The premise: A hundred comedians chew over a dirty joke a joke with unlimited scope for filthy invention. The pay off: surprisingly limited.
The Aristocrats is diverting enough, but it was not the procession of laughs I expected it be. Its principal flaw is, surprisingly, that simply not enough of its comedians tell the joke and well. One could, and others have, blamed intrusive editing: the film-makers cut away from many of their subjects mid-flow. However, I think that in a lot of cases their source material left the directors no choice.
The film's performers are, we know, fine comedians, but only a once-in-a-decade improvisatory genius advances over such well trodden ground without a prepared routine. Those that pull out such a routine, Sarah Silverman for instance, fare well. Those who haven't really thought about their interview before turning up, and who can't use material they've worked up before, just don't cut it.
Most of the comics fall into this category; they manage a lively, somewhat amusing conversation (although a few participants look like they just walked off a plane), however, when it comes to telling the joke, most just touch the main bases sex involving all three holes, defecation, incest without any real verve; a few buzz words delivered in forthright fashion apparently signifies a good effort.
Veteran George Carlin is one of surprisingly few who actually manage to expand upon the buzz words, and, when he hits virgin territory, his act becomes irresistibly funny (add the words polyp and "she gets it right most the time" to any defecation scene). It's not surprising that the camera keeps returning to him.
He also belongs to a seeming minority that understands the secret of this joke is in a matter of fact telling; if one delivers the smut with too much relish, it's the same kind of sin as laughing loudly at your own stuff before you even finish (which a number of comics do here).
Carlin is one of a small number of performers that carry this film: the rest are only there to make up the magic number one hundred; they are enjoying an off the cuff chat about a dirty joke for a low budget doco they think will never see the light of day; they are not at anywhere near top form. South Park's Cartman and Stan outdo all but a couple of their competitors; this duo's telling is, prima facie, prepared.
Others less jaded than I obviously find this film highly appealing. If you're not uptight; if banter about orgies, felching, and the dirty sanchez is novel to you; then, hey, you'll probably love this film. But, if you've already met the aforementioned subjects at university, then you may well find this doco passé. I've heard more offensive things on stage and on tape. Have a listen to a genuine boundary pusher like Bill Hicks; his recorded impersonation of Satan getting off: now THAT'S funny!
The Aristocrats fell rather flat in Sydney's bohemia (Newtown); I was the most vocal amongst an audience of fifty and I didn't laugh very much. In a warmer room I might have enjoyed the film more; I certainly would have liked it had I snuck in at the age of sixteen.
