As I said, I am not asserting any baseline level of competence in the SNL writing this year, but I do think there was a noticeable difference. In several places, it was not just that the parts that were clearly supposed to be funny were not funny, but that it was difficult (at least for the studio audience) to even identify what parts were trying to be funny. That audience wanted to laugh and be supportive of Trump (I felt), but just did not always know where - maybe it was the guys controlling the apple-sauce signs that were protesting, not the writers?
I could see some conscious or unconscious goldbricking by the writers as part of the problem, even with the risks Tom points out; I could also see meddling and micromanaging, and maybe lack of enthusiasm by some of the cast. And of course it also could just be that Trump (and his daughter) are just not (intentionally) very funny. That is not a reason not to vote for him for president (there are loads of those), but I think it is easy to confuse someone who is funny either unintentionally, or just because his style undermines the normal, conventional context he is most often seen in, with someone who is genuinely funny. On Sun, Nov 8, 2015 at 7:57 PM, Kevin M. <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Sun, Nov 8, 2015 at 7:47 PM, Tom Wolper <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Sun, Nov 8, 2015 at 12:41 PM, PGage <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >>> Then it hit me - was it possible that the writers really were >>> intentionally tanking the show, as their own protest at being forced to use >>> Trump? I am sure this will be a big ratings winner for NBC, but it had to >>> make most of the cast and crew feel dirty - not because he is politically >>> controversial, but because Trump himself is just such a hack. >>> >> >> I would never assume that if only because professionals don't put their >> livelihoods at risk like that. Staff writers do not have tenure and if the >> effort is noticeably lacking there will be consequences. What is more >> likely is that Trump and his handlers micromanaged the writing process and >> took out any sharp lines. >> >> Not to contradict what I previously wrote, but I know of a handful of > instances when writers intentionally -- well -- lowered their own level of > quality in an effort to make on-air talent look bad. There are tales of > revenge against those who crossed the picket line during the last WGA > strike, for instance. Writers did, indeed, put their livelihoods as risk > because they felt the subject(s) of their writing were no longer worthy of > their words. I just think, in the case of the SNL staff, for them to write > any lower they'd have to resort to knock-knock jokes. > > > -- > Kevin M. (RPCV) > > -- > -- > 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 > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "TVorNotTV" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- -- 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 --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TVorNotTV" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
