Is There Still a Place for Sitcoms in Today’s World? 情景劇如今還有市場嗎？

杰克·伯恩哈特 唐毅

The sitcom’s gig might be over， with audiences’ lust for comedy being served by competitive baking shows and reality TV.現場演出的情景劇也許不會再有了，頗具看點的烘焙秀和真人秀滿足了觀眾對喜劇的渴望。

By Jack Bernhardt

It’s always the stupidest questions that stick in your head. Does Vin Diesel1 mean “Wine made out of petrol” in French？ Do Shetland ponies2 feel inadequate compared to regular horses？ Do Henry Bolton3 and his racist girlfriend actually exist， or are they just very active figments of Nigel Farage4’s imagination？ The one that has been going around my head recently is one that’s borne out my own insecurities about my career choices， and it’s one that’s been nagging at my brain since I caught the last few minutes of the Mrs Brown’s Boys Christmas Special5： what’s the point of sitcoms today？

That’s unduly mean to Mrs Brown’s Boys， really—I know that Brendan O’Carroll has worked hard developing the character of Mrs Brown， almost as hard as the rest of the cast has worked on developing ways to avoid the British tax system. The existential “what is the point of sitcoms” crisis was less triggered by the quality of the episode， and more by the achingly traditional end credits， where Mrs Brown leads the cast in bows to the studio audience.

For all of its weirdly subversive touches—Mrs Brown frequently breaks the fourth wall， seemingly aware that she’s a character played by a man trapped in a BBC One sitcom， like a particularly confusing episode of Black Mirror6—the show is inherently old-fashioned， with most of the jokes coming out of broad stereotypes. It mimics the old 1970s and 80s sitcoms of Are You Being Served or Hi-De-Hi in joke structure， characters and set pieces， and that reinforces a pernicious idea： that sitcoms are something that belong to the past， a relic of a bygone era like flared trousers or consequences for politicians who lie.

This is a perception that isn’t exactly challenged by the BBC. In 2016， they launched the new Sitcom Season with a promotional campaign that harked back to the past—complete with Michael Fish inspired weather backdrops and cheesy font. All that was missing was a couple of hushed-up sexual assault cases and we would have been right back in the 1970s for real. The retro style was to “celebrate” the fact that the BBC was rebooting a bunch of old sitcoms—Are You Being Served， Porridge and Keeping Up Appearances， among others—in a move that definitely didn’t make the sitcom feel any younger. There’s nothing quite like being told that the industry you’re attempting to crack into belongs in the 1970s. Which of course is why I decided to focus on working for the business of the future—writing for print media.

So then， what is the point of sitcoms today？ On the surface， this is relatively simple to answer—to create new and original comic characters， and to spawn a series of catchphrases that look good on mugs， T-shirts and adverts for taxes.

But in recent years， comic characters and catchphrases that permeate the national consciousness haven’t come from sitcoms， but from reality TV like Gogglebox7 and Love Island8. June and Leon9 were effectively a classic comedy duo that eclipsed most sitcom couples， while Chris and Kem’s rap was the Let’s Get Ready To Rumble of 201710. What is the point of the sitcom if we’re getting all our jokes from competitive baking shows and programmes where Jo Brand11 watches a competitive baking show？ What if British society’s desire for dumb stories， outrageous characters and silliness for silliness’s sake is being sated by Joey Essex12 and that guy from Made In Chelsea13 who sounds like he always has plums in his mouth？

As a result， many sitcoms seem to be shunning the concept of jokes altogether. Three of the most brilliant “sitcoms” of the past two years have been praised for being dark， compelling and dramatic， ahead of being funny： the pilot for Fleabag14 ends with the revelation that Phoebe Waller-Bridge’s best friend is dead; series three of Catastrophe15 is an unflinching look at the devastating alcoholism and infidelity of Rob Delaney’s character; and arguably the most celebrated episode of Inside No 916 （Sheridan Smith’s heart-wrenching performance in The 12 Days of Christine） has more mystery， intrigue， sadness， heartbreak and pain more than it has actual jokes.

These are all fantastic programmes， but if a show is making you cry more than it’s making you laugh， is it still a sitcom？ Are we destined to have two types of sitcoms： one with jokes， but stuck firmly in the 1970s; and one modern， but really more of a drama where people occasionally say funny things？ Does the joke-heavy， modern sitcom have a place in the world？

Just as I was asking myself these pretentious questions about my own craft， in danger of thinkpiecing myself into oblivion， I watched something that reminded me just what makes sitcoms so great. Derry Girls17， the Channel 4 sitcom by Lisa McGee， appears at first to be a gritty look at life in an all-girls Catholic school during the Troubles18—but in reality it’s just a wonderfully funny show packed with so many gags （particularly those centred around the suspected bomb on the bridge that ruins everyone’s commute） and beautifully written characters （the best being Michelle， who watched Pulp Fiction over the summer and declares that saying “motherfucking” is her new thing）. It wasn’t afraid of making jokes， or being dumb and over-the-top—in fact， it embraced it， because it knew that the characters and the writing were strong enough to pull them off.

In the end， the simplest answer is the best one： the point of a sitcom is to make people laugh， and create hilarious characters that you could watch do pretty much anything and still be entertained. And in reality， there are plenty of recent British sitcoms that do that： Michaela Coel’s Chewing Gum， Roisin Conaty in Gameface， Charlie and Daisy May Cooper in This Country19， Guz Khan in Man Like Mobeen20 and Asim Chaudhry in People Just Do Nothing are all unique and brilliant comic creations that can only exist through sitcoms. The sitcom is not dead—we just need to get its reputation out of the 70s and celebrate the great writing and performing talent we have today.

你腦海中總有些愚蠢到極點的問題揮之不去吧：范·迪塞爾在法語里的意思是“汽油做的葡萄酒”嗎？與普通的馬相比，設得蘭矮種馬會自慚形穢嗎？亨利·博爾頓和他那個有種族偏見的女友是確有其人，還是壓根兒就是奈杰爾·法拉奇憑空想象出來的？自從看完《布朗夫人的兒子們——圣誕特輯》后，我腦子里便久久縈繞著一個問題，這個問題更是印證了我對自己職業選擇的擔憂，那就是——當今情景劇意義何在？

實際上，提出這個問題對《布朗夫人的兒子們》有點兒過分苛求了。我知道布倫丹·奧卡羅爾已盡力演繹布朗夫人這個角色，幾乎和劇組其他那些想方設法逃避英國稅收制度監管的演員一樣賣力。當今“情景劇意義何在”的危機大多并非由該劇質量引發，更多是因為片尾按例播放演職員表時布朗夫人帶領所有演員向演播室觀眾鞠躬致謝，看了讓人心酸。

《布朗夫人的兒子們》采用了顛覆傳統的手法，頗不尋?！热绮祭史蛉顺３４蚱平巧拗疲坪踔里椦菟@個角色的是被BBC1臺的情景?。ň拖衲遣孔屓藭烆^轉向的電視劇《黑鏡》）不幸困住的男演員——盡管如此，這部劇本身還是很老套，其笑話大多是直白的套路。那些笑料的結構、角色和固定套路模仿的是七八十年代的情景劇《百貨店奇遇記》以及《你好呀你好呀》，這樣做其實會強化一個有害的觀念：情景劇都是過去年代的事，就像喇叭褲或政客們撒謊被揭穿的糟糕后果，都是過去時代的遺物。

而BBC并不想挑戰這種觀念。2016年，BBC開啟了新一季情景劇，推廣活動還是過去的樣子——總是被邁克爾·菲什激發出靈感的天氣背景和俗里俗氣的字體，一個都沒落下。唯一消失不見的是一兩件已被掩蓋的性侵案，除此之外全是70年代的東西。這股懷舊風是為了“紀念”吧，BBC正在重啟一大堆舊劇，其中包括《百貨店奇遇記》《粥》《維護面子》等。這一舉動顯然沒有讓人感覺情景劇年輕化。還有什么比有人告訴你說，你削尖腦袋想要擠進的行業屬于70年代更讓人難受呢？這當然也是我決定專注于未來的行業——為紙媒寫作的原因。

那么又回到這一問題：當今情景劇的意義何在？表面看來，這問題回答起來并不太難——要創造嶄新的、前所未有的喜劇人物，要大量產出奪人眼球的金句印在馬克杯、體恤衫或征稅的廣告上。

但是近年來，滲透國民意識的喜劇人物和金句并非來自情景劇，而是來自真人秀，如《電視匣子》《愛情島》。瓊和利昂是常常讓大多數情景劇搭檔都黯然失色的經典喜劇二人組，而克麗絲和肯姆說唱的是《2017，我們準備好了》。試想一下，如果我們所有的笑話都來自頗具看點的烘焙秀和有喬·布蘭德觀看有看點的烘焙秀的那些節目，情景劇還有存在的意義嗎？如果英國大眾就喜歡愚蠢無腦的故事、怪里怪氣的角色、為博傻而博傻的段子，這種欲望通過喬伊·埃塞克斯或是《切爾西制造》里那個說話總好像嘴里塞著李子的家伙而完全得到滿足，那又怎樣？

結果，許多情景劇似乎完全放棄了搞笑的念頭。過去兩年有三部情景劇受到追捧，并非因其笑料，而是因其暗黑的風格、引人入勝并富有戲劇性的情節而廣受好評：《倫敦生活》的試播集以菲比·沃勒-布里奇最好的朋友死亡告終;《大禍臨頭》第三季堅持不懈地反映毀掉羅伯·德蘭尼生活的酗酒和不忠問題;堪稱《9號秘事》最有名一集的“克里斯蒂的12天”（希爾頓·史密斯在其中的表演打動人心）情節神秘復雜和悲傷心痛多過搞笑。

這些劇集都非常棒，但是如果一部劇集的淚點比笑點多，那還是情景劇嗎？難道我們注定只有兩種情景劇，一種讓人發笑卻固守70年代的形式，另一種屬于現代，但其實更像舞臺劇，只是偶爾來點兒插科打諢？令人時時捧腹的現代情景劇在世界上還有一席之地嗎？

就在我冒著將自己批得一無是處的危險，用這些自以為是的問題質疑自己這個行當的時候，我看到了一部劇，這部劇讓我想起了情景劇如此了不起的緣由。這就是由莉薩·麥吉導演并在第四頻道推出的情景劇《德里女孩》。這部劇表面看來就是描寫北愛爾蘭問題時期一群天主教女校學生的真實生活，實際上情節非常有趣，笑料頻頻（尤其那些圍繞放在橋上、妨礙上下班通勤的可疑炮彈的笑話），劇本人物塑造也非常成功（塑造最成功的要算米歇爾了，暑假里她看了《低俗小說》，于是聲稱“操他娘的”是她新的口頭禪）。這部劇不怕講笑話，不怕犯傻，不怕夸張——實際上，它正是極力去表現這些元素，因為它自信人物和劇本都夠扎實，完全可以獲得成功。

最后，其實最簡單的答案就是最好的答案：情景劇的意義在于搞笑，創造一些奇葩角色，讓你看到他們做一大堆傻不拉嘰的事，你還覺得很樂呵。實際上，近來英國有許多情景劇都在這樣做：比如邁克爾·科爾的《口香糖》，而《變臉游戲》中的魯瓦森·科納蒂、《英村二三事》中的查理和黛西·梅·庫珀、《像莫比恩一樣的男人》中的古茲·卡恩及《他們什么都沒做》中的阿西姆·喬杜里等這些喜劇角色都是獨一無二、光芒四射的，僅存于情景劇中。情景劇沒有死——只是我們需要將其從70年代中拯救出來，要珍視我們今天那些精彩絕倫的劇本和才華橫溢的演員。? ? ? ? ? ? ? □

（譯者單位：東華大學）

1美國電影演員，制片人。主要作品有《拯救大兵瑞恩》《速度與激情》等。? 2產于蘇格蘭設得蘭島的古老的矮種馬。性格溫順，身體肥厚強壯，四肢短小，可在嚴寒的氣候下生存。? 3英國獨立黨領袖。其模特女友喬·馬尼因在和友人的手機短信中抨擊哈里王子妻子梅根·馬克爾的非裔血統而受到多方指責。? 4英國獨立黨前領袖，播音員、政治分析家。

5由BBC制作、本·凱利特執導的一部舞臺劇，講述一個滿嘴臟話但又熱情活波的母親獨自養大六個孩子的故事。這出劇在英國演出時，場場爆滿，一票難求。? 6《黑鏡》由英國電視四臺播出，至今已播出四季。故事以現代科技為背景，每集情節相互獨立，表達了當代科技對人性的利用、重構與破壞。

7英國很受歡迎的一檔真人秀節目。Gogglebox是英國人對電視機的俗稱。這檔節目是將電視鏡頭置于各個家庭，記錄各個家庭觀看電視節目時的表情和感受。因其真實地體現了普通民眾的喜怒哀樂而大受歡迎。? 8英國頗受歡迎的一檔男女約會真人秀節目。節目組將6組互不相識的單身男女召集起來，扔在一個小島的豪華別墅里待6周，不能使用手機，必須聊天交際，然后用攝像頭記錄他們24小時的舉動。

9《電視匣子》中的一對老年夫妻，相伴60年，丈夫于2018年去世。這對夫妻最先出現在轟動英國的這檔真人秀節目中并很快受到觀眾喜愛。? 10這話最初出自美國拳擊比賽報幕員Michael Buffer之口，原話是Let’s get to rumble，意思是“讓我們準備好看比賽吧”。Michael經典的長音迷倒了許多拳擊迷，從而成為他的粉絲。后來公司將此話注冊，專供Michael使用，其他人不得使用。? 11英國編劇兼演員，主要作品有《目中已無我》《要命》等。? 12英國演員，主要作品有《埃塞克斯是唯一的生活方式》。? 13 2011年首播的真人秀節目。? 14菲比·沃勒-布里奇主演，2016年首播。? 15 2019年1月首播的電視劇，故事描述一個愛爾蘭女人與一個美國男人在英國倫敦相遇并相愛，但因文化差異，兩人在一起生活并非易事。

16由大衛·科爾、吉列爾莫·莫拉萊斯導演，紳士聯盟成員史蒂夫·佩姆伯頓和里斯·謝爾史密斯自編自演，聯合BBC推出的一部英國黑暗喜劇。? 17講述四個生活在德里的天主教女校學生和一個來自英格蘭的男孩的搞笑故事，一經播出就成為英國電視第四頻道最受歡迎的電視劇。? 18指北愛爾蘭問題時期。始于1960年代后期，終于1998年4月10日簽訂北愛和平協議。

19 BBC偽紀錄片式喜劇，BBC為深入了解如今英國農村地區的年輕人感到的前所未有的邊緣化，在科茲沃爾德地區村莊跟拍了一些年輕人的生活，將他們的經歷改編成了這部熱門喜劇。? 20講述住在伯明翰的28歲的穆斯林小伙獨自撫養15歲的妹妹的故事。這個劇集記錄了他過去的犯罪生涯、友誼以及作為一個巴基斯坦穆斯林所面臨的許多爭議。