The Hangover and the Age of Jokeless Comedy

I had never thought about categorizing movies in this way, now that I am it seems very clear. Some comedies revolve around the characters, their interaction and their situation in a funny, yet vaguely realistic way ("The Hangover"). Other comedies are blatantly absurd and ridiculous and are propelled forward by the jokes themselves which are often slapstick, the characters are tend to be flat and their situations simply a frame to hang the jokes upon ("Airplane!" <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0080339/" rel="nofollow">http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0080339/</a>).<p>I agree with the OP, having a mix of these types of comedies is a good thing. Too many of one or the other type wears on an audience. I haven't seen "The Hangover II" but already I have concerns that it will be funny in parts yet depressing overall ("Very Bad Things," <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0124198/" rel="nofollow">http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0124198/</a>).

Buster Keaton noticed the opposite in his time. He mentioned in his autobiography that there was a silent comedian whose movies got bigger laughs than himself, Chaplin, or Lloyd. Lots of absurd cartoony stuff, like jumping into an empty swimming pool, then coming out of the hole with a Chinese family, or being shot out into space. Keaton noticed that guy's movies got bigger laughs, but audiences didn't remember scenes from his movies like they did for Chaplin and himself.<p>If people remember lines from Airplane! it's not necessarily due to the absurdity. They could just be good lines. Try remembering a line from any of the Scary Movies.

Excellent article, although a bit too long to make the point.<p>I enjoy the jokeless comedy a lot, but precisely because of its common irrelevant stream-of-though kind of dynamic and its lack of punch lines or gags in general, I can usually recall very few parts of these movies. I thought I was having memory problems!