The State of SNL
Featured, The Idiot Box — By Jordan Green on October 22, 2009 at 12:00 am
Only one of these people was actually funny.
Every year around this time, like clockwork, naysayers commence tossing barbs at Saturday Night Live, about how it’s going downhill, about how it’s become a dinosaur.
Admittedly, I did it last year, about a week or two before SNL proceeded to kick out it’s most memorable and successful season in at least a decade.
In my ignorance, I neglected what makes Saturday Night Live so special: it is performed in real time by a host of players, with a wild card guest host who, more than likely, is not trained in improvisational comedy. It’s that live, rushed energy that makes SNL both inconsistently funny, and capable of transcendent moments.
Take, for instance, Tina Fey. On a minute-to-minute basis, Fey’s 30 Rock outguns SNL in solid laughs 10 to 1, a conservative estimate considering the length of each episode. It is tightly-wound, mad cap, and utilizes well the most underestimated tool in television comedy: editing. And yet, Tina Fey is now recognized more for her portrayal of Sarah Palin than as harried head writer Liz Lemon. It’s hard to argue the results: Fey’s Palin character influenced an entire presidential election, after all.
The point is, I’m learning to take SNL for what it is. The highlight of each episode will likely be the moments that are edited and fresh (which is why the Lonely Island-helmed Digital Short series is so awesome), a musical guest who really brings it, and the occasional standout sketch.
That said, I’m not letting Saturday Night Live off the hook just yet.
First, player selection. In any comedy troupe, it’s important to have a wide-array of talents. Saturday Night Live‘s players tend to fall into one of six camps:
The Innovative Savant - Folks like Bill Murray, Tina Fey, and Norm MacDonald. These are the guys who stand out in retrospect, the brilliant minds willing to work the background behind the attention-hogging stars. More often than not, the head writer falls into this category, probably because of their overarching vision of the show. The current cast features a few of these in Fred Armisen and Will Forte.
While I think this is one of the most valuable types, there are certainly poor examples, like Janeane Garafalo.
The Everyman - Often, these players could just as easily fit in the first group, but they are recognized by their everyman status and tempered with less daring. Dan Akroyd, Kevin Nealon, and Chris Parnell are examples: guys who toil for years as consistently funny pieces of the whole. The current cast’s only role player seems to be Jason Sudeikis.
The Chameleon - These are the guys adept at impressions: Phil Hartman, Darrell Hammond, the little-known Jeff Richards, and Bill Hader. The Chameleon should also be a valuable role player. Dana Carvey should be included in this group, but he was a different animal altogether: a superstar mimic who owned the show for a few years.
The Hyper-Intelligent Smarmster - Chevy Chase, David Spade, Jay Mohr, Dennis Miller. This act usually works best on Weekend Update, and Seth Myers fills this role now, though his smarm is considerably toned down compared to those other guys.
The Black Guy - Since Eddie Murphy, SNL’s Black Guy slot has been a cornerstone for that season’s success. While Chris Rock, Tracy Morgan, and Tim Meadows never attained the superstar status of Murphy, they were often valuable additions who could carry a sketch when asked.
But when The Black Guy is bad? Well, you get Kenan Thompson, a guy who’s stuck around despite the fact he wields the same cheesy, shit-eating grin in every single role he plays. Kenan Thompson is what drives me absolutely nuts about the current iteration of SNL. Even when he does manage to elicit a chuckle, like the French Def Jam comedian, Jean K. Jean, he’ll then proceed to pummel said joke into the ground.
The Black Guy needs an outsider edge, whether it’s Rock’s scalpel tongue, Morgan’s bizarro twist on the black guy typecast, or Tim Meadows’ placid straight man. Thompson, meanwhile, has all the outsider’s edge of Nickelodeon, which is, appropriately, where he dulled his teeth. In fact, he more accurately fits into the last group.
The Manic Attention-Grabber – Ever since John Belushi and Gilda Radner, Saturday Night Live has revolved around this role. With a combination of volume, physical comedy, elaborate costumes, crazy/loud voices, and over-the-top antics, the MAG usually becomes the avatar for any given SNL era.
SNL‘s history is littered with these folks. There are the great (Belushi, Will Ferrell, Chris Farley), the occasionally good (Adam Sandler, Mike Myers, Jimmy Fallon, and Radner) and the downright obnoxious (Cheri Oteri, Chris Kattan, Rob Schneider, Jim Breuer, and last season’s merciful cut, Casey Wilson).
The non-obnoxious MAGs seem to share one similar trait: they start off as unknown scene-stealers, rise to the top of the game for a few years, then spend the next decade churning out mediocre drivel in another medium. They define an era of comedy, then make you wonder what happened. Notice that the only long-standing icons on this list are Belushi, Farley, and Radner, all of whom passed away at an early age.1 The MAG career path isn’t unique to SNL, either: witness Robin Williams and Jim Carrey.2
The problem is, the MAG becomes a crutch, a player writers can rely on to fill space and time; to mug, crash, and yell their way through a large portion of the show.
Kenan Thompson premieres a new look, and expects you to laugh riotously.
Because of that reliance, and because MAGs rise to lofty heights so quickly, Lorne Michaels seems to be hiring them more and more. Last season, the cast featured five MAGs: Kristen Wiig, Andy Samberg, Kenan Thompson, Casey Wilson, and Bobby Moynihan. Moynihan and Wilson generally played supporting roles (though Wilson sure tried her best to snatch the spotlight), but that still leaves three hams, and three hams is too many.3
Obviously, the odd man out is Kenan Thompson, because, as opposed to Wiig and Samberg, he is not funny. That seems clear to everyone I’ve ever talked to about the subject.
What I’m fascinated to watch, though, are the career arcs of Kristen Wiig and Andy Samberg.
Samberg resembles, from name to nose to comedy routine, Adam Sandler. He’s goofy and dynamic, utilizes a man-childish emotion, and already has one underrated comedy film (Hot Rod) under his belt. If Sandler’s career is any indication, Samberg has one more brilliant comedy in him (Sandler had Happy Gilmore after Billy Madison), then a series of treacly family comedies in which his man-child character discovers the true meaning of life, then one surprising dramatic turn (Punchdrunk Love), then back to the crappy comedies again.4
His one tether to lasting success is the other two-thirds of The Lonely Island. While I’m sure Akiva Schaeffer and Jorma Taccone aren’t solely responsible for Samberg’s rise to prominence, they seem to balance his comedy in a way Sandler’s menagerie does not.
Besides the Digital Shorts, Wiig has been SNL’s brightest light ever since she was a bit player. Besides stepping into the role of Queen of SNL, Wiig outright robs scenes in films (Knocked Up, Adventureland) and television (as “Brahbrah” on Flight of the Conchords).
Unfortunately, the more SNL spotlight she’s earned with Target Lady, the more opportunity she’s had to play rote characters with minor inflection and behavioral shifts, like Penelope and Gilly.
Of Wiig’s characters, Target Lady is the only one I really love. While Wiig’s portrayal of the nervous, fast-talking Judy Grimes is impressive, I’m more compelled to applaud than laugh, sort of like how I know Yngwie Malmsteen is a great guitarist, but I prefer the music of George Harrison. As for Gilly, Will Forte bears most of the comedic brunt, the other “kids” (usually played by Thompson and Moynihan) are often unbearable, and those skits last way, way, way too long.
I think Wiig will follow the Will Ferrell route, absolutely blowing away the audience when provided great material, but also prone to massive lapses in judgment in choosing roles, particularly if they require her to fall back on her zany voice/crazy hairstyle default.
—
This is getting long, but I’d be remiss not to mention SNL‘s biggest triumph over its first four episodes this year: flawlessly capturing moderate voters’ anxieties regarding Barack Obama nearly a year after his election.
A sketch in SNL’s second episode exposed what Obama’s supporters have been afraid to admit: change has not come. It depicted the President as ineffectual, like George H.W. Bush, a leader who couldn’t follow up on his promises. Comedy is a tool not often used in knocking down the Left (at least not good comedy), and the nervous laughter the sketch gleaned was reflective of that. The sketch was the talk of the media the next couple days, as pundits on both aisles proclaimed the Obama honeymoon over.
That said, I think a sketch two weeks later, featuring Dwayne Johnson as “The Rock” Obama, served up a nice counterpoint, poking fun at the idea that one of the reasons Obama has been so ineffectual was also one of the reasons so many moderates supported him: he’s willing to talk things through. The sketch wasn’t all that funny, but it highlighted a painful reality: as much as we talk about wanting a leader tries to explain, who reaches out for middle ground, the current state of US politics, with filibusters and punditry, doesn’t work for guys like that.
I mean, you gotta hand it to George W.: he got things done.
- Well, relatively. Gilda Radner succumbed to ovarian cancer at 42, while Farley and Belushi each overdosed when they were 33 years old. ↩
- Notably, Williams, Carrey, Belushi, and Mike Myers all appear as prime examples of the Enneagram Type 7 on the Enneagram Insitute website. My theory is that almost all MAGs are Type 7s, but I didn’t want to go into too much here. ↩
- Which is hard for me to say, because I love ham. ↩
- Notice, again, the similarities to the careers of Jim Carrey, Will Ferrell, and Eddie Murphy. I pray Samberg is never offered the role of a Seuss character, or forced to play a series of roles in different fat suits. ↩
22 Comments
Jordan, loved this assessment, dude. Very good stuff.
Man, Dana Carvey. What ever happened to him? He was so so funny, I loved him. Why did his career implode?
I dunno, Jordan. I mean, your assessment overall is very astute. Not sure I agree with every single point, but that’s not surprising considering you made about a hundred of ‘em. For example, why not mention Garrett Morris, the first Black Guy? He wasn’t a center stage guy, like Murphy could be, but he was very funny as a supporting guy.
But I do think that SNL isn’t near as good as in the late 70′s-to-mid-80′s era. The fact that that criticism comes around like clockwork doesn’t make it less true.
Having said that, it’s definitely not as bad now as it has been in the past. Coffee Tawk sucked. The Billy Crystal era sucked. SNL has rebounded somewhat after it hit bottom. It just hasn’t come close to its former heights.
And on a tangent, when you say this:
“The non-obnoxious MAGs seem to share one similar trait: they start off as unknown scene-stealers, rise to the top of the game for a few years, then spend the next decade churning out mediocre drivel in another medium. The define an era of comedy, then make you wonder what happened. … The MAG career path isn’t unique to SNL, either: witness Robin Williams and Jim Carrey.”
were you saying about that Carrey and Robin Williams’ movies have been lame? Some have, of course, but they both have some films which have been much more successful, both critically and financially, than the SNL MAGS you mention.
Nice catch on Garrett Morris. To be honest, there are a number of blind spots in my SNL history knowledge. I watched a lot of the reruns when they ran on Comedy Central in the ’90s, which usually included some older ones, but obviously not all of them.
I think the worst era was ’94-’95, right after Phil Hartman left, and the cast was almost completely brand new, featuring guys like Chris Elliott (who was underrated, but still too weird for a mainstream show like this) and Janeane Garafalo.
As for Williams and Carrey, yeah, I’d say many of the movies they’ve been in later in their careers have been lame.
Running through Robin Williams’ IMDB account (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000245/), the last films I can remember him being decent in were “Good Will Hunting” and maybe “Patch Adams”, both released in the late ’90s. His career has been so long that he’s gone through a couple resurgences, but I think the arc generally sticks to that MAG standard.
As for Jim Carrey, he has a couple great comedies (“Dumb and Dumber”, “Ace Ventura”), then it’s downhill until his dramatic turn in “Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind”, then it’s back to crap right up until today with a remake of an action-packed animated version of “A Christmas Carol” (in which Carrey will play many of the roles). Maybe that’ll be a break out, but it sounds completely awful.
And you’re right: Coffee Talk DID suck.
Guess we’ll have to disagree about Robin Williams. Certainly he has some stinkers(Jakob the Liar), but quite a few that weren’t. He starred in the single most favorite movie of mine, ever: The Fisher King, plus Good Morning Vietnam, Dead Poets, Good Will Hunting, Aladdin, Doubtfire, Awakenings, Moscow On The Hudson, and The World According to Garp.
Funny you mention Patch Adams. I saw a TV ad a few days ago for some new TV series called (I think) Mercy. The tag line is that the Dr in the show plays by her own rules.
But wait! Don’t all Doctors on all medical TV shows have that same gimmick? Ever since MASH, that’s been the M.O. for MD’s on TV. Challenge the stuffy higher-ups, break the rules, save a life!
So Patch Adams is the movie version of that same concept, combined with the patented Robin Williams formula of a guy in any profession whose methods are disturbing, not just because he “plays by his own rules”, but because he’s funny in the process (Good Morning Vietnam, Dead Poets Society)
Put those two things together, what do you get? Patch Adams, one of the worst movies I have ever seen in a theater.
Still, I think RW has had quite a few movies that were not duds, unlike the SNL folks you compared him to.
James:
Are you reading my posts? Every single one of the movies you mentioned came out before “Good Will Hunting”. I agree that these guys usually have a few great comedies in them (and, again, Robin Williams is unique because he’s had such a long career), but since the late ’90s, he’s been awful. And one could argue he was pretty bad before that, too. He was in some awful films in the ’90s. You can’t say the same for Bill Murray.
To restate my theory: comedian rises to the top of his field, makes a few really great comedies (Anchorman, Dumb and Dumber, Good Morning Vietnam, Happy Gilmore); proceeds to make a lot of horrible, awful role decisions; comes out with a surprising dramatic turn (Stranger Than Fiction, Eternal Sunshine, Good Will Hunting, Punchdrunk Love), then goes back to making crappy inspirational films/animated features/children’s book adaptations.
And yeah, I’m carrying a special hatred for “Mercy”. I’m not sure I’ve ever hated a show so much based on the commercials.
As for “Patch Adams”, I’m not really a fan, but it seems like that movie had some supporters.
I read your posts, but I got some very different meanings from what you wrote originally. I thought you were saying that MAGs do well on SNL, then make lame movies. My apologies for misunderstanding, but the sub-thread made for a good discussion. Hope I didn’t derail the main thread to an unrecoverable degree.
Back to your point: I never saw Anchorman, but every Will Ferrell movie I did see was so lame and overrated (Elf, Blades of Glory, Talledega Nights) that I didn’t bother watching the others. I did, however, watch Stranger Than Fiction, and loved it. In fact, I think it ties in right well with Don Miller’s book.
Reading back over my article, I realize I actually didn’t explain as well as I thought I did, so you were completely justified.
You’re totally right regarding the Ferrell movies, but you should see “Anchorman”. It’s not perfect, but it’s a great comedy.
Jordan,
I enjoyed your summary. I think you speak for many of us (although, I also think, based on your breakdown of the six common types of SNL performers, that you have spent more time thinking about it than most of us ever will).
I agree with most of what you wrote, but I will contend, however, that SNL’s uninspiring sketches aren’t the result of a lack of editing as much as poor writing. Some of the sketches are so terrible that even a cast of SNL All-Stars would have trouble eliciting a chuckle. If the writing were better, the sketches would be funnier. I think that’s the bottom line.
In the last few years, SNL’s political humor has been consistently impressive. That’s clearly their bread-and-butter these days. And that success is a result of good writing and subject matter that is universally interesting.
I’d also like to add that, when you wrote this, you couldn’t have been more right:
“But when The Black Guy is bad? Well, you get Kenan Thompson, a guy who’s stuck around despite the fact he wields the same cheesy, shit-eating grin in every single role he plays.”
Postscript: In your brief rundown of Sandler’s movies, you mentioned Punchdrunk Love as a “surprising dramatic turn.” But what about Reign Over Me? I think he did a pretty good job in that movie, but maybe I’m just crazy. Because it doesn’t seem like it garnered much attention at all.
I haven’t seen “Reign Over Me”, but the AV Club “I Watched This On Purpose” column did say it was a bit underrated.
(http://www.avclub.com/articles/reign-over-me,28712/)
Ditto on Sandler’s performance in Reign Over Me. I didn’t like the movie as a whole, but he and Cheadle’s performance were very well done.
Hey, really liked the article, though I do have to disagree with one major point.
Kristen Wiig. Let me start off by saying I like Kristen Wiig, she’s a solid comedian who, outside of SNL, has made me laugh a lot. In Knocked Up, for example, she was hilarious and stole scenes left and right. On SNL, it’s a completely different story. Her recurring characters (Target lady, Gilly[ugh, shoot me], and Judy Grimes) are frequently the worst part of the show. The Gilly sketches are particularly bad. They’re about 5 minutes too long and each sketch takes the same labored joke and beats it into the ground.
Like I said, I really like Kristen outside of SNL. I’m really looking forward to her career post-SNL. But while on SNL, in my opinion, she’s just unbearable.
Overall though, loved your assessment of SNL’s current strengths and weaknesses.
“The Gilly sketches are particularly bad. They’re about 5 minutes too long and each sketch takes the same labored joke and beats it into the ground.”
Absolutely agreed.
It bummed me out to write about Wiig that way, because she really is awesome. So is Will Farrell, but that doesn’t make “Blades of Glory”, “Semi-Pro”, “Kicking and Screaming” and “Step Brothers” any good.
I hope I’m wrong, but I just see Wiig going down that road. I think she still relies to much on hamming it up, and I think she’s best when she gets away from that (like her appearance in “Flight of the Conchords”), when she’s forced to play a really subtle role.
i’ve been a huge fan of snl for a pretty long time now and always argue with people who think it sucks now. i think this is one of the best casts ever, between fred armisen, bill hader, andy samberg, kristin wigg, and bobby moynihan (who isn’t a full on cast member yet, but i think he’s hilarious). i don’t hate kenan as much as you do, but i do think we’d be better off if they stuck with finesse mitchell, the other “black guy” who started at the same time, after tracy morgan left. all that being said, i think this season has sucked pretty hard so far, and i sure hope it gets better soon.
also, you didn’t mention that one of the mags on any given cast tends to be overweight.
An overweight male. Casey Wilson is the only “overweight” female cast member I can think of, and she wasn’t even really fat, maybe like a size 8. There were rumors that’s why she was let go, because they told her to lose 30 lbs over the summer and she either couldn’t, or flat out refused. But again, they’re just rumors. I guess that goes to show, fat guys are funny but fat chicks are..well who cares? nobody likes fat chicks.
Interestingly, I think the obesity factor actually plays into the Enneagram type 7 theory. I left out Horatio Sanz, but he could easily be considered a MAG as well. (Though he didn’t really seem to want to steal the show.)
Type 7s are prone to excess. Here’s what the Enneagram Institute has to say about addiction and health in Type 7s:
“The type most prone to addictions: stimulants (caffeine, cocaine, and amphetamines), Ecstasy, psychotropics, narcotics, and alcohol but tend to avoid other depressants. Wear body out with effort to stay “up.” Excessive cosmetic surgery, pain killers.”
In other words, it fits the theory that Farley and Belushi would overdose, and obesity would be more common than some of the other types.
sorry emily, you’re right. i should have specified.
i also meant to mention that kenan seems to be simultaneously filling the roles of “black guy” and “fat guy” in the cast (especially before moynihan showed up), and that maybe his twofer status helps them keep him around.
Aaron,
No problem. It makes me sad that Kenan isn’t funnier, I loved him on Nickelodeon on Kenan & Kel, and I’ll confess, I loved “Good Burger”. Maybe that’s just a sign of my age, or maybe Kenan just needs a Kel, or maybe he has never funny. Regardless, it still makes me sad.
Anyone see Lady Gaga’s second performance on SNL a few nights ago? What the HELL was that?? How many bands wish they could have their ten minutes or less on the SNL stage? She gets up there and does that, are you kidding me? Or to quote Seth and Amy on WU…..”REALLY!? Lady GAGA! REALLY!?!”
Wow, people have so many opinions about SNL…
Kenan: agreed that he is the worst character on the show.
My other least favorite?: Bobby Moynihan. (Except for the sketches at the wedding/funeral where there’s a variety of speeches and his speech only includes: “whaaaaaat?”)
lol, Eddie is so crazy! I love him.
You lost me, buddy. I mean, I suppose I get what youre saying. I get where youre coming from. But you just seem to have forgotten that you can find folks out there who can see this issue for what it actually is and may possibly not agree with you. You seem to alienate a whole bunch of people who may possibly have been fans of your internet site.