RayClarke wrote:I've often wondered if there's a link between someone's level of intelligence and their ability to understand and/or exercise sarcasm, irony, multiple levels of meaning, and basically the various types of comedy devices used in US and UK sitcoms.

murshid wrote:Some humour cannot be translated. Puns, for instance.

Mike_L wrote:There was plenty of clever humour in Frasier... including irony, sarcasm, double entendre, puns, etc.
The excellent Seinfeld relied mainly on comedy-of-the-absurd.
But most of the American sitcoms seem to rely on innuendo as the chief mechanism for humour.
I think it's a generalisation to suggest that American sitcoms are somehow lacking. But yes, they're certainly different to British fare.

Mike_L wrote:There was plenty of clever humour in Frasier... including irony, sarcasm, double entendre, puns, etc.
The excellent Seinfeld relied mainly on comedy-of-the-absurd.
But most of the American sitcoms seem to rely on innuendo as the chief mechanism for humour.
I think it's a generalisation to suggest that American sitcoms are somehow lacking. But yes, they're certainly different to British fare.

Dutch cabaret is unique in the world. That at least is what Dutch people believe. In a country that has always been a melting pot of cultures and influences owing its existence to its neighbours, this cannot be true.

What is true is that Dutch people apparently have strong opinions about what cabaret is and can easily argue whether some theatre performance is really and truly cabaret. The English music hall is not, nor is the American musical or show, nor the French café chantant. Cabaret in the Dutch sense is in the first place play with language. The theatrical aspect comes second. The play with language should preferably have some impact, i.e. be part of a political, social or religious statement. We think that cabaret must be about something, and that something is usually ourselves, the microcosm we live in, our ethical and political views, our social opinions. Cabaret must be something personal, and that is why we think that the performing artist must be the creator of its text and songs.

Scot Dutchy wrote:

Mike_L wrote:There was plenty of clever humour in Frasier... including irony, sarcasm, double entendre, puns, etc.
The excellent Seinfeld relied mainly on comedy-of-the-absurd.
But most of the American sitcoms seem to rely on innuendo as the chief mechanism for humour.
I think it's a generalisation to suggest that American sitcoms are somehow lacking. But yes, they're certainly different to British fare.

American sitcoms rely on basic primitive humour and as you say plenty of innuendo.

chairman bill wrote:I do wonder at the US tendency to want to make US-specific versions of British comedies. Did The Office, or Being Human really need to be Americanised? How come we get Frasier, or The Simpsons, but the US needs our stuff re-done for a US audience? I really don't get that.

LucidFlight wrote:

hackenslash wrote:

virphen wrote:US sitcoms have humour?

The evidence suggests not (although I have a secret penchant for The Big Bang Theory, but I suspect that's just because of the nerd gags).

The Big Bang Theory? Really? It's been recommended to me by various friends and acquaintances. I've watched it and I have no idea why people have recommended it to me. I noticed lots of nerd references, but as for the humour, I didn't find any. The IT Crowd is more my style.

Loren Michael wrote:I'm kind of curious as to South Park's international appeal and perception. Is it popular around the world? What kind of show is it regarded as?