Dr. Strangelove Or: Does Satire Have To Be Funny To Be Effective?

You're a Genius all the time

01-29-09

I'd just like to point out I said essentially the exact same thing in post #11 of this very thread. Mark, in his infinite knowledge of world cinema, still can't resist copping the occasional golden nugget of information from a classic Swedish Chef post. Zot!

linespalsy

style over substance

01-30-09

Originally Posted by mark f

I'm not sure that people fully understand the difference between satire, spoof, parody, dark comedy, farce

"Satire is a lesson, parody is a game."

-Vladimir Nabokov

As to the rest... it's already past my bed-time.

mark f

Bright light. Bright light. Uh oh.

01-30-09

Nabokov also said, "Style and Structure are the essence of a book; great ideas are hogwash."

-and-

"To play safe, I prefer to accept only one type of power: the power of art over trash, the triumph of magic over the brute."

__________________
It's what you learn after you know it all that counts. - John Wooden
My IMDb page

rufnek

Registered User

01-30-09

Originally Posted by meatwadsprite

Don't most satires want you to laugh at how ridiculous the things they mock are ?

If you view it and it seems acceptable , then I wouldn't think it's all that effective.

You're likely correct about most satires being intended to be funny or at least ridiculous. You're certainly right in that the reader or viewer generally gets out of it what he wants to get out or maybe what he is capable of getting out of it given the possible limits of his knowledge, understanding, and sophistication.

But like I said earlier, my dictionary says satire is used to hold up a particular subject to "ridicule or contempt." One would think that ridicule often would involve laughter--but not always. Think of Cyrano being ridiculed because of his big nose. His response of witty puns that one might use to make fun of his looks is funny, but the point he's making is that the insults voiced by his detractors are mundane and without wit. (I'm not saying this book or movie is a satire, just using it as an example of ridicule that is not funny. His critics' ridicule of Cyrano isn't funny, but his ridicule of them is).

But even allowing for the comedy potential of ridicule, the other form of satire envoking contempt seems to me would likely be very un-funny. Reminds me of a scene in Citizen Kane where Kane's opponent in the gubernatorial race complains of political cartoons in Kane's newspapers showing the opponent in a prison uniform "and my kids see that." My point being that some satire can be mean and critical without being particularly funny. Or maybe it doesn't have to be mean and nasty but simply serious, such as a scene in King of Hearts in which some British and German troops in World War II get into a shootout in a village where the inmates of an insane asylum have escaped and are wandering through the city. One of the inmates picks up a machinegun and starts shooting anything that moves--British, Germans, other inmates--while calling out, "See, I'm just like you, I am sane." Not particularly funny but very satirical.

Frankenstein seems to me to be a satire of the limitless advancement of science and of scientists who assume the powers of God. But at what point does satire become a morality story?

On the other hand, some satire can be so funny that people think of it simply as comedy rather satire that is trying to make a particular point. Some examples that come to mind would be Chaplin's Great Dictator and Modern Times or the Marx Brothers' Duck Soup. Again, at what point does satire fade into parody which then fades into comedy?

Sedai

A system of cells interlinked

01-30-09

I think I am biased with Strangelove. I just adore Sellers so much, that i can watch him just stand there and he cracks me up with his subtlety. Meanwhile he does much more than simply stand around in Strangelove, so I am usually rolling.

I am originally from Arizona, and I agree with Ruf's point about Slim's character, as well. Seeing a personality like his in that particular situation is pretty damn clever and quite funny to me.

Aside from the cast just totally nailing all the roles, I find the film's balancing of comedy with one of the most horrifying prospects in human history to be interesting, as well.

Anyway - No, I don't think satire needs to be knee-slapping to qualify.

Strangelove kills me, though. Not on a level with His Girl Friday as far as belly laughs, but some sections do have me roaring.

__________________

�It takes considerable knowledge just to realize the extent of your own ignorance.� ― Thomas Sowell

rufnek

Registered User

01-30-09

Originally Posted by mark f

OK, first off, I agree that this is a VERY good topic, but I'm not sure that people fully understand the difference between satire, spoof, parody, dark comedy, farce, and/or the fact that many films incorporate many of the above into one hopefully seemless film. When I think of satire, I think of something either making social commentary on things which people take for granted [war, politics, "normal life" (accepting "the system")] or perhaps certain conventional genres of film, literature, TV and music]. For example, what would you call An American Werewolf in London? I think it's a satire on the werewolf genre, as well as a dark comedy, a full-blooded horror film and a flick which truly trailblazes a new, unnamed genre. Is it funny? Oh, God, yes, but are the funny parts actuallly the best or are they so intertwined with the horror, sexuality and storytelling, that it's not really that important?

Is Woody Allen's Love and Death a satire? Before I answer that question, I want to say here and now that it's funny as hell, but is it a satire of War and Peace or is it a spoof? I guess you could argue that it truly makes some social commentary on the world that Tolstoy was limning, but since I believe its chief aim is to make fun of rather than socially-critique, I find it to be a spoof, and occasionally it pushes the limits up to farce. For example, Duck Soup is undoubtedly a political satire, but it's just so crazy that most people would probably see it as a farce, similarly to ALL the Marx Bros. films.

I find The Graduate to be a wonderful social satire, even though I've heard it not that highly regarded around here lately, but the film does show "an overachieving, young bum", who lives in an insulated, well-to-do society who graduates from college at an early age and proceeds to enter into an affair with an older married woman who's even more bored than he is. The thing is that she's had plenty of time to determine how bored she is, and for all we know, she's had many such affairs, but for "the Graduate", he's in way over his head and just lets the sensuality, as dull and meaningless as it is, wash over him as some form of recompense for his job "well done" of graduation. The worm turns when he decides that his lover's daughter is far more compatible than her mom and actually downright lovable.

Then we get into films which are just too witty for words. I'm not sure if any of these are satires, but if they aren't, what the hell are they? I'm talking about the works of Shaw (Pygmalion), Wilde (The Importance of Being Earnest), Hill/Goldman (Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid) and Penn/Willingham (Little Big Man). These films definitely satirize relations (as in a strong comedy of manners) and the western genre, but they equally provide extremely dramatic (sometimes tragic) moments. What would you consider these films?

I really like this topic. I feel like I could go on and on here, but I'm not sure that anything I say would truly have any meaning to anybody else because I do believe that understanding and/or appreciating satire has to do with one's life experience. And I'm not trying to be an agist here because I honestly believe that there are many more literate younger people on here than I am, so they may have an entirely different perspective than I do. In fact, I spent an hour talking with my daughter about satire before I made this post, and she's a fount of info, so I'm going to shut down, but I'll be back if the responses demand it.

A very interesting post, Mark. I got so bummed out by the gore of American Werewolf that I don't recall it being particularly funny, but even I recognize it is witty--especially over the period of several days as the young man is becoming a werewolf, he has these terrible dreams and visions of wolf-faced soldiers breaking into his home and killing his family. Most werewolf films just have the victim sprout hair and start gnashing fangs. Having the dead friend reappear in a progressively rotting condition also is more imaginative than a continually life-like image. And the part where the werewolf sees and converses with his dead victims was particularly interesting--a werewolf with a conscience even when he's in werewolf form--unlike Lon Chaney Jr. in human form always worrying about what he may have done and not remember. Not sure that film is a satire (holding werewolf movies up to scorn and ridicule?); more like a parody of the genre, I'd say, but that gets back to my question of the difference between satire-parody-comedy.

I think your opening statement best expresses it--it's not a matter of being only a satire or only a parody or only a comedy or only a drama. A smart author/director would mix and match all of them to appeal to a bigger audience that can enjoy the same film on different levels.

Love and Death obviously parodies War and Peace on several levels but it also satirizes human behavior and attitudes, war, patriotism, the meaning of life, so many things. I think his Play it Again, Sam is more a satire of human relationships and the dating/mating ritual and the deceit and silliness involved. But it also parodies and pays homage to one of the greatest films and movie star of all times. And it's just drop-dead funny if you want to see it just as a comedy. (Most of Allen's films are satirical, I think.)

Certainly everything Wilde ever wrote is a satire of heterosexual society of his and subsequent times. But until now, I'd never thought of The Graduate as satire although it so obviously is. "Plastics" is pure satire of the funniest kind! But I too had thought earlier of Little Big Man as a great satire cum parody of the history of the westward migration and of the whole genre of western movies.

Last edited by rufnek; 01-30-09 at 07:55 PM.

Sedai

A system of cells interlinked

01-30-09

Little Big Man!

"I'm Invisible!!!"

rufnek

Registered User

01-30-09

Originally Posted by linespalsy

"Satire is a lesson, parody is a game."

-Vladimir Nabokov

That's it in nutshell! Thanks, linespalsy!

rufnek

Registered User

01-30-09

Originally Posted by Sedai

One of my favorite scenes in Strangelove (and one of the most satirical) was when, in answer to the president's inquiry if the SAC bombers can get through Russian defenses to hit their targets, Scott starts off describing the caliber of the aircraft and crews and, standing in a chair with his arms spread, gets caught up in the pride and brag of how they can come barreling through below radar level. "Can they get through! Hell, yes!" he says with a proud grin--and then realizes that, having trained the bomber crews to succeed in hitting their targets, that's now the last thing on earth they want them to do! Now that's satire!

KasperKristensen

You want to post like me?

01-30-09

Well. I believe that it must be funny to some people. I found 'Borat' vulgar and disgusting, but I still realize the topics it's critical towards.

Harry Lime

BANNED FROM VIENNA

01-30-09

I love the film Dr. Strangelove, and it's satire is not always meant to be funny, in my opinion.

__________________
"Don't be so gloomy. After all it's not that awful. Like the fella says, in Italy for 30 years under the Borgias they had warfare, terror, murder, and bloodshed, but they produced Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci, and the Renaissance. In Switzerland they had brotherly love - they had 500 years of democracy and peace, and what did that produce? The cuckoo clock."

Golgot

there's a frog in my snake oil

01-31-09

Originally Posted by Swedish Chef

So does satire have to be funny to be effective? What do you think?

The first definition the internet spat out for me was this:

"A [literary] work in which human vice or folly is attacked through irony, derision, or wit."

Which, aside from the 'literary' bit, seems spot on to me. And those three shades of humour are more on the 'wry smile' end of the laughter scale I'd say - (with some frowns of acknowledgment and rueful shakes of head thrown in).

lines' Nabokov quote also has the 'effective' bit down pat. There's gotta be a lesson in there somewhere. (I guess the wry-humour side just sugar-coats the bitter pill for easier consumption

)

Strangelove actually prompted the military to ensure better lines of communication in case of a similar scenario, i believe, which would be pretty a good sign that it 'lessoned' its target good

. Our personal reactions are all going to vary - and it's taken me a while to really dig it - but i now find it a thoroughly enjoyably dark ride to revisit (which is an achievement in its own right, right? - the enjoyable darkness and that

). It's still a welcome reminder that the nuclear deterrent warrants constant oversight. And i do now find bits occasionally hilarious

(Altho some of the moments that do it for me are kinda incidental to the central 'lesson' - IE Seller's bottled-up Brit struggling to be diplomatic with the ole rainwater General. Others are all tied up in the theme tho - like the chummy slant cast on the first President's phonecall)

---

But is An American Werewolf in London satire though? It feels like it is. So long as werewolf films (or possibly our willingness to buy into their mythologies) are vices and follies too

__________________
Virtual Reality chatter on a movie site? Got endless amounts of it here. Reviews over here

WSSlover

Movie Forums Wacko

01-31-09

Originally Posted by Swedish Chef

So does satire have to be funny to be effective? What do you think? I'm focusing more on film here, but you can read into this and answer however you want. It's a question that was posed in a review I read of the purportedly horrible War, Inc. The reviewer went into some detail about how right-on the movie was in some of its observations, and yet he couldn't in good conscience recommend it because of how clunky and supremely unfunny it was.

Personally, that's kind of how I feel about Dr. Strangelove. I respect its genius and how remarkably perceptive it is and whatnot. But it doesn't make me laugh. I "get it", but I think the humor, for the most part, falls flat.

Satire, by definition I believe, is a form of comedy. So can it still be as effective as it wants to be if it doesn't make you double over in hysterics? Should a slice of satire be measure by how many times you slap your knees or by how many times you nod your head knowingly?

Is this funny?

Thanks for this question, Swedish Chef, and for pointing out that it's OK not to double up in hysterical laughter at what's supposedly a funny movie or whatever. Satire is more somber comedy, which is what makes it, and movies such as Dr. Strangelove as interesting as they are.

Also, comedy/satire are in the ears and eyes of the beholder, if one gets the drift.

__________________
"It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brush fires of freedom in the minds of men." -- Samuel Adams (1722-1803)

polvaulting

Polvaulting

06-07-13

polvaulting .com

Dr Strangelove - Adaption of satire for North Korea's Kim Jung-Un in his role of "Boy Dictator gets the bomb".

I hope you know that satire is usually funny. But maybe murky.... but always clear.

will.15

Semper Fooey

06-07-13

I think Dr, Strangelove is a brilliant film. I think it is frequently hilarious and when it isn't, it is also telling a story that matters and is suspenseful and the humor becomes secondary to that. It is an extraordinary juggling act Kubrick pulls off. Take Sterling Hayden as the mad general. The stuff about fluoridation in the water being a commie plot was a cliche even in 1964. Is that stuff particularly funny? No. And Hayden unlike Sellers in s not a comic actor. But he delivers his lines with such low key intensity he makes you believe the character believes it and it keeps the story moving, A lot of directors don't understand how to pace comedy and, yes, DS is a comedy, albeit a black one. Unless you are dong Airplane type humor, your story should always be secondary to the jokes. You hit your spots. You don't try to be funny every minute. The humor should come out of your story and characters. The problem with satire so often, and Strangelove misses those pitfalls, is the satire is strident.

__________________
It reminds me of a toilet paper on the trees
- Paula

Watch_Tower

I am the Watcher in the Night

06-08-13

Satire isn't always funny and it isn't always meant to be funny either. With regards to Strangelove, it is a satire which is meant to be funny and those who didn't find it to be so may not fully appreciate what the movie and the script is doing OR they just don't have the same sense of humour as those who do find this masterpiece to be hilarious. Humour is subjective. Some people found American Pie to be hilarious, I didn't, some people found Borat to be hilarious (ME) but some found it vulgar, stupid and boring. It's just the way it is.

The fact that most people find Strangelove to be both funny and artistic in value is a terrific achievement. That's a rarity in cinema.

The Gunslinger45

You talking to me?

06-08-13

Dr Strangelove is one of my top ten favorite films. It is funny, but it does not make me laugh out loud as much as say Kevin Smith or Mel brooks. But it is a genius satire and still can bring the funny. Especially Peter Sellers.

__________________
Fear and Loathing in MoFo... The Gunslinger 45's Top 50 Favorite Films

In the 10 Ring: Gunslinger45's reviews

DeeVeeDee

Not Enough Time

06-09-13

I need to come back to this thread and read all the posts, and when I am in more of a discussion mood. But one thing I didn't see mentioned is that humor is extremely relative. Everyone is different when it comes to taste, and humor is a taste. What one person finds hilarious, someone else doesn't get the joke or doesn't think it's funny. I also agree there is a difference between satire and parody. I think I would describe parody as a ridiculous satire. Satire is more just showing contradiction or hypocrisy in our real world, mostly political. They both play off of irony, which I think is funny either way. Whether it's laugh-out-loud funny is a different story. I think parody is made for the purpose of enticing laughter, while satire is more of a statement and wants to convey a point and I think it usually uses more symbolism.

Anyway, I can't put my thoughts in concise sentences, so like I said, humor to one is not to another. But for me personally, I think it's how it is portrayed. Even if I don't think a movie is that funny, but it's displaying an issue in a light-hearted satirical way, it's still funny. Other times there are movie which are satirical but in a much more depressing and upsetting way, usually those are much more realistic, sometimes more so than how we actually view them in reality.

__________________
"so i turned away, because i didn't want to see. just like everybody else."

"If dreams are like movies then memories are films about ghosts"

mark f