Pogue tweeted:

Whoa. Steve Jobs, Eric Schmidt, Mark Zuckerberg to meet with Obama, 2/17: http://abcn.ws/fbrlU8.

The list of funny responses includes this:

Finally, the most powerful men in the world, and the president, are getting together. (@dmj)

I was saddened by this missed opportunity (more saddened than is probably healthy). The joke is an old one, a simple bait-and-switch. It’s a classic and it’s still funny as ever, given new life with each new setup that comes along. And this setup about Jobs, Schmidt, Zuckerberg, and Obama is a good one, considering our tech-obsessed culture.

But then @dmj goes and blows the punchline halfway through the joke, before you even realize what the joke is supposed to be. For this kind of joke, the audience shouldn’t even realize it is a joke until a split-second after the end.

PSA time.

The way it’s currently phrased, the audience subconsciously pauses halfway through to process the joke: Wait, he said “powerful men and the president”. Is he making a distinction? Probably. I see. He’s saying the president isn’t one of the most powerful men. Funny. Time to continue reading: “are getting together.” OK.

For maximum effect, punchlines should come at the end. This is true almost always, for comedy and for writing in general. End with the point you want your audience to carry away with them. In a bait-and-switch routine like this, it’s absolutely essential.

With a hat tip to @dmj, the intended joke looks more like this:

Finally, the most powerful men in the world are getting together. And the president will be there too.

The mental process for this one goes more like this: “…are getting together.” Yeah, that’s true. Oh, what’s this? Another sentence. The president will be there “too”? He’s making a distinction. He’s saying the president isn’t one of the most powerful men. Funny.

By getting the audience to accept the setup in its entirety before they’re even aware of the joke, the unexpectedness of the punchline is heightened, making it funnier. Plus, they walk away with the funny part fresh and unspoiled in their mind.[1]

That’s all for today’s class. Read Chapters 12 and 13 in the text for next time. And don’t forget, your essays on “Why I Think My Favorite Funny Movie Is Funny” are due next Friday.

1. Other variations could include a hard return or two between the setup and the punchline, forcing a longer pause for the audience to more fully accept the premise and heighten the punchline contrast. Or, for something more subtle: “The most powerful men in the world are getting together with the president,” which increases the pause between the end of the sentence and the realization of the joke (although I think in this case it is too subtle). In all cases, the punchline comes at the end.

Today we’re talking about jumping on bandwagons. Here’s a typical case: an unintentionally funny Youtube video goes viral. Like this Antoine Dodson Eye-Witness Rapist video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ua-OqYZC1DA

It’s funny. You don’t need to add anything to it to make it funny. It just is.[2]

For some reason[3], whenever one of these pops up (cf. Double Rainbow guy), people immediately feel compelled to make and post their own “remix” video. For example:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ozFYtdkiNtk

What is the point of something like this? I assume it’s intended for humor, because that was the reason for the original video’s popularity. Using that assumption as a starting point, what does this “remix” add to the legacy of the original video? The answer is nothing.

It’s another case of trying to be funny by association: the idea that referencing something funny makes you funny. It is entirely dependent on the viewer having seen and appreciated the original video. It’s even more dependent on this because it has rendered all the humorous elements of the original unrecognizable. The creator has chopped up the audio so much that the rhythm and meaning of the original is completely missing. Then, to further screw things up, the video has been separated from the audio (or otherwise obscured) so the viewer is unable to appreciate the physical attributes of Antoine’s soliloquy.

There is nothing to give this “remix” credibility on its own. The underlying beat sounds like a loop that comes standard with Garageband. Likewise, the visual effects appear to be off-the-shelf, randomly selected, and applied indiscriminately. The whole repetitive video has nothing going for it.

Does this mean everyone should avoid any attempt to re-edit or supplement a funny video? Yeah, probably. But not necessarily. Case in point: the following video by The Gregory Brothers, AKA the guys and girl behind Auto-Tune the News, an internet series based entirely on repurposed video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hMtZfW2z9dw

This is lightyears beyond the self-described “remix” in terms of humor, and it may even top the original when it comes to replay value.

This video succeeds, it seems to me, by following three rules.

1. Respect the source material.

Even with the “auto-tune” vocal effects, the best parts of the original video aren’t buried or obscured by carelessness. Rather, they’re highlighted. The phrasing, the physical mannerisms—it’s all maintained here and augmented by the production surrounding it. And for viewers who may not have seen the original, enough context remains to keep them from being completely lost.

2. Add something to it.

The auto-tune effect, used well here, is a funny way to make speech sound kind of like singing (as any number of Top 40 artists can tell you). But they didn’t stop there. This is so much more than audio effects over a generic beat. They wrote an effing song, complete with verses and chorus. What’s more, it’s a damn good song, catchier than most crap on the radio these days.

3. Be awesome.

The creators are talented musicians (who have, thankfully, chosen to use their immense powers for comedy, not evil) as is clear by the music. You can see the care that went into everything: the selection of the best clips to use, the background vocals and handclaps, the tight editing and overall production. This is how you make a funny tribute video.

Auto-Tune The News is one the best video series on the internets today. And it’s great because it consistently applies everything I’ve just mentioned. If you’re not a subscriber, you should be ashamed.

Remember, kids: taking something funny and altering it does not make it funny. Taking something funny and making it funnier does make it funny.

1. Please note, this is completely different from figuring out if something is funny.
2. This post is not about why this particular video is funny.
3. Probably influenced more by the viral popularity of the original than any sense of paying homage to it

If you don’t listen to Tally Hall’s music, that’s understandable; it’s not for everyone. But if you aren’t watching Tally Hall’s Internet Show, you are a moron. You don’t want to be a moron, do you?

This sketch from the latest episode is something that, I think, is pretty amazing: a bit that is funny and original. Most sketches I see around may be funny, but they’re almost always a variation on a well worn structure, or simply something we’ve already seen but in a different setting (think SNL recurring characters who do their schtick at a friend’s party one week, then at a different friend’s party the next). But this thing… well, it’s beautiful. Watch:

Check out full episodes: Tally Hall’s Internet Show.

Note: Conlan received no compensation for this unsolicited adverstisement

CollegeHumor.com via Laughing Squid.

In the meantime, ’tis the season…