“The cool people in the city did not like the Kids in the Hall. We were too successful. We were males. And I wasn’t the right kind of homo.” – Thompson
“For the first couple of years at least, we’d play to 10, 15 people every week.” – Foley
“For a while, they did every Monday night. They’d write new material, rehearse material; there was a lot to do. They started losing their audience because it was getting kind of thin.” – Stearn
“We were on the verge of breaking up because nothing much had happened. We were having fun but couldn’t get people to show up. Then in March of 84, we thought we’d do a best-of show. The Rivoli, god bless them, gave us three or four nights in a row. And on a weekend. Suddenly it was on.” – McKinney
“We told them to do less improv. They were very good at improvising. But when they took the time to write down and hone their skits, they were smart, it was funny and it was more dramatic.” – Andre Rosenbaum, co-owner, the Rivoli
“This might sound arrogant, but I honestly knew the first time I saw the Kids in the Hall that they’d be very successful. The moment we started performing, I thought, ‘You can not not notice us.’” – Thompson
“We got a good review in one of the daily papers the day the SNL talent scouts were in Toronto for one day to look at Second City performers. So they saw the review and figured they’d have to see us, too.” – McKinney
“There were no jobs really in comedy. So Saturday Night Live coming was huge. It was in the press. It was like a huge hand coming down and picking us up.” – McCulloch
“I think it comes down to Lorne loving comedy, more than anything else. He saw the group as something that was special and didn’t want to break us up. He thought about bringing us down, and thought we’d be assets to Saturday Night Live. But what I’m told is he thought we worked too well as a unit to break us up.” – Foley
“When someone tells our history, it’s always, ‘Oh, Lorne Michaels discovered us and we got a show!’ But they forget the nine months of pain previous to that. The bullet points make it sound like everything happened fast, but every hurdle we got over, we just got over it. Our bellies were hitting the hurdle.” – McCulloch
The Kids in the Hall are Canadian legends
Yes, I love 'em -- mostly. Dave Foley is a child-support-ducking asshole. He even had a victim shtick going for a while based on this. Does this make me crotchety and old?
So who's funny now? The sketchersons?
They were funny and are still funny to me. For my kids they are not that funny. Is that because much of humour is a progression and there is little time between when a joke has been perfected and when it becomes stale?
I think there are many factors. Culture changes and humour changes.
Seprate from that, I tend to ignore anyone who gets too famous out of a personal disdain for celebrity culture. Who knows, I might still find them funny today. But all the quotes in the first post talked about how they were going at it awhile before they got lucky and the right circumstances presented themselves for them to get famous. Really, my question is: what talent are we currently ignorant of?
..very funny stuff
Kids in the Hall Brain Candy (1996)
A team of scientists working for a pharmaceutical company discovers a cure for depression. When the company finds itself in trouble financially, they rush the new drug into production without doing enough testing. Things seem to go fine until some of the users of the drug start slipping into comas.
They were funny and are still funny to me. For my kids they are not that funny. Is that because much of humour is a progression and there is little time between when a joke has been perfected and when it becomes stale?
A good question! I would think that their quintessential "cult" status would preserve their humour for future generations (à la Monty Python) but apparently not. Maybe there's a gestation period where their datedness must fade before the kernal of their comedy can emerge victorious? Kind of like the way music trends work. We love the nineties now (again), apparently.
I think there are many factors. Culture changes and humour changes.
Seprate from that, I tend to ignore anyone who gets too famous out of a personal disdain for celebrity culture. Who knows, I might still find them funny today. But all the quotes in the first post talked about how they were going at it awhile before they got lucky and the right circumstances presented themselves for them to get famous. Really, my question is: what talent are we currently ignorant of?
No talent at all, IMHO. You attitude. however, sounds like that of the people who disdain a band/artist for becoming more popular and well known by a wider circle of fans.
Just sayin'.
You attitude. however, sounds like that of the people who disdain a band/artist for becoming more popular and well known by a wider circle of fans.
Just sayin'.
That sounds pretty much exactly like the philosophy I'm describing ;). Keep in mind it's a political stance. It's nothing personal against the artists, It's a stance against celebrity culture as a whole. I know it's not popular to dislike that our society has cultural elites in the same way that it is popular to dislike the '1%' or the financial elites, but I feel it is important that we do so.