Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

SNL is Friggin' Horrible! Except when Timberlake is hosting.


Christo

Recommended Posts

Very choppy...can't believe how clunky every skit seemed.

And not a very good indication of creativity...

She's hard to look at but that Biz Markie looking chick should probably get more skits.

Who's the new guy that looks like Andy Samberg and Jon Cryer had a baby? He seems like he could shine a bit.

Between those two and McKinnon...my wide screen can barely handle the nostrils.

Really hope Lorne loosens his hold at some point soon and let's someone else find the writing talent out there...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pete Davidson has promise.

His appearance on Weekend Update was the only time I laughed all night.

I was just relieved to have someone who could read from a prompter. Che was brutal. Chalk it up to first time jitters I guess.

Yeah that was as bad as I can recall ever seeing. Uncomfortably terrible. Wasn't Lorne or some article saying he had awesome chemistry with the other guy? Not an ounce was seen yesterday anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Aidy Bryant: Sex Kitten" works well once every few episodes. Three sketches in one night was overkill, and hurt that Awkward Flirters sketch. which Chris Pratt was fantastic in, BTW.

Like others have said, a lot of flubs and stumbled lines. Michael Che was the worst offender, but loosened up during the Cheer Up jam.

Greg Davidson is the truth. I was almost in tears laughing at his WU bit. That was really clever. Can't wait to see more of that guy. More Leslie Jones in WU, too. Her performance style and energy level is a great change of pace for the joke grenades the anchors roll through the room. Overall the problem with WU wasn't the material; it was all in the delivery. Give the same stuff to Myers & Poehler or Fey & Fallon and it destroys.

Weird how little Vanessa Bayer and Kenan Thompson appeared on screen. Might not have made the show funnier, but at least would have come off as more professional. They're pretty smooth even when sketches die.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does the format of SNL just make it too difficult to put on a consistently funny show? Making the show live, and coming up with something like 60 minutes of material in a week, and integrating a new host every week, just seems like hurdles other shows don't need to deal with. From my perspective, both Key & Peele and Amy Shumer are way better sketch comedy shows right now, and I think that's in large part due to the fact that those shows aren't live, don't have guest hosts, and are only like 22 minutes of material.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Aidy Bryant: Sex Kitten" works well once every few episodes. Three sketches in one night was overkill, and hurt that Awkward Flirters sketch. which Chris Pratt was fantastic in, BTW.

Absolutely. SNL has been hammering that note to death. Trying to turn her into a Melissa McCarthy, maybe? I don't know, but it's overkill.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think the host has to be a killer. What is the format usually? 7 live skits, a digital short, a prerecorded "commercial", and weekend update? How hard is it for an army of writers to make 3 of that 7 skits funny even if they don't include the host?

I think that this could actually be part of the problem. You have a bunch of writers and a bunch of talent, many of whom do not know each other. They need to get a feel for each other and sometimes don't really mesh. It is probably at its best when there is a really good head writer and/or a few de facto leaders. Too many people and not enough chemistry can make it difficult to work out. Compare that to the comedy central shows, or others, which are generally the vision of 1 or a couple of people, normally working with a smaller team of people that they like.

It's probably why the individual weekend update pieces are people's favorites. They are an individual idea worked through from beginning to end without too much interference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does the format of SNL just make it too difficult to put on a consistently funny show? Making the show live, and coming up with something like 60 minutes of material in a week, and integrating a new host every week, just seems like hurdles other shows don't need to deal with. From my perspective, both Key & Peele and Amy Shumer are way better sketch comedy shows right now, and I think that's in large part due to the fact that those shows aren't live, don't have guest hosts, and are only like 22 minutes of material.

I would agree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does the format of SNL just make it too difficult to put on a consistently funny show? Making the show live, and coming up with something like 60 minutes of material in a week, and integrating a new host every week, just seems like hurdles other shows don't need to deal with. From my perspective, both Key & Peele and Amy Shumer are way better sketch comedy shows right now, and I think that's in large part due to the fact that those shows aren't live, don't have guest hosts, and are only like 22 minutes of material.

There's a lot more competition for talent, that's for sure. I don't think the live format is the problem... I think it all boils down to lack of writing and has for a few years. There are funny people in the cast, the material is just crap.

After that bull#### season premiere, and with an up and coming first time host that SHOULD have been a plus-plus.. I'm as down on SNL as I've ever been right now.

To right the ship Lorne would have to blow the lock off a wallet and poach some real comedy writers from one of the dozen or so funnier shows out there. I'm not DVRing this trash anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think the host has to be a killer. What is the format usually? 7 live skits, a digital short, a prerecorded "commercial", and weekend update? How hard is it for an army of writers to make 3 of that 7 skits funny even if they don't include the host?

I think that this could actually be part of the problem. You have a bunch of writers and a bunch of talent, many of whom do not know each other. They need to get a feel for each other and sometimes don't really mesh. It is probably at its best when there is a really good head writer and/or a few de facto leaders. Too many people and not enough chemistry can make it difficult to work out. Compare that to the comedy central shows, or others, which are generally the vision of 1 or a couple of people, normally working with a smaller team of people that they like.

It's probably why the individual weekend update pieces are people's favorites. They are an individual idea worked through from beginning to end without too much interference.

I can appreciate the chemistry piece, but this seems like a missed opportunity for the show. Why not leverage the internet (streaming or not) and let the new people work together during the summer and push some content?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This past Saturday night from 10-11 pm, NBC re-ran a classic episode from 1975 with Richard Pryor hosting.

Five minutes of Pryor's monologue was funnier than entire the season premiere combined.

I hadn't watched an SNL in years but figured since its the opener, why not ? Now I remember why I have avoided this show for ages.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have liked the show even when most people hated it, but agree this was a clunker. Feels like the cast is hurting a bit right now, and the writing has been spotty for awhile. Hoping they can discover some talent though. Still usually put out one or two skits each show that are decent so it's good to be able to watch on DVR and skip through the terrible stuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think the host has to be a killer. What is the format usually? 7 live skits, a digital short, a prerecorded "commercial", and weekend update? How hard is it for an army of writers to make 3 of that 7 skits funny even if they don't include the host?

I think that this could actually be part of the problem. You have a bunch of writers and a bunch of talent, many of whom do not know each other. They need to get a feel for each other and sometimes don't really mesh. It is probably at its best when there is a really good head writer and/or a few de facto leaders. Too many people and not enough chemistry can make it difficult to work out. Compare that to the comedy central shows, or others, which are generally the vision of 1 or a couple of people, normally working with a smaller team of people that they like.

It's probably why the individual weekend update pieces are people's favorites. They are an individual idea worked through from beginning to end without too much interference.

They need to finally fix the wrong and hire Wikkidpissah

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SNL was consistently funny every week in the early up to Phil Heartman eras. I agree with too much alternate channels for young talent to exploit.

The show used to attract the young multi-talented comedians who could write, act, and sing. But guys like Donald Glover got poached when Tina Fey went off to do 30 rock. He would have been perfect for SNL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does the format of SNL just make it too difficult to put on a consistently funny show? Making the show live, and coming up with something like 60 minutes of material in a week, and integrating a new host every week, just seems like hurdles other shows don't need to deal with. From my perspective, both Key & Peele and Amy Shumer are way better sketch comedy shows right now, and I think that's in large part due to the fact that those shows aren't live, don't have guest hosts, and are only like 22 minutes of material.

A lot of good points here.

The writing schedule is brutal. It was originally designed by people who used cocaine daily, so there's an all-night writing session on Tuesday night.

The shorter show and season helps smaller staffs like Key & Peele a lot. I'm a big fan of K&P, but it's tough to make an apples-to-apples comparison of what they are doing to SNL. The entirety of the Key & Peele series run to date would fill about half a season of SNL, and they wrote and filmed it over at least three years. (I'm curious to see if the quality of K&P suffers this season; they are doing 22 new episodes this season, a workload they previously spread over two years.)

Another disadvantage SNL has is how the show and their parent company chooses to do business. Cast members don't make big money to keep production costs down. Cast members are expected to write sketches but most of them aren't credited as writers. Cast members have to sign long-term contracts with little leverage. A new cast hire signs a 6-7 year deal for SNL that also includes limitations on TV work afterwards, funneling cast members to NBC-owned TV projects after their time on SNL is done. The NBC suits don't want to give SNL cast members a ton of airtime on SNL only to see them break out as stars on an NBC competitor. So a performer who doesn't want to have the next 10-12 years of their career limited by a contract will pass on SNL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kyle Mooney is good. His weird shorts are creative. That 80s three guys living together sitcom sendup with the pack of gang kids would have been funnier if it had been sandwiched between funnier material. Because the overall night was so poor, it looked amateurish when that intended effect would have resonated better in a good show.

Mooney had a similar problem last season premiere. His first appearance in character was as an unfunny 1980s standup comedian on Weekend Update. The bit kills with comedy nerds, but fell flat with in the audience in the midst of a mediocre WU. It took me a while to "get" him, but he's an asset.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That 70s Richard Pryor rerun will best anything the 2014 cast throws up this year.

And that was trimmed down...I think they cut out the Exorcist sketch and the ongoing police lineups bits that were spread out across that episode.

They really should've played that entire episode...it's got a lot more funny to give.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does the format of SNL just make it too difficult to put on a consistently funny show? Making the show live, and coming up with something like 60 minutes of material in a week, and integrating a new host every week, just seems like hurdles other shows don't need to deal with. From my perspective, both Key & Peele and Amy Shumer are way better sketch comedy shows right now, and I think that's in large part due to the fact that those shows aren't live, don't have guest hosts, and are only like 22 minutes of material.

A lot of good points here.

The writing schedule is brutal. It was originally designed by people who used cocaine daily, so there's an all-night writing session on Tuesday night.

The shorter show and season helps smaller staffs like Key & Peele a lot. I'm a big fan of K&P, but it's tough to make an apples-to-apples comparison of what they are doing to SNL. The entirety of the Key & Peele series run to date would fill about half a season of SNL, and they wrote and filmed it over at least three years. (I'm curious to see if the quality of K&P suffers this season; they are doing 22 new episodes this season, a workload they previously spread over two years.)

Another disadvantage SNL has is how the show and their parent company chooses to do business. Cast members don't make big money to keep production costs down. Cast members are expected to write sketches but most of them aren't credited as writers. Cast members have to sign long-term contracts with little leverage. A new cast hire signs a 6-7 year deal for SNL that also includes limitations on TV work afterwards, funneling cast members to NBC-owned TV projects after their time on SNL is done. The NBC suits don't want to give SNL cast members a ton of airtime on SNL only to see them break out as stars on an NBC competitor. So a performer who doesn't want to have the next 10-12 years of their career limited by a contract will pass on SNL.

All very true...but there's a LONG hiatus between seasons. You can't tell me a solid writing group can't come up with enough material to fill in the gaps or at least make a great season opener...This was awful.

my son watched the Richard Pryor episode before watching this thing and he said, "the old one was funny because they were doing comedy that's timeless...This new stuff is so topical...who'd watch this 20 years from now and laugh at the over the top impression of Shannon Sharpe he's doing...who even know who Shannon Sharpe is? They'd just sit there and say, I guess it's funny."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That 70s Richard Pryor rerun will best anything the 2014 cast throws up this year.

I'd love to hear from someone who thinks the Albert Brooks short film or the Muppets sketch from the Richard Pryor rerun was funnier than any sketch from the 2014-2015 season premiere.

I would've trimmed both of those for the Exorcist and police lineup sketches.

Not funny at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That 70s Richard Pryor rerun will best anything the 2014 cast throws up this year.

And that was trimmed down...I think they cut out the Exorcist sketch and the ongoing police lineups bits that were spread out across that episode.

They really should've played that entire episode...it's got a lot more funny to give.

I saved it on my DVR so I could upload this clip. It's astounding to me that this skit was deemed suitable for network television at any time.

Chevy must watch this now and cringe.

Edited by Raider Nation
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That 70s Richard Pryor rerun will best anything the 2014 cast throws up this year.

And that was trimmed down...I think they cut out the Exorcist sketch and the ongoing police lineups bits that were spread out across that episode.

They really should've played that entire episode...it's got a lot more funny to give.

I saved it on my DVR so I could upload this clip. It's astounding to me that this skit was deemed suitable for network television at any time.

Chevy must watch this now and cringe.

Already blocked. How does that happen that fast?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does the format of SNL just make it too difficult to put on a consistently funny show? Making the show live, and coming up with something like 60 minutes of material in a week, and integrating a new host every week, just seems like hurdles other shows don't need to deal with. From my perspective, both Key & Peele and Amy Shumer are way better sketch comedy shows right now, and I think that's in large part due to the fact that those shows aren't live, don't have guest hosts, and are only like 22 minutes of material.

A lot of good points here.

The writing schedule is brutal. It was originally designed by people who used cocaine daily, so there's an all-night writing session on Tuesday night.

The shorter show and season helps smaller staffs like Key & Peele a lot. I'm a big fan of K&P, but it's tough to make an apples-to-apples comparison of what they are doing to SNL. The entirety of the Key & Peele series run to date would fill about half a season of SNL, and they wrote and filmed it over at least three years. (I'm curious to see if the quality of K&P suffers this season; they are doing 22 new episodes this season, a workload they previously spread over two years.)

Another disadvantage SNL has is how the show and their parent company chooses to do business. Cast members don't make big money to keep production costs down. Cast members are expected to write sketches but most of them aren't credited as writers. Cast members have to sign long-term contracts with little leverage. A new cast hire signs a 6-7 year deal for SNL that also includes limitations on TV work afterwards, funneling cast members to NBC-owned TV projects after their time on SNL is done. The NBC suits don't want to give SNL cast members a ton of airtime on SNL only to see them break out as stars on an NBC competitor. So a performer who doesn't want to have the next 10-12 years of their career limited by a contract will pass on SNL.

:lmao: SNL isn't trying to be those shows. I give them huge props for their format. It's like going to an improv comedy show and leaving saying "that wasn't as funny as Anchor Man. They should really rehearse more and edit and stuff."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...