Reminds me of the video series called Pingu, which uses no natural language, though it does use a fictional language based on honks and context; basically it’s for kids in regardless of the language they speak.
Aardman's stop-motion TV series Shaun the Sheep also does not use speech and relies on visual comedy. There are even two feature-length films - both devoid of any dialogue or narration.
Pingu was a favourite to watch with the kids when they were younger - so much going on with no words. Also loved "The Flying Adrenallini Brothers" which was an animation with a made up language but so many visual gag laughs.
I co created and directed the Adrenalini Brothers - glad you liked it!
The made up language was Rendoosian. In the beginning we tried to improvise gibberish but realised that it just didn't sound right so we wrote everything down.
Wow, this is an honour indeed to interact with you! I've actually gone back on Youtube and watched a few episodes again - ah the memories.
Loved re-listening to Rendoosian again - wonderful language that has enough of a hint of actual English that you understand what was being said or implied. Also loved the intro Rendoosian glyph fonts.
Thank you for bringing such a wonderful and different cartoon to the world!
EDIT (Translation): Binti Boo mit ur magnificibifici Cartoon grandi-max
Also Khaby Lame, TikTok's most followed creator (currently almost 150 million followers and 2.3 billion likes). Some say his purely visusal comedy contributed to his success, because he is not siloed into a language community.
For some reason this doesn't seem to translate to games, or at least I'm not familiar with any good kids games without audio cues. Not sure why that is, maybe because the player is in control and the camera isn't as easily able to control the view of the narrative?
Early Lego games made great use of intonation and miming for their gags and storytelling. For example, this is their version of the famous "I am your father" scene: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fvX3MaFB9TI
For some reason the entire audio track is completely different for US and the rest of the world. If you’ve ever seen it in the US, you haven’t heard the original.
Rowan is a staunch defender of Free Speech in Comedy. When it looked like the UK government were going to legislate against it, he delivered this amazing speech:
This is a great video, and a great outlook on free speech to hold, but it also seems elementary in a world where information travels as quickly as it now does. Should the law still do nothing in the face of literal automated machines pumping out false information to the masses that is impossible to distinguish from real, thinking, free speech having humans? It's a catch-22: without rampant misinformation campaigns we would gladly love to let everyone speak their mind freely, but without control on speech we get rampant misinformation campaigns.
The optimist in me says these are growing pains, one day humans will get used to the internet and we will live in a world where people understand how to think critically about new information. The pessimist in me says a sucker is born every day, we will always have unrest caused by confusion of propaganda, and we will inevitably see our society and internet destroyed.
> This is a great video, and a great outlook on free speech to hold, but it also seems elementary in a world where information travels as quickly as it now does. Should the law still do nothing in the face of literal automated machines pumping out false information to the masses
Governments and their corporate media partners have done this for a long time. They lied and pumped out false information to go to war in Iraq, for example.
Let's wait until the people have the ability to censor and shut down dangerous government misinformation before worrying about giving those governments more power to censor the people.
Yes, propaganda is not the thing that is new, it's the speed of information exchange and the automation of propaganda creation that is new. Whereas 100 years ago, a lie could travel around the globe while the truth is putting on its shoes, today a million lies can travel to the moon and back whereas disseminating the truth still requires the same amount of leg work (pun intended). The problem is orders of magnitude worse.
The media didn't purposely pump out false information to go to war in Iraq. Anonymous conspiracy mongers are incapable of suffering reputational damage and can lie with impunity.
> The media didn't purposely pump out false information to go to war in Iraq.
Of course not, no one in the media would ever dream of doing such a thing. Did you know that the US only lost war in Afghanistan because Putin paid a head bounty to the Taliban for every US soldier killed?
> Anonymous conspiracy mongers are incapable of suffering reputational damage and can lie with impunity.
I can well remember how former luminaries like Tom "Give War A Chance" Friedman, Bill "The war in Iraq was right and necessary, and we won it" Kristol and David "Axis-of-evil" Frum or Stephen "The Connection" Hayes lost their lucrative careers over advocating catastrophic policies that cost the US tax payer trillions of dollars and resulted in the loss of hundred of thousands of lives. They are now all relegated to such fringe outlets as the New York Times or NBC, which admittedly is nothing compared to what happened to Clapper for perjuring himself in front of congress -- he now partly has to make a living as CNN's national security analyst.
> Did you know that the US only lost war in Afghanistan because Putin paid a head bounty to the Taliban for every US soldier killed?
Not something the media claimed. This is a claim pushed by anonymous conspiracy theorist patrec, which supports my point. The media said that Trump was briefed about possible bounties (true), the intelligence agencies had low to moderate confidence that Russia was paying bounties (also true) and made no assertions about how much this affected the outcome of the war.
> I can well remember how former luminaries like Tom "Give War A Chance" Friedman, Bill "The war in Iraq was right and necessary, and we won it" Kristol and David "Axis-of-evil" Frum or Stephen "The Connection" Hayes lost their lucrative careers over advocating catastrophic policies
These are news commentators, not reporters, and their articles are clearly marked as such. Their reputations _are_ poor among people who are not partisans, once again supporting my point. You could post more conspiracy theories in other social media accounts, and nobody will be the wiser.
As far as Clapper, he clarified his statement soon after being informed that it wasn't about what the previous questions about collecting dossiers on Americans was about and went as far as declassifying documents about the phone metadata collection program in question: https://www.lawfareblog.com/ic-record-response-times-editori...
They are complicit in colluding with government to construct narratives that support their agenda, whatever it may be (wars, intervention, persecution of real journalists, supporting dictatorships, etc), by mass distribution of misinformation.
Of course they are very careful to try to maintain the veneer of plausible deniability, so while they do get caught out in some big lies, often they can say "well ACTUALLY we didn't really lie we just published something as fact and added a 'sources say' at the end". But the net resulting damage to society is no less than if they had left out the weasel words.
So again, until we have a mechanism to censor and punish the worst offenders (governments and their media corporations), let's not hand them any more power to censor us. They've shown time and again (recently with covid) that they'll even use these censorship powers against the truth, or scientific questions if they decide it.
Visual comedy transcends language barriers. I have fond memories of enjoying hours of Mr. Bean with my Chinese relatives who didn't speak any English, but could still enjoy the skits because there was almost no dialogue. The story was conveyed physically.
The is one thing I really appreciate about Just For Laughs Gags. No words or languages to understand, just silly harmless situations and pranks. AFAICT it's mostly done somewhere in French Canada, but there's a few from Singapore I believe.
Here's an example I remember that made me laugh, a good example - it's all about facial expressions and reactions rather than words -
Yup they do a great job. I guess human emotions are the same across the board. I think the reactions...of confusion, surprise, anger, fear etc seems to be what gets the laugh. The more unexpected it is the bigger the laugh. For me atleast.
Another interesting thing about pranks is how quickly the brain resets from excited state back to normal as soon as some one says 'there's the camera'. It should probably be used more to stop wars and stuff.
Good points. I think comedy boils down to absurdity, personally. So seeing absurd situations makes people act and feel weird until they realize it's only for show and they're not going crazy.
It also explains why people have different tastes. Some people don't like British comedy because their absurdity may be different than an American's. For example a lot I watched in the 90s was a man dressed as a woman or some such, which may not be absurd to us today.
Not so sure about Benny Hill. As an American, I couldn't see what the Brits found so funny about him. The keystone cop sequences of naked women chasing him, etc. and the silly situations he concocted (which required spoken language). Whereas Mr. Bean was truly universal situations and effectively no spoken words.
Not sure if you'll find many Brits under the age of 60 trying to defend Benny Hill or make a case for his comedy. I'm in my 40s and I don't remember a time when he wasn't seen as naff, and from some distant time before comedy got clever...
Sad fact: Benny Hill died penniless in a shabby council flat, his body wasn't found until two weeks after he died. Naff or otherwise, no-one should go like that. :(
There were amazing scenes just the other day when someone blasted Yakety Sax outside of Parliament as the government was collapsing. Made for some wonderful TV - and apparently was due to a suggestion by Hugh Grant, no less.
I was going to say something snarky about Hugh Grant and Pierce Brosnan and other charming Englishmen in suits getting to embrace the full national experience with Benny Hill, except evidently Pierce Brosnan is actually from Ireland. Today I learned.
Yakety Sax[1] :) but everybody knows it as the Benny Hill theme song.
Benny Hill helped popularize it but it was there earlier, and itself inspired by Yakety Yak (which is a name of Ubuntu release 16.10 - now we're full circle :))
Mr. Bean is how I spent time with my grandfather. We did not speak the same language, just sat and laughed at the same thing. And he had his own little physical comedy routine (finding a quarter behind my ear sort of thing).
Surprisingly, Zack Braff is actually a very, very funny physical comedian. I was watching some episodes of scrubs last week and it’s surprising how much he leans on physical comedy.
It transcends but some is lost in translation. There are youtube videos of people showing Mr Bean to tribs in middle east and they struggle to grasp some ideas due to different social norms.
"I Love Lucy" was a huge cultural touchstone for my grandparents, who immigrated to the United States after World War II. Their English was weak at the time, but they fell in love with Lucy's physical comedy. (they couldn't afford a TV, but were able to watch at a neighbor's apartment).
I just looked him up, he's really good! Though I seem to find his images faintly horrific, rather than funny. There's definitely no comfort there. His work reminds me of Alfred Kubin, actually.
I wanted to play the drums, but I didn't know of anyone nearby who could teach me. I couldn't figure out how to separate my hands from my feet. I watched this video of Rowan Atkinson "playing" an invisible drums set [1], and it suddenly clicked how to add each part of the drum kit in on its own rhythm. I tell people Mr. Bean was my drum teacher.
Reminds me of some of the videos from Every Frame a Painting about visual comedy in film. Specifically "Edgar Wright - How to Do Visual Comedy" [1] and "Buster Keaton - The Art of the Gag" [2]. They give and explain some great examples from different movies.
Agreed, Mon Oncle is a masterpiece, all the little threads woven together to come out like they do. I've watched it quite a few times and I keep discovering more. And the way he takes pity on the boy to give him a bit of life outside of the sterile home he lives in is very touching.
My children found it very funny. I think they liked the foreshadowing of each gag as much as the gags themselves - and obviously all the chaos is previewed in the court case that starts the show.
Probably quite a smart pandemic project - few actors, almost all in one inside location. Watch it in one hit (like we did) or an episode a night with young kids, or break part-way through if young children are due to go to bed.
Amazing. If there’s a flaw, it’s that there’s a bit too much smoking indoors. If you like this, you’ll probably also like Rowan Atkinson Live: https://youtu.be/uw8dW9Hyno0
Haven't watched the video but I wanted to say I am a huge fan of him. His work outside of Mr. Bean and Blackadder (haven't seen it yet!) is hilariously funny to me, and him along with Monty Python were instrumental in my becoming very fond of the English humour and culture and eventually deciding to move here.
I got all of this sketches memorised. There's some kind of deep social intelligence behind his comedy, that's apparent when he's not in character, i.e. during an interview, where it's impossible not to be charmed by his eloquence and demeanour.
I recommend: the "beatings" and the Shakespearean actor sketches.
Definitely check out Blackadder but I would highly recommend skipping the first series. They tried something, it really didn’t work and then they switched it up for the second series and absolutely nailed it.
I felt the first series definitely had some pretty good moments; the episode where Edwin becomes Archbishop of Canterbury in particular is pretty good. I don't think it's as bad as its sometimes made out to be, but it certainly different than the other three series (and specials) they did.
Ah fair, but for someone thinking “I’ll give Blackadder a try, it gets recommended to me a lot…” it’d probably be quite a bad introduction that would likely put someone off rather than encourage them to watch the rest
I concur with this. Whenever I recommend Blackadder to friends or family, I encourage them to start with 2, then move forward, then go back to watch 1 if they become a fan. This was the exact path I took when I became familiar with the series.
In every instance where I know of people who watched 1 first, they are almost always put off by the silliness and don't continue.
I think BA2 will always be my absolute favourite of all as it was the first one I watched, and it also endeared me to the delightful characters that Miranda Richardson, Stephen Fry and Tony Robinson brought to the show. Only Hugh Lawrie in BA3 came close.
Each series takes place in a different time frame and with entirely different characters so they each stand on their own. Anyone can watch the episode named "Beer" in the second series and find it funny for a 30 minute show.
I second this recommendation. I've had Blackadder on my library for a long time but never got into it. Then a week ago I saw a reddit post of Blackadder teaching Baldrick how to count with beans[1] and found it damn hilarious. Turns out it is from season 2 and ever since I checked out that episode, I've become a fan of the show to the point coming to like season 1 as well. Rightfully binging now.
And when you're done with series 2, 3, and 4, keep the Christmas Carol special (which includes Robbie Coltrane as, well, a prototype Hagrid) in mind for, well, Christmas. The Back and Forth millennium special is fun to.
I am a long time fan of Rowan Atkinson - though I must say, not of his 'visual comedy' characters like Mr. Bean or Man vs Bee etc. I lean more towards his 'Blackadder' characters (specifically Blackadder 2, 3 and 4. Series 1 was more a 'visual comedy' lead character than the latter, which relied more on a dour character with a sharp verbal wit).
Blackadder 4 in particular added in a darkness to the humour that was really compelling - that last scene in the last episode (when they charge out of the trenches into no mans land) was absolutely haunting and moving. As were the final lines given by the secondary characters (especially Capt. Darling)
EDIT: For those who want to see what I am talking about, here is the final scene (4 minute footage), though I'd highly recommend watching the whole series to really understand the interplay between the characters (especially the pathos of Cpt. Darling vs Cpt. Blackadder) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NgyB6lwE8E0
I find Blackadder to be one of the greatest achievements in the history of television.
I’m still moved by just how wonderfully subversive it is. There was no need for that show to have anything close to the quality of writing it had over it’s run, especially when you watch the first couple of episodes. It could easily have run for years as a simple, meandering medieval sitcom that went nowhere. I’m so glad it ultimately went to so many places, across so many time periods, without it being an excuse for reusing the same old stories.
I still remember watching the final episode at school, in the early 90s, as part of a history lesson on the First World War. The way it turns from a comedy into something that couldn't be more serious! - except, that seriousness was always there. The tone doesn't so much change as reveal itself. Unforgettable.
You are so right about how the seriousness was always there and revealed itself at the end. I too was fairly young when I first watched it, and I think it really framed my propensity for adding humour to otherwise serious situations as a coping mechanism.
It reminds me of something else I watched in school - My Boy Jack - a film about Rudyard Kipling and his son. I recently watched it again for the first time since being a child. It’s worth a watch.
His sneezing in church, visiting his former school at open day and making a sandwich on a park bench are other priceless additions to the visual comedy hall of fame.
Rowan Atkinson has either a stutter or stammer (The two are used interchangeably but they are different) [0]. I suspect this influenced the physical (and mostly non-verbal) comedy of Mr. Bean as well as his earlier standup.
He also blocks on the letter 'B' which makes him slightly halt when pronouncing words like "Baldrick", "Blackadder", "Bean", "Bob" which he uses to this comedic advantage.[1]
Am I the only one that absolutely loathed Mr Bean? I have to immediately change channels when it appears. It makes Mrs Brown's Boys (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mrs._Brown%27s_Boys) look like PG Wodehouse.
I never liked Mr Bean, but I _love_ Blackadder (starting from season 2). Every season plays in a different time period. In the first season I feel the comedy is not yet really fleshed out.
Hugh Laurie and Stephen Fry also play roles in Blackadder.
Fellow Blackadder lover here. Agree that the first season was not that great compared to the subsequent seasons. The big change was a smaller budget (indoor shoots only) and bringing in Ben Elton as a writer. Also of course the Blackadder character was revamped from village idiot to Machiavellian antihero. It's a shame that most people recognise Rowan Atkinson for only the former kind of role.
There's a purely visual Polish comedy artist Ireneusz Krosny, see e.g. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iYwuvil6cp0
Not sure if the gags could be considered stand-up in a strict sense, but he can capture and entertain the audience using just body language and very little, if any, props.
Love him (I suspect this won't last long on the HN front page, alas).
He does both physical and verbal. If you ever watch Mr. Bean, it's entirely physical, and, in Blackadder, he almost never shuts up (but there's still plenty of physical humor).
He’s one of the all time best comics for verbal delivery in my opinion. He’s second to none in the way he accentuates syllables to make even mundane words have a striking impact.
There are quite a few famous comedians with an Oxbridge connection, leading to the following throwaway gag in the Burkiss Way:
"In today’s profile on comedy we visit the new one night show at Her Majesty’s Theatre by Siberian salt mine workers in aid of people all over the world who are, for one reason or another, Oxbridge comedy geniuses. Also, later on in the show, Wither Rowan Atkinson. A blast furnace manufacturer shows how it’s possible."
Tom Lehrer is still alive and his musical career is doing as well as it ever did even if he hasn't produced a new piece in decades, he will be around for another 100 years or more. His songs have staying power well beyond the norm and his career will only truly end when the last person plays the last of his songs and no longer gets them.
Years ago I saw a NZ comedian called “boy with the tape on his face” with some Spanish speakers. They LOVED it, as did I. This is a wordless comedy show that also transcends language. He is known as “tape face” today with residency in Vegas.
There is something special and innately human about visual and physical comedy transcending language. Strongly recommended.
I'm not a big fan of comedy in general, but I am an adult human who is capable of hitting the channel change button if it comes on, or leaving a conversation about it.
If it's okay for someone to express, and comment on how they enjoy something... Why is it not okay for someone to do the same when they don't enjoy it?
Truly have never understood this knee jerk reaction people have to criticism. It's a healthy part of civil discourse. I'm not only interested in seeing everyone's praise.
'I wish this thing that other people enjoy would die, even though it doesn't impact my life at all' is not a healthy part of civil discourse.
[edit] The thing is that I actually agree with the parent: I can't stand Mr Bean - it makes me physically cringe. But I recognise that other people are fans, so I'm happy to just shut up and let them have their fun.
I agree his choice of words was not helpful, so if that's the sticking point then we agree.
I interpreted your post though to be a general sentiment that we shouldn't even voice negative opinions, even if they are done so politely. I certainly wouldn't agree with that perspective. As someone who is rather neutral to British humor, I enjoy seeing both positive and negative conversation around the subject.
Right, I feel quite defensive of British comedy in general but there's no denying we produce a lot of godawful shite. I've never watched much Mr Bean but I've always mentally filed it in the same category as Mrs Brown's Boys or The Benny Hill Show.
I’m in the same boat. There’s some truly top quality stuff that I’ll defend to the death, and some utter rubbish. The US has the same though - they’ve got excellent stuff like Eddie Murphy and Arrested Development, and awful unfunny shit like Owen Benjamin and Big Bang Theory
The BBC does a lot of things that aren't just comedy. If you think that everything the BBC does is useless, or that it should be paid for with a better model, or that it should spend less money on comedy, then that is absolutely a fair criticism. Asking for it to disappear just because you don't like one particular brand of comedy is not.
I haven't watched Mr. Bean but Yes Minister is a British show and had me laughing all the time! Much different than any American comedy I've ever seen but quite interesting and a really fun watch.
Someone once told me - "British comedy is about making fun of yourself, whereas American comedy is about making fun of other people", and I have found it to be true in a lot of shows I've witnessed. Probably why I personally tend to prefer British comedies over American ones. I have a thing against people having a laugh at the expense of others.
That doesn't ring true to me at all. I'm more inclined to agree with Stephen Fry [1], who explains that it's ultimately a matter of optimism versus pessimism.
The great American comics are people like John Belushi, the wisecracking charmer who gets the girl in the end, while the British comedian prefers to play the failure; British comedy comes from strife and tragedy and embarrassment and loss of dignity, which is why most British comedy focuses on lower/middle class people and their relationship with the hierarchy: Basil Fawlty (John Cleese's character in Fawlty Towers), Blackadder, David Brent (The Office), and so on.
The types of comedic personalities you tend to see in American culture are the likes of Jim Carrey and Adam Sandler, featuring people who may be average, but generally don't start as failures, and if they do (or if they have an unfortunate fall from grace in the middle of the story), the central theme isn't the inevitability of their failure, but an optimistic path towards self-betterment and reclaiming control over their own destiny.
The US also doesn't have the kind of history of tensions between the classes that Britain has (even though wealth inequality is objectively worse, and the system is simply not recognized as being a class system among ordinary people). The American style of comedy goes hand in hand with the idea of the American dream, that anyone can succeed if they try hard enough.
The most "British" American comedy I've seen in recent times was Forgetting Sarah Marshall (written by Jason Segel, an American, but directed by a Brit, Nicholas Stoller), which basically revels in the haplessness and constant failures of the main character, and his path to happiness isn't the traditional American one (though it has that "pull yourself by the bootstraps" approach).
I recommend watching the clip. Fry delivers a very eloquent thesis. If you're not familiar with Fry, his answer might sound rehearsed, but it's clearly not; he's just extremely articulate.
I'm not gonna say you're the only one,but all of my nerdy friends and myself would vehemently disagree :-). Let British keep making humour, from Mitchell and Webb to fry and Laurie to Monty Python to British Office to Darling Buds of May to As Time Goes By, and long live bbc the original home Top Gear :-)
Sorry, but this was true fifty years ago. German cars haven't been as realiable as, say, Japanese cars for quite some time now. The myth still persists, though.
Of course, reliability is not the only thing that matters in a car. German brands excell in technological innovation, I think. I still prefer a reliable car over a higher-tech one.
But since you're talking about German cars and about Britain, I have to say that, somehow, as the years and decades go by, I find the the most timelessly beautiful cars ever made were the British ones. (Jaguar e-type, Aston Martin DB4gt, McLaren F1, etc).
I’m not a fan of mr bean. I don’t get it, it vaguely seems like laughing at someone with learning disabilities to me. But there’s definitely skill and talent in creating the character without words.
It’s also clever - the lack of language makes it universal. Most of the people I’ve met who profess their love for the character are not native English speakers.
There’s a culture-spanning appeal there, and fame, that Eddie Murphy (with all his undeniable standup skill and wit) will never, ever achieve.
To say crafting that lacks talent does Rowan Atkinson a big disservice.
> Just take "Eddie Murphy Raw is a 1987" - which is near the same time frame. Just compare the talent. Mr Bean quietly sticks crackers in his nose - Eddie Murphy on the other hand ...
You do realise that the comedy scene in Britain is hugely varied? So you don’t like Mr Bean. That’s fine. But there’s plenty of comics at the other extreme end of the spectrum here too. And a plethora of stuff in between too.
I watched Raw a few times, and it is good, but I much prefer Eddie Izzard for example. I watched both decades ago (sometimes re watch them) and I can only remember one joke from Raw (where he makes fun of Bill Cosby), while Izzard's routines live in my head to the point I can recite them without hints.
There are amazing America and British stand up comics, I'm a bit out of the game recently, but oldish (80s and 90s) stuff from both sides of the pound were amazing (I loved Bill Cosby and Woody Allen stand up records for example but never had a chance to see them on tv as there were no recordings (one of Cosby I watched actually, and think audio only was better)
Comparing stand-up to a sitcom is a little bit of an apples/oranges comparison. There’s plenty of talented standup comics from Britain, though. I’m normally not a huge fan of standup generally but I do really like Stewart Lee for example.
To be honest I think it’s silly to get all nationalist about something as subjective as comedy, and trying to compare one to another and deciding who is better accomplishes absolutely nothing
It's ok for a culture to suck at something. British bands are amazing. Italian food is amazing. German cars are amazing. American comedy is amazing. British comedy and French cars are terrible. That is ok.
Some American comedy (Parks and Rec, Brooklyn 99, Cheers, Community, etc) is amazing. Most of it is crap (2 1/2 Men, Big Bang, 90% of SNL, 100% of "middle aged dude with a family and a wife that's way too good looking" sitcoms).
Some British comedy (Fawlty Towers, Black Books, Fleabag) is amazing. Most of it is crap (Mr Bean, Keeping Up Appearances, One Foot in the grave).
There are some terrible British bands, and some great French cars.
No it’s not ok. You really should throw all those preconception out of the window, it helps you for nothing except missing interesting things in your life
But British comedy in particular has the same reputation as British rock music. It's universally considered one of the best in the world, and your opinion on this matter seems like a very weird outlier.
https://m.youtube.com/user/pingu/videos?view=0&sort=p&flow=l...