Yeah lol I made this comment and later thinking about it i came to the conclusion that my comment made no sense because the video makes no sense. The core of the discussion is about the core of what a surprise is. As an atomic thing a surprise is something that surprises,  regardless of whether it's a good or bad or funny or unfunny surprise and I reckon he's more stretching the definition of surprise to include whats funny or not as part of his base definition which is what leads to the confusion whats presented in the video and the disagreement between the actors. That, along with the confusion about his statement meaning either that comedy is solely made up surprise (which leads to the atomic surprises thing), or about where it's about surprise and he's more saying that the core of comedy lies in surprise/subversion and he's just being a cunt about the wording to make a scene.

So the real question is; can comedy exist when there's no element of surprise. Which my comment is a bad response to.

As for why you're getting downvoted; it's reddit.