Wednesday 21st April, 11.00 at the ADC Theatre.
The Footlights are back – not even Iceland can stop them – and it seems that the break has done the Club a world of good. This was one of the best Smokers I’ve seen since I become accustomed to the ‘brand humour’ usually offered at the ADC. Lots of new faces were in evidence, and with them, a breath of fresh air blew through the old hands, ruffling previously unexploited comedy feathers.
A great opener set up an explosion of volcano-related hilarity. Characters were appropriately allocated, according to each of the performers’ strengths. This entrance began a set that was – for once – well-paced, with not too much of any one comedian or type of humour, and only, say, three of four of the signature Footlights entreaties for applause. The ones that run something like: ‘step forward, raise hands, smile/nod/wink at the audience.’
There was a real, genuine situation comedy sketch. It had characterization, a bit of back history, and other stuff that makes things that aren’t a series of one-liners funny. Eve Hedderwick Turner and Nick Ricketts provided a witty response to couples arguing while disparaging the French (always good fun). Jacob Shephard’s stand-up was a highlight, keeping you interested beyond a couple of minutes, something some of the longer skits failed to do.
A pitifully self-deprecating stand-up voiced every Cambridge student’s fears, while another seemed to be tackling his own on stage too much to properly deliver what was arguably funny stuff. And then there was Katy Bulmer.
Katy, Katy, Katy. Your Complete Works of Shakespeare poem needs to be published, along with the rest of your work. It was nice to hear your not quite so shouty for once, too.
James Moran and Lucien Young smashed everything PC with squirm-in-your-seat guilty pleasure comedy that wasn’t pulled off quite so well in a ghost-writing parody. Abi Tedder proved she can be funny just by standing there, but especially when drenched in water. Phil Wang’s TV appeals, though a good idea, dragged on, and the iPad sketch, amusing in parts, could have been cut down. (The device is, after all, enough of a joke in its own right.) The missing national census report was hilarious.
Last night hailed a new age for Smokers. They have more, better-rehearsed sketches and a wider variety of humour and performers. This year’s tour is going to be oh so good!
There's….there's just nothing here….
"Lots of new faces were in evidence, and with them, a breath of fresh air blew through the old hands, ruffling previously unexploited comedy feathers".
My god. Both a writer and an editor deemed that sentence worthy of dissemination.
Hey where's Milo?
He's alright you know. No seriously. He's alright.
It's coming to somethign really when ADC reviews are written by ADC insiders. And when they are so wildly out of step with the facts you start to wonder if this is the ONLY way this should would get anything more than the panning it deserves.
Sexism, Anti-semitism, low level racism, stolen material, jokes about songs that were current a year ago, or adverts that have been on our screens for five years or more? The list of flaws runs on and on.
Only three or four moments of performers begging for laughs or applause though? really? I'd expect at least basic counting skills from any Cambridge student writing a review.
The crashing lack of ambition was the most disapointing thing. There is an election going on, the first election that 90% of the audience will have a chance to vote in and did anyone notice? Does anyone care? Not that it's important? Nor that it is ripe for comedy.
…
…
And Katy, Katy, Katy love… that painfully badly delivered poem… go back and write it in iambic pentameter or better still in series of sonnetts and then it would have been technically impressive but still doggeral and a clunky mis-step in the middle of a "comedy" show.
Yet again with the review, and even more so with the material on the stage, it is brought back front and centre that Cambridge has no Creative Writing or Drama students.
If this is the new age for the smoker then I can hope those involved in the old age of it were put down humanely.
Oh and Tadhgh dear boy, if you want your 4 stars to mean something you have to then right a review that sounds like the show deserved 4 out of 5, you wrote a soft, overly friendly 2 1/2 or 3 star review and slapped 4 stars at the top so you didn't upset too many people. Your editor (if the Tab even bothers with such things) should have corrected that even if you make such an error.
Maybe if the show wasn't infront of a worryingly drunk group of friends then it would be greated with the silence it deserves.
Good shout, Marwood.
Right, first of all Marwood, if that is your real name, you used to be so chilled out. Relax and smoke a camberwell carrot.
This review was written by an 'ADC insider', which is a bit ridiculous, but that's the TAB's fault, not footlights. You might want to read George Reynold's review in Varisty which is also positive and he most definitely is not an insider and is quite happy to stick the knife in when he feels that the act deserves it – as he does to Katy whose material you also didn't like. Just because you don't like a show that doesn't mean that everyone else could only like it because they're the performers' friends.
Cambridge does have drama students actually, but I fail to see how being a drama student makes you any better at comedy. As for low-level racism, sexism and anti-semitism: what are you talking about? Those are some pretty serious accusations that you'd better back up.
Utterly baffling.
Turns out I'm a cunt! How about that, also, I will be auditioning for the next smoker just to show everyone how fantastic my sense of humour is.
As for drunken crowds, it's a comedy night; everyone is going to be drunk. On the professional circuit everyone is drunk too. It's a different type of humour to TV, or print comedy. Try and understand the realities of the situation a bit.
It is also a testing ground, one that’s proven quite fruitful over the years, so please don’t pout all over the place. Attempt a positive outlook on life and perhaps you’ll enjoy it a bit more.
Just as patronising as you can be,
Alice x.
Dear Marwood, you bitter old codger,
Do let us know if you get in. Perhaps a sign saying – "I'm 'Marwood' the hugely embittered, sad, prematurely middle-aged wannabe critic" would be a good idea.
Tadhgh may have done a lot of stuff at the ADC, but nothing with the Footlights.
Reviews are simply opinion, you don't agree, fine. But not all comedy has to be purely topical & everyone around me loved Katy's poem.
A review isn't to there to write creatively as its main aim. It's there to inform, show admiration of some performers and not others, etc.. Inflating your own personal standing by overly self-indulgent writing doesn't sit well for people who read reviews to go and see things rather than just for laughs.
As for being sexist, the fifth word you just used, some would argue, is particularly misogynistic.
TBC…
[...] come out to play. It usually boasts a weekly mainshow (7.45pm) and late show (11pm), as well as Smokers (during which the Footlights practice their stand up) and other performances that take its [...]