ‘at the races’, because those details don’t need to register – the viewers will fix only on ‘win a luxury car’. We don’t need ‘this week.’ I’ve made her plight sound more desperate, and added the ambiguous ‘state benefits’. Submitted as:

As state benefits are cut even further, one pensioner takes desperate measures to try and maintain her standard of living…

By Peter Wright

15 Chorts! showcasing new comedy characters have been selected to be screened at the Craft of Comedy UK on 31st March – 1st April 2017. There were over 100 submissions in the first month and the standard was high, so some really promising characters only just missed out. In this post we’re going to share what the very best entries did to get the nod (check out all 15 here).

Chorts! are 2 minute videos of original comedy characters. Anyone can submit one and it’s free,  We screen the best Chorts! at festivals and bring them to the attention of producers, commissioners and agents. To read more on why they are a great way to get your comedy noticed check out this post.

5 Things You Need For A Great Chort!

1. A Distinctive Character

Selected Chorts all had original traits and flaws. It sounds obvious to say, but the starting point for a good character is to define what makes them unique and interesting. Comedy audiences are very quick to spot derivations (how often have characters been said to have ‘something of David Brent’ about them) and so creating something completely ‘fresh’ takes hard work. Here are some resources to help you create your character.

2. Simple and straight to the point

Having a distinctive character only works if you communicate to your audience quickly why they should be interested. It’s important to keep it simple and engage them quickly. Be clear about what makes your character funny, and get straight to it!

3. Creative use of the Chort format

Selected Chorts explored creative ways to show the character at its best.  They introduced an interaction, put them in an interesting situation, or used props effectively. There are limitations to a ‘to camera’ monologue, though it has been done very effectively, so make sure you’re using all the tools available.  Check out how Rob Morgan did just that in his Chort! below:

4. A great performance

There were examples of good writing that wasn’t portrayed to its best in performance. We aren’t all performers, but many actors are looking for good writers to work with. If you’d like to write a Chort! to be performed by a pro why not check out our Chort! Writing Competition.

5. Get in the mind of a producer

Does the character have a limited scope? Could you put that character in other interesting situations or interactions.  Some of the best Chorts! had characters that have comic potential in many different settings, whereas in others the character was a vehicle for a single (and often very funny) sketch. Sean Burke’s Chort! is an example of a character that has great scope.

So keep those great Chorts coming! We’ll continue to watch each one that comes through and by gaining likes and shares you can move your Chort! up the page and get noticed. There will also be some more exciting screening opportunities this year.

By Simon Paul Miller (with additional material from Jeremy Miller)

Mel Helitzer states there are six essential ingredients for humour. I’m not convinced that every joke has all six of these ingredients, but I do think it could be a useful concept to assess and improve my jokes. Mel has an acronym to remember these ingredients, which is THREES. I’ll briefly outline them below, but for a lot more detail (and plenty of one-liner examples) you can read ‘Comedy Writing Secrets’. (A revised 3^rd edition was released earlier this year almost immediately after I bought the 2^nd edition!)

T is for Target.

“I’m not a good lover, but at least I’m fast.” (Drew Carey)

Who, or what, your joke is aimed at is a critical piece of information you need to know and how funny it makes your joke will depend on your target audience. Don’t forget that the target could be the person or character saying the line, often the case if you are doing stand-up or writing a sketch/sit-com.

H is for Hostility.

“Donald Trump is a confirmed liar, nothing he says is ever confirmed.”

The more hostile your audience is to the target, the funnier they will find it. You’ve probably noticed that you don’t even need a joke if your audience really hates that person. For example, just calling Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt a rude word that rhymes with Hunt will get a laugh from most junior Doctors, but Jeremy Hunt is less likely to be amused, so you need to choose the right target for your audience.

R is for Realism.

“What has four legs and flies? A dead horse.”

At the heart of many a joke lies a truth and, up to a point, the more bitter the truth, the bigger the laugh.

The first E is for Exaggeration.

“I’ve told you a million times, stop exaggerating!”

There may be truth in what is being said, but in a joke, the audience usually allows some embellishment. Understatement is also included in this category.

The second E is for Emotion.

“My father had a profound influence on me – he was a lunatic.” (Spike Milligan)

Emotion can be used in the set-up to trick the audience into a state of apprehension, which is then deflated by the punch.

S is for Surprise.

“Boo!” (Jeremy Miller)

I can’t take credit for the previous line, it was inserted by my son as I left my computer to answer the door. I’ll refer you to Daniel Page’s article, The 2 Fundamentals of Comedy Writing, which more than adequately covers this ingredient.

So, after you’ve written a joke, or sketch (or indeed any comedy piece), you could go through this list of ingredients like a checklist and see if you can adjust your piece to make it funnier…

• Is there a target I could add to this joke, or a different target, that would make it funnier to the joke’s target audience?
• Can I phrase the joke differently to make my audience more hostile to the target?
• Is the ‘truth’ in this joke visible enough (or too overstated)?
• Would exaggeration (or understatement) help?
• Can I add or increase an emotional hook for the audience?
• Have I maximised the impact of the surprise?

Alternatively, you can use them to rate your jokes. For example, if you need to trim down a list of one-liners to send into Newsjack, rating them against each of these ingredients gives you a way of comparing them and weeding out the weaker jokes. If your joke doesn’t score anything in all the categories, then it probably isn’t a joke – but if you can prove me wrong, please do in the comments section below.

Simon Paul Miller is the creator of The Rhyming Detective podcast.

You can buy Mel Helitzer’s book for yourself here:

Comedy Writing Secrets: How to Think Funny, Write Funny, Act Funny and Get Paid for it

Do you want to turn your passion for comedy into a career? Lee Dilley and Paul Farrell started writing together after meeting at university and have worked on a range of comedy projects alongside their day jobs. Now they have co-founded their own production company, Goat Tree Films, and have been privately commissioned to write, produce and direct sitcom pilot ‘In The Dog House’, which premieres on Tuesday 23rd August.

Their journey is one that many Comedy Crowders will relate and aspire to, so we caught up with them to ask about their experience so far.  Their responses contain some great insights about how they write together, what they’ve learned about creating real characters, and why they’re always working on multiple projects.

How did you get into comedy writing?

LD: ‘Very slowly but naturally, like putting on an old pair of slippers. I say naturally, but not easily; first you have to wear the slippers in. From watching comedy such as the Two Ronnies, Morecambe and Wise, Porridge, Black Adder, The Office, Inbetweeners, Fawlty Towers and of course Only Fools And Horses all my life, the next natural step was to imitate them in some shape or form. I was never any good at writing because of my dyslexia, so telling comedy stories verbally was my high. I tried writing but my confidence and inexperience hindered me, I even posted some early work off but I never even got a reply unless it was a bounce back. It’s the equivalent of messaging everyone on a dating app and the only reply is the dating app recommending a different app. At the start the writing isn’t the hard part at all – anyone can write. The hard part is being prepared to be judged on your writing, that’s the real art. Once you shake that bit off you will have the confidence to paint your personality into every word and then the words will start to feel real and breathe. I say this now but I couldn’t call myself a writer until I met my writing partner, Paul during my time at University. He also had a quietened voice, but really wanted to scream about comedy, a love for stories, great dialogue and character arcs. More than that, Paul had something I missed completely, “structure”; if story is King it’s nothing without its Queen of structure. Nail the structure and worst case scenario you’ll still end up with a standing house, 2 out of 3 pigs get this wrong.’

PF: ‘By being that pig for a long time. I’ve always aimlessly written since I was a child without ever realising that it could become a career (that’s still debatable), so once that clicked I went to University and met Lee. Basically, I paid 20 grand to meet my writing partner. I grew up wearing out VHS copies of Only Fools and Horses so comedy is engrained in my writing.’

Tell us about the first comedy script you wrote?

 LD: ‘It was Jobseekers #jobseekerssitcom inspired by the credit crunch and high unemployment rates, we [myself & Paul] didn’t just write it, we made it. I sold my only car, my precious classic Mini to fund the project and what money we had from our dwindling student loans (don’t worry, we’re never paying it back at this rate) we then premiered the pilot at Derby Quad Cinema and BAFTA and we were then signed to a UK Top 100 production company. Since then Jobseekers made it to commissioners’ tables from BBC CH4, ITV and more. Jobseekers unfortunately never got picked up but we had some very interesting feedback and about 50 re-writes during the 2 year pitching process.’

PF: ‘With Jobseekers it really was a crash course for us as new writers, you don’t exactly expect your first script to hit the desks of the major channels but it did (and it’s still sitting on a few). What we learnt was to not get to caught up in one project; you should have a catalogue of scripts and pitches on the go at any one time.’

How did your comedy journey progress?

LD: ‘Stories are about unravelling. Think of a knot in a ball of string, well the character has to find a way to that knot, sometimes making others but eventually they learn the way and all is undone again. The writing process is the same, you have to find your knots, what bugs you, what gets you out of bed in the morning or what stops you going to sleep at night. Find that knot then create a character and set them out to find it, the truth, the answer or question. As you might notice I enjoy a metaphor but I suppose put simply, the journey is one of truth, you have to be truly honest about yourself and why you do things as a character, you might not like what you see but eventually you realise they are natural reactions even if they are selfish, inconsiderate, rude, hurtful etc.. Nobody is perfect which means no character is either and that ‘false knot’ will stand out like a leather jacket at a vegan fair. Be honest it’s human, we have all these emotions for a reason, it’s normal, what isn’t normal is trying to hide it.’

PF: ‘It’s constant evolution. New found knowledge will destroy everything you have ever written but for the better. So the learning journey of the craft is a bumpy one, but the most rewarding. Even though we are only just on the road ourselves, we have written scripts in a variety of formats now from features to stand up. Each having their distinct hidden rules and boundaries to find that you can’t see without launching yourself feet first with eyes open. We are currently working on our latest feature film script called ‘UFHoax’ with all fingers and toes crossed this one will break free of the page.’

You’ve worked in roles as varied as a croupier and a nursery play worker – how important is life experience to being a good writer?

LD: ‘Very important if you want to write about a nocturnal croupier who works as a play worker in the day. Seriously though, I’d say extremely important – I’ve probably had 50 different jobs in my day but it isn’t particularly the job it’s who is doing them and why? People, it’s all about the people. Everyone has a story and experience is listening to and living through other people’s stories.’

PF: ‘Dead end jobs? Truthfully, it adds a grit and determination and a good fear of taking a backwards step if you don’t take an opportunity that appears.’

What would you advise someone who wants to write but doesn’t have a diverse range of life experience?

LD: ‘I’d say go get some! That’s exactly what I told myself at 21, and I went and worked on cruise ships and travelled to 5 continents and 45+ countries to find stories and create my own. Before travelling I created false knots in my stories, stories with part truths, too exaggerated, paper thin characters.’

PF: ‘You’ll write nothing feeling numb, so go out there and feel, good and bad. Also be fully aware that writing is a bizarrely twisted profession. You sit in a dark room in complete and utter self-isolation dreaming up human interactions. So it’s probably best to go out there and learn and experience what you’re going to spend your life banging on about.’

Tell us about your writing process?

LD: ‘So random we could never get assassinated, as a writing duo we meet whenever we can, after work, weekends, on the phone, in the pub before 2 pints. Unfortunately routine can only happen with paid work, and as writers you work for love and then you get money when other people fall in love with your work, which isn’t an easy achievement. I think as a duo it’s best to get the structure, chat about possible problems, outline the characters then go off individually to write jokes and dialogue, then pitch it the other writer as the character. Writing by myself I find 2am is the best time for me, I need absolute quiet, no TV, no phone and no next doors lawnmower. I do write in the morning sometimes but I hit walls quicker, walls not blokes, although it can mean the same thing. Your character might have taken a wrong turn and hit a wall, a bloke means you wrote the wrong character and he can’t get over the wall ‘end of story’. A wall means you need to have a break, usually a shower and find the way your character would try and get over the wall (obstetrical).’

PF: ‘Late Dinner. Gossiping like old women on a bus. Snack break. One great idea. That will do for today.’

How important is it to have a writing partner?

LD: ‘For British comedy it’s usually a duo, although John Sullivan wrote Only Fools And Horses on his own but he’s a comedy genius and an exception to the rule. I imagine it’s very difficult to find a writing partner with the exact same sense of humour, resilience, enthusiasm, goals and most importantly honesty. As a writing duo we lie down like therapy and confess our failures, needs, wants and could never gets.’

PF: ‘Its main benefit is having an audience member with you at all points so your ideas are always being challenged and questioned. ‘Why’ is our favourite word as you have to challenge every single word in a script. We usually find if one of us really fights for an idea it usually means they’re right.’

Tell us about Goat Tree Films

LD: ‘The name is all about how we as a couple of working class blokes look odd as writers, and so does a goat in a tree. However it seems to work somehow, and bonus, it’s funny to look at. Our mantra is we believe a great story promotes change. We also promote women in media, which brings us onto the next question nicely, that’s another thing about writing… plan ahead.’

PF: ‘We’ve always felt slightly like the out crowd, a couple of unfashionable filmmakers who don’t go home and watch a 1921 film from Botswana. We watch Jurassic Park. So Goat Tree felt perfectly awkward for us. Plus we also don’t have very catchy names.’

Tell us about your current project, ‘In the Dog House’?

PF: ‘ In The Dog House is a sitcom pilot inspired by the books of Sid Jenkins, who has devoted over 50 years of his life to animal welfare. It follows a group of naive kennel workers who go rogue to solve animal related crimes.

Finally, what advice would your current self give to your past-self at the point you started on your writing journey?

LD: ‘I would probably say nothing, because the truth would be, you’re not going to make it this year or the next, or the next and it’s going to cost you a lot of money and time. Sometimes it’s better not to warn yourself of the end goal because you won’t enjoy the ride. Or I’d say, structure, get the structure write you stupid prick do you realise how much we’ve had to write around your problems, move scenes, delete scenes, erase characters, days and weeks wasted.’

PF: ‘Those that talk the talk, rarely walk the walk.’

Tickets to the premiere of Lee and Paul’s latest comedy In The Dog House can be bought here .

Want to turn your comedy passion into something more? Here at The Comedy Crowd we are building a community that works together to create great comedy.  Subscribe to our weekly newsletter for the latest opportunities, advice and tools to create comedy:

Leave this field empty if you're human:

---

Sketch Scribe is a competition looking for scripted comedy sketches from new writers from around the UK which are performed live at the festival by a super group of comedians formed from live sketch groups. The sketches will be judged by a panel of industry professionals who will decide on a winner. The deadline is 14th August.

The winning writer will have a chance to receive a development and insight session with an award-winning sketch group and a script development executive. Last year’s winner saw Michael J Byrne from Ireland win a development session with script editor Andrew Ellard (The IT Crowd, Red Dwarf, Cardinal Burns).

This is a great opportunity for our UK subscribers, so we approached Adam Dahrouge, the artistic producer for London Sketchfest to give Comedy Crowd subscribers some advice:

What have successful sketches in recent years had in common?

The writers were true to themselves. They didn’t try too hard to be something.You might expect us to be more specific but in this case it’s about the art rather than the science.

We could say that pull back and reveals are popular where you pull back the story and reveal a completely different joke. But these styles are transient, popular at one time and then they pass.

What is common behind all good sketches is a writer who is true to their style of comedy. It may change with time but you can’t fake it or impersonate without it being obvious.

What advice would you give about writing sketches for the Sketchfest audience?

Our audience now expects the unexpected. They expect clever, new takes on things. Ultimately audiences want to be surprised and exhilarated, either by an idea or a performance or being taken by surprise, or if you’re lucky all three.

It’s the writer’s job to come up with something that we haven’t imagined or thought of before, after that you’re performers will add another layer of character, so it’s important to focus on what’s at the core – the idea.

It may not come straight away but if you keep searching you’ll eventually surprise yourself and that’s when you know you have it.

What did you learn from sketch scribe last year?

Honestly, that as good as the writing is, the reaction of an audience is crucial for the development of a sketch. A good comic actor can help as well. Sketches are truly brought to life in their performance. It is where the characters really shine and it’s often the beginning of the next big editing phase.

It’s one of the reasons we thought we had to continue Sketch Scribe after it’s inaugural event at last year’s festival, it’s a great opportunity for writer’s to get their work on stage and move to the next level.

To view the full submission guidelines and submit to London Sketchfest Sketch Scribe click here.  The applications deadline is midnight on 14th August. 

To make sure you never miss out on comedy opportunities subscribe to our newsletter below:

Leave this field empty if you're human:

 

At the recent BBC Salford Sitcom Showcase Vanessa Amberleigh, executive producer of CBeebies, gave an enlightening talk on how to write for Children’s TV, attended by the Comedy Crowd’s Northern England correspondent.  There are an increasing number of opportunities emerging to write for kids, not least because of the sheer quantity of programmes, particularly on the BBC where there is a desire to produce more sketch shows.  If you’re serious about a career in writing, what better way to make your first impression?

Here are the DOs and DONTs we picked up from Vanessa:

DO

• Be adventurous.  When writing for kids you are writing for an audience with great imagination. Don’t be afraid to do something different.  Execute it well and they will follow you
• Remember the basics of comedy writing still apply. Create strong characters and use 3 act structure
• Use repetition and reinforcement.  If writing a series consider using format points, a cue in each episode where the audience knows that particular feature or action will always happen (kids love these)
• Try to weave in an educational or moral dimension
• Make sure you include physical humour (but be aware of imitative behaviour – every outcome should be safe and every intention should be non-malicious)
• Make your characters laugh (laughter is infectious for adults, but the effect is amplified in children)
• Be mindful that children, generally, like mess
• Set up situations that create anticipation and suspense.  Think pantomime – ‘What can the audience see that the characters cannot?’
• Consider use of music and dancing (not always required).  CBeebies will even accept standalone songs as submissions

DON’T

• Make it too wordy
• Introduce lots of sub-plots, stick to one
• Prioritise including references for adults (a common mistake)
• Include topical or cultural references that will be lost on your audience
• Neglect the use of slapstick gags that you might consider cliched, children won’t always know what is coming

There you have it.  Well done to the BBC for putting on this great event for writers.

Join thousands of creators and fans receiving our free weekly newsletter with the latest opportunities and insights in the world of comedy:

Leave this field empty if you're human:

Further listening – If you are serious about writing for children we highly recommend you listen to this Sitcom Geeks podcast with Ben Ward, writer of ‘Horrible Histories’.