INTRODUCTION:

Tamil film is incomplete if there is no comedian. Well, this was possibly true till a decade back. Today, the role of comedian have become obsolete as filmmakers are planning for the ‘comedy track’ with a friend of the protagonist in a key role with some comic relief.

When we look back the history of Tamil cinema, comedians have decorated the silver screen and have shared the limelight with other stars in the industry: N.S. Krishnan, T.R. Ramachandran, A.

Karunanidhi, T.S. Balaiah, Chandrababu and Nagesh. Then there was 'Cho' Ramaswamy and 'Thengai' Srinivasan before Surulirajan, Senthil and Goundamani entered the comic space. N. S. Krishnan or NSK, popularly called as Kalaivanar shared his space on screen for over 150 films in his career with all the top stars in the 1940s and 50s. Unfortunately, he demised at a very young age of 48. Other stars like T. S. Balaiah came after him; it was Chandrababu and Nagesh who plunged into the stream of comedy. When we think of Tamil actor Nagesh, the very first movie that strikes our mind is Server Sundaram (1964). He was then went on to become a much sought-after comedian in the 1960s and to credit him with more than 1000 films, even today he is considered to be one of the best actors and comedians of his time. While he seemed to have horned himself after Hollywood’s Jerry Lewis, it was Chandrababu who got more locally connected with his ‘Madras bashai’ and slapstick style. In the late 1980s and early 90s, it was the most famous duo Senthil - Goundamani slapstick comedy that the audience enjoyed a lot. The Laurel and Hardy of Kollywood, the duo has set their signature comedy which is till date hilarious - ‘vazhapazham joke’. Soon later, Vadivelu and Vivekh took their place in the industry as filmmakers wanted some new talents. But Vadivelu aspired to play lead roles and Vivekh went down in the popularity meter even though the fall was in a meagre plane. It was then Santhanam who stepped into the industry.

It is not only male comedians who have made their mark in Kollywood. Artistes like T.A. Madhuram, T.P. Muthulakshmi, M. Saroja, C.T. Rajakantham, Sachu, Sowcar Janaki, ‘Aachi’ Manorama and Kovai Sarala have proved their skilful performances in this male-dominated domain over the last century. Since many of these actors were paired with male comedians, their meritorious success was associated to their male counterparts.

In the last decade, comedians aspired to play the lead, and hence a vacuum formed for the role of ‘comedian’. But the changing trend in the nature of films and the audience mindset also proved to filmmakers that requirement for a comedian in a film is not so relevant. The mainstream commercial flick paved way to the birth of new genres like dark comedy, thriller, horror, historical fantasy, drama thriller and more. In these new genres, no place for a separate comedy track was found, instead, it was the hero/ heroine’s friend who added slight comic elements to the film.

While actors like Bala Saravanan, Arjun, Aarti, Vidyullekha and several others are seen sparkling up the film with the role of the comedian, as seen in previous years. The lead actors themselves, for instance, rejoice the audience. For instance: OKOK, Naanum Rowdy Dhaan, Remo and Naduvula Konjam Pakkatha Kaanom. Horror films do not require comedians and their success have always proved this. Movies likes Kanchana, Maya, Pizza, and Aranmanai.

Today, most of the movie scripts do not depend on comedians nor require their contribution. Roles for comedians are no longer written with comedians.

When it comes to winning awards, the comedians now need to face the problem of competing with other actors in the movie for Best Supporting Actor. While this is more like a two edged knife where comedian’s scope has reduced and those with a comic streak can prove their versatility.

In this recent trend, the lead character’s friend with a funny bone has been stereotyped and the role doesn’t allow the artist for showcasing their talent. And there are no more full-fledged comedy roles being written - except for the lead roles.

OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY:

1. To verify whether the comedy scenes in movies interests the audience.

2. To check how the mannerisms of comedians are accepted by young audience.

3. To verify whether the dialogues have an impact among audience.

4. To understand the reach of social messages conveyed in comedy scenes.

REVIEW OF LITERATURE:

Existing within the commercial pressures of the broadcast industry, Jones (1992) views the sitcom as a mass construction commodity that must remain ideologically conservative if it is to appeal to the largest possible audience.

Mills (2005) explains that this is a commonly held viewpoint amongst theorists who believe that ‘the pressures of commercialism have rendered the radical nature of comedy obsolete’

Grote (1983) suggests that by relying on repetition and stability, the sitcom ultimately rejects the anarchic and progressive potential of the traditional comic plot. By rejecting change, therefore, the sitcom cannot be considered as anything other than a static and conservative form.

According to Langford (2005), this is representative of a standard critical strategy within the academy, which he refers to as ‘the redemption of the exceptional object. Seeking to discover an underlying seriousness, a depth of characterisation, or the use of high production values within individual programmes, this strategy aims to relieve the ‘embarrassment’ of studying sitcom.

The film industry is a mixture of commerce and culture, business and art, of which we all have access to and can relate to in some ways or another. Hence, this media type could qualify as having predominant importance to our society, providing us with glimpses into worlds and lives we ordinarily do not have access to (Anderson and Iannaco, 2010).

Blumler and Katz (1974) proposed that the audience’s needs have social and psychological origins, which generate certain expectations about the mass media, leading to differential patterns of media exposure. This results in both the gratification of needs and in other (often unintended) consequences.

The uses and gratification approach (Rosengren, Wenner, and Palmgreen, 1985) has served as a general theoretical framework for explaining associations between personality factors and music preferences. This approach has focused on the motives for individuals’ music consumption and stresses individual choice and how ‘people intentionally participate and select media messages from communication alternatives.

Rentfrow and Gosling (2003) found both the Reflective and Complex and the Intense and Rebellious dimensions to be positively related to Openness to Experience. The Upbeat and Conventional dimension was found to be positively related to Extraversion, Agreeableness and Conscientiousness, and negatively to Openness to Experience. The Energetic and Rhythmic dimension was positively related to Extraversion and Agreeableness.

The Psychoticism dimension (Eysenck and Eysenck, 1985) has been found to predict media preferences. Weaver (1991) found that individuals scoring high on Psychoticism tended to dislike comedy preferring graphically violent films (compared to their low Psychoticism counterparts).

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY:

In order to understand the acceptance of comedy scenes and its form in Kollywood movies, quantitative research method were employed for this study and data were collected by using structured questionnaire which has 8 questions and a three point Likert Scale. Sample size for this study is 100. Convenient sampling technique is applied for this study.

The data collected was coded and processed with SPSS with percentage analysis, cross tabulation, Chi square test and one way ANOVA.

HYPOTHESIS:

1. There is significant relationship between the respondents’ age and comedians’ characterization, mannerism, appearance and dialogues.

2. There is significant relationship between the respondents’ gender and comedians’ characterization, mannerism, appearance and dialogues.

3. There is significant relationship between the respondents’ movie watching frequency and comedians’ characterization, mannerism, appearance and dialogues.

4. There is significant relationship between the respondents’ favourite genre of movie watched and comedians’ characterization, mannerism, appearance and dialogues.

DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATIONS:

The purpose of this study is to understand the reception of comedy scenes by young minds. It also aims at analysing what factors in comedy scenes influences the audience greatly.

FREQUENCIES:

Age:

Out of 100 samples, 24% of respondents belong to the age of 17 years, 48% of 18 years, 12% each of 19 and 20 years, 2% each of 21 and 22 years of age. As teenagers are more influenced by the media content, the percentage of teenagers is more.

Gender:

Out of 100, 52% of male respondents and 48% of female respondents were considered.

Nature of birth:

This question was framed to know whether the single child and the one’s with siblings have a different perspective as the single child have none to quarrel or share their views except elderly people. 26% of respondents are single child at home while 74% have their siblings.

Movie watching frequency:

72% of the respondents watch movies frequently, 24% are moderate movie goers, 2% of them rarely watch movies while 2% of the respondents never watch movies.

Favourite genre of movie preferred:

20% of the respondents expressed that their favourite is Romantic genre, whereas 10% said horror films. 20% respondents told that they prefer Action movies. 26% of the respondents preferred comedy films and 24% of respondents opted for other genres.

Watching comedy scenes in movies:

Majority of the respondents expressed that they like watching comedy scenes in the movies (98%) while just 2% responded negatively.

CHI SQUARE TEST:

Age Vs. Type of movie preferred:

Age of the respondents did not play any major role in the genre of movie watched (Chi-square value: 0.953).

Age vs. watching comedy scenes in movies:

There is no significant relationship between the age of the respondents and watching comedy scenes in movies (Chi square value: 0.187).

Gender Vs. Type of movie preferred:

Gender of the respondents does play a major role in the genre of movie being watched (Chi-square value: 0.041).

Gender Vs. Watching comedy scenes in movies:

There is no significant relationship between the age of the respondents and watching comedy scenes in movies (Chi square value: 0.766).

Nature of birth Vs. Type of movie preferred:

Age of the respondents did not play any major role in the genre of movie watched (Chi-square value: 0.276).

Nature of birth vs. watching comedy scenes in movies:

There is no significant relationship between the age of the respondents and watching comedy scenes in movies (Chi square value: 0.549).

ONE WAY ANOVA:

Age:

F ratio (3.505) pertaining to the effect of the Age of the respondents on the mannerism of the comedian performed is highly significant. Hence it can be concluded that the age of the respondents has greater impact in the way the respondents take in the mannerism of the comedian (p > 0.009).

F value is 2.428 and p > 0.050. Therefore it can be inferred that there is a significant relationship between the age and the social message conveyed through comedy scenes.

Other two dependent variables, Characterization and dialogues used by comedians have the F ratio 0.792 (p < 0.561) and 0.955 (p < 0.455) respectively that has no significant relationship with the age of the respondents.

Gender:

F value is 4.896 and p > 0.032. Therefore it can be inferred that there is a significant relationship between the gender and the mannerism of the comedians.

Rest of the three dependent variables, Characterization, social messages conveyed and dialogues used by comedians have the F ratio 0.664 (p < 0.419), 0.923 (p < 0.342), and 0.315 (p < 0.577) respectively that has no significant relationship with the gender of the respondents.

Nature of birth:

F ratio of characterization, 0.190 (p < 0.455), mannerism 0.857 (p < 0.359), Social messages conveyed 1.003 (p < 0.322) and Dialogues delivered 0.164 (p < 0.688), denotes that nature of birth of the respondents has no significant relationship with the dependent variables considered in this study.

Movie watching frequency:

F ratio of characterization, 0.776 (p < 0.513), mannerism 1.523 (p < 0.221), Social messages conveyed 0.463 (p < 0.710) and Dialogues delivered 1.268 (p < 0.296). From the above values, it can be inferred that movie watching frequency of the respondents has no significant relationship with the dependent variables considered in this study.

Genre of Movie preferred:

F ratio of characterization, 1.625 (p < 0.184), mannerism 0.879 (p < 0.484), Social messages conveyed 1.402 (p < 0.249) and Dialogues delivered 0.303 (p < 0.874), denotes that the genre of movie preferred by the respondents has no significant relationship with the dependent variables considered in this study.

Watching comedy scenes in movies:

F ratio 3.538 (p < 0.046) pertaining to the effect of the watching comedy scenes the respondents is highly significant to the mannerism of the comedians in movies.

F value is 2.280 and p > 0.038. Therefore it can be inferred that there is a significant relationship between watching comedy scenes and the characterization of comedians. Other two dependent variables, Social messages delivered and dialogues used by comedians have the F ratio 1.920 (p < 0.172) and 0.033 (p < 0.857) respectively that has no significant relationship with the viewing pattern of comedy scenes of the respondents.

Summary:

This study made evident that the mannerisms and social message conveyed by the comedians are accepted largely by the respondents of younger age as they are more prone to media content and are easily attracted.

Gender of the respondents is an important factor when it comes to the mannerism of the comedians. Some mannerisms of the comedians are not greatly accepted and acknowledged. Hence there is a significant relationship established by gender of respondents to the mannerisms of the comedians. Whereas the characterization, social message conveyed and dialogue used has no influence on the gender difference of the respondents.

Whatever the genre of the movie may be, audience view comedy scene as it is and get entertained. Hence it does not have a great influence on the comedy viewing and consumption pattern.

Frequency of movie watching of the respondents does not have any relationship with taking in the content of the comedy scenes as it is not generally necessary for any individual to watch a movie to get the content of the comedy scene.

The respondents either have siblings or a single child, their comedy scenes watching and getting entertained is just the same. There is no great difference observed in this study.

To like a comedy scene in a movie, Characterization of the comedian and the mannerisms of the character play a key role. These two factors are easy to imitate and follow by the young people than the other factors which were expressed in this study.

CONCLUSION:

The results of this study show that nature of birth, movie watching frequency and the genre of movie preferred has no effect on viewing comedy scenes by the respondents. College students are younger and only at this age group, they tend to be independent to access media to get gratified so they get more influenced by the mannerisms of the comedians as it is easy to grasp and use it among friends. They are open to get the social messages conveyed by the comedians as they more into fun and easy going than being very serious and stressful. When it comes to gender, men and women have different perspective and so there is a significant relationship seen in the mannerisms comedians portray. These young minds concentrate more on the characterization and mannerisms which lead them to watch more comedy scenes and enjoy it.

REFERENCES:

1. Anderson, D., Iannaco, G. (2010). Love and hate in dementia: The depressive position in the film Iris. The International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 91, 1289-1297.

2. Blumler, J. G. Katz, E. (1974). The uses of mass communication: Current perspectives on gratifications research (pp. 19-32). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

3. Eysenck, H. J., Eysenck, M. W. (1985). Personality and individual differences: A natural science approach. New York: Plenum Press

4. Grote, D (1983) the End of Comedy: The Sit-Com and the Comedic Tradition. Hamden, Connecticut:Archon.

5. Jones, G. (1992) Honey, I’m Home! Sitcoms: Selling the American Dream. New York: St Martins Press.

6. Langford, B. (2005a) “Our usual impasse”: the episodic situation comedy revisited’. In J. Bignell S.Lacey (eds.) Popular Television Drama: Critical Perspectives. Manchester: Manchester University Press, pp.15-31.

7. Mills, B. (2001a) ‘Comedy’. In G. Creeber (ed.) the Television Genre Book. London: BFI, pp. 61-62.

8. Palmgreen, P., Wenner, L., Rosengren, K. (1985). Uses and gratifications research. The past ten years. InK. Rosengren, L. Wenner P. Palmgreen (Eds). Media gratifications research: Current perspectives (pp. 1140). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

9. Rentfrow, P. J., Gosling, S. D. (2003). The do re mi’s of everyday life: The structure and personality correlates of music preferences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 1236–1256

10. Rosengren, K. E., Windahl, S. (1977). Mass media use: causes and effects. Communications: International Journal of Communication Research, 3, 336-351

Received on 24.10.2017 Modified on 18.12.2017

Res. J. Humanities and Social Sciences. 2018; 9(1): 81-85.

DOI: 10.5958/2321-5828.2018.00014.1