Watch Dinner for One, the Short Film That Has Become a Baffling New Year’s Tradition in Europe

There are myr­i­ad New Year’s Eve cus­toms world­wide. In Japan, toshikoshi soba noo­dles are eat­en to bring in the com­ing year. In North Amer­i­ca, find­ing some­one to share a New Year’s Eve kiss with as the clock winds down has become a boon to the roman­ti­cal­ly-chal­lenged. In Ger­many, how­ev­er, a dif­fer­ent tra­di­tion has tak­en form: every year on Decem­ber 31st, TV net­works broad­cast an 18-minute-long black and white two-han­der com­e­dy skit.

In 1963, Germany’s Nord­deutsch­er Rund­funk tele­vi­sion sta­tion record­ed a sketch enti­tled Din­ner For One, per­formed by the British comics Fred­die Frin­ton and May War­den. The duo depict­ed an aging but­ler serv­ing his aris­to­crat­ic mis­tress, Miss Sophie, din­ner on the occa­sion of her 90th birth­day.

Although four addi­tion­al spots have been set at the table, the nonagenarian’s friends have long since passed away, and the but­ler is forced to take their places in drink­ing copi­ous amounts of alco­hol while toast­ing Miss Sophie’s health. Hilar­i­ty, as it is wont to do in such cas­es, ensues.

Since its ini­tial record­ing, the clip has become a New Year’s Eve sta­ple in Ger­many. Although Din­ner For One has nev­er been broad­cast in the U. S. or Cana­da, the clip has spread through­out Europe to Nor­way, Fin­land, Esto­nia, Lithua­nia, Aus­tria, Switzer­land, and beyond the con­ti­nen­t’s shores, to South Africa and Aus­tralia. In Swe­den, a bowd­ler­ized 11-minute ver­sion of the clip has been pro­duced, where, for decency’s sake, much of the butler’s booz­ing was excised along­side its atten­dant comedic effect. In Den­mark, after the nation­al tele­vi­sion net­work failed to broad­cast the sketch in 1985, an avalanche of view­er com­plaints has guar­an­teed its sub­se­quent year­ly appear­ance. Although the cat­e­go­ry is now defunct, the clip held the Guin­ness World Record for Most Fre­quent­ly Repeat­ed TV Pro­gram. As for why the video’s gar­nered so much atten­tion? No one’s real­ly sure. The Wall Street Jour­nal’s Todd Buell posits that the sketch’s easy to under­stand Eng­lish com­bined with a Ger­man long­ing for secu­ri­ty and sim­plic­i­ty may have led to its icon­ic sta­tus. To me, how­ev­er, it seems that the fine­ly tuned phys­i­cal com­e­dy trans­lates read­i­ly beyond any lin­guis­tic bound­aries, and sim­ply hit the right note at the right time.

Above, you can view the orig­i­nal 18-minute comedic opus and cel­e­brate New Year’s day in the same way that much of Europe brought in 2014 (don’t mind the Ger­man intro­duc­tion — the video is in Eng­lish). In future years, you can always find Din­ner for One in our col­lec­tion 4,000+ Free Movies Online: Great Clas­sics, Indies, Noir, West­erns, Doc­u­men­taries & More.

From all of us at Open Cul­ture to you, have a hap­py new year!

Relat­ed Con­tent:

The Sci­ence of Willpow­er: 15 Tips for Mak­ing Your New Year’s Res­o­lu­tions Last from Dr. Kel­ly McGo­ni­gal

The Ramones Play New Year’s Eve Con­cert in Lon­don, 1977

A New Year’s Wish from Neil Gaiman

The Top 10 New Year’s Res­o­lu­tions Read by Bob Dylan

 

Every Time “Making Love” Was Uttered in a Woody Allen Film: A Four Minute Montage

Woody Allen once said that “sex with­out love is a mean­ing­less expe­ri­ence, but as far as mean­ing­less expe­ri­ences go it’s pret­ty damn good.” Most read­ers would be com­pelled to think that Allen’s slight frame, trade­mark horn-rimmed glass­es, and stut­ter­ing deliv­ery would pre­clude his char­ac­ters from achiev­ing much of any­thing in the sex­u­al realm. After all, how could the con­sum­mate neb­bish­es that Allen por­trays in most of his films pos­si­bly impress a mem­ber of the fair­er sex? Some­how, how­ev­er, in spite of their whing­ing neu­roti­cism, Allen’s geek incar­nates trans­form into gal­lants of prodi­gious pro­por­tions in almost every role. Those want­i­ng con­crete evi­dence may take a look at Take the Mon­ey and Run (1969), Annie Hall (1977), or Man­hat­tan (1979), among myr­i­ad oth­ers, and note that Allen’s char­ac­ters repeat­ed­ly end up with women who seemed to make a gross error in sex­u­al selec­tion.

Last month, we brought you a super­cut of Woody Allen’s stam­mers, com­pris­ing a 44-minute grad­u­ate course in Allen’s awk­ward man­ner­isms. Today, we con­tin­ue this tra­di­tion and bring you anoth­er Allen super­cut; this time, the mon­tage con­sists of four-odd min­utes of every occur­rence of the term “mak­ing love” in Allen’s films, begin­ning with What’s New Pussy­cat (1965) and end­ing in To Rome With Love (2012). Mer­ry Christ­mas!

If you would like to sign up for Open Culture’s free email newslet­ter, please find it here. Or fol­low our posts on Threads, Face­book, BlueSky or Mastodon.

If you would like to sup­port the mis­sion of Open Cul­ture, con­sid­er mak­ing a dona­tion to our site. It’s hard to rely 100% on ads, and your con­tri­bu­tions will help us con­tin­ue pro­vid­ing the best free cul­tur­al and edu­ca­tion­al mate­ri­als to learn­ers every­where. You can con­tribute through Pay­Pal, Patre­on, and Ven­mo (@openculture). Thanks!

Relat­ed Con­tent:

Woody Allen Answers 12 Uncon­ven­tion­al Ques­tions He Has Nev­er Been Asked Before

Watch a 44-Minute Super­cut of Every Woody Allen Stam­mer, From Every Woody Allen Film

Woody Allen Lists the Great­est Films of All Time: Includes Clas­sics by Bergman, Truf­faut & Felli­ni

Woody Allen Box­es a Kan­ga­roo, 1966

 

Horror Legend Christopher Lee Presents a Heavy Metal Version of The Little Drummer Boy

Every year, around this time, I give thanks that I no longer work retail. Sore feet and rude cus­tomers go with the ter­ri­to­ry, but Decem­ber (nay, Novem­ber) brings with it a ter­ri­fy­ing onslaught of Lit­tle Drum­mer Boys. I know folks who can’t abide Grand­ma Got Run Over By a Rein­deer, or the Singing Dogs’ Jin­gle Bells, but as far as I’m con­cerned, noth­ing has­tens a psy­chot­ic break faster than a few dozen pa rum pa pum pum pum rum pa pum pum pum rum pa pum pum pums.

It seems hor­ror leg­end Christo­pher Lee, famil­iar to younger fans as Star Wars’ Count Dooku, feels my pain..and rel­ish­es it. It’s a cliche for an aging actor to release an album of sea­son­al chest­nuts, but the 91-year-old Lee’s A Heavy Met­al Christ­mas is a thing apart. His take on The Lit­tle Drum­mer Boy is the son­ic equiv­a­lent of Rose­mary’s Baby.

I can’t say that I pre­fer Lee’s to any oth­er ver­sion — they’re all tor­tu­ous in my book- but I’m at peace with admir­ing it in the abstract. A stunt? Maybe, but he seems whol­ly sin­cere in his video greet­ing below, wish­ing us all a very hap­py Christ­mas and “for the sake of the world and those peo­ple in it” a safe New Year.

Ayun Hal­l­i­day reveals the true mean­ing of of Xmas here. Fol­low her @AyunHalliday

Relat­ed Con­tent:

Christo­pher Lee Nar­rates a Beau­ti­ful Ani­ma­tion of Tim Burton’s Poem, Night­mare Before Christ­mas

Edgar Allan Poe’s “The Raven,” Read by Christo­pher Walken, Vin­cent Price, and Christo­pher Lee

Orson Welles Records Two Songs with the 1980s Heavy-Met­al Band Manowar

Yakov Smirnoff Remembers “The Soviet Department of Jokes” & Other Staples of Communist Comedy

Yakov Smirnoff has the dis­tinc­tion of being the most famous Russ­ian com­ic in Amer­i­ca. He’s also the only Russ­ian com­ic in Amer­i­ca (ba-dum-dum). But seri­ous­ly: In his mid-80s hey­day, he had the mar­ket cor­nered on Sovi­et humor in the U.S. What­ev­er demand there was, Smirnoff sup­plied it, sin­gle­hand­ed­ly, as a fix­ture in ads, TV show and film appear­ances, com­e­dy spe­cials, late-night talk shows…. His was the only face of Russ­ian humor any­one knew in the 80s (unless we’re count­ing Ivan Dra­go). Smirnoff even war­rant­ed a Fam­i­ly Guy ref­er­ence, which pret­ty much cements his rep­u­ta­tion as end­less­ly recy­clable pop cul­ture syn­di­ca­tion fod­der.

And yet, post-Sovi­et Rus­sia, it’s hard to imag­ine there’s a place for Yakov Smirnoff, since corny jokes at the expense of end-stage Russ­ian com­mu­nism were not only his bread and but­ter, but his whole comedic menu, such that Marc Maron intro­duces Smirnoff as a guest on his WTF Pod­cast above with: “that guy, with his hook, that cer­tain­ly isn’t rel­e­vant any­more. How does a guy like that sur­vive?” Ouch. But what a hook it was, says Maron: a won­der­struck immi­grant exclaim­ing “What a coun­try!” as he took in each new cap­i­tal­ist mar­vel. He was like a real-life ver­sion of one of Andy Kauf­man’s char­ac­ters, or a pre-Borat East­ern Euro­pean inno­cent abroad. The act car­ried him beyond his mid-eight­ies 15 min­utes of fame and through a 20-year career enter­tain­ing mid­dle-class Amer­i­cans in Bran­son, Mis­souri.

But was there much demand for Smirnoff’s brand of humor even at his peak? If you didn’t have the great for­tune of liv­ing through the 80s, you might be sur­prised at just how pop­u­lar his sort of thing could be—“a Russ­ian com­ic talk­ing about how great Amer­i­ca was.” But it wasn’t only Smirnoff’s per­sona that flat­tered our sense of eco­nom­ic, polit­i­cal, and moral supe­ri­or­i­ty. A whole genre of Sovi­et jokes had a promi­nent place in the dis­course, with knee-slap­pers about KGB sur­veil­lance and bread lines and oth­er pri­va­tions com­mon­ly tossed around at din­ner par­ties. Even Ronald Rea­gan tried his hand at it, as you can see here. Rea­gan’s deliv­ery was nev­er my cup of tea, but you can also see Smirnoff do his impres­sion of Rea­gan telling the same joke in the video at the top of the post.

And while revis­it­ing Smirnof­f’s not exact­ly mete­oric rise to fame in the U.S. is fun for its own sake, what’s even more inter­est­ing are Smirnof­f’s seri­ous rem­i­nis­cences of his time grow­ing up and work­ing as a com­ic in Rus­sia. The seri­ous Smirnoff is full of psy­cho­log­i­cal insights (he has a mas­ters degree in the sub­ject from Penn) and soci­o­log­i­cal anec­dotes about life under a repres­sive com­mu­nist regime—though he nev­er miss­es a chance for some of the old Smirnoff mate­r­i­al, com­plete with his honk­ing, don­key-like laugh­ter.

For exam­ple, about twen­ty min­utes into his WTF inter­view, Smirnoff dis­cuss the seri­ous sub­ject of joke approval in the Sovi­et Union. That’s right, in all seri­ous­ness, he tells us, comics were required to sub­mit their mate­r­i­al to a Depart­ment of Jokes. Smirnoff also once spoke expan­sive­ly on the sub­ject in a 1985 Chica­go Tri­bune piece on him at his peak.

Yep. There’s a Depart­ment of Jokes. Actu­al­ly, the Min­istry of Cul­ture has a very big depart­ment of humor. I’m seri­ous now. Once a year they cen­sor your mate­r­i­al, and then you have to stay with what they have approved. You can‘t impro­vise or do any­thing like that. You write out your mate­r­i­al and mail it to them, and they send it back to you with cor­rec­tions. After that, you stay with it for a year.

It is per­haps for this rea­son that comics in Sovi­et Rus­sia bor­rowed lib­er­al­ly from each oth­er, rarely did orig­i­nal mate­r­i­al, and nev­er, ever impro­vised. Says Smirnoff: “I would do some orig­i­nal mate­r­i­al, but that would be unusu­al. Also, it was OK for come­di­ans to borrow—if one of the big come­di­ans went on tele­vi­sion and did a monolog, next day 10 or 20 oth­er come­di­ans would do the same thing in clubs. That was­n’t con­sid­ered steal­ing.”

It also turns out that seri­ous Yakov Smirnoff explains the com­ic stylings of his per­sona, the corn­ball char­ac­ter:

It was old jokes, more vaude­ville type of humor. More like Eng­lish-style com­e­dy. Or like Hen­ny Young­man. One-lin­ers or sto­ries that have been told over and over again but they’re still fun­ny. No impro­vi­sa­tion com­e­dy. You don’t impro­vise. You don’t tell sto­ries about your­self the way Amer­i­can comics do.

So it turns out that a lot of those bad jokes about Rus­sia at the tail end of the Cold War actu­al­ly descend­ed from the source. Take this one from Smirnoff:

A funer­al pro­ces­sion is going by, and they’re walk­ing a goat behind the cof­fin. A guy comes over and says, “Why are you walk­ing a goat behind the cof­fin?” The oth­er guys says, “That goat killed my moth­er-in-law.” The first guy says, “Can I bor­row this goat for a week?” The sec­ond guy says, “You see all these peo­ple in the pro­ces­sion? They’re all wait­ing. Get in line.”

See? It’s a joke about stand­ing in line! Also, about moth­ers-in-law, which must be a tru­ly uni­ver­sal sub­ject. Find more of Smirnof­f’s insights into Sovi­et humor and joke cen­sor­ship at the full Chica­go Tri­bune inter­view piece and on Maron’s WTF pod­cast.

Relat­ed Con­tent:

The Nazis’ 10 Con­trol-Freak Rules for Jazz Per­form­ers: A Strange List from World War II

Joseph Stal­in, a Life­long Edi­tor, Wield­ed a Big, Blue, Dan­ger­ous Pen­cil

Stephen Fry Pro­files Six Russ­ian Writ­ers in the New Doc­u­men­tary Russia’s Open Book

A Look Back at Andy Kauf­man: Absurd Com­ic Per­for­mance Artist and Endear­ing Weirdo

Josh Jones is a writer and musi­cian based in Durham, NC. Fol­low him at @jdmagness

Cancer Patients’ Extreme Makeovers Let Them To Forget Their Illness ‘If Only For A Second’

The sea­son of giv­ing can be an unseem­ly time for non­prof­its. As New Year’s approach­es, every char­i­ta­ble insti­tu­tion down in Char­i­ta­ble Insti­tu­tionville must bang its tar-tin­ker and blow its hoo-hoover, in hope of dona­tions.

No doubt they’re all deserv­ing, but the onslaught of requests can leave sup­port­ers feel­ing a bit Grinchy. When that hap­pens, I rec­om­mend the video above, which doc­u­ments a hoax of Borat-like pro­por­tions. The per­pe­tra­tor is the Mimi Foun­da­tion, a Bel­gium-based group that offers psy­cho­log­i­cal coun­sel­ing, beau­ty treat­ments, and hair­style tips to peo­ple with can­cer.

The unsus­pect­ing vic­tims? Twen­ty can­cer patients who took it on good faith that they were being treat­ed to stan­dard makeovers, the sort of pro­fes­sion­al artistry that cre­ates an illu­sion of health, what many think pass­es for nor­mal­cy. All the Mimi Foun­da­tion asked for in return was that the recip­i­ents keep their eyes closed as the mag­ic was being worked.

Mean­while, pho­tog­ra­ph­er Vin­cent Dixon crouched behind a one-way mir­ror, poised to cap­ture each sit­ters’ reac­tion to his or her trans­for­ma­tion.

One does­n’t want to say too much. The end results are not what you think, unless you were think­ing of one of those over-the-top bizarre Amer­i­ca’s Next Top Mod­el pho­to chal­lenges.

Dixon’s images record the shock and invol­un­tary spon­tane­ity. The video, called “If Only for a Sec­ond, shows those ini­tial respons­es blos­som­ing into …well, let’s just say the Mimi Foun­da­tion, assist­ed by a pha­lanx of styl­ists, achieved their goal.

H/T Alan Gold­wass­er

Relat­ed Con­tent:

Come­di­an Tig Notaro’s “Tru­ly Great” Can­cer Stand-up Set Now Avail­able on Louis C.K.’s Web­site

Life in 4,748 Self-Por­traits

Ayun Hal­l­i­day’s heart grew three sizes today. Fol­low her @AyunHallliday

David Rees Presents a Primer on the Artisanal Craft of Pencil Sharpening

How have you been sharp­en­ing your pen­cils? Regard­less of your answer, rest assured that you’re doing it wrong.

Lest there be any doubt that I’m geo­graph­i­cal­ly sit­u­at­ed smack dab in the mid­dle of for­mer car­toon­ist’s David Rees’ tar­get demo­graph­ic, I almost did­n’t click on the link to the pitch per­fect send up above because I believed it was real.

Here in non-Caribbean, non-South­east-Asian, non-Russ­ian, non-Mex­i­can Brooklyn—think Girls, the Jonathans Ames and Letham, brown­stone-dwelling movie stars and the very lat­est in n’est plus ultra strollers—it’s entire­ly plau­si­ble that a humor­less young arti­san might take to the Inter­net to teach us reg­u­lar schlubs How to Sharp­en Pen­cils.

Just wait ’til he brings out his leather strop. (Mis­placed yours? Look in your base­ment, or your grand­fa­ther’s tomb.)

Please note that though the video may be satir­i­cal, Rees makes actu­al mon­ey sharpening—and authen­ti­cat­ing—cus­tomers’ Num­ber Two pen­cils, using the same tech­niques demon­strat­ed in the video. (Sor­ry, hol­i­day shop­pers, as per his web­site, he won’t be tak­ing orders for his live pen­cil sharp­en­ing ser­vices until the New Year, but he does have a book out.)

Like you need any more excuse to whip out your knife, place it in your dom­i­nant hand, and start carv­ing.

To quote a cer­tain clas­sic Broad­way musi­cal, you got­ta have a gim­mick.

Relat­ed Con­tent:

“The Peri­od­ic Table Table” — All The Ele­ments in Hand-Carved Wood

Watch The New Amer­i­ca, a Stop Motion Ani­ma­tion Star­ring 800+ Laser Engraved Wood Blocks

Learn to Draw Butts with Just Five Sim­ple Lines

Ayun Hal­l­i­day can get behind New Ork City pub­lic school teach­ers’ insis­tence on the Ticon­dero­ga brand. Fol­low her @AyunHallliday

John Cleese Stars in a Morbidly Funny Anti-Smoking Campaign (1992–1994)

In 1992, the Health Edu­ca­tion Author­i­ty (HEA) began run­ning a series of ads on British tele­vi­sion star­ring the Mon­ty Python come­di­an and ex-smok­er, John Cleese. Smok­ing remained the #1 cause of pre­ma­ture death in the UK, and the HEA want­ed to see if a media cam­paign could make a dent in the epi­dem­ic. As part of a con­trolled exper­i­ment (all detailed here), ads star­ring Cleese were shown in cer­tain parts of the UK (but not oth­ers), and they used mor­bid humor and macabre sce­nar­ios “first to engage the view­ers’ curios­i­ty,” and then to “high­light the dan­gers of smok­ing, show[ing] the ridicu­lous­ness of the smok­ing habit.” Final­ly, view­ers were giv­en a phone num­ber to call where they could get more infor­ma­tion on how to quit.

So what were the results? Dur­ing the cam­paign (which ran from 1992 to 1994), the “quit­line” received around 20,000 calls over­all. Data crunch­ers lat­er found that the con­trol groups exposed to the ads quit smok­ing at a high­er rate than groups that had­n’t seen the com­mer­cials. Plus the relapse rates of the con­trol group were low­er than the norm. All of this led the gov­ern­ment to con­clude that “anti-smok­ing TV adver­tis­ing should be under­tak­en rou­tine­ly as an essen­tial com­po­nent of any pop­u­la­tion smok­ing reduc­tion strat­e­gy.” In this post, we’ve high­light­ed three of the bet­ter pre­served ads in the cam­paign.

Relat­ed Con­tent:

An Anti, Anti-Smok­ing Announce­ment from John Waters

Bertrand Rus­sell: “I Owe My Life to Smok­ing”

John Cleese’s Phi­los­o­phy of Cre­ativ­i­ty: Cre­at­ing Oases for Child­like Play

John Cleese’s Eulo­gy for Gra­ham Chap­man: ‘Good Rid­dance, the Free-Load­ing Bas­tard, I Hope He Fries’

Learn to Draw Butts with Just Five Simple Lines

You know what I say when some­one tells me they “can’t” draw?

Pshaw.

Even those who’ve yet to dis­cov­er the trans­for­ma­tive effects of Lyn­da Bar­ry’s won­der­ful­ly cor­rec­tive Pic­ture This know how to draw some­thing. Very few chil­dren make it to adult­hood with­out pick­ing up some sim­ple geo­met­ric for­mu­la by which a series of ovals, rec­tan­gles and lines can be con­fig­ured to resem­ble a dog­gie head or a brave astride his can­ter­ing pony.

A cou­ple thou­sand ren­der­ings lat­er, such mag­ic still sat­is­fies, but you might want to con­sid­er branch­ing out. May I rec­om­mend the teach­ings of artist and visu­al sto­ry­teller, Karl Gude? This laid-back for­mer Direc­tor of Infor­ma­tion Graph­ics at Newsweek can — and will! — teach you how to draw “great butts” with just five lines.

Gude’s com­mand of pos­te­ri­or essen­tials is down­right heady. (I say this as a for­mer artist’s mod­el whose rear end has been mis­rep­re­sent­ed on paper more times than I’d care to men­tion.) Who knew that cap­tur­ing this part of human anato­my could prove so sim­ple? Gude’s easy­go­ing online instruc­tion style may be trace­able to some sort of adult bev­er­age (I’m not cast­ing stones…), but his meth­ods are easy enough for a child to mas­ter.

Speak­ing of which, if you want to make a friend for life, share the above video with an actu­al child, prefer­ably one who claims he or she “can’t” draw. Put a Sharpie in his or her paw, and with­in five min­utes, Gude will have the lit­tle twerp crank­ing out butts of all shapes and sizes. After which, pride of accom­plish­ment may well lead to some of Gude’s more advanced tuto­ri­als, like the detailed human eye seen below.

If that proves too chal­leng­ing, there’s no shame in stick­ing with the glutes. To my way of think­ing, the mind­set that allows the artist to keep going when his pen­cil snaps mid-demon­stra­tion is les­son enough.

Relat­ed Con­tent:

Join Car­toon­ist Lyn­da Bar­ry for a Uni­ver­si­ty-Lev­el Course on Doo­dling and Neu­ro­science

Saul Bass’ Advice for Design­ers: Learn to Draw, and Cre­ate Beau­ty Even If Nobody Else Cares

The Anatom­i­cal Draw­ings of Renais­sance Man, Leonar­do da Vin­ci

Clever Ani­ma­tion Brings Fig­ure Draw­ings to Life

Ayun Hal­l­i­day’s per­son­al mot­to is Dare to Be Heinie. Fol­low her @AyunHalliday

« Go BackMore in this category... »
Quantcast