Review of Black Adder VI: Black Adder Goes Forth "Black Adder VI: Black Adder goes forth" is the best of the British
comedy that takes satirical swipes at various epochs of history;
Medieval (I), Elizabethan (II), Georgian/Regency (III), and finally,
in this fourth series, World War I. In each series stars Edmund
Blackadder (Rowan Atkinson, in what is possibly his best performance),
who is sharp of intellect, corrupt and conniving. In each
"resurrection" through these ages, he is accompanied by the dimwitted
Baldrick (Tony Robinson).
While the first series is weak, the ensuing three are excellent, and
the fourth is my particular favorite. Accompanied by his incompetent
subordinates, the eternal Baldrick and the good-natured and stupid,
although surprisingly talented George (Hugh Laurie), Blackadder spends
most of his time attempting to evade going out into the field against
the Germans (as it meant certain death). Thwarting Blackadder's goal
are the loud, dimwitted General Melchett (Stephen Fry) and his "office
boy", the waffly Captain Darling (Tim McInnerny), who is Blackadder's
enemy. The anti-war message in this particular series is clear and
poignant, exposing the futility and inefficiency of the first world
war.
The series is absolutely hilarious, and each episode is excellent.
Rowan Atkinson is stellar as always, but I particularly enjoyed the
performance of Hugh Laurie as George. The actor is most-often cited
for his performance as the prince...
... middle of paper ...
...inions, and I've done nearly 400 now. Although the subtleties of the
British humor may be over the heads of some of you, there is so much
that can't be avoided that you will wonder why you hadn't heard of
this one sooner. The DVD has a special bonus area that will fill you
in on some of the real history involved, just in case you flunked
yours in school. Actually, if you have any kids in high school, this
could be a good way to let them develop an interest in WWI without
ever having to crack a book!
I would love to tell you more, but I can't really do either the jokes
or the sarcasm justice in text. I guess the only way for you to once
again prove what a superb reviewer I am is to get this one and watch
it for yourself. Once you do, you will be willing to kill anyone who
might want to deprive you of it. Go for it....
Australian humour is very unique to Australia. This individual sense of humour is not often found in other Westernised cultures and people from those places may have difficulty understanding it. In some places, the characteristics of Australian humour may not even be considered acceptable behaviour and it would be breaking the law to do so. For example, in Australia, people are free to make jokes about the government, but in other countries this may not be accepted. Some unique and important characteristics of Austral...
When someone is trying to prove a point or make a statement, what do you think is the most effective was to do so? Do you think using sarcasm is an efficient way to do so? Do you think that by using sarcasm you will just anger the party that you’re trying to get your point across to? What if the person or group of people doesn’t understand what you’re trying to say or still doesn’t agree with the point that you’re making? Chaucer, a very controversial writer, uses sarcasm, or satire, to get his points and views across in a very alarming way. What Chaucer did in the mid 1350’s was very controversial and had a lot of repercussions, although many of them could be seen as good.
The majority of comedy is centered on identity. Comedy, like many other aspects of different cultures contains barriers that are broken only by an understanding of the context of the comedy. In order words, it is unlikely that an African would fully understand a joke by an American comedian if the joke draws from a primarily American historical or social context. Hence, what one can identify with affects what kind of jokes one can relate to. Identity is predicated on the ability to relate because identities are formed through personal interpretations of the environment one finds himself or herself in. These personal interpretations can be highly influenced by a manipulation of the context or amount of representation. Using Bigsby and Ruckus
Raskin (1985) introduces his approach as being concerned with ‘verbal humor’, but his analyses are based on all types of humor conveyed in language, that is, our ‘verbally expressed’ humor. The widely-cited general theory of verbal humor (Attardo, 1994), which we have not space to discuss here, is about humor expressed in language, not merely humor dependent on specific language devices. To complicate matters further, Norick (2004) uses non-verbal to describe jokes which cannot be effectively conveyed in written language, since they are dependent on audible material (e.g. tone of voice) or on non-linguistic devices such as gestures; ‘verbal’ jokes would then be those which can be expressed successfully in writing. In this chapter, we will stay with the terms outlined earlier: anything conveyed in language is ‘verbally expressed humor’; ‘verbal humor’ is dependent on language-specific devices, ‘referential humor’ is based solely on meaning.
It takes a great sense of humor to appreciate a great joke. I have a good sense of humor. You see, you gotta be able to appreciate the nuances; the little pieces of the joke that make it funny, without askin’ you to laugh. If you can’t do that, then that joke is gonna fall deader than a door nail right in front of you. This is why Charlie and I were such great friends; he could tell the jokes, and I could appreciate them. That’s why I called him “Punchline”. He never fuckin’ stopped bein’ funny, like that time
Psychologists, sociologists and anthropologists study humor because it is a fundamental culture value, but they still can’t determine why certain things make some people laugh and others not. There are “humor quotient” tests that are designed to measure an individual’s sense of humor, but these tests are questionable. These tests aren’t accurate because almost all humor depends on cultural background knowledge and language skills. Not every person in the whole world, or even in one country share the same background knowledge and skills, therefore they cannot have the same type of humor. “The fact remains that individuals vary in their appreciation of humor” (Rappoport 9). Since humor varies from individual to individual, humor lies in the individual. How successful or funny a joke is depends on how the person receives the joke, humor cannot be measured by a statistical
In trying to show this however, it is necessary to first establish a viable alternative to the notion that those who fail to "get" irony are inferior and less sophisticated than those who do. This is to undermine a rather insidious line of logic that consequently supports o...
is a great aspect of humour, this is shown in two major ways. One of
Frequently in literature, humor is added in scenes to make them more interesting and more appealing to readers. Often times underneath the humorous covers lay a much more serious principle. Charles Dickens does exactly this in A Tale of Two Cities, by making slight comedy of issues such as democracy, the lower class, and spousal abuse.
The name of the film I am going to review is final destination 3, it is the 3rd in the final destination series. It was released in the cinemas on February 11th 2006 and then released on DVD and video on 25th July 2006.
Let’s face it, in The United States, we do not understand cricket, we do not understand tea, and we certainly do not understand hidden emotions. Of course there is more to Britain than these cultural icons, just like America is not just made of cowboys from “Dallas” and loud egotistic tourists. However in the year 2000, there are still several myths surrounding the British culture that are very much alive today.
Before analyzing the comedic content in question, it is important when drawing on a variety of sentiments from comedians to understand that many performers use a character or parody for their humor. Others choose to voice opinions and views contrary to their own, in the hopes of receiving a certain reaction from a specific audience. In referring to the material of writers and comedians, one must respond to the beliefs they promote (which can be known), rather than those they espouse, which cannot.
Most of us have a tendency to regard a clever sense of humor as the distinction of a person who is good hearted and friendly, someone people feel at ease with. They are "life of the party" we always invite and the co-worker who always has a joke. Everyone has the jocular family member that they always look forward to seeing. We remember the kid in school that always made the class break into laughter. Humor is never forgotten when we reminisce and it is just as amusing as it was the first time.
If there is one way to bring a smile to someone’s face, it is laughter. Funny jokes, comical stunts, sarcasm- Every person is different when it comes to what makes them laugh. Some find dry humor comical. Others think sarcasm or joke-filled ranting are the best. ‘Comedy’ is such a broad term, broad enough to allow everyone to find something they find comical. In fact, ‘comedy’ includes a specific type of drama, one where the protagonist is joyful and happy endings are expected. Comedy is like a drug; it allows you to escape reality. When we say the word ‘comedy’ in the present, we are generally referring to a type of performance which provides humor. However, in its broadest sense, comedy has only one purpose: comedy makes people smile and
England, England is a satire written by Julian Barnes at the end of the 20th century (1998) in a post-modernist environment in which the USA has become the first world power putting England aside. Inside the novel we can see how Barnes analyze the defects and lacks of his own country; it is about a harsh criticism of the ‘Englishness’.