Is Philomena Cunk the funniest female comedian ?

youtube.com/watch?v=9YeCpHoy9EQ

This was fucking excellent
BBC needs to get their shit together and make this its own series already

wtf, I love female comedians now

Holly Walsh is qt and has been genuinely funny in some panel shows I've seen her on.

>youtube.com/watch?v=G5-5cpdAvB8
>even tho we had a female king
she is actually funny as fuck. why havent i heard about this before.

Philomena Cunk has been on Charlie Brooker's "-wipe" shows a lot. He "dumb person" thing can be great, but also gets tiresome.

Diana Morgan is a qt

Yeah.

She has material

>time ISNT a flat circle
woah

I first heard her on The Unbelievable Truth radio show, then she turned up on Mock The Week and now I don't know what to feel.
They let anyone on Mock The Week. Pic related

she's like a more subtle Ali G, pretty funny

>Soon Romeo and Juliet are in love, even though they come from two different families, which is how we know it isn't set in Norfolk

losing my shit over here

>le british sarcastic humour

she's good, it's just that british humour sucks in general.

this, with some better material she'd be alright

the video in OP is generic as hell

>generic as hell
How is that generic?
If you don't find that funny you're a humorless cunt.

because it's entry level "petrend to be serious and explain something in a silly way" anyone can do this

It's a little "lol I'm dumb lmao"

senpai, this looks like something me and my m8s would come up and post on vine, I've mastered sarcasm, I don't even know if I'm being serious right now.

Humor is largely in the delivery. Every joke has already been told, the good comedians make it funny anyway.

They're Americans, lad.

her delivery isn't good because we already know it's a comedy show. this style of humor only works when you're bullshitting your mates and they think you're 100% serious.

I didn't believe opinions could be wrong before I read this garbage.

Do it right now then, to the level of the video in OP's post. Obviously not with the same production va;ues but I'm sure you'll come up with something hilarious because anyone can do it, and post the link here.

confirmed for having no mates

Confirmed for being illiterate

the comedy style doesn't work on camera or when you know the person is a comedian/isn't actually serious. that's why OPs video isn't funny.

you would either have a character do it in a show/movie and the other characters think he's serious. or you just do it in real life with your mates.

a comedian just walking around going "l watch me pretend to be serious" isn't funny.

You do know that declaring that something isn't funny doesn't actually stop it from making people laugh, right? Like, the ultimate test of whether or not something is funny is a pretty basic question of, did the viewer laugh?

But anyone can do it.

>the comedy style doesn't work on camera
It clearly does work though. Don't tell me what's funny and what isn't, ya cunt.

FEMINISM:

youtube.com/watch?v=G5-5cpdAvB8

>why are mirrors back to front but not upside down

Genuinely good question. Anyone have an answer?

if you laughed you have no mates

lol ok

Riiiight

Stop arguing about if she's funny or not. She is, but not the best most funniest person ever.

Explain why I laughed if it "isn't funny". It didn't reach out from the screen and tickle me so I don't have any other explanation.

>mfw the entire scene interviewing the Feminist Expert

Absolute fucking gold lads

"Like fish and stuff."
That's it I'm going back to studying.

because you haven't encountered this style of comedy in real life

Forgive me oh most experienced one.
I was unaware you have sampled every social experience known to man and are thusly able to pass judgement for your fellow humans on it.

So you admit its a style of comedy, and thus its funny

IIT: 1 guy trying to make people stop liking things they like

she has the funniest name

i'm sorry your social life is so lacking

i already said it was a comedy style before, it doesn't work when you know it's just a comedy tv show and it's not serious though.

It's like a name Gavin from Achievement Hunter would give a worm

lmao

It does work, though, because people are laughing at it.

Also not her real name

>this thread

But it does work. People continually watch it and are left in a manner that results in laughter.

That you state - this does not work and is not funny is flawed, because you only need 1 person to disagree with your thesis.

Yes, I do know that.

Mind if I save that real quick? I'll give it back, I just need to use it once.

...

you can only save pics if you roll dubs in this thread.

This, they need a laugh track to understand when to laugh.

he's right you know this is basically every other girl at my university

I said I needed it, that hasn't changed now.

Dubs, I summon thee.

she sounds like she's trying too hard to be karl pilkington

more alan partridge

And references to operating systems.

Oh don't confuse them further by mentioning Alan Partridge.

>muh british humor

See

become an hero

jesus FUCKIN CHRIST

Delivery is top tier but how much of it does she write?

Genuine question, I've no idea.

i'm crunching these right now, they're absolutely fucking hilarious

the first 30 seconds of medicine are gold

I remember falling for her when she did bits on Current TV.

superior panel show waifu coming through

I thought that was the chick from the it crowd

>if men were women, would they be better at feminism?

This is smart

holy shit what a horrible accent

anglos are such fucking trash

>people here actually understood that reference

>what is satire

What?

there's quite a few, it's jsut that you finally realise. Does Sarah SIlverman ring a bell?

>so fanny xd randumb

try again, chelsea peretti is better

ok, it wasn't hilarious.

>she's from Bolton

Well I'll be, someone else to add to our "famous" list

>1 name on an otherwise blank piece of paper
You're getting there lad

>That line about TV and film
That needs to be a Cred Forums banner

stop using our language then you cheeky twat

>Queen Joffrey, like all of Shakespeare's queens, is played by a boy in a dress

Holy shit, I haven't laughed this hard in literally years

You guys realize she's just an actress doing what other people write for her, right?

Kate and Kate are better.
Also I want to fuck them in the face

youtube.com/watch?v=4yr_etbfZtQ

you mean like pretty much every woman in the mainstream entertainment business? no shit retard

if you want funny go listen to maria bamford or christine levine cuz all you'll get from comedy central is hooked noses and bad titties

This isn't funny at all. The brunette would get it though.

Plays out like a non-politicized Daily Show report.

The interviews seem like they may be improvised, and they're sometimes the funniest parts. The democracy expert interview was amazing.

But, you know, with real jokes.

So nothing like a Daily Show report?

so? No matter how good the writing is, the performer has to be somewhat funny, or it just doesn't work.
Any comedy writer knows this.

This. It's why people say that comedic actors are far more talented than dramatic ones

I have literally never heard anyone say this.

I don't know. The crediter writers are all guys.
I'm not saying there aren't any good female comedians or funny women but I don't think picking somebody who just does what a bunch of dudes write is a good example to prove women can be funny and such.

Yes, I don't deny that. But when people refer to somebody as a good or bad comedian it's usually because they also make their own material, or at least part of it.
She's a pretty good performer, that's for sure.

You mustn't talk with many people who know even the littlest thing about acting then, since people will tell you this shit in acting 101

it takes a lot more talent to make someone laugh than it does to make them feel sad

Literally wasted my college degree on a theatre major, but whatever you say brah.

Is this your first fucking day on Cred Forums or something

When actors transition from comedy to drama it's almost always fucking amazing - it definitely doesn't always happen in reverse

I mean holy shit even Tyler fucking Perry was fantastic when he did some drama (see: Gone Girl) and I never expected to say anything positive about him in my life

If you did a theatre major and never heard that comedic acting requires more talent than dramatic acting, then yes you definitely fucking wasted it

This.

topkek

You say that like the opposite doesn't happen, too. Leslie Nielsen made one of the smoothest transitions in acting history.

I said it definitely doesn't always happen in reverse. It sure as hell does sometimes though.

The point is that it's much more common for a comedy actor to become a great drama actor than it is for a drama actor to become a great comedy actor

Mostly because actors prefer doing drama to comedy. How often do they fail at making the transition, compared to their counterpart?

Is she the only truly funny female comedian?

Actors prefer drama to comedy because drama is easier

Seriously just google "is comedy acting or drama acting harder", there are people far more qualified than me who can explain it better

NUDES WHEN

There's simply no way to back up that kind of statement, it's just preposterous to say that one is more or less difficult than the other. They're just different.

It's a lot harder to fake being funny than it is to fake being serious

>There's simply no way to back up that kind of statement

Sure there is. Nearly everybody in Hollywood says comedy is harder. I can't find a single person who says drama is harder - though some say certain dramatic roles can be more difficult, the majority are not

That's a really stupid post. Equating "being funny" and "being serious" is inherently wrong, since one describes only what the audience perceives, and the other describes something that an actor can actually be trying to portray. If you want to compare the skill it takes to be funny, its counterpart is more likely "be emotionally moving," or "be inspiring."

Oh, sorry, I forgot that Cred Forums thinks logical fallacies are a valid form of proof.

if thats the funniest i would hate to see the worst.

>bring me irrefutable evidence that comedy is harder than drama

Don't be such a dipshit, it's just a fundamental fact of life. If you'd ever done any acting yourself, even at school, you'd know it. It's just a lot easier to be convincingly miserable and realistic than it is to nail comedic timing and elicit a real laugh from an audience.

Bring me any proof that it's harder. It's impossible, how would you go about it? I've had plenty of acting experience, and the reality is that they're just very different. Comedic acting is more about surprising your audience, while dramatic is about creating an empathic bond. Great actors can do both in one character.

>logical fallacies
It's not an appeal to authority or an appeal to popularity.

Experts in the field all agree that, in general, comedic acting is harder than dramatic acting. They don't even have a reason to lie about it. If this were a court case, these people would be considered expert witnesses. An "appeal to authority" and "appeal to popularity" mean that the authority figure and/or popular choice don't necessarily know about the thing they're commenting on. For example, someone can be the best astronomer in the world, but if you cite him for your opinions on economic policy, that would be an appeal to authority. If I cite, for example, Vince Gilligan, creator of one of the most successful drama shows ever, as saying "comedy is harder than drama", that is not a logical fallacy. That's an expert in the field.

>Comedic acting is more about surprising your audience

You just gave irrefutable proof that you have no fucking idea how to comedy.

If you don't bring anything to back that up other than their name, it's an appeal to authority.

lol ok

youtube.com/watch?v=YZ1oSS5bQvQ

he's right, comedy is all about the unexpected, it's why the same joke isn't as funny as the first time, why something as stupid as "the chicken crossed the road to get to the other side" is a good punch line

>comedian
>funny

>If you don't bring anything to back that up other than their name, it's an appeal to authority.

Vince Gilligan created one of the most successful drama series of all time. He purposely sought out comedic actors where possible because, in his EXPERT OPINION, comedic actors can do dramatic acting better than vice versa.

An "appeal to authority" and "citing an expert in the relevant field" are entirely different

>I'm so confused and dumb
Is that the only gimmick british ''''''''''humour'''''''''' can offer?

Yes, there is no kind of proof that could be provided, which is why I said you're being a dipshit for asking for it. It's just a fact, and if you ask any actor they'll agree.

Creating an empathetic bond is as simple as reacting realistically and believably to the written lines without fucking up or looking like you're acting. It's just a case of being properly in character and not having a shitty script.

Good comic acting requires exactly the same skills in order to play the character, plus the ability to read the audience and nailing the timing. They're not that different, comedy just requires an extra set of skills, that's why it's harder and less actors are capable of it.

Yes, great actors can do both with one character, but even bad comic actors can pull off dramatic work. Bad dramatic actors can't pull off comedy.

If it says nothing other than, "X thinks Y" it doesn't matter, because it's an opinion. If an expert says a fact, sure that's worth citing, but you've added no logic or data to the conversation.

Yep, comedy is predicated on lulling the audience into a false sense of security and made when you surprise them. is a braindead clod

>it can't be proven
>it's just a fact
>this unverifiable statement is just true!

lol

The difference is that in Britain, being confused and dumb is a joke instead of a national pastime.

I have provided some evidence that comedic acting is harder than dramatic acting.

You have provided zero evidence of the contrary, you have just said "nah uh you're wrong" and "it doesn't matter if every expert in the field who has actually done it says so"

Literally nothing you've provided has been proof. You've alluded to experts who believe it, but have provided none of their logic that supports the opinion. That's not proof.

TRIPS AND QUADS BOTH SAY YOU'RE WRONG

BTFO

if I were serious, this would be a logical fallacy

Comedic acting requires the same skills that dramatic acting does, plus more, since comedic actors will need to draw on dramatic skills in order to create the "surprise" or tension for better comedic payoffs. Dramatic actors do not need to do this, they can simply use dramatic skills all the time.

It rings a bell that tells me it is time for you to troll harder.

Got it.

That's bunk. There are plenty of ways to induce laughter without using those same dramatic skills. Much of physical comedy is completely removed from what you'll see in most dramatic work. The Daily Show, at its best, was a great piece of satire that shared pretty much nothing with dramatic acting. There are certainly actors who use dramatic skills to add to that surprise, but there are also dramatic actors who use surprise to help build empathy.

Asking people to prove that comedy is harder than drama over Cred Forums is like asking a bus of downies to solve Fermat's last theorem.

I suggest you Google "why is comedy harder than drama" to get some basic articles on the subject. Basically, it takes all the same skills as drama plus some extra ones that are unique to comedy, all actors, writers and directors agree, and if you want more "proof" than that, I'm afraid you're shit out of luck because weirdly nobody's done any definitive peer-reviewed studies on the subject.

...

>Female Comedian

Fast becoming my favorite oxymoron

>The Daily Show, at its best, was a great piece of satire that shared pretty much nothing with dramatic acting.

That's because the Daily Show does not use very much acting. We're talking about people doing comedic or dramatic roles.

Since you're so fucking fond of logical fallacies, you should look up "moving the goalposts"

That's not really true, but fine, the Colbert Report, which was entirely acting. Same concept, same point.

It's an unverifiable opinion. There will never be any peer-reviewed studies, because it's impossible to prove one way or the other.

And I've already said why I don't believe comedy inherently requires the same skills as drama.

The Daily Show was always pretty crap, frankly it barely even counts as comedy. Easy, hastily-written pop culture jokes and a handled audience providing a laughtrack made it seem funnier than it was.

If you want some insight into the importance of comedic timing, go watch some Big Bang Theory with the laughtrack removed on Youtube.

Nobody is disputing that the greatest actors can do both, but comedy is definitely harder than drama.

Stephen Colbert would be an amazing dramatic actor, purely from his experience as a comedic one.

GO AHEAD AND PROVE ME WRONG OH WAIT YOU CAN'T THAT MEANS I'M RIGHT

I'm gonna die watching this

Sure, granted on all points. You're still wrong.

The scientific method cannot solve subjective questions such as this, but that doesn't mean there's two right answers to the question.

It's an objective fact that can only ever be expressed in the form of an opinion, and your opinion is wrong. There is no proof of your error, it simply speaks for itself, much the same as a person with a Y chromosome who claims they "have a woman's brain".

I'm trying to wrap my brain around this thought process and failing.

>there is no way to verify the point
>there is such a thing as an objective opinion
>there can not be proof provided, but rest assured you're wrong

I guess all I can say is that you're stupid, and move on.

Dismissing The Daily Show as unfunny doesn't really disprove any of the points made, especially since you kind of just decided to ignore most of them.

i would smash aisling but she can be annoying at times

More subjective fields, such as difficulty of acting, can be determined by using expert opinions. This would also work for fields like fashion or interior decorating.

You might as well be saying "smearing the inside of my house with literal shit is the best interior decorating design and you can't prove it's not even if literally everyone says otherwise"

There are obvious reasons that smearing your house with shit is the wrong way to go about it. It's unhygienic, for one. There is nothing comparably objective for skill in acting, or, if there is, you haven't provided it.

Alright then, you might as well be saying "painting my house by randomly throwing buckets of paint at it is the best method of decoration and you can't prove it's not even if literally everyone says otherwise"

It's called hyperbole

And if you ask an interior decorator why you shouldn't decorate that way, they will be able to give you an answer with internally consistent logic, they don't just say, "Well, I'm an expert, so there."

Frankly, I should have just shat on Vince Gilligan when he was brought up, that's how you win arguments on an anonymous image board.

Alright now I'm convinced you're just fucking trolling.

It has been brought up several times that the logic is that comedic acting requires the same talent as dramatic acting, with extras on top, thus it is harder.

ur a faget

brits are cucks with the muslim mayor who is open to sharia law. London will never be white again. Hows that for a "humoUr"?

And I addressed that. No one has actually bothered to address the points I brought up, so where am I supposed to go?

obviously the side with the best repeating digits wins

thank god there is an ocean between you and I...

an ocean of muslim pakis yeah

>where am I supposed to go?

I'm not reading through this thread but the idea of comedy being harder than drama is all based on opinion. Your approach to acting determines which is easier.

>Not even a single vagina joke

This some next level shit.

>Macbeth also has a female sidekick called Lady Macbeth, it was very much the Miss Pac-man to Macbeth's Pac-man
>In a spooky encounter Macbeth meets some witches who tell him he's going to become king of Scotchland, which back then was apparently considered a good thing
I'm dying here

You tell that goy!

>People today still come to see this sort of thing
>Despite it being completely fucking unwatchable

>tfw you're actually as retarded as Cunk is pretending to be

>This is the actual school he probably went to
kek'd