Ian Rush's review I find spot on! What we need is a more open mind to comedy. Espically at The Edinburgh Festival. I found this show proved comedy really is an art form and be approched, produced and created in many different, equally interesting ways. I also failed to catch anything like the Johnny and Joe show anywhere else at the festival. I agree Iain. This is exactly what british comedy needs to see more of, people trying something different. As I am for one bored of the 'observations, sublimated sexism, racism, homophobia and bigotry dressed up as irony and religion bashing' which I am but used to with stand up/sitcoms/sketches recently. I really just hope they haven't been scared off by an ignorant quater of the audience members who shouted many awful words in the perfomers faces as they left half way during the show. Much love for Johnny and Show, I for one love their work. Although I do believe, the difference of opinions, might have a little something to do with generation. I hope to see more perfomances this year following in Johnny and Joe's footsteps and trying something new.

Emma Berwick, May 2009

I agree. Their show was boring and unfunny and I wish I'd joined the sensible third of the audience who walked out before it had ended on Saturday night. I want my ten pounds back.

Cath, August 2008

Your review of johnny and joe's show is the latest in a fairly long line of reviews you or your correspondents have written which fall in to the 'yes its very clever, but it doesn't make me laugh...' variety. 'Comedy' as a term encompasses a number of approaches and styles, without wanting to get into seminar pedantry, 'comedy' isn't all about jokes (ask Jerry Seinfeld, Ricky Gervais and Chris Morris), and there are many different kinds of laugh. I would far rather than spend 55 minutes with comedians like Johnny and Joe, ambitious comedians, prepared to use their slot to push the envelope, try something genuinely inventive and be prepared to try and fail. I found their show very funny, engaging, subtle and not so subtle in paces but overall one of the most inventive and, yes funny I have seen. I certainly prefer it to the glut of obvious, hackneyed, macho, cockwaving, or faux sensitive/confessional or at times downright plagiarising standups. they have their place, don't get me wrong and yes they would 'last longer than five minutes' in a club. I don't think Johnny and Joe would want to. But let's at least say this is one kind of comedy, and that there are an increasing number of audience members and acts who are trying to reach out to try something different. Often its work that deals with comedy itself, looks with a skewed eye at human relationships, often they are writers and comics who try (not always successfully) through their work to find form for the ineffable, the unsayable, barely comprehensible facets of human interaction, rather than repeating almost by rote tired and well worn comic 'observations'. sublimated sexism, racism, homophobia and bigotry dressed up as irony and religion bashing (i am an atheist) that by august 3 is about as dangerous as crazy paving and presented as smugly taboo smashing is starting to wear away at my will to live. Johnny and Joe's 'credit crunch' sketch/happening is one of the most spot on pieces of satire I've seen at this or any festival. I think great art allows you to see the world in a different way, Johnny and Joe do this, and I like the fact that they treat comedy as an art form. your review, Steve, I don't think really does their show justice. As I say the 'oh yes its very clever, but is it funny' approach is emblematic of quite a conservative approach to comedy that doesn't really get to grips with what Johnny and Joe are trying achieve on their own terms. I've read reviews like this on your site to many times alas, but with this show you have really, really missed the point. the sketches are intentionally unfinished, I think the two writer performers are deliberately eschewing the pat punchline and blackout beloved of other sketch groups. This works for some groups and that is fine for them, but this is an attempt at something different. the most elementary reading of this show would surely comprehend that this was a deliberate stylistic choice. don't like it on those terms, but don't suggest that they've forgotten to do some important unwritten rule of sketch comedy. you are right to observe that the show is about the difficulty of human communication (QED jonathan edge), its antecedents are not the fast show, or morecambe and wise (i own DVD box sets of both) but pinter and beckett, writers for whom communication between human beings is not incidental to the evening but its glaring central point. i think most people got that, the audience on the night i was there was split certainly but the overwhelming majority laughed along and took the piece on on its own terms.rnrnfor me johnny and joe are a breath of fresh air, i think their experiment is a success, very much what a festival should be about. for me they very much get the job done. 'yes its clever but it didn't make me laugh'... that's as maybe steve. but now as more and more acts try to experiment with form and react against comic 'norms'; and as audiences flock to shows like johnny and joe's, you might want to ask yourself why they are laughing.

ian rush, August 2008

Your review is spot-on. These guys are typical of trendy comedy. No substance. They are complete rubbish and would not last fivr minutes in a comedy club.

Jonathan Edge, August 2008