Is it inevitable for comedians to get less funny as they get older?

This topic came to mind after reading this thread and, in particular, this post:

Although I partially disagree with the statement (and would substitute the adjective “hungry” in place of “angry”), it did get me thinking that a lot of comedians–including many great ones–did all their best and funniest work before they turned 50. For example, I still watch David Letterman’s show and sometimes laugh, but he’s nowhere near as funny as he was on his “Late Night” show during the 80’s. Likewise, I still like Steve Martin but I think he was at his funniest during his “wild and crazy guy” period in the late 70’s. He just seems too subdued now. George Carlin, on the other hand, is anything but subdued but, unfortunately, has also gotten so cranky he’s turned into a bitter, unfunny old man. Finally, Eddie Murphy is even younger than any of them and, except for a few moments now and then, he’s a comic shadow of his former self.

And this isn’t true only for recent comedians. Going way back into the past, I’ve noticed a decrease in funny as comedians get older. Cases in point: Charlie Chaplin’s output fell off drastically after he turned 50; Buster Keaton was burned out by the time he was in his 40’s; and (I know I’m going to get a lot of flack for suggesting that he ever was funny) Jerry Lewis stopped being amusing before his 40th birthday.

Of course, I’m not necessarily saying that comics–like athletes–lose their talent after they turn 40 (or 50). People like W.C. Fields and Rodney Dangerfield didn’t really come into their own until after their 50th birthdays. However, they seem more like the exception rather than the rule. So, does the ability of even the best comedian to make people laugh fade as he or she gets older?

It’s kind of like musicians. You listen to their stchick for a while but eventually it starts to get old. The comedian has to go through his act and reinvent himself if he wants to stay on top. Most entertainers are just flavors of the month and while they might have a big impact they’re not going to remain popular forever.

Marc

To add to the musical analogy, established comics, like musicians, attract a sizeable following of the same people who want them to come up with the same old thing all the time - whether live or on recordings. I think things were at least a bit different in the old days (pre TV) when most of the acts’ work was live or on disc.

You go to an Eagles concert, you want to hear HC and Desperado. You go to a Monty Python show and you want to hear the dead parrot skecth and the lumberjack song. Try something new and you’re in danger of losing your following and your cash cow.

Many comedians are manic depressives, anyway, and they crave the adulation. A stage is a lonely place to be when a joke doesn’t work, and it’s no fun reading negative reviews.

What MGibson and the estimable mr. thornhill said. Plus, there’s the generational thing. Most teenagers and twenty-somehtings simply aren’t going to find sixty or seventy-something comedians funny (Rodney Dangerfield excepted, but he was middle-aged before he even became a comedian). There’s too big a gap between their respective points-of-view. For a comedian to be funny, you have to be able to identify with them at least somewhat as compatriots. To watch someone your parents’ age – or worse, your grandparents’ age – trying to yuk it up just seems like schtick and can even seem icky.

And I think that as you grow older you become more cynical, things become more predictable and stale, you become more out of touch with the younger mindset and more dismissive of it (think of how you view what’s funny to six-year-olds) and you just lose that creative spark that you had when you were younger.

Well, I apologize for being picky, but it’s more accurate to say Rodney was middle aged before he became a semi-successful comedian. In his twenties, he was an unsuccessful comic under the name Jack Roy, before chucking it all to become a middle class entrepreneur (selling aluminum siding, among other jobs).

He went BACK to comedy as a middle aged guy, and finally found the audience that had eluded him when he was young.

I chalk it up to drugs and reckless youth. They’re funnier when they’re still fresh and new and partying it up. Once they’ve made the money, lived the lifestyles of the rich and famous, they lose their edge. And they go and get sober, and that’s no good for creativity. :smiley:

I agree with everything that’s been said, and would include:

Because we know what they’re going to say. 85% of funny is in being surprised. While we may not know precisely what topic he’s going to cover, we know George Carlin’s going to be angry about it. We know Robin Williams is going to be manic about it. We know David Letterman’s going to be cynical about it. It’s not surprising anymore. And since comics choose the same topics over and over again, it becomes a matching game when we know the comics style so well. Let’s see…
Osama Bin Laden + angry rant against children = George Carlin.
Osama Bin Laden +cynical detachment + Paris Hilton reference = David Letterman.
Osama Bin Laden + growing amazement that the media’s made up of morons + weed reference = Jon Stewart.

yawn OK, Jon still makes me giggle. But there’s only a few year lifespan left to his schtick.

This is why I think Robin Williams is still moderately funny. Funnier than his compatriots, anyway. He’s just so freakin’ insane that he’s still somewhat unpredictable. (Really, if he didn’t have all that money, he woulda been locked up years ago and force fed lithium till he puked, dontcha think?)

I don’t think that Robin Williams is that funny anymore. He’s too weird for me. You know who I still think is funny is Letterman. Bill Cosby isn’t even funny anymore - he’s just overly dogmatic about his opinions.

I can only imagine what Bill Hicks’ routine would be like today, had he lived. As it is, a lot of his stuff was eerily prophetic. But he was so angry in the early '90s, I’m not sure if he would even be entertaining anymore.

I agree with many of the reasons mentioned. I also wonder if Reversion To The Mean may also be a factor. If a comedian is really really funny when you first notice him, there’s more room for him to get worse than to get funnier.

I’m still hoping someone can come up with a counterexample, of someone who actually got funnier and funnier as they got older.

Groucho Marx is perhaps a good counterexample. Virtually every great line in the Marx Brothers’ movies was already there in the script. He may have contributed a few ad libs, but it was his delivery rather than his writing that made the movies funny.

After the writing in the movies turned so awful that his movie career all but ended, though, Groucho found his niche on You Bet Your Life where his ad libs built upon the already established character.

W. C. Fields, BTW, was already one of the world’s leading comics in vaudeville worldwide two decades before he started working in films. He’s a poor example of someone who came into his own in his 50s.

Comedy comes from life experiences and it’s harder to look sideways at the world when you’re one of its most celebrated and pampered figures. It’s like the cliché about bands: the first album is about everything and the second album is about the road, because that’s what your life is like when recording it. I agree that younger comics are hungrier, but they are also looking at life from the bottom up and that is where all humor comes from.

I disagree that Jon Stewart is as played out as the others mentioned, though. Politics, the media, and the idiocy of the world at large is a never-ending gift of comedy. He has the advantage that people tune in to him expecting current events and knowledgeable about them. Few stand-ups have that luxury, which is why most stand-up comedy today is about relationships. And Stewart is much better than he was earlier in his career now that he’s found his niche. His earlier talk shows were terrible, his lame attempts at trying to be hip. He’s not hip. He is smart, though, and now he’s found a way to express that. And he’s good. His book Naked Pictures of Famous People is one of the tiny number of books by comics that are worth reading. It’s hard doing comedy as an adult, but he’s found a way.

I agree with you. And your the one to remind us, Harpo :slight_smile:

Geroge Burns got funnier as he got older, but that may be because he reinvented himself from Gracie’s straight sidekick to solo standup. It may be more accurate to say that he simply moved himself into the spotlight.

Of course, as he got MUCH older he went from being funny to being an icon.

Thanks for mentioning Groucho. I was going to include him in my list of comics who remained funny as they got older but didn’t want my OP to get too bogged down with examples. As MGibson said, he was somebody who successfully “reinvented himself” (if that’s the appropriate term in this case).

As for W.C. Fields, I was aware he had been a successful comic before he broke into movies in the late 1920’s. What I meant to say is that while he may have been funny when he was younger, he didn’t reach is comic peak until he was almost 60. That would still make him an exception to most comics because many–if not most–do their funniest work before they turn 50.

Anyway, I think another reason why many comedians aren’t as funny when they get older is due to age itself. While performing, comics adopt certain personas and, quite often, that persona does not age well. For example, it may (and I emphasize may) be funny to see a twenty-something Jerry Lewis acting like a hyperactive goony bungler but that routine doesn’t work when it’s a forty-something (or older Lewis) doing the same thing. Granted, for somebody like the aforementioned W.C. Fields, age can enhance a comic persona but, much of the time, the effect can be pathetic or even creepy.

I think that what Groucho Marx, W. C. Fields, and George Burns have in common is that their jokes and comedy came out of a persona that they created, which could be extended almost indefinitely. Mae West is another example.

In his book Funny Men (or perhaps one of the sequels) Steve Allen did a chapter on Groucho, with a dozen drop-dead funny ad libs of his. Except that Allen had written them all himself. They were funny because you could see and hear Groucho doing them in your head. His persona made everything automatically funny.

Few comics these days have a persona separate from their selves. Rodney Dangerfield created one. So did Phyllis Diller, who did stand-up until she was 84. Of the younger comics, how many do? Adam Sandler, perhaps, although it’s probably not one he’ll be able to continue for too many more years. He’s already appearing to try to grow out of it just as Steve Martin, Jim Carrey and Robin Williams have. Woody Allen had the most successful modern persona and he also had to throw off most of his mannerisms as he aged.

It’s one thing to be able to throw off a successful line in your persona’s voice as you get older, and a much harder thing to do to act it out. If your act consists of throwing yourself across a stage you can only continue it for so long.

He also does some gross stuff (although that never makes me laugh) and he does his things about language, which are not as funny as his rage - what is? - but they can be funny and insightful.

As time goes on, I think it’s gotten clear that what he does is not unpredictable or improvised, it’s just made to look that way.

I think Exapno is right about Groucho and he’s also right about comedians with personas. You don’t see that anymore. Talk shows and hype and exposure may have something to do with it. There are comedians who play the same type of character over and over because that’s the only thing they know how to do, but that’s not the same.

Can I make this my sig line? As if I would use any gem other than one created by me or someone I consider my comedic equal, such as Mark Twain.

Marley’s on the money too. Robin Williams deeply annoys me, but part of it is because he has so much talent. Why oh why can’t he realise that reining it in is the responsibility and the art of the comic? Ars latet artem and all that. The other part of it is that I’m freaked out by his body hair. The way that whatever type of shirt he’s wearing, however high the collar, some hair will always find its way out.

I think it’s often true that comics become less funny as they age. Fortunately, there are exceptions. I found Zero Mostel to be wonderfully funny till the day he died (at which point he ceased to be funny only because he didn’t get any gigs).

Sure. Rumors of my genius are greatly unexaggerated.

I also think it’s about surprise. If something isn’t surprising it simply *isn’t * funny. And comedians have certain takes on the world which are usually hilarious the first time you hear it and then increasingly stale. It’s just impossible for them to remain surprising over decades, and no amount of drugs or bipolar illness can change that. I think that also explains generational humor. Your parents comedy isn’t funny because you’ve heard it all your life.