Austin Improv

What is the one Maestro game that you would not miss if it went away...

...FOREVER.

That game with surfing the radio stations. Also the one where everyone lines up and does a monologue all rapid fire style.

Speak in one voice - no matter how many players.

Aden wrote:That game with surfing the radio stations.

Oh jeez! I love that game.

I'm sure I'm in a minority, but my least fav game of all time is Category: Die.

My favorite way to eliminate players is Beastie Rap.

Mike wrote:Speak in one voice - no matter how many players.

Yeah, I can't fathom how to make that game any crisper. I mean, in theory, it seems like a pretty solid game, but I dunno.

Also, I think those rapid-fire monolouge games are ok with the right number of players. I think you'd have a hard time making any kind of story if you have to eliminate too fast.

2 words: Emotional orchestra.

Why?

1. Ambigious for the players to player, since some emotions have more than one kind of sub-emotion.
2. Ambigious for the directors to direct, since every director plays it differently. Some direct one at a time, some do it musically, some do it with a certain line of dialog or prose, and some divide the emotions into orchestral sections.
3. I've never seen it score anywhere above a 4, and it usually scores between 2 and 3, verging on 1.
4. Some people just suck at doing certain emotions.
5. It becomes a clusterfuck near the end when the directors are directing everyone at once.
6. It's not really that entertaining for the audience when compared to other games, and I don't really find it that fun to play, either.

Speak in one voice, on the other hand, I don't find so bad. It's fun for the audience to watch, watching a bunch of improvisers somewhere finish sentances together, and I find it fun as a performer trying to keep up with everyone and form words. I've even tried it during just in-general scenes, since it makes a great game or scene opening.

I love the radio station game, but I don't think it's played right 4 out of 5 times. When it is on, it can be on fire. It just isn't one we work on very often. I think I'll definitely add it to the jam this week.

I also love Beastie over Category Die, but it is too long to begin on and I like having the energetic elimination in my pocket for later in the night. I think the trick with Category Die is to play with the conventions. DON'T KILL YOURSELF. Say EVERYTHING with confidence. Try to put one over on the audience. Tweak the meaning of the category. And always be willing to go down to help the show structure instead of 'trying' to win.

I'm not a fan of Speak in One Voice, but I don't think we give it the gusto it requires most times. I think we play it too safe and going fast and making mistakes is what can be fun about it. What I do hate, however, is speak in one voice with more than one group of people. It is OK when it is 2 single players and 1 group of 3 or 4, but I hate it when it is 2 groups of 3 or even 3 groups of 2. It seems to work best when the gag is with one group and the other players serve to push that group and support them. I think it weakens the game to disperse the gag over several groups.

My personal least favorite game is Slow Motion Samurai. With a passion.

I'm also sick of some games, but I don't hate them. I just don't want to play them again for about 4 months. I'm Tater Do'd out until February of '08 and if I don't see Tag team Monolgue again until Christmas, that would be fine by me.

Wesley wrote:I'm not a fan of Speak in One Voice, but I don't think we give it the gusto it requires most times. I think we play it too safe and going fast and making mistakes is what can be fun about it. What I do hate, however, is speak in one voice with more than one group of people. It is OK when it is 2 single players and 1 group of 3 or 4, but I hate it when it is 2 groups of 3 or even 3 groups of 2. It seems to work best when the gag is with one group and the other players serve to push that group and support them. I think it weakens the game to disperse the gag over several groups.

Back in the day when I started playing Micetro, we'd do Speak in One Voice with one set of three and a single player--usually on a first date or a parent reprimanding a child. That way one player could "torture" the set of three and there were fewer cues from the directors. The single player basically "directed" the scene. "Tell me right now why you love me and what you will do to prove it to me!"

I think multiple failures of the game led directors to add more to the game rather than focus on the basics of the game. Yes, go faster. yes, call the Character out if gobbldy-gook comes out.

One note. The Speak in One Voice character is ONE character and should never use the pronoun "we" unless he/she is referring to him/herself AND the other character on stage. Small point but I believe it helps the threesome to play as a onesome.

Sit, stand, kneel. Hands fucking down.

I gotta go with "Good Bad Worse Advice" - it just never seems to work.

Wesley wrote:DON'T KILL YOURSELF

I totally disagree...somebody should absolutely kill themselves if it is needed. if the game is going on too long, it is VERY BORING. sometimes you gotta take a dive for the greater good of the show. i also think it is a good way to eliminate 2 players from a group of 5-6 who are tied in Micetro, but not a good way to award a random point at the top of Micetro. It takes too long to eliminate everyone. mor ethan 3 rounds and I want to kill myself...literally.

As for Speak in One Voice - we generally do it poorly. I hated this game until I saw the guys from Dad's Garage do it 2-3 times in Edmonton. They are completely badass at it. They go really fast and if they mess up, they back up and say the sentence over again (and over again if needed) until they get it right. Usually it is the next time through. They actually sound like one person even if it is 3-4 of them. The audience ate it up!!! It is interesting - sometimes the audience laughs at this game because it is a train wreck. However, when it is done like DG does it, they roar in amazement. part of our problem is that we don't have the chemistry that they have. They practice this will each other and perform it regularly with the same people they practiced it with. We try to do it with people who we sometimes have never even played with. that makes it much harder.

improvstitute wrote:

Wesley wrote:DON'T KILL YOURSELF

I totally disagree...somebody should absolutely kill themselves if it is needed. if the game is going on too long, it is VERY BORING. sometimes you gotta take a dive for the greater good of the show.

I think what Wes was saying was don't take yourself out. Take huge risks, try to take a dive, etc, but deliver everything with absolute confidence, and wait for the audience to kill you before leaving, even if you know what you said was absolute bollocks. Leaving before getting killed takes the fire and the fun out of it.

Yeah, I purposefully kill myself just about everytime I play that game. What I meant was: don't sell your answer short. Give a fake answer but stick it. Sell it. Exude confidence that no matter how insane, that answer was right.

Don't bow and start to walk off before the audience actually yells "DIE!" It shortchanges them getting to decide if you live because the answer was funny. Try to go down with bad answers, but don't literally kill yourself by walking away from the game without a DIE being yelled.

Yes, Yes, YES, a thousand times yes to BE WILLING TO GO DOWN! (If you come to the jams you'll see me riding people about this constantly in all these elimination games: Scene with no S's, Beastie Rap, etc.) There should just about never be more than 8 answers in a category before someone goes down. My strategy is usually to give one real answer and then slightly off answers (unless the director targets me and then we just go at it).

Roy Janik wrote:Take huge risks, try to take a dive, etc, but deliver everything with absolute confidence, and wait for the audience to kill you before leaving, even if you know what you said was absolute bollocks.

That's exactly where I get the most enjoyment in that game. I called love a type of drug a few Maestros ago and the audience couldn't decide whether to eliminate me or laugh. It caused a really weird murmur that I haven't experienced before.

I think the most fun comes when your decision to take huge risks inspires other improvisers to do the same. A couple of months ago I threw out "one fish" during the category of types of fish, then Justin Davis, Mike K and someone else completed it with "two fish", "red fish" and "blue fish". It was incredibly silly/stupid, but a few people told me after the show that it was their favorite part of the entire night.

I personally don't like the alphabet game.
When the players suck at it (like me!), it's excruciating to watch. Looks slow and painful. It's a halting dialog.
When the players are great at it, it seems too easy and is just a boring scene, with the alphabet sentence starts bogging down any possibility for deeper scene work.
And then there's the end of the alphabet,
"Xylophone! My xylophone is in my pocket!"
"You can't just change the subject!"
"Zonks! What am I saying?"
I've seen it be OK, be good, but never stellar.