Film Editor James Evenden gives his take on Ricky Gervais’ newest standup special, Super Nature
Content warning: This article contains themes of transphobia, paedophilia and AIDS which some readers may find distressing.
It feels like these days that Ricky Gervais wants to be seen more as a defender of comedy rather than a comedian in his own right. I think this is again the case with his latest Netflix special Super Nature. Gervais seemingly delights in picking the low-hanging fruit of our current social landscape, making fun of everything from the trans community to AIDS. Gervais makes sure to include lines emphasising the irony he is going for, and that his jokes do not represent his actual political views. In my opinion, I can see the positives in his argument for a lack of policing in comedy. However, I believe more so that the recent backlash to Gervais’ special rightly highlights the laziness of Gervais’ jokes in Super Nature.
I do not know how or why Ricky Gervais has become a sort of bastion for free speech in comedy. The Independent recently noted in their review ‘Being offended by the content is a victory for Gervais, who is more comfortable in the composition of quips that rely on a cheap shock factor than any emotional or creative truth.’ I think this sums up the issue with Gervais’ style of comedy. In trying to defend the right to say anything, he ends up cracking jokes that seem more interested in fanning the flames of controversy, so he has more to criticise.
Hollywood Insider’s Leah Donato said, ‘I personally don’t see any true malice behind these segments on Gervais’ special. It’s understandable to see what he was going for, but I find that there could’ve been a bit more thought put behind said jokes.’ I think Donato hits the nail on the head – Gervais in his quest to tell us that the topics he jokes about can be joked about becomes too bogged down in the rules that he forgets to be inventive. I do not think Gervais is actually transphobic, but his jokes about the trans community do not feel like they have much of a purpose. Black humour is all well and good, but without anything to back it up it comes off as oppressive and boring.
I think that comedy is a subjective art form, and seeing some of the positive things people have had to say about Super Nature, Gervais’ wild popularity is seemingly not slowing down anytime soon. I think that on the surface, there is nothing objectively wrong with Gervais’ message that there should not be untouchable subjects. If comedy is subjective, different people will find different things funny. However, as The Independent noted, just because Gervais might have a point about comedy needing to be open, does not excuse the obviously offensive jokes he makes. Just because something can be joked about does not necessarily mean it has to be in such a gross fashion.
If comedy is subjective, different people will find different things funny
Most things about Super Nature feel gross. Gervais, in establishing a lack of rules for comedy, does nothing interesting with this blank canvas other than telling distasteful jokes. He uses the excuse of ‘irony’ to say anything he wants. Whilst I think he is being ironic, the jokes he tells simply feel unnecessary. I think for any of these to work he needed to create a more open space that does not feel as cruel. In rejecting the policing of comedy, it feels like Gervais is himself policing what is allowed to be said, without any consideration of what does not need to be.
He uses the excuse of ‘irony’ to say anything he wants
The annoying thing about Gervais’ style of comedy is that anyone who tries to criticise it is seemingly playing right into his hands. Gervais presents an argument for a lack of rules, that he seemingly thinks is an intellectual and brave thing to say. As soon as he sets out this ‘genius’ rulebook, he resorts to childish jokes about AIDS and paedophilia. Gervais wants to be both the smartest voice in the room but also the most irreverent, and these tones do not work well. If all you want to do is tell crude jokes, that is fine. I do not think that he needed to establish his own rules for how comedy should function, because he does nothing ground-breaking with these new rules.
Gervais wants to be both the smartest voice in the room but also the most irreverent
Ultimately, Ricky Gervais’ Super Nature focuses too heavily on setting up a lack of rules only to do nothing new or interesting with them. The backlash Gervais has received with undoubtedly go into his next special, and I predict that he will focus on the offense he generated rather than channeling that offense into anything constructive. I found Super Nature difficult to get through, not because I was particularly offended by anything or Gervais’ person, but because in trying to be ‘anti-woke’ Gervais instead comes off as mean-spirited for the sake of it. He adds nothing new to the conversation around comedy being an open space, rather he uses that open space to justify his crudeness.
Check out more TV articles here:
Comments