Last night, I was watching one of my favorite movies of all time, Monty Python and the Holy Grail. If you haven't seen it, it's all on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eOfI88NKRzY. Stop whatever you happen to be doing and watch the whole thing from start to finish. It's one of the funniest movies I've ever seen, but last night, it occurred to me that I have absolutely no idea why I find it, or anything else, funny. Just a heads-up - this post will be composed primarily of spoilers from the movie.
So why do we find things funny? Seems like a simple question at first, but think about it a bit. I dare you to come up with one good reason that could not possibly be contested. For example, the first thing I would have come up with is that the things we find funny are ridiculous or idiotic. This isn't necessarily true, though. If I came into school tomorrow with a swastika painted on my face, it would be completely ridiculous and just about as stupid as you could get. But nobody would find it funny, would they? (If you disagree with that statement, do yourself a favor and seek counseling.) And things don't necessarily have to be ridiculous to be funny, do they? For example, when somebody trips in an embarrassing way (usually me), people generally laugh. At the same time, this is something completely reasonable that I'd bet has happened to just about everybody out there. Of course, that's not to say that ridiculous things can't be funny. Take the scenes in Monty Python and the Holy Grail with the tenacious, invincible Black Knight, the trial of the purported witch, and the Knights Who Say Ni. But the reason these ridiculous scenes are so funny are that all the actors involved stay in character. Graham Chapman's (Arthur's) reactions when the armless Black Knight attacks are completely natural, which is, to me, what makes the scene as funny as it is. And the stupidity of the peasants accusing the woman of witchcraft is done just enough, not in excess. Would it be funny if they overdid it?...yes, it would be. But would it be as funny? I don't think so. And of course, the Knights Who Say Ni...who say ridiculous words that cause people pain (thanks to the ingenious acting of Graham Chapman and Terry Jones), who demand ridiculous sacrifices to horror movie sound cues (two shrubberies and a tree cut down by a herring), and who are weakened by common everyday words such as "it." As with the witch scene, the amount of ridiculousness is just right, not over- or underdone.
I feel as though another one of the most significant factors in humor is context. Going back to my example of the swastika, if such an event occurred in our daily life, it would definitely not be seen as amusing. But in a Mel Brooks-style scenario, which would likely involve a clearly fictional Nazi blundering around and trying to fit in, it would most likely be seen as funny. In the right context, you can make anything funny, as evidenced by Tim the Enchanter and his warnings. When Tim warns the knights that death awaits them, it wouldn't be funny save for two things; the fact that Tim is spitting in Arthur's face half the time, and the fact that his mannerisms are completely ridiculous. (For more on mannerisms, see the next paragraph.) When we see the context (a small furry rabbit), Tim's warnings become all the more humorous. When we see that Tim was actually telling the truth, the whole thing becomes even funnier (aided by Arthur's delicately placed line, "JESUS CHRIST!").
To an arguably greater extent, I feel as though an actor's mannerisms and tone, and even appearance, can be used to an unbelievable effect in humor. Perhaps the best example I can think of is the French taunting that the knights endure on their quest. John Cleese's character is so ridiculously over-the-top and worked up, it's almost amazing that the character isn't viewed (at least by me) as overdone. I feel the reason I find the French Taunter so funny is that his mannerisms corroborate his over-the-top nature. Couple that with lines like, "I don't wanna talk to you no more, you empty-headed animal food trough wiper," and, "Silly King! You tiny-brained wipers of other people's bottoms," and finally, my personal favorite, "I'll wave my private parts at your undies, you cheesy lot of second-hand electric donkey bottom batterers," all delivered in one of the most ridiculously stereotypical nasal French accents imaginable. I doubt that anyone who's ever seen this movie (and doesn't hail directly from France) hasn't laughed at this scene.
Are these the only things that make the things we find funny funny? Not by a long shot, no. These are just the three I personally feel have the greatest impact on what we view as funny. You could argue for or against any of these, or any others. But frankly, it's not as important to the audience why we find things in comedies funny; what's important is that we do.
I agree with your statements. Also, Monty Python and the Holy Grail is probably my favorite movie on the planet, even though they copped out on the ending.
ReplyDeleteI used to teach comedy at sleepaway camp, so I learned a number of the tricks of comedy. Staying in character is probably Rule #1. When people act as themselves, it's usually pretty dull and embarrassing. When they act as other people though, it's hilarious, especially if that character is well-formed.
Something to add to your list is probably how the relationships between characters add comedic effect. This wasn't perhaps used as much in Monty Python, but it's used in a lot of other comedic material. For example, in Two Broke Girls, the humor derives from the friendship between Max, a poor girl with an obscenely sharp sense of sarcasm, and Caroline, a girl who spent most of her live in sheltered aristocratic living until her father fell from grace.
But even then, the reason they have such an interesting relationship is because the characters are so interesting as individuals.
Personally, I've been wanting to do long form improv and sketch comedy in STAC ever since I joined. It hasn't happened yet, but hey, maybe this can be the year.