>> Both of the Cheech and Chong movies I've seen would be examples >> of the latter category, since they consist of little but a series of >> sketches. > > I wouldn't consider this drugs so much as just vaudeville Up In Smoke has a very strong, straight-forward plot -- Cheech and Chong trying score some dope -- and its the spine that holds the story together. After the necessary introduction of the characters they go to visit Strawberry, which sets up the introduction of Sgt Stedenko, but they strike out there. Then they go to Cheech's cousin's, but immigration shows up and they're deported to Mexico. Then they need to get back to L.A. so they take a job driving a truck back, not knowing it's made of dope. All the while complaining they can't find any drugs, pursued by Sgt. Stedenko, and setting up the ultimate climax where the truck starts burning, everyone gets stoned, and they win grand prize at the punk rock concert. Starting with Next Movie the plot gets thinner, and their later movies are certainly little more than sketches with little or no connection with one another. Still Smokin' is certainly their weakest for this reason. But the first movie has a very tight plot, and every scene is linked to it. That's why I think it's their most successful. Here in Canada we have similar characters called Bob and Doug McKenzie and they made a more complicated movie called Strange Brew involving a brewery and an evil brewmaster. Unfortunately the plot got in the way of the comedy, instead of enhancing it. A friend of mine always thought a better movie could have been made if it followed the Up In Smoke model, keeping it simple -- Bob and Doug trying to buy a case of beer. You could do a whole movie of their misadventures of trying to buy some. In Canada it can only be bought in government-controlled beer stores, and they are not 24 hrs. This, in itself, could be worked into the story. > But of course nobody cares about the plots. The best plots (at least in comedy) go unnoticed, as does Up In Smoke. In the end, all people remember are the gags, but the gags work because they are carefully set up, often early in the story before the big payoff. And it's equally important to set up the characters -- their fears, physical characteristics, and a host of other details. The other day I was watching Rat Race -- a movie that would be easy to dismiss -- but it has a very strong structure, and well-defined characters, that works for the comedy. First it quickly sets up the characters and the premise, and then it's on its way. But each adventure has a ripple effect. Sometimes a seemingly pointless scene leads to a huge payoff scene later, such as Kathy Bates as the Squirrel Lady. And each misadventure leads to another, or affects another character, yet it is all structured so that all the characters -- nearly a dozen -- end up in the same place at the same time. Not as easy as you might think. There's an old saying "comedy is structure" and if one was to break down the plots of any successful comedy, this is quite evident. ---- To sign off Screen-L, e-mail [log in to unmask] and put SIGNOFF Screen-L in the message. Problems? Contact [log in to unmask]