Many people here are mistakingly taking his opinion as a British vs America, i don't see it like that, he didn't say once that one is better than the other, it's just different!
Yes we were talking about the modern culture of pronouns and transgenderism. And my friend said “ as a white heterosexual Englishman I identify as anyone else”. That captures their self deprecating culture perfectly
Our style of comedy reminds me of the last rap battles in 8 mile. How can you insult us when we already said evething there is to say. It completely takes the punch out of everything they had to day. Americans get a lot more defensive and offened.
What I've noticed about British comedians is that they are able to make a scene a hundred times through subtle movements and facial expressions. They are the absolute best in that regard.
I think that's one of the reason Sunny in Philadelphia has such a strong following. It's the only American comedy I can think of where all the main characters are absolute failures and deservedly so.
There are many American sitcoms where the main character (s) is a failure. All In The Family, Married With Children, Frasier are many others are great examples of this.
Stephen Fry says Americans get more offended than Brits about humor, then the Americans in the comment section proceed to got offended and argue and completely prove his point. People just don't listen
One of the few American comedies what stands out to me is It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia. Even though they may have the occasional one-liner, it gets it's humour from the context of the characters and situation
I watched one episode of that shit and I genuinely felt like I was watching a show made for 5 year olds. Maybe I got a bad episode the one where they have a high school reunion?
The point that the there is no direct public questioning by peers of the President and actual lively debate between elected representatives in the US is a very good point id not thought of before. US politicians can hide behind prepared statements, PR and "managed" communication so much more easily than in the UK. I wonder how many democrats and republicans would survive if the US public could see how poorly they do when not surrounded by advisors.
It says a lot about the internet that the whole comment section is arguing about which style of comedy is better, Fry didn’t actually pass any such judgment at all. He pointed out the differences, not which he thought was superior. The answer if anyone is interested is that both have their highs and both have their lows and which is better is totally relative.
I tend to agree with Mr. Fry on this one. A lot of times when you have the American comedies that have a sort of loser... they are still winning... like the early 2000s mold of having a goofy fat male character who always makes mistakes, yet he's married to some super fine woman who adores him. So, they are "benefits" that come with being a loser.
I don't agree with _everything_ Fry said, but _much_ of it. And I really appreciate that he's able to discuss that two things are different & still acknowledge that *both can still be good.*
That's the kind of jokes I like to do. Joke about myself more often, since people tend to laugh about others rather than face something about themselves
I'm American and I once watched Prime Minister's Questions on CSPAN. I couldn't get over how raucous it was, but I kind of liked it because it kept the Prime Minister on his toes. As for humor, Stephen Fry is right. I do enjoy British humor, like Fawlty Towers and The Office. I like the American version of The Office, as well. Lately I've been enjoying Michael Mcintyre- he's really funny.
The UK would never create a show like Brooklyn 99. The characters are way too confident and happy even when things are going terribly. But we like American comedy here too. It just seems less realistic
@All_Roads haha yeah Monty Python was out there at the time. I definitely don't think either comedy is superior over the other but they are a little different for the most part. It's just cultural, no big deal. It's not even restricted to comedy though. It goes beyond that. Self-deprication is so firmly rooted in British culture that it's not even modesty, it's just a severe lack of self-esteem or ego. I've met several Americans and what always strikes me is how sure of themselves they are. I've talked about this before with several British commercial lawyers in London and they all say the same thing. American confidence and attitude is unlike anything in Northern Europe (which is unique and not necessarily a criticism). I think though that it's why [worldwide] people sometimes mock Americans because it's like they're detached from reality or in their own bubble. But when you go to the States it's so isolated, distant and protected from world affairs (geopolitically) that I can see how that would seep into the culture. I've heard many theories as to why American culture is how it is but I have to stop the comment somewhere
@@Joker-yw9hl Basically that’s okay, but I’ve met an American who was not only self-deprecationg but extremely so. I guess it’s not 100% idea then, because it just depends if you meet winners of the capitalist system or losers. Winner write the stories, losers read them.
@@perimetrfilms I disagree tho. 99 is very much about the characters, and hardly ever relies on witty one liners which seems to be the standard for American sitcom. You may argue that Jake peralta does kind of reflect the one liner troupe. However I will argue that his use of one-liners creates his persona which is the humour, rather than being the joke in and of itself. Not sure if I’ve gone off course or just rambling at this point, but does that make sense?
Everyone debating which type of comedy is the superior one.. when really he didn't say British comedy is better. He just pointed out the DIFFERENCES between two types of comedy! Ultimately, it's down to personal taste. We all have different senses of humour. It's absolutely fine laughing at the American situational comedy with its punchlines, and so is giggling at British, character based satire with all it's witty sarcasm. Different strokes for different blokes my darlings
Stina1234 We have some OK stuff here, but I’ll take British comedy anyday. He described it perfectly. These are my words now, I’m not paraphrasing, I don’t want to sit a comedy club week after week, listening to one liner/zingers, hour after hour. It gets old. Usually after one, and if they’re really good, two seasons.
@@mangot589 fair enough! I myself prefer British comedy too. Maybe it's because it's very similar to Swedish humour! (Only our comedy shows have a big pinch of awkward situations too!)
Stina1234 😉. We used to have a GREAT channel, that showed all kinds of international shows/movies. It’s gone now (of course) can’t see it, subscribe to it (this was way before subscriptions), but heck yeah I’ll be first in line, about 20 years ago. I loved all of your shows too that they had, I know what your saying! don’t mind reading subtitles oh somebody please bring a channel that has other country’s shows lol🙏.
And this is one of the reasons why Finns love British humour. We both make fun of ourselves and can without a problem call something rubbish. Don't get me wrong, I love American sitcom, but if I want to laugh, I watch British comedy.
While I think this is valid to a point, the 'flaws' in genuinely good American shows, be they comedies or dramas, tend to be more multifaceted. The Office UK for example, has the manager character as almost unbearably awkward, obnoxious, unbearable. And while The Office US' Michael Scott starts with similar characteristics and doesn't 'not' have them, we see redemptiveness as well and the more we get to know him, the more we see what is good in him, but it doesn't hide what is bad about him either. Funnily we see that in a lot of US remakes--Shameless is another good example, I think. But even outside of this, it exists in a lot of good American television: Bojack Horseman, The Wire, Breaking Bad, The Sopranos, etc. The leads in these shows are not objectively good people, and we know it. Many times, the shows will lead with their good qualities to make us want to invest in them, and THERE, US to UK varies for sure. But American shows tend to encourage loving in spite of flaws that are definitely visible, whereas UK shows I think tend to encourage loving because of flaws. Just my 2 cents.
50 years ago, I was in New Zealand. I went to the cinema very often, and saw a lot of films, both American and British. I saw an Alf Garnett film that was, for me, forgettable. It was billed as a huge comedy, but I didn't laugh once while everyone around me was in stitches. Then I went to see Kelly's Heroes. In it, Donald Sutherland comes out of a tunnel in a tank and is firing the guns at the railroad stock while he has a loudspeaker playing "I've been working on the railroad". I found it very funny, while everyone around me didn't get the joke. American humor is more in your face, while British is more subtle.
I'm not a big fan of Alf's, (even though I enjoy Warren Mitchell). I can see that the writing is clever, but for me the nature of the lead character makes the show unenjoyable. I expect the film is the same.
I'm American but most of my dad's family came over from England in the olden days. I figured that was what always accounted for my love of British humor. I mean humour, s'rry.
I've noticed many of them seem fascinated by his broken nose 🤔 I'm guessing it's because their celebrities are so airbrushed and have to look 'perfect' rather than be real human beings. If Stephen Fry was American he'd have to have had plastic surgery to 'correct' that. They're very sensitive people and have apparently never seen someone whose nose isn't perfectly straight 😂 bless 'em.
All I see are a bunch of Brits patting themselves on their lobsterbacks. Don't tempt fate, my friends. We've got plenty of tea ready to drop in the harbor.
That "ability to laugh at ourselves" is invaluable in hard times. My neighbour recently got burgled, lost a lot of valuable stuff, and laughed her socks off when I said "Look on the bright side, at least they didn't take your Little Mermaid DVD".
I can certainly hear what Stephen is saying, and I think I’d agree on the most part. I like both American and British comedy; it’s nice to have the variety to choose from.
This was a refreshing comment! I feel most of the comments here are debating which type of comedy is superior! And that's not what he said actually! Just different. I think it simply comes down to taste :)
I would have liked if Stephen Fry had listed off Hyacinth Bucket from Keeping Up Appearances and Elizabeth Slocum from Are you Being Served as prototypical British comedy heroes that try to be grander than they are in a world that constantly lets them down. Hyacinth once tried to convince everyone in town that her husband had "the royal disease" gout instead of the decidedly lower-class ailment of a sprained ankle.
The key thing to recall about what Fry’s saying is based on loose generalities and overall trends. Large populations and diverse media landscapes are massively complex, and there’s always going to be exceptions. Its just easier to speak in specifics as key points that things trend to, and assume that the audience understands “yes, not everything is like this, but this is where the bell curve’s centered at least”.
Brits have one thing over Americans. They end their series before the audience gets bored with them. This doesn't stem from some sort of brilliant comic timing. It's simply that Americans are born capitalists and are willing to take advantage of every dollar they can squeeze from every possible franchise. (Look at how many Austin Powers movies we made.) There are very few American sitcoms that ended on a high note, and most of the time, this is because were canceled early. This can be a mixed blessing. The Office, for example, allowed greater character depth to people that were more or less extras in the original series. The first five or six seasons were very good in America, and the show stood on its own for that difference, but then it kept going on and on until Ricky Gervais's twelve eps and the Christmas special had a far better batting average.
I think for us here in the States, those capitalist sensibilities have also conditioned us over the years to spur on that vicious cycle of never ending a show because we're always crying, "More, more, we want more!" Then we get more of it but it's only a matter of time before something happens in that show that turns the audience against it. The ratings sharply drop off and, as you said, it doesn't end on a high note.
I always think of the difference being that in British comedy there is always the aim of producing moments that are meaningful and profound amidst the humour. Steptoe and Son, Hancock, Fawlty Towers, Inbetweeners, Thick Of It, The Office, Blackadder, Friday Night Dinners. You care and your heart aches when mishaps turn to actual relatable tragedy. When the pace changes in Frasier or Seinfeld to a Brit it seems utterly insincere and manipulative. I don't think that I have EVER felt emotional while watching an American comedy. Maybe it's a Shakespeare thing but Comedy and Tragedy are seen as interchangeable here.
This is why British panel shows work. An American version of the show will mainly consist of comedians with lots of posturing and trying to get one liners.
So many comments here are from people saying that their favourite show is more like British comedy than it is. It's okay for shows to be American, if people enjoy something then it's great entertainment. Some people prefer British comedy over American and Visa versa, they're both able to coexist. I prefer British comedy typically because I find a lot of it to be unexpected. Though there are shows on both sides I don't like. If anything the resolute defence of ones favourite American show highlights the American mindset mentioned of not being allowed to be seen failing and always wanting to be successful.
Thank you, Stephen Fry. You have just explained why/how there is no actual conversation in America (except perhaps NY?). I am half English, half American and lived in France for a long time. When I came back to America, I did JUST THAT: I took issue with something someone said, and instead of countering what I claimed with an argument, I got a highly emotional and huffy response. I'm in the Passive Aggressive Pacific Northwest where everyone has to agree with one another. What passes for conversation IS often smartass-one-liners. (You could die for an actual conversation here).
When people are deluded and puffed up with their own self importance it's very easy to get offended. Everybody is so busy making sure everybody feels soooooo important, even if they have done nothing that is actually merits being important except for breathing,.. it just keeps the delusion going.
As an American that loves British comedians I can safely say that in general this is true, but like everything there is nuance. What I find is that British comedy is fundamentally more social in how it wants to smooth out and affect everyone with the joke (ie a joke that is self-deprecating can transform into one that makes fun of all of us) where American is more focused and makes everyone laugh through pin-point jokes that target specific hypocrisies or ideologies (ie a joke that twists your expectation on self-deprecation through a social revelation). Neither of these are better at making people laugh, they're just different paths to get people to laugh. And since all humor is subjective it only makes sense that one type would be more popular in some places over other types. If I had to say something bad about both styles is that the worst of our comedians make our kinds of comedy one-note, where the ONLY jokes available are ones that will resonate with as many people as possible. This is the Easy Mode of comedy and helps show that deep down we're all here to laugh, just in different ways.
I HAD to click on this. If anyone can it explain what the heck is the difference is, it’s Fry. It’s really hard to pinpoint, AND he’s correct, about the difference. What can I say, I’m a huge fan of his. He’s so smart and witty. And I do get the difference, but I for the life of me I haven’t been able to explain it, but hopefully, now I can. I loved the Gordon Gordon reference in House, I actually got that lol. I’m in the middle of his Mythos book, read by him, because there is no other way except for him to read it, and it’s so good. And I agree with Stina, he in no way said one was “better”.
I cannot generalize a complicated and layered question, but one thing that sticks out to me is that the British put more power in the mannerisms and the use of wit in their comedy while American comedy is a little more blunt.
That's varied though. It completely depends on the medium of comedy, the comedian, as well as the audience. I get what you're saying but on both sides that's just one aspect.
He's obviously thought about this deeply. Much truth in what he says. There are some obvious exceptions. The 'Walter Mitty' character is a famous one. Seinfeld had several character actors who's personal defects were the crux of the show. And Portlandia is defined by social failure.
Actually Animal House was as well. The whole group was the rejects of the school. Remember the first meeting, and John Belushi was standing in the yard pissing and drinking beer at the same time? Like defining his purpose in life. Think Fry might have not actually seen that movie if he was thinking Belushi's character was a successful intelect.
Hollylivengood he meant it in the context of the scene, that, in that moment John was the guy who “got” the laugh, whereas Stephen Bishop, who played the singer-guitarist was the object of scorn; in making the comparison, Fry astutely observed the British comedian would opt to play the singer-guitarist instead, as that would evoke the funnier part, the object of derision, the ability to laugh at oneself. And that is the difference.
@@acspore Ahh, not familiar. Ok, in the US, the musician was the what would call him, upper class. The good guy, you know, classy. Belushi was the monster who went around breaking things. You know the object of scorn. The absolute waster throughout. That's why we thought he was funny anyway.
The differences can also come down to how they are written. Many US sitcoms are usually written by committee and go on for multiple seasons yearly. British shows usually have a constant writing team, short seasons and generally less episodes.
That's a key difference yes. I prefer 4 or so seasons 6 episodes each all controlled with one set creative input. There's are loads of US shows I simply won't watch because I don't want to sit through 8+ seasons each with 22 episodes..
Now for that. That depends on the network and what they're looking for. Also tons of shows here still have the writers they started with. There are tons of comedy shows both here and English that either never should have ended, or never should have started.
As a brit, i agree with fry to a point although of course it's nnot entirely true. I can hink of a number of somewhat failures in american tv but i would expannd on fry's pont by saying it's more extreme in british comedy. Even the biggest 'failures' in american sitcoms tend to be people that either have a pretty respectable job, or they happen to live in a very nice house, or they happen to be a relatively good looking human bbeinng. Look at british sitcoms like Shameless, Only fools and horses, Rab C nesbitt, Blackadder, etc. Most of the time these people live in squalor, they are flat broke, they are very rarely attractive like most characters on american shows. Generally i think british shows take it to the extreme where as american shows tend to just have minor fails throughout the plot
My man, you apparently said it better than I did. lol. Thanks for acknowledging that there are several examples in American sitcoms that fit the mold Fry pointed out... and yes, UK tv sitcoms do take it to extremes but to stereotype all US shows as nothing more than one liner shows is absolutely wrong.
Having lived in both places I've come to believe that understanding yourself comes down to realizing that you can't do so without laughing at imperfection because it enables you to grow, change and improve. In America being laughed at is often seen as failure and hence can't be right while in Britain it is seen as an incentive to prove the laughers wrong.
Interesting analysis, I think. Speaking as one who enjoys both American and British sit-coms I've been aware of a subtle difference between them, and Mr. Fry may have put it into perspective. I can think of exceptions on the American side. I Love Lucy, for an early example, and some more recent ones with bumbling fathers. I'm spit-balling here, not arguing a point.
As for failure-heros, in the U.S., we have had Michael Scott (thanks, David Brent!), Ray Barrone ("Everybody Loves Raymond"), "The King of Queens," Jim Belushi's character, Louis C.K., Maxwell Smart, Gilligan, Ralph Crmden, Lucille Ball...
As an American, I agree totally with Mr. Fry's assessments. One thing I would like to point out about American comedy, which I find greatly disturbing, is that the butt of the jokes here are largely blue collar workers. You know, those who do not have a college education, those who are religious, those who do not live in big (often corrupt) cities. Just look at a political map of the USA and this explains a lot. Another facet of the American v. British humor I find fascinating is that the British KNOW there are different classes within society. We Americans love to pretend that we live in a class-less society, and that everybody is "middle class" except of course those too stupid to go to college (see above). Thanks for the great insight!
The class thing is interesting. As an Englishman living in America, I love it, because I'm not judged on the basis of my class to the extent I would be in the UK. But I also don't see a class system here. There's income strata, but nobody will look down on someone who bought their own furniture.
@@farmbrough Oh there is a class system in America. As a foreigner, much of it would be hidden from you. It's not just income strata. See, for instance, exactly who upper "middle class women" will and won't date.
@@farmbrough Funny you should mention that. All my UK friends in USA have always told that they find it quite amusing that most Americans assume, no matter what dialect the UK guy speaks, he is "upper class". See, e.g., Michael Caine speaking Cockney, and yet everybody assumes he's "upper class". LOL
@@lewjames6688 that sort of thing can be quite funny. But in fairness, most English people wouldn't know a Boston, Massachusetts* accent from a Nashville accent. *as distinct from Boston, Lincolnshire.
I showed a clip of Prime Minister's Question Time in a Comparative Politics course once. American students found it to be both absolutely surreal and hilarious at the same time. They seemed to like it!
Frasier and Niles Crane were outwardly successful with their elite society lifestyles, but critically flawed underneath and therein lay the humour (or humor). The British comedy hero may have unachievable aspirations, but there are American comedy heroes who achieved success without addressing the faultlines. When Frasier and Niles agree on both ordering a decaf latte with skimmed milk and the barista yells back their order as "two gutless wonders", well you have laugh even if you are a Brit.
Interesting how the algorithms brought us all here, I wonder why? I think Fry has a point though - Americans seem to laugh more at relatable situations (What's the deal with airline food?) whereas Brits tend to laugh at everything and ourselves (He's not the Messiah, he's a very naughty boy!).
When he said "British comedians would want to play the folk singer" I immediately thought of "Neil the hippy" from the Young Ones. Stephen Fry absolutely nails it. Of course. What a brilliant man.
Also, British comics aren't afraid of being unlikable or even despicable characters, but American comics feel the need to be essentially nice and good people. It didn't used to be like this, as one of the funniest people in American history, WC Fields, always played an unlikable character who had almost no redeeming qualities and was a personification of every human vice, fault, and defect. And he was absolutely hilarious. This is why I think that a series like AbFab, in which the two leads were despicable characters, could never be made in the USA. They would try to make Patsy and Edwina "nice," and that would be the death of the whole thing.
This is exactly the reason why "Dinner For Schmucks" was such a lacklustre remake of "Le Diner De Con" - in the French original, the guy hosting the party was a complete turd so you get tremendous joy watching his life collapse around him. In the remake they tried to make the host more likeable and give him a redemption story.
Michael Scott was supposed to be a copy of David Brent, but then we had to change it so that Michael isn't a narcissistic sociopath, but a lovable oaf.
As an American at Oxford I remember my politics tutor remarking about Prime Minister's Question Hour, that it would never work in America -- the very idea of holding the President's feet to the fire. As an example, arose the issue of police killings, that when a English Bobby kills someone in the UK the incident will no doubt arise for discussion in Parliament itself with the PM being pointedly questioned and called to account; whereas in the USA, because of federalism, a police killing is merely business as usual and of trifling interest to the Executive branch.
I think that the ability to laugh at yourself is something developed through tradition and indeed from the culture within the country. We're so incredibly patriotic as Americans and that is problematic in some sense. But coming towards the Gen Z generation of Americans (me myself a member), self deprecating jokes are hilarious to us. It takes humility and recognition for wit. That is part of British culture, they recognize their past mistakes. Americans can just be too proud.
i think part of the development of gen z humor is that the internet is slowly nullifying cultural borders, which means many gen z americans, including myself, have adopted a mix of humor styles that come from around the world
I agree with the characterization of American comedy with the important caveat that this refers to what gains mass appeal. So while the average (or modal) American enjoys comedy as described, satirical shows/comedians and characters as failures still have large and deeply loyal fan bases.
I do think that Mr. Fry captures something about American humor, but his analysis is incomplete even for what is massively popular. Consider The Hangover; The Simpsons; There's Something About Mary; Mrs. Doubtfire; Tootsie; Friends; Ace Ventura; Dumb and Dumber; any Apatow movie; Beavis and Butthead; Shrek [I'm serious]; Ghostbusters; Cheers; Happy Gilmore... Haven't even gotten to the stand up comedians. Also, the influence of too-cool-for-shcool John Belushi and even Chevy Chase has considerably waned.
@@MintyDragonfly I appreciate your measured and thoughtful response. I see your point, but disagree only in that I can think of a few giants of American comedy who are NOT designed to be lovable, and are absolutely rotten to the core. But what you're saying is also slightly different than what Mr. Fry is saying. There are similarities and differences between American and British comedy, but Fry's "an American would never have a failure as a comic hero" premise is patently false. thinks. He was on more fertile ground when he was talking about the British emphasis on "character," which partly springs from the incomparably rich English theater tradition.
@@MintyDragonfly Cheers! I like hearing this perspective on the differences. Three recommendations that no one asked for; three of the most influential and acclaimed comedies from the aughts: 'Arrested Development' [first three seasons] 'Curb Your Enthusiasm,' and '30 Rock' [slow start with the pilot, but quickly picks up steam]. All three have formidable ensemble casts.
Look at the differences between Veep and the British show it was inspired from The Thick of It. The best British comedy in recent times - very underrated - is The Brittas Empire.
Yes, some of those differences help us understand, but don't forget that Veep had a British team working on it in the US. Though it got more American as the series progressed.
I think American humor is changing on some fronts. The reason for my opinion is that I’m American who absolutely loves British humor and consumes a lot of British programming. It used to be I didn’t enjoy any of our own shows but as of late, I’ve seen quite a few that i enjoy.
The legacy of one-liners in Anglo-American, Afro-American, and Jewish-American comedy Stephen mentions is rich, it's a heritage worth celebrating - Mark Twain, Groucho Marx, Rodney Dangerfield, Richard Pryor, Jerry Seinfeld, Nick Offerman as Ron Swanson, and a whole lot of others used them brilliantly. To a degree, each of them could also laugh at themselves, but Stephen's right about the basic assumptions of American comedic characters: even if they fail at something, they still have to appear confident and successful, as if success is never in doubt for them despite their setbacks.
Seinfeld is / was the unfunniest show I ever had the misfortune to to witness , if not for the “”da dum “ at the end of each skit no non would know when to laugh/ giggle or smirk !
Oh my yes. Look at Blackaddar. I still watch the show. It's my favorite, There's nothing like it in the US. Though I think we're coming around. Does it matter how long it takes you to come, as long as you do? OK, I'm moving along.
One can't say one is better than the other. British people are more adept to British humour and Americans at American humour. The latter is based on slapstick mainly, whilst the British specialises in puns and word twists. Sometimes the two styles join forces and produce a very clever comedic work. ie: MASH. But that's rare.
I would like to add something to what Fry said about the differences. In another interview he talked about American optimism and self-help books. And I think it is a clue there. There is always the idea that people can change in American literature. People might be confronted with difficult situations, or they might make fools of themselves. It isn't true that American characters are not self-deprecating to some degree. But they usually learn something from it. Like a moment of epiphany where they think, oh I have to get a grip, I have been so foolish. Now, this NEVER happens in British comedy. The main character never learns anything from the experiences. And he or she stays the same foolish self throughout, and there is no expectation of the character to change either. People are as they are regardless. There is a type of determinism in British comedy, and maybe society as a whole, rarely found in the US.
Sitcoms like Peep show and It’s always sunny in Philadelphia sum up this contrast perfectly, both are great but the British style of comedy is much more self deprecating and relies on cringe and 2nd hand embarrassment. The inbetweeners is another great example
Yes. When you see the so called "odd balls" in the US version of that show they seem far too nice and hardly flawed compared to the original show. That and a severe lack of earthy language.
One was mainly centered around Ricky Gervais. The other had a full cast of lovable and identifiable characters and ran for a much longer period of time.
@@stevieavail5773 Yet The Office la Britain was a world wide hit and the American version was not. Nobody is saying American humour is not made for an American audience because it is you just have a different humour to the rest of us.
I love the nitpickery, pedantic nature of internet comments. He speaks in general terms, as he often does (and incidentally, leaves off quite a bit of British humour, too, but that's another discussion) and instantly, there's a slew of comments about how this one guy or two characters aren't like that, therefore his argument is entirely invalid...? Really?
Now that I've thought about this a bit, American (U.S.) comedy is as diverse as the American people. Dave Chappelle vs Amy Schumer vs Chris Rock vs Jerry Seinfeld. Family Guy vs Futurama. The variety is infinite and you can watch what you enjoy and ignore the rest. Cheers!
I think one of the problems with American comedy is that sitcoms go on for so many seasons so it has to be watered down, while British ones are fairly condensed.
the expression "Jumped the Shark" was coined when the sitcom Happy Days ran out of fresh ideas and had Fonzie jump a shark. Yes many sitcoms are on long after they've jumped the shark.
@dfarmbrough same! Idky it just doesn't make me feel anything, unlike all those other comedians. But I disagree a little bit with the op, those are similar in a few ways, that Fry resumed well.
On a similar topic, I always thought the difference between british and american Science Fiction is that britain leans towards analog and american leans towards digital. Like you have dr who with his tardis or HG Wells with the time machine that the person built himself. Compared to american scifi like star wars and star trek where everything is digital.
British sci-fi tends to be about personal or social challenge, American is more about great battles. You might say that Brits were brought up with narratives on the scale of Beowulf or Robin Hood or maybe Iliad - quite small in scale; Americans - unsurprisingly - have narratives which resemble that of World War II from Pearl Harbour, through the islands of the Pacific to Leyte Gulf, and ending with a decisive strike at the heart of Japan, achieved by a small crew delivering a great technical knock-out blow. Alien and Blade Runner have a very British feel to me. Frightfully sorry - off topic a bit.
@@lindsayheyes925 Star wars is like how you described the british. It's an epic hero's journey. Other sci fi, like the transformers, I'd agree with what you said. I have the image for british scifi of an inventor going into his garage and building something. Kind of like wallace and grommet, versus american scifi like star wars, star trek, terminator where the tech is beyond human ability to create. This creates for me a feeling of man being master of the tech in the case of british and tech being the master of man in the case of american.
@@annereilley4892 Interesting case - and that may account for its popularity. Star Treck was clearly modelled on naval society; Star Wars is - to me - a very successful hybrid of the vast scale of Iliad and the personal narrative of Oddysey. By dint of a low-tech nostalgically scrolling text preface - taking the place of a narrator (channelling the personal story level of, say, "Peter and the Wolf") - and the costume design (channelling, on the one side the war machine of The Axis, and on the other side the mufti of the outnumbered Resistance), it signals that it crosses the barrier of scale, and places protagonist and antagonist on opposite sides of that barrier. "War of the Worlds" - in all its iterations - fails to run any effective parallel narrative for the antagonist because of their inscrutable nature. I would argue that it therefore falls more in the genre of Horror. Alien is more successful because of the similarity of the antagonist to insect life - which we see in great detail - and the tag-line "In space no-one can hear you scream", which prompts you to engage with the vulnerability of the protagonist, especially when it is emphasised in the closing scene to create a subtle cliff-hanger. Starship Troopers fails to anthropomorphise its insect antagonist until its final scene, creating instead a gauche and disturbing reference to misogyny through the anatomical design of the captured Queen in the closing torture/propaganda scene, which subverts the status of the heros, revealing them to be viscious dupes of an authoritarian mindset. Clever - but as subtle as a sledgehammer in a fist-fight, and devoid of the humour which sweetened the pill in the shooting of the swordsman in "Raiders of the Lost Arc" - so not so clever.
It was hard to adapt in America, no offense but they would get offended easily I had to constantly remind myself to tone down the sarcasm and no banters not a comedian
The way I see it is unfortunately the location of most or at least a lot of the venues you probably play are just exactly what you said. The get offended easily, they don’t or can’t take a self deprecating joke and don’t understand many other types of comedy. You won’t make much money playing the small town west of the Mississippi River crowd and East of California. You’re humor we get cause that to a degree is us somewhat. We go out to the job at the factory and bam, they screwed us over in time. We went out to the farm or ranch and another fence , or tractor that was just fixed doesn’t work. But with us we are all ways trying to find a way around the system because sometimes the system is stifling. I’m sure their is a mountain of comedy you can find that’ll work, but mostly you just haven’t found Your audience, we’re out here. Best wishes my friend.
Generalising is hard, because there are always exceptions. In my view, US humour is typically more direct whilst British humour is far more indirect (probably due to a more historically deferential culture). Once you combine that with the fact that the global role of the US has been on the up since at least the mid 19th century and the British have been on the slide since the 40s, you start to see where each nation tends to look to for inspiration in its modern comedy and the characters within.
In British comedy the heroes are failures who actually fail. In american comedy they have all the character traits of a failure but they still somehow succeed e.g. Ricky Bobby from Talladega Knights and Michael Scott from The Office
@@clambert608 why would that disqualify it? They're quite different - I've watched them both. And the US version has done much better than the british one...
I love british and American comedy but the one thing I notice with American comedy is how the majority of the main characters are successful at the start of a show, Fraiser, Seinfeld, Monica and Ross etc... where as in the UK, specifically more of the 80s-90s sitcoms, characters such as Del Boy, Gary and Tony (men behaving badly) Andy from Extras all start at the bottom and their journeys have a sort of redemptive arc, Andy finally gets his own show, Del Boy finally becomes a millionaire, Gary finally gets a proper family with Dorothy while Tony finally gets with Debs, these developments come at the end of a series run not at the start. So i find I identify more with british characters moreso than American. Just an observation.
Rene from 'allo 'allo is probably the exception, he was happy being a failure but kept on being put in positions where he had to, and actually generally did succeed.
Thinking about it, perhaps that's an overlooked British comedy archetype... The guy who basically just wants to be left alone, but for whatever reason keeps being lumbered with problems, or made the centre of attention. Rene, Blackadder and Dave Lister could all fit into that description. They're all characters who just want to keep their head down, survive or be left to do their own thing, but people around them keep putting them into ridiculous or dangerous situations.
Agree with Fry but I think Frasier (the sitcom) managed to punch through in terms of being more self-deprecating, it's one of the reason why I really enjoyed it so much.
A ton of shows did! Friends, all the guys were as Fry described. 3rd Rock From the Sun. Home Improvement. Hell: The Simpsons! We have zero issues with arrogant buffoonish "heroes" getting smacked around by the world.
@@WormholeGarden I would say that there is still a difference as they are still successes/"heroes" even though they may take the occasional knock in life. Homer still has a really nice home and well paying job, the cast of friends are financially secure and have each other despite being not very nice people (Chandler's the only actually nice one IMHO), and most of the cast of 3rd rock have relationships and jobs even though they are actual aliens. In some of the examples given by Stephen, the central character never wins. Harold Steptoe never gets the success he wants or the girl, David Brent's has some small personal growth when he stands up to Chris but his life ultimately fails (even though he is pretty chipper about it. I think American humour (humor) is very rarely willing to go the full hog and properly shit on the main character. I do think this is changing to an extent, partly because there have been some adaptations of UK Comedy Shows like Shameless and the Office etc but also because there are seemingly more platforms to allow them and studios are able to see that there is a market for those characters.
As an Australian I have a great appreciation of both. I love some of the British comedies, and many iconic Australian comedies are based around the idea behind British comedy, however I do also love a good American comedy. However, some of the most successful American comedies, such as Brooklyn Nine-Nine and The Big Bang Theory tend to have a blend of what Stephen described for both the British and American humour. Especially Brooklyn Nine-Nine. You can imagine that sort of thing happening just about anywhere in the world!
from a german outsider view, i mostly agree with stephens statement. I lived partly in the us and spent some time in the uk. But there are however exceptions, such as leslie nielson in the naked gun. But yes, americans are much faster offended by a joke than brits
If you can't laugh at yourself, you have no right to make fun of others.
True 👍
👏👏👏
American comedies make sure you laugh and carry on with hope.
British comedies make sure you laugh at the idea of hope but still carry on.
eloquently put
Is profound, comrade. In Russian comedy, we laugh hopelessly at idea of carrying on.
Basically keep calm and carry on
Ja, mein freund. In German comedy, we carry on hoping to laugh at something.
Si, and in Italian comedy, we are hopeless, but we carry on laughing.
Many people here are mistakingly taking his opinion as a British vs America, i don't see it like that, he didn't say once that one is better than the other, it's just different!
Aye, tribalism on full display out here.
Not becoming of anyone.
The wonderful thing about the Brits is...you don't have to put them down. They'll do it for you.
Yes we were talking about the modern culture of pronouns and transgenderism. And my friend said “ as a white heterosexual Englishman I identify as anyone else”. That captures their self deprecating culture perfectly
...and at the same time, being so kindharted and show you how funny this actually is. Brit humor is humane, as much as the french one.
Mostly by riding british cars . . .
(10 years Landy😢)
Our style of comedy reminds me of the last rap battles in 8 mile.
How can you insult us when we already said evething there is to say. It completely takes the punch out of everything they had to day. Americans get a lot more defensive and offened.
Had to listen to my uk pals arguing which hometown was the shittiest
One has to have a sense of the utterly ridiculous. I cannot see a Monty Python coming out of anywhere but the UK.
How about India?
@@MW-ic7lr you'll have an FIR lodged against you the moment you say something mildly offensive. Good luck with that
What I've noticed about British comedians is that they are able to make a scene a hundred times through subtle movements and facial expressions. They are the absolute best in that regard.
Or not so subtle, a la Mr Bean 😜
@@benwatson5787 Mr. Bean is the exceptional exception to the rule.
I think that's one of the reason Sunny in Philadelphia has such a strong following. It's the only American comedy I can think of where all the main characters are absolute failures and deservedly so.
I love that show. I’m English so you might be right.
There are many American sitcoms where the main character (s) is a failure.
All In The Family, Married With Children, Frasier are many others are great examples of this.
@@spacebum Yeah IASIP does seem to have a strong fanbase here.
Stephen Fry says Americans get more offended than Brits about humor, then the Americans in the comment section proceed to got offended and argue and completely prove his point. People just don't listen
well duh, he's criticizing americans. Imagine If i thought all british humor was benny hill? and crass mysogist humor?
Yiffox We don’t really care and rolls our eyes *shrug*
@@cobramcjingleballs We'd laugh, or just smirk and leave you to your delusions.
@@LG-cz6ls its sad your "nation" is now the US armpit
@@cobramcjingleballs Strange leap from comedy.
Try again, lad.
One of the few American comedies what stands out to me is It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia. Even though they may have the occasional one-liner, it gets it's humour from the context of the characters and situation
I watched one episode of that shit and I genuinely felt like I was watching a show made for 5 year olds. Maybe I got a bad episode the one where they have a high school reunion?
Not a sitcom but if ever there was a merry old band of losers, popular in American culture its Jackass.
Agreed but there are no one liners, Shut up Bird
The point that the there is no direct public questioning by peers of the President and actual lively debate between elected representatives in the US is a very good point id not thought of before.
US politicians can hide behind prepared statements, PR and "managed" communication so much more easily than in the UK. I wonder how many democrats and republicans would survive if the US public could see how poorly they do when not surrounded by advisors.
It says a lot about the internet that the whole comment section is arguing about which style of comedy is better, Fry didn’t actually pass any such judgment at all. He pointed out the differences, not which he thought was superior.
The answer if anyone is interested is that both have their highs and both have their lows and which is better is totally relative.
I tend to agree with Mr. Fry on this one. A lot of times when you have the American comedies that have a sort of loser... they are still winning... like the early 2000s mold of having a goofy fat male character who always makes mistakes, yet he's married to some super fine woman who adores him. So, they are "benefits" that come with being a loser.
I don't agree with _everything_ Fry said, but _much_ of it. And I really appreciate that he's able to discuss that two things are different & still acknowledge that *both can still be good.*
Absolutely!
Thats why i always say, if everyone would be able to laugh about themselves, the world would be a slightly better place :)
That's the kind of jokes I like to do. Joke about myself more often, since people tend to laugh about others rather than face something about themselves
They'll grow up and "get it", one day.
@@footsoldier857 ???
I'm American and I once watched Prime Minister's Questions on CSPAN. I couldn't get over how raucous it was, but I kind of liked it because it kept the Prime Minister on his toes.
As for humor, Stephen Fry is right. I do enjoy British humor, like Fawlty Towers and The Office. I like the American version of The Office, as well. Lately I've been enjoying Michael Mcintyre- he's really funny.
The UK would never create a show like Brooklyn 99. The characters are way too confident and happy even when things are going terribly. But we like American comedy here too. It just seems less realistic
@All_Roads haha yeah Monty Python was out there at the time. I definitely don't think either comedy is superior over the other but they are a little different for the most part. It's just cultural, no big deal. It's not even restricted to comedy though. It goes beyond that. Self-deprication is so firmly rooted in British culture that it's not even modesty, it's just a severe lack of self-esteem or ego. I've met several Americans and what always strikes me is how sure of themselves they are. I've talked about this before with several British commercial lawyers in London and they all say the same thing. American confidence and attitude is unlike anything in Northern Europe (which is unique and not necessarily a criticism). I think though that it's why [worldwide] people sometimes mock Americans because it's like they're detached from reality or in their own bubble. But when you go to the States it's so isolated, distant and protected from world affairs (geopolitically) that I can see how that would seep into the culture. I've heard many theories as to why American culture is how it is but I have to stop the comment somewhere
But much of 99 is a mockery and celebration of each character’s flaws. It’s very much like UK humour at its core
@@Joker-yw9hl Basically that’s okay, but I’ve met an American who was not only self-deprecationg but extremely so. I guess it’s not 100% idea then, because it just depends if you meet winners of the capitalist system or losers. Winner write the stories, losers read them.
@@87togabito It’s not clear cut as much as Fry says it is.
@@perimetrfilms I disagree tho. 99 is very much about the characters, and hardly ever relies on witty one liners which seems to be the standard for American sitcom.
You may argue that Jake peralta does kind of reflect the one liner troupe. However I will argue that his use of one-liners creates his persona which is the humour, rather than being the joke in and of itself.
Not sure if I’ve gone off course or just rambling at this point, but does that make sense?
Everyone debating which type of comedy is the superior one.. when really he didn't say British comedy is better. He just pointed out the DIFFERENCES between two types of comedy! Ultimately, it's down to personal taste. We all have different senses of humour. It's absolutely fine laughing at the American situational comedy with its punchlines, and so is giggling at British, character based satire with all it's witty sarcasm. Different strokes for different blokes my darlings
Stina1234 We have some OK stuff here, but I’ll take British comedy anyday. He described it perfectly. These are my words now, I’m not paraphrasing, I don’t want to sit a comedy club week after week, listening to one liner/zingers, hour after hour. It gets old. Usually after one, and if they’re really good, two seasons.
@@mangot589 fair enough! I myself prefer British comedy too. Maybe it's because it's very similar to Swedish humour! (Only our comedy shows have a big pinch of awkward situations too!)
Stina1234 😉. We used to have a GREAT channel, that showed all kinds of international shows/movies. It’s gone now (of course) can’t see it, subscribe to it (this was way before subscriptions), but heck yeah I’ll be first in line, about 20 years ago. I loved all of your shows too that they had, I know what your saying! don’t mind reading subtitles oh somebody please bring a channel that has other country’s shows lol🙏.
And this is one of the reasons why Finns love British humour. We both make fun of ourselves and can without a problem call something rubbish. Don't get me wrong, I love American sitcom, but if I want to laugh, I watch British comedy.
Any funny fin comedys
While I think this is valid to a point, the 'flaws' in genuinely good American shows, be they comedies or dramas, tend to be more multifaceted.
The Office UK for example, has the manager character as almost unbearably awkward, obnoxious, unbearable. And while The Office US' Michael Scott starts with similar characteristics and doesn't 'not' have them, we see redemptiveness as well and the more we get to know him, the more we see what is good in him, but it doesn't hide what is bad about him either.
Funnily we see that in a lot of US remakes--Shameless is another good example, I think. But even outside of this, it exists in a lot of good American television: Bojack Horseman, The Wire, Breaking Bad, The Sopranos, etc. The leads in these shows are not objectively good people, and we know it. Many times, the shows will lead with their good qualities to make us want to invest in them, and THERE, US to UK varies for sure. But American shows tend to encourage loving in spite of flaws that are definitely visible, whereas UK shows I think tend to encourage loving because of flaws.
Just my 2 cents.
50 years ago, I was in New Zealand. I went to the cinema very often, and saw a lot of films, both American and British. I saw an Alf Garnett film that was, for me, forgettable. It was billed as a huge comedy, but I didn't laugh once while everyone around me was in stitches. Then I went to see Kelly's Heroes. In it, Donald Sutherland comes out of a tunnel in a tank and is firing the guns at the railroad stock while he has a loudspeaker playing "I've been working on the railroad". I found it very funny, while everyone around me didn't get the joke. American humor is more in your face, while British is more subtle.
I'm not a big fan of Alf's, (even though I enjoy Warren Mitchell). I can see that the writing is clever, but for me the nature of the lead character makes the show unenjoyable. I expect the film is the same.
I'm American but most of my dad's family came over from England in the olden days. I figured that was what always accounted for my love of British humor. I mean humour, s'rry.
All I see in the comment section are a lot of Americans proving Stephen's point about being unable to laugh at yourselves 😂
100% you cant even pass a critique without being harassed and insulted !
I've noticed many of them seem fascinated by his broken nose 🤔 I'm guessing it's because their celebrities are so airbrushed and have to look 'perfect' rather than be real human beings. If Stephen Fry was American he'd have to have had plastic surgery to 'correct' that. They're very sensitive people and have apparently never seen someone whose nose isn't perfectly straight 😂 bless 'em.
All I see are a bunch of Brits patting themselves on their lobsterbacks. Don't tempt fate, my friends. We've got plenty of tea ready to drop in the harbor.
@@MW-ic7lr thanks for proving my point
With every word you write against the USA, a pound of English Breakfast Tea will be thrown into Boston Harbor or a comparable body of water.
That "ability to laugh at ourselves" is invaluable in hard times. My neighbour recently got burgled, lost a lot of valuable stuff, and laughed her socks off when I said "Look on the bright side, at least they didn't take your Little Mermaid DVD".
Maybe she'd have been better off if they had!
I can certainly hear what Stephen is saying, and I think I’d agree on the most part. I like both American and British comedy; it’s nice to have the variety to choose from.
To be fair he never claimed British humour was better or anything like that, he just simply stated the differences between the two
You can watch the British comedy and then rather than watching an unfunny America program, watch a documentary instead. It will be more enteraining.
This was a refreshing comment! I feel most of the comments here are debating which type of comedy is superior! And that's not what he said actually! Just different. I think it simply comes down to taste :)
I would have liked if Stephen Fry had listed off Hyacinth Bucket from Keeping Up Appearances and Elizabeth Slocum from Are you Being Served as prototypical British comedy heroes that try to be grander than they are in a world that constantly lets them down. Hyacinth once tried to convince everyone in town that her husband had "the royal disease" gout instead of the decidedly lower-class ailment of a sprained ankle.
Also Norman Wisdom!
The key thing to recall about what Fry’s saying is based on loose generalities and overall trends. Large populations and diverse media landscapes are massively complex, and there’s always going to be exceptions. Its just easier to speak in specifics as key points that things trend to, and assume that the audience understands “yes, not everything is like this, but this is where the bell curve’s centered at least”.
I haven't watched the video yet, but as a Canadian, I find the main difference is that British comedy is funny!
Canadian comedy is pretty good too. Certainly their standups make me laugh.
@Gar and Trailer Park Boys?
@@farmbrough How about Corner. Gas ?
I thought that was terrible
@@jonathanspencer5884 I had never heard of it until now.
Well said, mate.
I listen to a lot of audio books at work and it always easy to tell the books that are distinctly British by the humor
Brits have one thing over Americans. They end their series before the audience gets bored with them. This doesn't stem from some sort of brilliant comic timing. It's simply that Americans are born capitalists and are willing to take advantage of every dollar they can squeeze from every possible franchise. (Look at how many Austin Powers movies we made.) There are very few American sitcoms that ended on a high note, and most of the time, this is because were canceled early. This can be a mixed blessing. The Office, for example, allowed greater character depth to people that were more or less extras in the original series. The first five or six seasons were very good in America, and the show stood on its own for that difference, but then it kept going on and on until Ricky Gervais's twelve eps and the Christmas special had a far better batting average.
The fact that the BBC is (for the most part) not driven by profit helps this.
I think for us here in the States, those capitalist sensibilities have also conditioned us over the years to spur on that vicious cycle of never ending a show because we're always crying, "More, more, we want more!" Then we get more of it but it's only a matter of time before something happens in that show that turns the audience against it. The ratings sharply drop off and, as you said, it doesn't end on a high note.
Unfortunately top gear ended too early after only running for a few decades ;_;
I always think of the difference being that in British comedy there is always the aim of producing moments that are meaningful and profound amidst the humour. Steptoe and Son, Hancock, Fawlty Towers, Inbetweeners, Thick Of It, The Office, Blackadder, Friday Night Dinners. You care and your heart aches when mishaps turn to actual relatable tragedy.
When the pace changes in Frasier or Seinfeld to a Brit it seems utterly insincere and manipulative. I don't think that I have EVER felt emotional while watching an American comedy. Maybe it's a Shakespeare thing but Comedy and Tragedy are seen as interchangeable here.
This is why British panel shows work. An American version of the show will mainly consist of comedians with lots of posturing and trying to get one liners.
Not to mention that most of the funny lines are bleeped to pieces or censored away completely.
So many comments here are from people saying that their favourite show is more like British comedy than it is. It's okay for shows to be American, if people enjoy something then it's great entertainment. Some people prefer British comedy over American and Visa versa, they're both able to coexist. I prefer British comedy typically because I find a lot of it to be unexpected. Though there are shows on both sides I don't like.
If anything the resolute defence of ones favourite American show highlights the American mindset mentioned of not being allowed to be seen failing and always wanting to be successful.
Thank you, Stephen Fry. You have just explained why/how there is no actual conversation in America (except perhaps NY?). I am half English, half American and lived in France for a long time. When I came back to America, I did JUST THAT: I took issue with something someone said, and instead of countering what I claimed with an argument, I got a highly emotional and huffy response. I'm in the Passive Aggressive Pacific Northwest where everyone has to agree with one another. What passes for conversation IS often smartass-one-liners. (You could die for an actual conversation here).
When people are deluded and puffed up with their own self importance it's very easy to get offended. Everybody is so busy making sure everybody feels soooooo important, even if they have done nothing that is actually merits being important except for breathing,.. it just keeps the delusion going.
@@rosiemackenzie5976 How dare you.
@@OURBOURFLYNN Why don't you go and live in England.
@@rosiemackenzie5976 A little tear fell from irony's eye. It was tired of being missed.
As an American that loves British comedians I can safely say that in general this is true, but like everything there is nuance. What I find is that British comedy is fundamentally more social in how it wants to smooth out and affect everyone with the joke (ie a joke that is self-deprecating can transform into one that makes fun of all of us) where American is more focused and makes everyone laugh through pin-point jokes that target specific hypocrisies or ideologies (ie a joke that twists your expectation on self-deprecation through a social revelation). Neither of these are better at making people laugh, they're just different paths to get people to laugh. And since all humor is subjective it only makes sense that one type would be more popular in some places over other types. If I had to say something bad about both styles is that the worst of our comedians make our kinds of comedy one-note, where the ONLY jokes available are ones that will resonate with as many people as possible. This is the Easy Mode of comedy and helps show that deep down we're all here to laugh, just in different ways.
I HAD to click on this. If anyone can it explain what the heck is the difference is, it’s Fry. It’s really hard to pinpoint, AND he’s correct, about the difference. What can I say, I’m a huge fan of his. He’s so smart and witty. And I do get the difference, but I for the life of me I haven’t been able to explain it, but hopefully, now I can. I loved the Gordon Gordon reference in House, I actually got that lol. I’m in the middle of his Mythos book, read by him, because there is no other way except for him to read it, and it’s so good. And I agree with Stina, he in no way said one was “better”.
If you silence the laugh track from most comedy made in the US, a lot of it is just a bunch of common people being very mean to each other.
I didn't think you had common people in America. It's a classless society.
@@farmbrough HAHAHAHAHAHA
Good one.
It's not funny at all, I agree. Some British shows deliberately remove the laugh track to encourage people to think for themselves.
you described Always Sunny, my favourite TV Show
Much of this just confirms to me just how bright Stephen Fry is, get to the nub of the question and answers it clearly.
Fry represented Cambridge on University challenge. His college roommate was Laurie Fry.
I cannot generalize a complicated and layered question, but one thing that sticks out to me is that the British put more power in the mannerisms and the use of wit in their comedy while American comedy is a little more blunt.
That's varied though. It completely depends on the medium of comedy, the comedian, as well as the audience. I get what you're saying but on both sides that's just one aspect.
He's obviously thought about this deeply. Much truth in what he says.
There are some obvious exceptions. The 'Walter Mitty' character is a famous one. Seinfeld had several character actors who's personal defects were the crux of the show. And Portlandia is defined by social failure.
Actually Animal House was as well. The whole group was the rejects of the school. Remember the first meeting, and John Belushi was standing in the yard pissing and drinking beer at the same time? Like defining his purpose in life. Think Fry might have not actually seen that movie if he was thinking Belushi's character was a successful intelect.
Hollylivengood he meant it in the context of the scene, that, in that moment John was the guy who “got” the laugh, whereas Stephen Bishop, who played the singer-guitarist was the object of scorn; in making the comparison, Fry astutely observed the British comedian would opt to play the singer-guitarist instead, as that would evoke the funnier part, the object of derision, the ability to laugh at oneself. And that is the difference.
@@acspore Ahh, not familiar. Ok, in the US, the musician was the what would call him, upper class. The good guy, you know, classy. Belushi was the monster who went around breaking things. You know the object of scorn. The absolute waster throughout. That's why we thought he was funny anyway.
The differences can also come down to how they are written. Many US sitcoms are usually written by committee and go on for multiple seasons yearly. British shows usually have a constant writing team, short seasons and generally less episodes.
That's a key difference yes. I prefer 4 or so seasons 6 episodes each all controlled with one set creative input. There's are loads of US shows I simply won't watch because I don't want to sit through 8+ seasons each with 22 episodes..
Now for that. That depends on the network and what they're looking for. Also tons of shows here still have the writers they started with. There are tons of comedy shows both here and English that either never should have ended, or never should have started.
As a brit, i agree with fry to a point although of course it's nnot entirely true. I can hink of a number of somewhat failures in american tv but i would expannd on fry's pont by saying it's more extreme in british comedy. Even the biggest 'failures' in american sitcoms tend to be people that either have a pretty respectable job, or they happen to live in a very nice house, or they happen to be a relatively good looking human bbeinng. Look at british sitcoms like Shameless, Only fools and horses, Rab C nesbitt, Blackadder, etc. Most of the time these people live in squalor, they are flat broke, they are very rarely attractive like most characters on american shows. Generally i think british shows take it to the extreme where as american shows tend to just have minor fails throughout the plot
My man, you apparently said it better than I did. lol. Thanks for acknowledging that there are several examples in American sitcoms that fit the mold Fry pointed out... and yes, UK tv sitcoms do take it to extremes but to stereotype all US shows as nothing more than one liner shows is absolutely wrong.
Fry: You cannot critizise Americans in your humor.
Americans in the comment section: How can you say that ???!
I guess you aren't British then either since you can't take your opinion being called rubbish. lol
Having lived in both places I've come to believe that understanding yourself comes down to realizing that you can't do so without laughing at imperfection because it enables you to grow, change and improve. In America being laughed at is often seen as failure and hence can't be right while in Britain it is seen as an incentive to prove the laughers wrong.
Interesting analysis, I think. Speaking as one who enjoys both American and British sit-coms I've been aware of a subtle difference between them, and Mr. Fry may have put it into perspective. I can think of exceptions on the American side. I Love Lucy, for an early example, and some more recent ones with bumbling fathers. I'm spit-balling here, not arguing a point.
As for failure-heros, in the U.S., we have had Michael Scott (thanks, David Brent!), Ray Barrone ("Everybody Loves Raymond"), "The King of Queens," Jim Belushi's character, Louis C.K., Maxwell Smart, Gilligan, Ralph Crmden, Lucille Ball...
Of which I found none of them funny at all.
As an American, I agree totally with Mr. Fry's assessments. One thing I would like to point out about American comedy, which I find greatly disturbing, is that the butt of the jokes here are largely blue collar workers. You know, those who do not have a college education, those who are religious, those who do not live in big (often corrupt) cities. Just look at a political map of the USA and this explains a lot.
Another facet of the American v. British humor I find fascinating is that the British KNOW there are different classes within society. We Americans love to pretend that we live in a class-less society, and that everybody is "middle class" except of course those too stupid to go to college (see above).
Thanks for the great insight!
The class thing is interesting. As an Englishman living in America, I love it, because I'm not judged on the basis of my class to the extent I would be in the UK. But I also don't see a class system here. There's income strata, but nobody will look down on someone who bought their own furniture.
@@farmbrough Oh there is a class system in America. As a foreigner, much of it would be hidden from you. It's not just income strata. See, for instance, exactly who upper "middle class women" will and won't date.
@@lewjames6688 I just assumed they dated anyone with an English accent.
@@farmbrough Funny you should mention that. All my UK friends in USA have always told that they find it quite amusing that most Americans assume, no matter what dialect the UK guy speaks, he is "upper class". See, e.g., Michael Caine speaking Cockney, and yet everybody assumes he's "upper class". LOL
@@lewjames6688 that sort of thing can be quite funny. But in fairness, most English people wouldn't know a Boston, Massachusetts* accent from a Nashville accent.
*as distinct from Boston, Lincolnshire.
I'm an American and I approve this message.
A lot of American humor is based on humiliating someone.
The best American humor isn't.
I showed a clip of Prime Minister's Question Time in a Comparative Politics course once. American students found it to be both absolutely surreal and hilarious at the same time. They seemed to like it!
Actually, now that I think about it, they were also quite impressed by the ceremonial mace, which is a bit cartoonish in its own right.
Frasier and Niles Crane were outwardly successful with their elite society lifestyles, but critically flawed underneath and therein lay the humour (or humor). The British comedy hero may have unachievable aspirations, but there are American comedy heroes who achieved success without addressing the faultlines. When Frasier and Niles agree on both ordering a decaf latte with skimmed milk and the barista yells back their order as "two gutless wonders", well you have laugh even if you are a Brit.
I think I view Fraser Crane as a great figure of American comedy who fits more into the Basil Fawlty model.
As a Brit, I love and miss Robin Williams. George Carlin too. And Robert Prior.
Mel Brooks.
I think you're funny Yanks.
Did you mean Richard Pryor? All brilliant comedians at any rate.
No, he meant the guy before him
Absolutely true, nearly every English conversation will have the line "what a load of bollocks" in it at some point.
The amount of americans crying in the comments about the 1 political comment out of the entire video, is hilarious.
and here we are, very early to a video that will have millions of views soon. the recommendations begin.
Interesting how the algorithms brought us all here, I wonder why? I think Fry has a point though - Americans seem to laugh more at relatable situations (What's the deal with airline food?) whereas Brits tend to laugh at everything and ourselves (He's not the Messiah, he's a very naughty boy!).
The algorithms brought me here because I watch tons of QI clips.
CaptHayfever why did it bring us all here yesterday though? The video is a year old
When he said "British comedians would want to play the folk singer" I immediately thought of "Neil the hippy" from the Young Ones. Stephen Fry absolutely nails it. Of course. What a brilliant man.
Very insightful thoughts! Lots of comedy in the US; some of it might be snappy punchlines but i love contextual humor/storytelling when available
Also, British comics aren't afraid of being unlikable or even despicable characters, but American comics feel the need to be essentially nice and good people. It didn't used to be like this, as one of the funniest people in American history, WC Fields, always played an unlikable character who had almost no redeeming qualities and was a personification of every human vice, fault, and defect. And he was absolutely hilarious. This is why I think that a series like AbFab, in which the two leads were despicable characters, could never be made in the USA. They would try to make Patsy and Edwina "nice," and that would be the death of the whole thing.
This is exactly the reason why "Dinner For Schmucks" was such a lacklustre remake of "Le Diner De Con" - in the French original, the guy hosting the party was a complete turd so you get tremendous joy watching his life collapse around him. In the remake they tried to make the host more likeable and give him a redemption story.
Michael Scott was supposed to be a copy of David Brent, but then we had to change it so that Michael isn't a narcissistic sociopath, but a lovable oaf.
And both shows work in their own way
As an American at Oxford I remember my politics tutor remarking about Prime Minister's Question Hour, that it would never work in America -- the very idea of holding the President's feet to the fire. As an example, arose the issue of police killings, that when a English Bobby kills someone in the UK the incident will no doubt arise for discussion in Parliament itself with the PM being pointedly questioned and called to account; whereas in the USA, because of federalism, a police killing is merely business as usual and of trifling interest to the Executive branch.
He's just so smart, so smart
I think that the ability to laugh at yourself is something developed through tradition and indeed from the culture within the country. We're so incredibly patriotic as Americans and that is problematic in some sense. But coming towards the Gen Z generation of Americans (me myself a member), self deprecating jokes are hilarious to us. It takes humility and recognition for wit. That is part of British culture, they recognize their past mistakes. Americans can just be too proud.
i think part of the development of gen z humor is that the internet is slowly nullifying cultural borders, which means many gen z americans, including myself, have adopted a mix of humor styles that come from around the world
Watch the American version of Inbetweeners you'll get the exact answer
I agree with the characterization of American comedy with the important caveat that this refers to what gains mass appeal. So while the average (or modal) American enjoys comedy as described, satirical shows/comedians and characters as failures still have large and deeply loyal fan bases.
@Brian C I see your point, but I disagree that those shows can be considered mainstream or have mass appeal (with the exception of Modern Family).
I do think that Mr. Fry captures something about American humor, but his analysis is incomplete even for what is massively popular. Consider The Hangover; The Simpsons; There's Something About Mary; Mrs. Doubtfire; Tootsie; Friends; Ace Ventura; Dumb and Dumber; any Apatow movie; Beavis and Butthead; Shrek [I'm serious]; Ghostbusters; Cheers; Happy Gilmore... Haven't even gotten to the stand up comedians.
Also, the influence of too-cool-for-shcool John Belushi and even Chevy Chase has considerably waned.
@@MintyDragonfly I appreciate your measured and thoughtful response. I see your point, but disagree only in that I can think of a few giants of American comedy who are NOT designed to be lovable, and are absolutely rotten to the core.
But what you're saying is also slightly different than what Mr. Fry is saying. There are similarities and differences between American and British comedy, but Fry's "an American would never have a failure as a comic hero" premise is patently false.
thinks. He was on more fertile ground when he was talking about the British emphasis on "character," which partly springs from the incomparably rich English theater tradition.
@@MintyDragonfly Cheers! I like hearing this perspective on the differences.
Three recommendations that no one asked for; three of the most influential and acclaimed comedies from the aughts: 'Arrested Development' [first three seasons] 'Curb Your Enthusiasm,' and '30 Rock' [slow start with the pilot, but quickly picks up steam]. All three have formidable ensemble casts.
Look at the differences between Veep and the British show it was inspired from The Thick of It.
The best British comedy in recent times - very underrated - is The Brittas Empire.
Yes, some of those differences help us understand, but don't forget that Veep had a British team working on it in the US. Though it got more American as the series progressed.
Melchet has forgotten Lord Edmund Black Adder. Great one-liners
Also fits as 'a man seeking grandeur and being humiliated by his own shortcomings and the world around him.'
I think American humor is changing on some fronts. The reason for my opinion is that I’m American who absolutely loves British humor and consumes a lot of British programming. It used to be I didn’t enjoy any of our own shows but as of late, I’ve seen quite a few that i enjoy.
The legacy of one-liners in Anglo-American, Afro-American, and Jewish-American comedy Stephen mentions is rich, it's a heritage worth celebrating - Mark Twain, Groucho Marx, Rodney Dangerfield, Richard Pryor, Jerry Seinfeld, Nick Offerman as Ron Swanson, and a whole lot of others used them brilliantly. To a degree, each of them could also laugh at themselves, but Stephen's right about the basic assumptions of American comedic characters: even if they fail at something, they still have to appear confident and successful, as if success is never in doubt for them despite their setbacks.
I'm with you on all but Seinfeld.
@@farmbrough you might be right on that. He had one good special after the show ended but that was it. I'll swap him with Dave Chapelle
Seinfeld is / was the unfunniest show I ever had the misfortune to to witness , if not for the “”da dum “ at the end of each skit no non would know when to laugh/ giggle or smirk !
@@TonyWhite22351 the Seinfeld phenomenon is beyond me.
Oh my yes. Look at Blackaddar. I still watch the show. It's my favorite, There's nothing like it in the US. Though I think we're coming around. Does it matter how long it takes you to come, as long as you do? OK, I'm moving along.
It's alway sunny is probably the best us comedy series. An it's just like how he discribes english comedy.
IME, Curb Your Enthusiasm is the best US comedy series. But I'll give Always Sunny a try, based on your endorsement.
I thought CHEERS was the best ever LMAO
It’s always sunny in Philadelphia is probably the only American show that straddles both genres
I'd say curb as well. maybe - veep is very much a mixture of american and british comedy - armando iannucci obviously is the reason
Married with Children
One can't say one is better than the other. British people are more adept to British humour and Americans at American humour. The latter is based on slapstick mainly, whilst the British specialises in puns and word twists. Sometimes the two styles join forces and produce a very clever comedic work. ie: MASH. But that's rare.
Stephen Fry is a treasure
Curb Your Enthusiasm is a great exception to this. Love that show.
Even that... proves the rule.
I would like to add something to what Fry said about the differences. In another interview he talked about American optimism and self-help books. And I think it is a clue there. There is always the idea that people can change in American literature. People might be confronted with difficult situations, or they might make fools of themselves. It isn't true that American characters are not self-deprecating to some degree. But they usually learn something from it. Like a moment of epiphany where they think, oh I have to get a grip, I have been so foolish. Now, this NEVER happens in British comedy. The main character never learns anything from the experiences. And he or she stays the same foolish self throughout, and there is no expectation of the character to change either. People are as they are regardless. There is a type of determinism in British comedy, and maybe society as a whole, rarely found in the US.
The American sitcom owes much of its origins to British sitcoms. Very popular example back in the 70s was Three's Company.
British comedy always seems to have such a profound level of absurdity, and that's what I like most about it.
The best British comedy does.
Speaking as an American , he has a point. Americans are largely not good enough at laughing at ourselves.
People talk about the British fortitude but qualities that have always impressed me are their sense of humour and love for animals
im so baked why are all the comments so young
Good question
🤔🤔🤔
the almighty algorithm
even how Stephen explained it shows you how british pessimism deep rooted inside them and i fucking love that
Sitcoms like Peep show and It’s always sunny in Philadelphia sum up this contrast perfectly, both are great but the British style of comedy is much more self deprecating and relies on cringe and 2nd hand embarrassment. The inbetweeners is another great example
Yes. When you see the so called "odd balls" in the US version of that show they seem far too nice and hardly flawed compared to the original show. That and a severe lack of earthy language.
If you want to see the difference between British & American comedy just look at the different “The Office” shows
One was mainly centered around Ricky Gervais. The other had a full cast of lovable and identifiable characters and ran for a much longer period of time.
@@stevieavail5773 Yet The Office la Britain was a world wide hit and the American version was not. Nobody is saying American humour is not made for an American audience because it is you just have a different humour to the rest of us.
The Office US was the number one show on Netflix and was streamed by hundreds of millions of people worldwide.
Rory Watkins what metric are you using to make that comparison?
I love the nitpickery, pedantic nature of internet comments. He speaks in general terms, as he often does (and incidentally, leaves off quite a bit of British humour, too, but that's another discussion) and instantly, there's a slew of comments about how this one guy or two characters aren't like that, therefore his argument is entirely invalid...? Really?
The funniest thing to me is how unfunny the counter-examples are. The Three Stooges, Seinfeld, Jerry Lewis. Never made me laugh.
Now that I've thought about this a bit, American (U.S.) comedy is as diverse as the American people. Dave Chappelle vs Amy Schumer vs Chris Rock vs Jerry Seinfeld. Family Guy vs Futurama. The variety is infinite and you can watch what you enjoy and ignore the rest. Cheers!
I'll enjoy all of those except for Seinfeld, which is odd, because I love Larry David!
I think one of the problems with American comedy is that sitcoms go on for so many seasons so it has to be watered down, while British ones are fairly condensed.
the expression "Jumped the Shark" was coined when the sitcom Happy Days ran out of fresh ideas and had Fonzie jump a shark. Yes many sitcoms are on long after they've jumped the shark.
@dfarmbrough same! Idky it just doesn't make me feel anything, unlike all those other comedians.
But I disagree a little bit with the op, those are similar in a few ways, that Fry resumed well.
I agree 100% - irony is an unknown to most Americans.
I've always love British comedy and TV shows.
On a similar topic, I always thought the difference between british and american Science Fiction is that britain leans towards analog and american leans towards digital. Like you have dr who with his tardis or HG Wells with the time machine that the person built himself. Compared to american scifi like star wars and star trek where everything is digital.
Interesting conjecture. Though ironically, Analog is an American sci-fi magazine and a word we don't use in England ;).
British sci-fi tends to be about personal or social challenge, American is more about great battles. You might say that Brits were brought up with narratives on the scale of Beowulf or Robin Hood or maybe Iliad - quite small in scale;
Americans - unsurprisingly - have narratives which resemble that of World War II from Pearl Harbour, through the islands of the Pacific to Leyte Gulf, and ending with a decisive strike at the heart of Japan, achieved by a small crew delivering a great technical knock-out blow. Alien and Blade Runner have a very British feel to me. Frightfully sorry - off topic a bit.
@@lindsayheyes925 Star wars is like how you described the british. It's an epic hero's journey. Other sci fi, like the transformers, I'd agree with what you said.
I have the image for british scifi of an inventor going into his garage and building something. Kind of like wallace and grommet, versus american scifi like star wars, star trek, terminator where the tech is beyond human ability to create. This creates for me a feeling of man being master of the tech in the case of british and tech being the master of man in the case of american.
@@annereilley4892 Interesting case - and that may account for its popularity. Star Treck was clearly modelled on naval society;
Star Wars is - to me - a very successful hybrid of the vast scale of Iliad and the personal narrative of Oddysey.
By dint of a low-tech nostalgically scrolling text preface - taking the place of a narrator (channelling the personal story level of, say, "Peter and the Wolf") - and the costume design (channelling, on the one side the war machine of The Axis, and on the other side the mufti of the outnumbered Resistance), it signals that it crosses the barrier of scale, and places protagonist and antagonist on opposite sides of that barrier.
"War of the Worlds" - in all its iterations - fails to run any effective parallel narrative for the antagonist because of their inscrutable nature. I would argue that it therefore falls more in the genre of Horror. Alien is more successful because of the similarity of the antagonist to insect life - which we see in great detail - and the tag-line "In space no-one can hear you scream", which prompts you to engage with the vulnerability of the protagonist, especially when it is emphasised in the closing scene to create a subtle cliff-hanger.
Starship Troopers fails to anthropomorphise its insect antagonist until its final scene, creating instead a gauche and disturbing reference to misogyny through the anatomical design of the captured Queen in the closing torture/propaganda scene, which subverts the status of the heros, revealing them to be viscious dupes of an authoritarian mindset. Clever - but as subtle as a sledgehammer in a fist-fight, and devoid of the humour which sweetened the pill in the shooting of the swordsman in "Raiders of the Lost Arc" - so not so clever.
Fry on button. Clever, clever, clever. Whatever proverbial hits the fan Brits. can laugh at it.
It was hard to adapt in America, no offense but they would get offended easily I had to constantly remind myself to tone down the sarcasm and no banters
not a comedian
The way I see it is unfortunately the location of most or at least a lot of the venues you probably play are just exactly what you said. The get offended easily, they don’t or can’t take a self deprecating joke and don’t understand many other types of comedy. You won’t make much money playing the small town west of the Mississippi River crowd and East of California. You’re humor we get cause that to a degree is us somewhat. We go out to the job at the factory and bam, they screwed us over in time. We went out to the farm or ranch and another fence , or tractor that was just fixed doesn’t work. But with us we are all ways trying to find a way around the system because sometimes the system is stifling. I’m sure their is a mountain of comedy you can find that’ll work, but mostly you just haven’t found Your audience, we’re out here. Best wishes my friend.
@@sssigsauer2266 I think you misunderstood me mate 🤣 I am not a comic, I'm just an international student.
xino951 sorry for the misunderstanding, no harm meant.
@@sssigsauer2266 no you're good 😂
xino951 I wish you well on your scholastic endeavors, and I appreciate the conversation. Have a great day young man. 😀
Excellent analysis. The American is a vey literal character. I am an American
@Bigfoot , my pleasure 🤢
Imagine being an American
Generalising is hard, because there are always exceptions. In my view, US humour is typically more direct whilst British humour is far more indirect (probably due to a more historically deferential culture). Once you combine that with the fact that the global role of the US has been on the up since at least the mid 19th century and the British have been on the slide since the 40s, you start to see where each nation tends to look to for inspiration in its modern comedy and the characters within.
Steady on, old chap!
@@farmbrough careful, I think your monocle fell out.
Dam cheek!!! The British Empire is not in retreat, we've just gone home for the Christmas hols.
@@colinharbinson8284 Tell that to the Indians ;)
@@lordrork5884 never really thought the Indian wars were a comedy, but I take your point.
In British comedy the heroes are failures who actually fail. In american comedy they have all the character traits of a failure but they still somehow succeed e.g. Ricky Bobby from Talladega Knights and Michael Scott from The Office
you cant use the Office as an example... it is a British show that has been adapted for America...
@@clambert608 why would that disqualify it? They're quite different - I've watched them both. And the US version has done much better than the british one...
I love british and American comedy but the one thing I notice with American comedy is how the majority of the main characters are successful at the start of a show, Fraiser, Seinfeld, Monica and Ross etc... where as in the UK, specifically more of the 80s-90s sitcoms, characters such as Del Boy, Gary and Tony (men behaving badly) Andy from Extras all start at the bottom and their journeys have a sort of redemptive arc, Andy finally gets his own show, Del Boy finally becomes a millionaire, Gary finally gets a proper family with Dorothy while Tony finally gets with Debs, these developments come at the end of a series run not at the start. So i find I identify more with british characters moreso than American. Just an observation.
Rene from 'allo 'allo is probably the exception, he was happy being a failure but kept on being put in positions where he had to, and actually generally did succeed.
Oh, was that supposed to be a comedy?
But he was playing a Frenchman LMAO
Thinking about it, perhaps that's an overlooked British comedy archetype... The guy who basically just wants to be left alone, but for whatever reason keeps being lumbered with problems, or made the centre of attention.
Rene, Blackadder and Dave Lister could all fit into that description. They're all characters who just want to keep their head down, survive or be left to do their own thing, but people around them keep putting them into ridiculous or dangerous situations.
Agree with Fry but I think Frasier (the sitcom) managed to punch through in terms of being more self-deprecating, it's one of the reason why I really enjoyed it so much.
They also have Always Sunny in Philladelphia, which also has pretty much the entire character roster failing on a regular basis.
A ton of shows did! Friends, all the guys were as Fry described. 3rd Rock From the Sun. Home Improvement. Hell: The Simpsons! We have zero issues with arrogant buffoonish "heroes" getting smacked around by the world.
@@WormholeGarden I would say that there is still a difference as they are still successes/"heroes" even though they may take the occasional knock in life. Homer still has a really nice home and well paying job, the cast of friends are financially secure and have each other despite being not very nice people (Chandler's the only actually nice one IMHO), and most of the cast of 3rd rock have relationships and jobs even though they are actual aliens.
In some of the examples given by Stephen, the central character never wins. Harold Steptoe never gets the success he wants or the girl, David Brent's has some small personal growth when he stands up to Chris but his life ultimately fails (even though he is pretty chipper about it. I think American humour (humor) is very rarely willing to go the full hog and properly shit on the main character. I do think this is changing to an extent, partly because there have been some adaptations of UK Comedy Shows like Shameless and the Office etc but also because there are seemingly more platforms to allow them and studios are able to see that there is a market for those characters.
Spot. On.
As an Australian I have a great appreciation of both. I love some of the British comedies, and many iconic Australian comedies are based around the idea behind British comedy, however I do also love a good American comedy. However, some of the most successful American comedies, such as Brooklyn Nine-Nine and The Big Bang Theory tend to have a blend of what Stephen described for both the British and American humour. Especially Brooklyn Nine-Nine. You can imagine that sort of thing happening just about anywhere in the world!
from a german outsider view, i mostly agree with stephens statement. I lived partly in the us and spent some time in the uk. But there are however exceptions, such as leslie nielson in the naked gun. But yes, americans are much faster offended by a joke than brits
Leslie Nielsen was a Canadian! ;-)
@@grahampaulkendrick7845 oh that explains it. my mistake. Thanks for the info
@@hhbased I would so love to hear that you *knew* he was Canadian but mentioned him just to make that second comment.😂
@@dozog i knew there was something wrong calling him american
I love British humor
Humour, then.
In a way Always Sunny is very similar to British humour as its about the failure of character.
Agreed, one of my favourite shows from America as it’s the most similar to what we have here