being a physical, energetic comic and being a hacky comic? i'm honestly wondering because i consider myself a very energetic comic but i don't want to be considered a hack. Steve Byrne and Katt Williams are very physical, but they don't seem to annoy people as much Dane Cook.
so i wanna know how i can be energetic without being annoying and a hack.
You can be as energetic as you want so long as you're, you know, actually funny.
haha, that makes sense
Are you using the physicality to add to the joke or to hide the fact that there is no joke? That's the difference.
i'm using the physicality to add to the joke.
Then you've answered my own rhetorical question. And your actual one.
The fear of being considered "hack" is a tool that is used by comedians to self-police our ranks...to make us too afraid to do anything that isn't as original as we can come up with...to being ever vigilant against letting the easy and the uninspired take over our efforts.
On countless message boards, I read thread after thread started by new comics who all want to know exactly what they can or can't do...as they want to do what they want, but they don't want to be called a hack.
The sad truth is...you can't inoculate yourself from ever being called a hack.
For one thing, what is considered to be "hack" is fluid and ever changing. What was frighteningly original one day can be tired and borrowed the next--often depending on someone doing something on a tv appearance.
For another thing, no one is bound to be either fair or accurate when they call you a hack. Prejudices or personal tastes sometimes drive some comics to slam other comics and the use of the term "hack" becomes the weapon they use... You'll hear it plenty... "Oh, guitar comics are all hacks." "You use props? Hack." ...the TRUTH is that it always depends on HOW you do what you do as much as WHAT you do...but being called a hack is never forced to be based on truth.
So, some people will look at high energy performers and dismiss them as not being as "pure" as material-based performers...and the dreaded "H" word might get dropped on you. That's just something you're going to have to accept and deal with...
On the other hand, maybe it IS based on truth...and maybe you ARE a hack. Maybe you're not doing something original...inspired...personal... Maybe you're just trotting out things that other performers do better and there's really no point in bothering to let you continue doing it.
That's the perversity of it--it is a tool meant to drive you from within...but everyone deals with things differently. It's a sledgehammer when perhaps a needle-nosed pliers is the right tool.
There will be some performers who get called hacks, who might not actually be, who can't handle the false accusations and will get out of comedy or will try to change something they don't need to change. On the other hand, there will be some performers who get called hacks, who actually are hacktastic, who are either ego-strong or pathologically defensive, who stick to their guns, hold to their hackneyed ground and blaze ever on...befouling comedy stages for years to come.
For the tool of "the fear of being considered to be a hack" to work, you have to KNOW something that you can't possibly know because it is constantly changing...and you have to FEEL that you're being as original as you can be while knowing that you could be lying to yourself...and you have to be ever-vigilant while at the same time taking everyone else's opinion with a grain of salt.
And that's why every thread about whether or not something is hack is tedious and annoying... And everyone's time would be better served concentrated on their own act and trying to improve it and make it as fresh, original, inspired and personal as it can be...
pg--Has been called a hack for doing topical material...not any specific topical material mind you, but ANY topical material was considered hack to the performer who called me that...--seattle
*LOVES PJ'S POST*
many tine tanies
I still think there's something to be said for being careful when venturing into well trod-upon comedic territory. Yes, there are great new angles found for seemingly squeezed-dry comedy fodder all the time. If you realize something profoundly hilarious about air travel, don't be afraid to take it to the stage. If you're afraid your act might be misinterpreted as a Dane Cook tribute show, it might be worthwhile to find ways to premeditatedly avoid the comparisons. Maybe create more of an ebb and flow, offset manic physical pieces with some calmer material, etc...
Is that really you? If it's really coming from a genuine place, it's not hacky.Originally Posted by eal4722
Katt and Steve both annoy me...Sorry.
Every time Siggers posts all that goes through my mind is "Chosen One"
People that enjoy Byrne and Williams are the same people who enjoy attaching whistlers to their exhaust and tweaking their motorcycle so that it sets off every car alarm within 100 feet whenever it accelerates.
Bob LaRitchie, Brian's Friend
Their names are Bubb Rubb and Lil' Sis. GET IT RIGHT!
its only 4 decoration.
I like Steve Byrne.
I like Katt Williams. (Although, I'm probably a bigger fan of a comedian named Andy Peters--formerly of Michigan, Seattle and now making it happen in LA--and his imitation of Katt Williams...)
pg--and I don't do any of those things Scammy said--seattle
Being energetic/physical and beign a hack are totally unrelated. However, more often than not, hack comics tend do be energetic/physical.
I've always thought there's two types of comics: Those who put themselves below the audience, and those who put themselves above the audience. The latter, tend to be douchey, who coincidentally, tend to be energetic/physical as well as hacky.
I don't understand this thinking at all. While you obviously can't just get on stage and act better than everyone, injecting ego/delusions of grandeur into one's comedic personality is something that a lot of really great comedians do. Paul F. Tompkins, Jimmy Pardo, and Todd Barry all being obvious examples, none of whom come across at all "douchey" or are all that energetic/physical.
PSSSSSST, Cameron...
Spoiler:
pg--The bigger comment is that there aren't "two types of comics" and attempts to simplify the grand spectrum of comedic possibilities to gross over-generalizations end up being an inaccurate representation of the much more complicated truth.--seattle
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
