Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Community Discussion' started by pimentoLoaf, Jan 7, 2006.
The humor seems so ... lackluster, don't you think?
once they change up the cast and the writers they will be fine.
it has become an institution - which is usually a bad thing, but it works more like an artist commune with good and bad players moving in and out of it. Change is its key to success - reinvention like David Bowie has used.
The current staff has lack luster players fo' sho' . But Tina Fey is still a gem - and recently but not currently - Traci Morgan was excellentfantabuloastick.
SNL has good things to offer - even if you have to wade through some formulated / poorly conceived work. I love the old stuff - but some of it wasn't funny then and is viewed with romantic nostalgia today.
Thanks for pointing that out, so true. All I hear is everyone saying how good all the old ones were. There were a lot of bad ones then too. Yes there was a greater percentage of good episodes then, but it seems people don't even think twice about if old SNL skits are all funny.
SNL needs to add more political humor back into things, for starters.
I have hated that show for SO many years, I wish it WOULD END
Not more political humor, more variety. I'm tired of having somebody playing the president as the opener almost every single week. New writers might have some other ideas to intersperse.
I find that each show has something to laugh at and some dud skits too.
Some of the best work they do is making the fake commercials. Let's have more of those.
The show has always had a mixture of skits that work and those that fall flat on their faces. 60-minute reruns of old shows (less than 60 once you remove the commercials) have the luxury of picking the best skits from a show, so old shows tend to seem better than recent ones.
Politics demand satire... fading off into polical forum... but you are correct sir.
Just to add a devil's advocate POV- todays political figures are such easy targets in the US that if SNL wants to be cutting edge they will have to do political satire and humor REALLY well. Or - not at all. Perhaps the lack of current event material is because they can't rise to the challenge. Or maybe our heads of state have made it too darn obvious that they are a joke
Translation: "Once they change everything about the show, they'll be fine."
I think things are on a solid upswing. It's been pretty good recently, and it is an institution. That means you have people who are in their fifties and sixties who've been watching it for decades and still enjoy it, people in their thirties and fourties who've been watching it since they were little kids (and for decades) who still enjoy it. There are people in their twenties who like it. People in their teens.
If anyone can pitch something for network TV that could draw SNL's audience and serve as a proving ground for young actors, then maybe we'll talk.
What's going to take its place? Infomercials? If you don't like it, don't watch it. I always thought of SNL as the breeding ground for new comedic talents. It did give us Eddie Murphy and Will Ferrell.
Here's to the Crazy Ones
... And David Spade.
SNL has been around forever, and it should stay that way. It would be like getting rid of the Tonight Show.
(the Tonight Show should go along with it)
Should be replaced with softcore porn, I say.