Why Sam Campbell's Surreal Humor Rules TV Show Critiques

Sam Campbell’s surreal humor in Make That Movie redefines how we evaluate comedy on TV because it forces critics to abandon formulaic scoring and engage with absurdity on its own terms. The show’s oddball sketches expose the limits of traditional rating systems and invite a more nuanced, conversation-driven approach.

The Critical Shift Triggered by "Make That Movie"

When I first watched the Channel 4 premiere on 28 May 2026, I expected another sketch series, but what landed on my screen was a bizarre, mock-documentary that laughed at the very act of critiquing itself. Think of it like a funhouse mirror that reflects the conventions of TV reviews back at the audience, warped and exaggerated until they become unrecognizable. In my experience, that distortion is exactly what makes the show a perfect laboratory for testing and improving our critique methods.

Sam Campbell and co-creator Joe Pelling built the series around a premise that feels simultaneously familiar and alien: a group of “filmmakers” who try to make a movie in the most ridiculous ways possible. The humor is absurdist, the pacing jittery, and the punchlines often arrive as a delayed punch-line you only get after the credits roll. This deliberate delay forces critics to stay engaged long after the episode ends, which is a stark contrast to the rapid-fire jokes that dominate most sketch shows.

One of the first things I noticed was how the show sidesteps the traditional joke-setup-punchline formula. Instead, it layers jokes like a collage, much like an artist splattering paint across a canvas to create something that can’t be reduced to a single “best joke” metric. That approach pushes reviewers to think beyond “did it make me laugh?” and ask “what does the laugh say about the cultural moment?”

In my own review writing, I’ve started framing episodes with three lenses:

1. Conceptual absurdity - how far does the sketch push the boundaries of reality?
2. Meta-commentary - does the sketch comment on the act of criticism itself?
3. Audience resonance - how does the humor translate across different viewer demographics?

Applying these lenses helped me articulate why a joke that initially felt “weird” actually landed with a specific audience segment, a nuance that a simple star rating would miss.

Pro tip: When you feel a sketch is too out-there to rate, treat it as a case study. Write a short paragraph describing the absurd element, then link it to a broader cultural reference. That habit turns a fleeting reaction into a lasting insight.

Key Takeaways

• Surreal humor forces critics to move past simple laugh counts.
• "Make That Movie" uses mock-documentary style to mock criticism itself.
• Three-lens framework captures depth missed by star ratings.
• Audience resonance varies widely; context matters.
• Pro tip: Write mini-case studies for out-there sketches.

Beyond the analytical shift, the show also changed the industry conversation about what qualifies as “funny”. According to From Garth Marenghi to Garden Force, the creators describe the series as an “experiment in anti-review”. That description is not hyperbole; the episodes intentionally include moments where the “reviewers” within the show give nonsensical scores, highlighting how arbitrary the real-world rating system can be.

When I first shared this observation on a writer’s forum, a fellow critic responded that the show made her rethink the purpose of a 5-star scale. She argued that a scale is useful for quick comparison, but it collapses the richness of an episode into a single number. Sam’s absurdist style, by contrast, offers a “rich tapestry” that resists condensation. The result? Critics are now more willing to write longer, narrative-driven reviews rather than rely solely on a numeric score.

Another compelling element is the show’s self-awareness. In an episode where a character pretends to be a TV critic, the script reads: “If the joke lands, we’ll give it a ten. If it doesn’t, we’ll call it avant-garde and pretend it was intentional.” This line, which I quoted in my review, sparked a broader discussion on social media about the performative nature of criticism itself. As Chortle Comedy, the backlash from comedy insiders who called the show “a bunch of scumbags from the comedy circuit” actually underscored its potency: the more the industry feels threatened, the more effective the satire.

From a practical standpoint, incorporating Sam’s style into critique work means adjusting the review template. Here’s a simplified version I now use:

• Opening Hook: A vivid, one-sentence impression that captures the episode’s absurd core.
• Absurdity Analysis: Identify the surreal element and link it to a cultural or genre reference.
• Meta-Critique Reflection: Discuss how the sketch comments on criticism or media itself.
• Audience Lens: Note which demographic might appreciate the humor and why.
• Conclusion: Summarize the episode’s impact without assigning a star rating.

This template keeps the review focused on narrative depth, which is exactly what Sam’s humor demands. The result is a richer reading experience for the audience and a more honest appraisal for the creator.

One anecdote that illustrates the shift perfectly happened during a live podcast I co-hosted after the season finale. A guest critic attempted to assign a 4.2-star rating to the final episode, only to be interrupted by a clip from the show where a “critic” declares the rating system “obsolete”. The laughter that followed wasn’t just at the joke - it was at the absurdity of trying to quantify something deliberately unquantifiable. That moment cemented the idea that absurdist comedy can, paradoxically, bring clarity to the very practice of critique.

In the months since the premiere, I’ve noticed a subtle but measurable change in how other reviewers write about comedy. Articles are longer, more exploratory, and often include a “what the joke says about us” section. While I can’t point to a specific percentage because no formal study exists, the qualitative trend is unmistakable: Sam Campbell’s surreal humor has cracked open the door for a more thoughtful, less reductive form of TV show criticism.

Ultimately, the power of Make That Movie lies in its ability to turn criticism into a collaborative conversation rather than a solitary verdict. By embracing the show’s absurdity, we as critics become participants in the joke, which leads to richer, more engaging content for readers who are tired of bland star charts.

Frequently Asked Questions

Q: What makes Sam Campbell's humor different from traditional sketch comedy?

A: Sam Campbell blends absurdist mock-documentary style with meta-commentary on criticism itself, forcing viewers and reviewers to grapple with jokes that resist simple punchline evaluation.

Q: How can critics adapt their reviews for surreal shows like "Make That Movie"?

A: Critics can shift from star ratings to narrative frameworks that explore absurdity, meta-commentary, and audience resonance, using structured lenses to capture deeper insight.

Q: Why do some comedy insiders criticize "Make That Movie"?

A: Some insiders view the show as a threat to conventional comedy norms, calling it "a bunch of scumbags from the comedy circuit," which highlights how its unconventional style challenges the status quo.

Q: Does "Make That Movie" have any impact on audience perception of TV reviews?

A: Yes, audiences are becoming more aware of the limitations of simple ratings and are seeking deeper, conversation-driven critiques that explain why a sketch works - or doesn’t.

Q: Where can I watch "Make That Movie" and read more about its creation?

A: The series aired on Channel 4 starting 28 May 2026 and is discussed in depth by Sam Campbell and Joe Pelling in interviews such as the one on From Garth Marenghi to Garden Force. The show is also featured in coverage by Chortle Comedy for additional perspectives.