I'm a bit late getting this blog out as I have my bi weekly on a Wednesday target. This is because I was waiting for a review to come in and decided to blog about comedy reviews.
The subject of reviews came up a few times last week just coincidentally as each time it was with different acts coming from a different viewpoint. I don't see reviews as a particularly important part of comedy unless it is from a critic who knows their stuff, but even then can a review ever really be anything more than an opinion of one person. I guess a lot depends on how a review is written and what the reviewer sees in the performance from an artistic point of view as much as the consideration as to wether the audience laughed. Steve Bennett reviews a lot of comedy and he is one example of a person who I consider hard to please. I don't see that as a negative thing, Steve must have seen every knob joke, every racist granny joke, every dyslexia joke (I have one, I hate it but people laugh) every type of comedy in some way or another will have been performed in front of someone like Steve and so with good reason he is harder to please. Being harder to please does not mean he is necessarily correct as he would have to review from his own point of view as much as one of a man who can see the skill in a comedians performance.
Steve recently reviewed Harriet Dyer, Harriet is easily one of my favourite acts, I have only seen her twice but I bloody love what I saw. The review was favourable and spot on, this is a review Harriet deserved and can be proud to show off because Steve knows his stuff. I know that Dave Twentyman was referred to as merely a club comic (or words to that affect, I have not seen the actual review)
Dave is another of those acts I just can't praise enough. He doesn't need my praise because audiences all over the country laugh hard and loud at his incredible work, yet my understanding is that his reviews by Steve Bennett have been less favourable (I must stress this is based on a post about snobbery in comedy, an interesting read, and not from me having seen a review of Dave Twentyman by Steve Bennett) disclaimer aside I understand that Steve Bennett may view Dave Twentyman differently and there is nothing wrong with that as any reviewer is entitled to their viewpoint but that does not make the review correct. If you have not seen Dave at work go now and make that right he is a joy to behold.
The concern I have with less than favourable reviews is that they may hinder progress, someone like DT may find it difficult to move into corporate work for example based on a review.
This is not really fair as acts can be considerably better (or in fact worse) than a review suggests.
At my level, well I say my level, I don't really know what my level is, I am now picking up weekly paid work yet still trying to impress a lot of promoters, I am closing more and more and MCing more and more yet if still say I'm an open spot, one of those more experienced but still easy to exploit open spots!
But anyway at my level reviews tend to mean much much less, the reviewer is usually a blogger or a student who has little experience of the world of stand up. Now this doesn't mean their opinion is not valid, anyone's opinion is valid, well anyone but racists, ok racists and homophobes. Oh and sexists, xenophobes and fascists.... Basically if your a phobe or an ist, or a politician you are totally valid in your opinion, the difference only is you may miss the art or the point of an act you review or give someone a great review who was performing tired themes (seriously people stop making Fritzl jokes.... No it's not too soon)
The thing is I wouldn't want reviewers to stop as how would you even begin to get experience, Steve Bennett was wet behind the ears at one point. I just think acts that have brilliant reviews should enjoy them and take all the positives and confidence from them yet those who had bad ones should not allow it to cause them any distress or loss of confidence as it is the view of one person who may be wrong.
I think if you are a reviewer you should continue to be honest, yes I just said you may be wrong but now I'm going to contradict myself and say you can never be wrong as it is your point of view (unless you're an Ist or a phobe, you're definitely wrong if you're one of them)
It's this contradiction that is why I think acts should not take any kind of review good or bad too seriously, if you get a string of great reviews that is of course a good sign and of course the flip side is if you constantly get bad ones you may need to look at your set then, certainly if the reviews say your are an ist or a phobe! But I'm nearly 400 gigs in now and I've only had 3 reviews so how likely it is that you will get a long list of bad or good ones I'm not sure.
I feel as I come to the end of this blog like I'm taking away the need for reviewers of any experience level, I'm not, please keep going to comedy and giving us needy attention starved stage junkies a sense of what you thought, but please try spell the acts name right. In fact do something I never do, use correct grammar and proof read for typos too then it makes us feel that you really care if if the review says "this guy should quit comedy immediately then remove his tongue so no one else ever has to hear the crap that falls head 1st out of his halitosis laden mouth, then to be certain he does not try emulate lost voice guy or the boy with tape on his face he should tie rocks to his feet and go swimming, in a pyroclastic river, I will award him as many stars as there are in the celeb jungle thing.... Zero"
I think really all I'm saying is reviews are nice to read and always will be a part of comedy, but as an act you should not really worry about them because all acts just want to make their audience laugh and some are really good at it others need a little more work.
Before I go (I have a review to write) I mentioned I have been reviewed 3 times, 2 lovely and one..... Well I don't really know what to make of it, the reviewer seemed to miss my point about homophobia suggesting my set was about religion and seems to suggest my apparent on stage confidence is not merited! Oh and jeans, shirt and jumper with flatcap is an unusual look, ha I guess it is but it's my look and was before I started comedy. I will class this as a bad review mainly due to the closing comment but it was 4 stars from 5 so not all bad, feel free to have a read and note my new name :)
The link is here but for some reason invisible, clic in this general area! http://altlinc.co.uk/2014/02/18/comedy-zing/#more-318
I will close now by saying, I am not as really as needy as I made out.... Erm can you all follow me on twitter so it looks like I have fans? @jimbayes thanks, I'm not needy though really I'm not.
No comments:
Post a Comment