August 16, 2002

4:46 AM

Minutesof lost Rat Pack meeting recently discovered in Las Vegas! This satirical piece by Bob Odenkirk brilliantly lampoons the group dynamic of Old Blue Eyes and his pals.
posted by MrBaliHai (17 comments total)

The bi-annual "Wives Luncheon and Photo-Op" was canceled due to lack of interest.

Teehee. Great find, MrBaliHai. I have several Rat Pack books and videotapes but I fear 99,9% of the banter and comraderie have been lost forever. As usual, people are more interesting in the debunking and the balloon-pricking. They go "it wasn't like that at all" and mention a few well-lnown sordid little episodes, without realizing we have no idea of what "like that" was in the first place. A great pity...
posted by MiguelCardoso at 4:53 AM on August 16, 2002

I'm glad to see that Bob and Dave have a site and are using it as a place for their material. I'd love to see the web become even more of a respectable comedic outlet. Right now, with few exceptions, it's a stepping stone to print.

Personally, I just wish the piece was, well, better. I see Dave Cross perform at least once every month or two and I've started to get the impression that he's believing his own hype these days, and not working terribly hard. This piece, to me, at least, says Bob is pretty much the same way. Every joke is obvious, most are repeated and none really give me the impression that Bob did much more than scribble down a few beats and post it on "the website thing."
posted by Sinner at 5:25 AM on August 16, 2002

Every joke is obvious, most are repeated

True, but that statement also applies to about 90% of the actual Rat Pack's humor. Their appeal wasn't so much in the quality of their wit, but the nothing-sacred attitude of the group. I think Bob did a pretty good job with the piece.

Although I do think the real Rat Pack WAS overly harsh to Sammy. They treated him like their mascot, and not only did he take it, he did laugh the hardest. It's a little sad, but then I guess that was a different time. Oh wait, it's supposed to be a funny Friday thread -- sorry for the downer.
posted by boomchicka at 6:12 AM on August 16, 2002

Sinner: obviously I disagree with you on the overall quality of the piece. While it's true that some of the jokes were obvious, I felt that Bob's repackaging of it made it funny all over again, and neatly encapsulated the whole Rat Pack mythos in the process.

Oh wait, it's supposed to be a funny Friday thread -- sorry for the downer.

Hey, it's MetaFilter. We're supposed to get all anal and pedantic about stuff like this!
posted by MrBaliHai at 6:24 AM on August 16, 2002

I liked it. And it only makes me want Run Ronnie Run! to be released that much sooner. Who knows how long I have until my entitilitus strikes me down.

On the bright side, my friend returned my Mr. Show Season 1 DVD set, so I know what I'm doing part of this weekend! Woo!
posted by tittergrrl at 6:48 AM on August 16, 2002

Looks a bit like a halfhearted emulation of the amusing AC/DC 'corporate meeting minutes' jape that was recently posted at The Site That Dare Not Speak Its Name *cough* 'Pile *cough*, written by someone named John Kenyon, apparently, and which I ripped off and claimed as my own reproduced for the amusement of the blogosphere here last week.

Obligatory opinion : These guys aren't really very funny at all, even when they make their own stuff up.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 6:53 AM on August 16, 2002

heh...heh..ah, ya. this piece gets a C-, no joey bishop.
posted by clavdivs at 7:05 AM on August 16, 2002

Looks a bit like a halfhearted emulation of the amusing AC/DC 'corporate meeting minutes' jape

Which reads like a stale rehash of Spinal Tap jokes to me, so I guess that there's just no pleasing everyone, stavros.
posted by MrBaliHai at 7:19 AM on August 16, 2002

i thought frank drank jack daniel's anyway, not dewar's...
posted by pointbeing at 7:54 AM on August 16, 2002

yeah but stavs post had Phil Rudd...i didnt see no joey bishop.
posted by clavdivs at 7:54 AM on August 16, 2002

Sinner -

Repetition is the core of comedy. Ever heard of the "Rule of 3"? A joke is repeated 3 times - once, it's introduction, twice, reinforcement, thrice, it's funny. I have a comedian friend who has put a lot of thought into the theory of comedy, and he thinks there are numbers beyond 3 that are also funny. He has succeeded in making 7 funny, but is not brave enough to try and make an audience sit through 11 repetitions of the same joke.

Oh, and I thought this was funny. I also like the AC/DC gag.
posted by starvingartist at 7:59 AM on August 16, 2002

These guys aren't really very funny at all, even when they make their own stuff up.

I'm guessing you never ran into Frenchy, the English Chimney Sweep. Does anyone know if there are plans for a 3rd or 4th season DVD?
posted by yerfatma at 10:02 AM on August 16, 2002

starving artist,

How, exactly is repetition the core of comedy?

I'm a comedy writer and sometime standup, so yeah, i'm familiar with the rule of threes, but not your definition of such. The definition I'm familiar with involves using two straight lines followed by a joke in a punchline, as in ... I don't know... doing my best impression of a borscht belt comic, "I wish I could be a kid in school these days, where they teach reading writing ... and sex."

I did a quick google search, but I'm too lazy to add links.

I thought the piece was poor. I didn't take issue with repetition in general: this piece was repetitious and short, meaning it had very little substance, just the same jokes ad nauseum.
posted by Sinner at 11:20 AM on August 16, 2002

Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that repetition is the central thing to all comedy, but it is one of the basic components. And the rule of 3 I'm familiar with is repetition. I've seen it work over and over again. You introduce something, you reinforce it, and the third time BAM!, it's funny. And I don't mean one right after the other in the space of 5 seconds. You space it out over 5 or 10 minutes. You introduce the joke idea. You go onto something else, and bring back the joke idea the second time, reinforcing the audience's memory. Then you go onto another unrelated topic, and bring it back full circle to the 3rd instance of the joke, and then it's funny.

I'm talking in theory here, and I can't remember any specific instances right now, but believe me, it works.
posted by starvingartist at 12:01 PM on August 16, 2002

starvingartist,

For specific instances, see every Letterman episode ever. However, that's not the rule of threes that I (or most of my comic friends) refer to - and you yourself said that your friend had extended it to ... what, four, or seven or eleven or something?
posted by Sinner at 2:17 PM on August 16, 2002

I didn't know there was so much number crunching to comedy! I thought you were just supposed to talk about how men enjoy having sex, and how black people and white people perform certain activities (such as dancing and raising children) differently.

I would, however, enjoy seeing some avant garde comic extending this "rule of threes" out to, perhaps, a rule of 115, until the joke became some sort of mantra, or litany, or perhaps even took on some of the characteristics of a voodoo chant.

Also, the piece was funny to me. It didn't seem like the jokes themselves were supposed to even be funny, so much as the unspoken tension and the group dynamic.
posted by Hildago at 4:02 PM on August 16, 2002

So...some people really DO find Bob & Dave funny? Wonders never cease.
posted by HTuttle at 9:55 PM on August 16, 2002