The document discusses the stigma around traditional British sitcoms and how the genre has evolved over time. It covers different styles of sitcoms from traditional to more modern approaches. It also discusses the many people and factors involved in the development and production of sitcoms that can slow the pace of change, including writers, audiences, trends, producers, commissioning editors, and critics. The overall message is that the range of successful sitcom styles is broad and that comedy can be achieved in many different ways.

1. “ not that I’m saying it’s traditional” --the stigma against the “traditional” in British sitcoms

2. My last visit to Germany.

3. FADE IN:

8. Two questions. (1) Why did the genial commissioner apologise for calling the sitcom “traditional”?

10. A traditional British sitcom.

11. The traditional British sitcom.

12. An archetypal moment

13. An archetypal moment

14. Our take on this … of which more later

15. Our take on this

16. What’s wrong with this?

22. (A word about darkness)

23. (A word about darkness) … and back to the list

25. The magic formula:

32. In other words…

33. In other words…

34. In other words… real life

35. In other words… real life boring

36. Real life isn’t funny

38. Why the stigma against being funny?

39. Why the stigma against being funny?

40. Why the stigma against being funny?

43. Technology has changed the possibilities

44. Technology has changed the possibilities

45. But it is not evolution music radio traditional modern hall sitcom comedy

46. Different styles

47. Different clusters of styles dark naturalistic niche multi- camera hand-held edgy experimental farcical audience laughter studio warm demonstrative familiar linear

48. Pick the bits that fit dark naturalistic niche multi- camera hand-held edgy experimental farcical audience laughter studio warm demonstrative familiar linear

49. Pick the bits that fit experimental

50. Pick the bits that fit

51. Crawford Park: the page

52. Crawford Park: the stage

53. Get the audience laughter right…

54. Get the audience laughter right… … and you don’t hear it.

55. Get the audience laughter right… … and you don’t hear it.

56. Get the audience laughter right… … and you don’t hear it.

57. Get the audience laughter right… … and you don’t hear it.

58. Get the audience laughter right… “ A lot of people said that we didn't have a laughter track. We went through this bizarre ritual of saying: ‘But it did!’ And they would say: ‘No it didn't!’ And we'd say: ‘Well it did!’” --Armando Iannucci

59. The fashion changed.

60. The fashion changed. Also out of fashion: PUNS.

61. The fashion changed. Also out of fashion: PUNS. An example pun:

62. The fashion changed. Also out of fashion: PUNS. An example pun: Q: According to Freud, what comes between fear and sex?

63. The fashion changed. Also out of fashion: PUNS. An example pun: Q: According to Freud, what comes between fear and sex? A: Fünf.

64. The fashion changed.

65. The fashion changed. hymns hers Mars Pa’s Bars Bars

66. The fashion changed. It will change again.

67. The fashion changed. It will change again. But slowly.

68. The fashion changed. It will change again. But slowly. Why?

69. Second guessing writers

70. Second guessing writers audiences

71. Second guessing writers audiences fashion

72. Second guessing writers audiences fashion producers

73. Second guessing writers audiences fashion producers

74. Second guessing writers audiences fashion producers

75. Second guessing writers audiences fashion producers commissioning editors

76. Second guessing writers audiences fashion producers commissioning editors

77. Second guessing writers audiences fashion producers commissioning editors schedulers

78. Second guessing writers audiences fashion producers commissioning editors schedulers

79. Second guessing writers audiences fashion producers commissioning editors schedulers channel controllers

80. Second guessing writers audiences fashion producers commissioning editors schedulers channel controllers

81. Second guessing writers audiences fashion producers commissioning editors schedulers channel controllers critics

82. Second guessing writers audiences fashion producers commissioning editors schedulers channel controllers critics

83. Who loses out? audiences

84. Who loses out? audiences

85. A writer wants:

86. A writer wants:

87. A writer wants:

88. What makes your peers laugh…

89. What makes your peers laugh…

90. … is not what makes the audience laugh.

91. … is not what makes the audience laugh.

92. A neurobiologist has a formula: ((R x D + V) x F) + S A

93. A neurobiologist has a formula: ((R x D + V) x F) + S A where

94. A neurobiologist has a formula: ((R x D + V) x F) + S A where R = recognisability of main character D = delusions of grandeur V = verbal wit F = n o of times characters fall over S = difference in status between characters A = success of characters’ stratagems

95. A neurobiologist has a formula: nonsense

96. The range of sitcom is so broad…

97. The range of sitcom is so broad… … some don’t even have any jokes.

98. The range of sitcom is so broad… … some don’t even have any jokes.

99. The range of sitcom is so broad… … some don’t even have any jokes.

100. The range of sitcom is so broad… Nighty Night

101. The range of sitcom is so broad… Nighty Night The Thick Of It

102. The range of sitcom is so broad… Nighty Night The Thick Of It (down here is not okay)

103. Jokes can be hidden…

104. Jokes can be hidden…

105. Playing with the timeline:

106. Playing with the timeline:

107. Playing with the timeline:

108. Playing with the timeline:

109. Playing with the timeline: … when it’s right for the story.

111. Mixing and matching: