Bad writing is bad writing, no matter where it comes from, which would include performers who write their own material.
As I said, with rare exceptions, the writing on the show sucks. Wish I knew why, but I don't. From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Bradford Sent: Sunday, May 09, 2010 1:50 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [TV orNotTV] Re: Watch the Betty White SNL I don't disagree that the main problem with SNL these days is the writing. But don't many of the cast members also double as writers - or at least contributing characters that they've done onstage before? I've just had a hard time figuring out what's so funny about running characters from the current crop of performers. At least with the return of some of the old cast members they were able to break away from some of the repetition of ideas that weren't all that funny in the first place. And certainly Betty White allowed them to go places they weren't able to go with the usual teenage flash in the pan that usually winds up as guest host. ----- Original Message ----- From: Melissa P <mailto:[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Sunday, May 09, 2010 11:55 AM Subject: RE: [TV orNotTV] Re: Watch the Betty White SNL SNL's only serious problem is the writing. Of course, that's a huge problem. You can complain about a performer, but it's actually the material that performer has to work with that's the real problem. So, given that the writing generally sucks from week to week (there are occasional bright spots), if there's any quality in an episode, it's almost always attributable to the guest host. And, Betty was, by far, the best guest host they've had this year. From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Bradford Sent: Sunday, May 09, 2010 12:44 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [TV orNotTV] Re: Watch the Betty White SNL Could part of the reason for last night's quality was that they relied so much on former cast members and so few of the current cast were used? (While I wouldn't say that last night's show was great, it was certainly better than most of their recent efforts and lacked the unevenness that has plagued the show for the last few years.) (In my opinion...) ----- Original Message ----- From: "donz5" < <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected]> To: "TVorNotTV" < <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected]> Sent: Sunday, May 09, 2010 11:29 AM Subject: [TV orNotTV] Re: Watch the Betty White SNL Betty was in every segment of the show, including "Update" (Molly's "I'm 50" vs. Betty's "I'm 90"), beating even Will Ferrell's last cast appearance. (Betty's two introductions to Jay-Z ensured her surpassing Will's record.) And yeah, explaining humor is an exercise in futility. I thought last night's SNL its best in years. I thought everyone stepped up to the opportunity. On May 9, 12:02 pm, PGage < <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected]> wrote: > On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 12:07 AM, Kevin M. < <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected]> wrote: > > On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 9:22 PM, David Bruggeman < <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected]> wrote: > > > This is for those that were on the fence. Get off. Tape it, watch it, > > > whatever. > > > The Welk cold open made me want to kill myself. The monologue fell > > flat. The MacGruber sketch made me want to kill others. The NPR sketch > > was better than the original Baldwin version, but only because there > > wasn't a Baldwin in it (same jokes, though). The Snickers commercial > > from the Super Bowl was nice to see, and the promo for Betty's TV Land > > sitcom looked interesting. The "Spanish" talk show wasn't funny, and > > might have been racist. The second MacGruber sketch was exactly the > > same as the first one. The promo for the season finale advertised a > > Baldwin as the host. The lesbian sketch wasn't funny, and might have > > been homophobic. The third MacGruber sketch was exactly the same as > > the first and second. > > > Let me know if later sketches were funny. It is too painful to > > continue. I know humor is subjective, so I welcome others who found > > humor in this installment of SNL to explain it to me. > > I won't even try to explain humor to you, but I will vote on the side of > those who found Betty White to be amazing in the episode. First of all, she > may have literally been in every single sketch, including the cold open (but > not, I suppose, Update) - which is more work than those 1/5 her age often > can handle. I don't think it was the best episode of the season, and I guess > if you are of the view that SNL is never funny any more then that > observation alone would be a death sentence, but it was generally funny - > and she is almost always the funniest part of whatever she is in. They > probably relied too much on contrasting her superficial persona with "dirty" > content, which has long been in her stock in trade. I was hoping for a > Password sketch, but either that was too much of a reach for the show's demo > (yet, that was probably the 3rd time they have done the Welk thing) or she > decided that was too pure to make fun of. > > I thought her monologue was great by the way, and Welk bit makes me laugh, > except for the part that I guess is supposed to be the topper (Wiig's > thalidomide parody - which was the only thing that may really have been > offensive in this show). > > BTW, I wonder if Kevin is serious in raising the possibility of racism and > homophobia about those two sketches, or if that is just the kitchen sink > being thrown into his characteristic hyperbolic panning of the show? I won't > waste any space responding to that unless I hear that it was serious. > > I thought the big news of the episode really was that Rachel Dratch is still > willing to be in the same room with Tina Fey. * > * > > -- > TV or Not TV .... The Smartest (TV) People! > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "TV or Not TV" group. > To post to this group, send email to <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] > For more options, visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en -- TV or Not TV .... The Smartest (TV) People! You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TV or Not TV" group. To post to this group, send email to <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] For more options, visit this group at <http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en> http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en -- TV or Not TV .... The Smartest (TV) People! You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TV or Not TV" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en -- TV or Not TV .... The Smartest (TV) People! You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TV or Not TV" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en -- TV or Not TV .... The Smartest (TV) People! You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TV or Not TV" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en -- TV or Not TV .... The Smartest (TV) People! You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TV or Not TV" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en
