So, I’m going to push back on this.The fact that you have to go back to Sid Caesar, who last ran a regular live television sketch show 61 years ago, as an example of how not difficult it is to do a live show seems more an argument for my side.
Plus, Caesar had a team of writers that is to this day unparalleled, including: Mel Brooks, Selma Diamond, Carl Reiner, Neil Simon, Larry Gelbart and Woody Allen (among others who were A-List, if somewhat less well known today). Cesar himself was a unique comic talent, who was widely credited with transforming and elevating the material he was given. I am not as critical of Lorne Michaels as Dave is, but he is no Sid Caesar, and it is unlikely that any television show since has ever had the writing talent Caesar had to draw on. Even so, Your Show of Shows and Caesar’s Hour had their share of clunker sketches, some of which went on way too long (though some of the long ones were magical). I have seen a few excerpts in some special they had a long time ago, but my main sources are my mother and grandfather, both of whom were big fans (my grandfathers parents were from a town not far from Caesar’s in Poland). When I talked with them the most about Caesar, mostly in the years after SNL premiered, they both argued loudly that Show of Shows was far superior to SNL, but also allowed that there were plenty of duds. Perhaps more to the point, between his two main series, Caesar did 7 seasons, which even corrected for the greater number of episodes per season is less than 11 seasons worth of content of SNL (and his second series was only an hour). Caesar’s Wikipedia article includes this quote from Mel Brooks: “I know of no other comedian, including Chaplin, who could have done nearly ten years of live television. Nobody's talent was ever more used up than Sid's. He was one of the greatest artists ever born. But over a period of years, television ground him into sausages." SNL has been on for 45 seasons, most of them produced by the same person. One of the ways it has survived as long as it has is by relying on shortcuts, which lead to many of the characteristics Dave cites that make it so often disappointing. Their topical and political humor is often obvious and simplistic. Like a long running improv troupe they have a stock of mad lib type templates that they mix and match and plug hosts and new cast member into. This doesn’t just save work for the writers, but keeps the demands on performing and production within well calibrated parameters that the show knows they can hit every week, even with weak or problem guests. Most of these problems get solved or are easier to deal with if they add more recorded material. They could take more chances, because they could edit and re-do what doesn’t work. They could be more innovative because they would have more time, and there would be less pressure because they could have some evergreen sketches in the can on reserve. They could have teams of writers and producers, and even cast members, rotating on separate schedules, giving everyone both more time off and more time to work on writing, production and post production. And yet, with a live host “Monologue “, 2-3 musical performances, Weekend Update and maybe a featured sketch, the show would still have the hook of being live that you emphasize. I imagine about 50-60% of the content being pre-recorded. On Sun, Apr 26, 2020 at 10:35 PM 'Dave Sikula' wrote: Personal taste in cast members aside, I think the "live" aspect of it is the only thing that's kept the show running--and why it now airs live on the west coast. The nets are desperate to get eyeballs and--for now, anyway--the best way to guarantee that is by going live (hence the ever-increasing reliance on sports). (Snip) I don't mind pre-taped material--I think the 1984-85 season was one of the show's best, and that was packed with filmed stuff--but I don't think the difficulty of creating 90 minutes of material 26 weeks a year is that overwhelming with the right writing staff. Caesar's staffs did, what, 39?, for years, as did every other variety show. Whether they were live or live to tape wasn't much of a distinction. The biggest problem with SNL (other than certain performers, of course) is that the writing is toothless and predictable, with variations on the same premises week after week and paper-thin political commentary. (I mean, is Baldwin's Trump really anything? Tony Atamanuik's "President Show" was far more devastating on a shoestring budget.) There are occasional gems--which is why I keep watching the show, in vain hope--but, for the most part, the sketches are just stupid, dull, and too long, rather than satirical or even funny. I blame that consistent similarity on Lorne's sense of humor, and assume the writers are working to his tastes, so while a change in that chair might work wonders, given his total stranglehold on NBC's late night lineup, I don't expect that any time soon. -- Sent from Gmail Mobile -- 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]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAKGtkYJRAO7yu7S-5R4yc18DvqYkn4uC-tPXHvvszZ-VmufOuA%40mail.gmail.com.
