Occupation: Ugly
Recently I saw Karl Chandler, who very conveniently gave out Christmas crackers at the end of his show, giving me chocolate and also an easy metaphoric angle for the review. This candy-and-creativity-for-comment was a sweet deal and guaranteed Karl would get a good review. Therefore, unfortunately, I have to give Occupation: Ugly a bad review.
No, just kidding. Occupation: Ugly is the inaugural production of Comedicate, a young group with high hopes of making RMIT’s Kaleide Theatre a place-to-be during the Comedy Festival. This squadron of seven comics and a producer feature a strong sampling from the University of Melbourne Law Revue. By holding a hugely successful sketch comedy night they’ve stolen from critics the right to dismiss shows as being ‘university-revue humour’. In what way can we now demean accent-over-content mimicries of overseas sketch shows? What pithy phrase will describe repetitive, mirthless meanderings or over-long excursions into stereotypical ‘surrealness’? ‘A pale imitation of Monty Python’, you say? That only works if you accept Monty Python can be a pale imitation of itself. No, with this fast-paced, well-acted show we just have to accept that university revues have been unfairly tarnished and are officially, occasionally funny.
The theatre was packed full of college students bubbling with alcohol-free excitement (an achievement in its own right, if my experiences of college social life are a guide). With people sitting on the stairs, the show got underway with the actors using scant props and dressed in white T-shirts, jeans and sneakers. The show was frequently funny, and if a sketch was a weaker idea it was usually saved by a great performance or punchline. If a sketch was flat, you could still sense a strong idea behind it. Time wasn’t wasted during set changes either, as we listened to clever audio sketches.
With proceeds going to the Cancer Council, you’ve really got no excuse. Occupation: Ugly is the best live sketch show of the festival, and there is plenty of room for it to grow.
Whaaaaaattttt? I have no idea what to expect from this show based on this review. Was it good or bad dude?
Hi Chevy – apologies for any confusion. The editor has re-written the review, and moved the point of the opening joke into the middle of the next paragraph. It’s all over-the-shop.
I was trying to be tricky, and wrote that Occupation: Ugly should get a bad review because they have done critics a disservice (unlike Karl, who was helpful enough to provide an easy metaphor). ‘University Revue humour’ has always been a bit of a put-down, but these guys (who are mostly from the University of Melbourne Law Revue) were entertaining and funny so ‘University Revue humour’ can no longer be a put-down. The fact I have to explain this, means it wasn’t worth it.
If we do have any defense, though, it’s that the final paragraph clearly states it’s good. Of all the sketch shows I’ve seen it’s the best, so if you like sketch shows, go and see Operation: Ugly.
Thanks for the feedback.
Were we watching the same show? I thought this show was really weak. Each sketch was either under-developed, or self indulgently drawn out. As far as university revue’s go- this would be considered a very weak one.
Hi Justin,
With live comedy there is a chance we watched seemingly different shows. On my night, in front of a packed house, the actors were on-form and the crowd loved it.
I think I would have to disagree on the “self indulgently drawn out” aspect. I don’t know a single sketch show, live or on TV, which doesn’t have some drawn out sketches (as I mention in regards to Monty Python). If you aren’t laughing then you will wish they moved on quickly. A good case study would be the Daniel Craig/James Bond sketch. In affect it was an unsurprising one-joke set-up which went on too long, but the writing was varied enough and the performance strong enough that it could have been much worse. For me, those strengths meant it felt like they got out of it relatively quickly and then the sweepers (audio skits) were playing. It meant for a high turnover of sketches and showed the Comedicate team was dedicated to keeping you entertained.
I also mentioned the “under-developed” nature, but that gives more reason to encourage the performers, don’t you think?
Leave your response!
2012 Reviews
Menu
Recent Comments
Recent Posts
Archives
Recent Posts
Most Commented
A New Leaf Media