Vena und Schnitzel’s World Calypso Experience Tonight!
A lot of effort goes in to putting on a comedy show. People write, rehearse, and arrange technical staff, equipment, costumes and make-up. They print up posters, they leaflet the streets, they harangue their friends all to make their show a success. So it’s so sad that sometimes the shows turn out to be just awful.
2006 Vena Und Schnitzel’s World Calypso Experience Tonight! is one of the worst things I have ever seen at a comedy festival. Ill-conceived, unfunny and downright offensive, it’s hard to see why anyone would have thought this was a good idea. A confused and bewildering premise leads to a seemingly endless series of ’shocking’ cabaret acts and video link-ups, each more tedious than the last. It’s all shock value with nothing to say’is this a comment on the media? On globalisation? On anything at all? After an hour of badly trying to recreate ‘The League Of Gentlemen’ the show commits the ultimate comedy crime of outright plagiarism (remember the episode when Papa Lazarou is kidnapping people, genetically modifying them and putting them in his circus? So do Vena und Schnitzel).
If you liked ‘Miss Itchy’ you may get something out of this, but really??I should mention the positive aspects of the show, so here they are’there are a few nice uses of wordplay, some very good keyboard playing, and the wigs are great.
Finished reading this article? You might also like:
I hope you can back up your plagarism comments sir. For your information the idea of kidnapping people for the circus was conceved long before the League of Gentlemen came along. I have a copywrited script to prove it.
Michael Dahlstrom.
I’ll gladly take on board your comments but for a “journalist” to accuse another artist of plagarism with only a hunch that it bears similarities to another show is digusting. How well researched are you? Did you check your facts before you made that wild accusation? NO?
That particular episode of The League Of Gentlemen first aired in 2002 – what date is your script copyrighted? And you have to realise that once an idea is done in comedy – even if you came up with it totally separately – the sad truth is the audience is going to think it’s plagarism, and you have to let it go.
I’m a bit surprised you’ve both gone for the “plagarism” bit, which is the element you really can’t argue – whether you meant to or not, you copied an exceptionally well-known element of a very well-known show… Why didn’t you just say I had no sense of humour and everyone else who’s ever seen it thought it was hilarious? That’s the traditional comedy festival approach to critics…
We first wrote a version of this script in 2000 and put a larger version of this show in 2001. We have video and dated documents to prove this. Unfortunately what you have done is accuse us of some thing that is not true and we will be in touch in regards to this. I understand you did not enjoy the show and so be it with in your right. Your sense of humour is not called in to question but your use of the word plagarism.
I can stand being called shit, but a thief, no thank you! We will be in touch.
Dear Sir,
The show “2001 Vena und Schnitzel World Calypso Experience” showed to hundreds of people in the “Drama Theatre” (Monash University Clayton Campus) in 2001 and included the “Freek Show” section. There are three different video copies documenting three different performances of the show which I would be happy to provide to you. There are countless drafts of the script dated 2000 which I would be happy to provide to you. There are at least five university professors who will swear to the fact that our show aired in 2001. They also supervised drafts of the script in 2000 / 2001.
I don’t have a problem with strong opinions about the show. It is supposed to incite strong feelings. I enjoyed what you wrote until you accused us of plagerism. If you had of stayed longer you may have understood why Vena und Schnitzel were being offensive. They are supposed to be anti-heroes. Its is a play. Not all characters are nice. If you want to see a play where the good guys where white hats and save screaming girls from railway tracks from the black-jacketed villian then I suggest that you subscribe to a video store specialising in 1920’s film “classics”.
Your comments are becoming liabilis. Please be aware of this. We did not copy “an exceptionally well-known element of a very well-known show”. There was never any “crime”. There was never any “plagarism”.
What was there? A ‘journalist’ who didn’t do his homework. A ‘journalist’ who didn’t check his facts. A ‘journalist’ who didn’t check his sources. I suggest you nominate yourself as a canditate for a story on next Monday’s ‘Media Watch’. I promise to flick on the TV at 9:20pm. I hope you can muster up the guts to do this.
I peacfully await your appearance.
Dudes, get over it. The guy thought you ripped an idea off a show you obviously know. If it really is that similar then maybe the problem is you are so unoriginal that it seemed like plagarism even if it was not intentional. If I were you I would be embarrased!
Saw the show last Thursday it was great!!! Well done guys. There’s another review here which does the show justice!!
http://www.thegroggysquirrel.com/issues/26/article/2006+Vena+Und+Schnitzel%27s+World+Calypso+Experience+Tonight
Yeah, great! If you are using the Squirrel as a guide for if a show is good or not then you are in trouble!!!!!!!! Those guys write because they want comics to think they are cool and they dont give a shit if a show is really good or not. The whole thing is an attempt to suck up the ass of performers and they have no idea what a review is. I like that I can use it to find out when there are gis on during the year but the rest is self indulgent crap.
Wow I can’t believe how bitchy you guys at this paper are. Is this a serious review? You realise this is a public areana?
Who guys? I don’t think it’s bitchy to point out that a show is weak and repetitive of old ideas, a review has to be honest for the audience and that’s why anyone picks up a review magazine. It’s why I looked at the website after I saw the magazine and why I don’t bother with GS anymore (how can you trust a review if you know the person writing it cares more about being seen as cool than actually saying what the show is like?). This review isn’t bitchy at all and I think that to suggest so just reinforces the idea that you should be ‘nice’ rather than ‘honest’. The obligation is to your readers not to not hurting peoples feelings if their show is shit! And dude, it’s a public ARENA. Which makes it all the more reason to be telling it how it is.
‘Dude’ wow that’s original, seriously that is absolutely full of crap. I’ve seen this show & think its great & very original (& I’m a fan of ‘The League of Gentlemen’) Saying it plagiarised League of Gentlemen is like saying you plagiarised Bonanza for having a cowboy in your show. I’m not taking sides as I’m friends with the performers in this show & with Lefa the editor of the mag. But the review was truly unjust, what about the production value, the singing, harmonies & the acting?? wow great work guys.
Don’t be too hard on the people doing the reviews though (I showed mine to some of the people in the industry & they laughed their asses off?? there’s a couple of lines that completely discredited him) most of them are students & not professional critics & haven’t been around the industry long enough to really know anything about comedy & performing, they see a couple of their friends doing shows & say ‘hey now that’s comedy’ & this really does show in a couple of the reviews (there’s more to comedy than just jokes) but at least they’re having a go. Some are quite good & constructive, but others wow (there’s an act that does other peoples routines that got a great review?? what do you call that again? If you’re going to review do your homework). If you want to know why I feel qualified to have an opinion, it’s because I’ve made a good living as a professional comedian for almost 10 years, get flown across the country & overseas to perform, average around 200 gigs per year (clean corporate & blue football clubs) & have written for TV & radio & all this from a guy with absolutely no profile, I must be doing something right. And please don’t make this a Pun & GS thing, that’s childish, it’s great that both mags are out there for Melbourne comedy?? but people will be bias. I’ve read great articles in both, but because there is little or no money you will get crap filter through. Great work Vena & Schnitzel, I loved your show & great work Lefa for all the hard work put into this paper?? just get someone who knows what they’re talking about to review me next time lol
Have a great festival everyone
P.S Anyone wanna buy one of my CD’s go to http://www.dougchappel.com & send me an email Cheers
Some people like peas some people hate them. Could you imagine if we all liked the same thing? Blech. Vena and Schnitzel is one of those shows that is peas, or more accurately… a James Blunt song. I can’t stand his songs but hey some people love em. Good on em. I read the review of this show and was curious as to it’s accessability. What i found was a show that was so outside the norm and so “WOW” factor that i came away inspired and delighted at the state of comedy and comedy performers in this country. Sure it’s not a channel 9 prime time type of show, thank goodness, but rather a breath of fresh, original air that the comedy industry needs kicked up its bum. I say more vena and schnitzel and more excitement boosted into the industry. Like a wriggling worm cast into the briney ocean i await with baited breath for more. You guys rock. Thank you for a wonderful show and a wonderful experience.
Hi all,
Sorry, but because of how busy we have been here getting our last edition out I have only just seen all the controversy here on this post. Just a few things:
Firstly, and most importantly:
1. I wish I had noticed, in the editing process, that the word ‘plagiarism’ had been used – you’re right, that word is strong and specific, a claim which you have disputed. If I had noticed it, I would have spoken to the reviewer about changing that assertion to reflect his belief that the material on stage was too similar to material previously performed to be coincidental, but not use the specific term. It is my responsibility, as the publisher, to ensure that all content is appropriate and clearly you feel this is not the case. I have not seen the show, or ‘The League Of Gentlemen’ material in question. What I can say is that the reviewer has indicated he is happy to retract the specific claim of plagiarism and would like the following to be noted:
“Our review of Vena Und Schnitzel last week suggested the show had stolen a key moment from the television series ‘The League Of Gentlemen’. We apologise for saying this was plagarism ‘ despite the remarkable similarities between the shows the original performance dates indicate this was coincidental.”
Again, I apologise for any unfairness which the performers feel has occured. Given the enormous amount of material which crosses our desk we let this one slip through and that was our mistake.
2. Michael, I’m not sure why you commented that the reviewer “should have stuck around longer” – there is no implication in his review that our writer left before the show ended, only that he didn’t enjoy it.
3. Sani, given that our paper is the only one in Melbourne covering each and every show in the festival, regardless of profile or popularity, I’m not sure how we are ‘bitchy’. If you take a look at all of our material; press releases, writer’s guide etc, you will see that we have always been clear about our aim to provide an even playing field for shows. That does not mean that we push reviewers to cover every show in a positive way. If we did that there would be no point going to print, nobody would read us. We encourage our reviewers to be honest about how they feel about shows, but to respect how much work has gone into putting that show on in the first place. We have put endless hours of work and resources into creating a publication which offers FREE, UNBIASED coverage of EVERY show in the MICF. That is the ultimate reason to be aware that this is a public arena and to publish our reviewers honest opinions.
4. Doug, I think you have shown that you have also not done your research. John Richards, the reviewer of this show, has worked extensively as a reviewer over many years. In fact, I doubt that you would find many other reviewers working at other street press or local press who have had more experience.
As for your generalised comments about most of our reviewers, again, you really haven’t done your research. While many of our writers are new to the game that isn’t the case for the reviewer of your show. He has, in fact, been published before. Explain to me how long The Age reviewers have been ‘around the industry’? It’s not their job to be comedy experts, it’s their job to give an honest audience perspective on the show that they saw. If you have seen a positive review in the publication of a show which plagarises another show how would a reviewer research this?
I don’t want groupies reviewing for my publication, I want writers who are prepared to put their perspectives forward in a well written, thoughtful review. Given you contacted me regarding your review but have chosen to air your views here I’ll respond again by saying that I think the reviewer for your show attempted to balance his perspective, looked for positive aspects to the show and was still honest about what he saw as the weaknesses. He didn’t attack and he backed up all his criticisms.
I do respect that you have pointed out there should be no Pun VS Groggy Squirrel element to this discussion – we certainly don’t feel that there is any rivalry or competition, the two publications are worlds apart in their aims and their content and, as you can see by the fact that we link to them, we don’t feel there is any issues or problems between the two.
I hope, one of these days, it’s not me or one of my writers giving you a bad review, Doug! Next year I’m coming myself so I can be as honest as possible and we can argue it out between us… I respect you as a working comic and for always talking to me about what you agree/disagree about before chucking a tantrum in public. My only criticism is that you, as a comic, should offer my writers the same respect as I ask them to offer you and keep in mind that they are learning and are not ‘professionals’; and this does not make them amateurs or give you the right to behave as if they don’t have a right to have their work published. I don’t hear any of my reviewers claiming any shows in this festival don’t have the right to perform. This show (or either of yours) didn’t get reviewed in The Age, and if they had I do wonder what kind of review they would have received…
4. Well said Ged. The reason that we have allowed open (uncensored) comments on this site is to encourage debate and for you to agree or disagree with the reviews we have published. We know our reviewer’s opinion isn’t the ‘right’ one, just their own perspective and we welcome as many differing opinions as people are prepared to offer. Comment away, people!
Leave your response!
TwitterPun
Error: Twitter did not respond. Please wait a few minutes and refresh this page.
Advertisement
Check out the PunCast
The Pun 2010 Reviews
Recent Comments
Advertisement
Menu
Polls
Recent Posts
Most Commented
Most Viewed