• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Should SNL Go Taped and Hour-Long?

Should SNL Go Taped & Hour-Long?

  • Yes to Taped

    Votes: 6 21.4%
  • Undecided

    Votes: 1 3.6%
  • No to Taped: Keep It Live!

    Votes: 16 57.1%
  • Yes to Hour-Long

    Votes: 13 46.4%
  • Undecided

    Votes: 2 7.1%
  • No to Hour-Long: Keep It 90 Minutes!

    Votes: 11 39.3%

  • Total voters
    28

Mr Light

Admiral
Admiral
As always in an election year, SNL gets accolades for its political sketches, but aside from that people generally decry how terrible the show is. Aside from the Digital Shorts of course. Would the show be better off if they shortened it to an hour and made it taped instead of live?

This would cut out a half hour of bad sketches leaving the cream of the crop, which would raise the average quality of the episode. And are two songs really necessary? Personally I just mute it for the songs. And if they're not forced to go live, they can a) get the best take, b) not have the guest star reading off cue cards, and c) get more creative with camera techniques and whatnot, as seen in the Digital Shorts.
 
They need to clean out the dead wood, too. There's only a handful of the cast who are consistently funny. A lot of the newbies just plain suck. And if they're going to bring hilarious people like Hugh Laurie, let him either write his own sketches or bring some of his writers along to do it, cause that was a huge waste of his talent the other night.
 
It's been 90 minutes for more than 30 seasons. Why fuck with the formula now? Uneven writing on the show is not a new phenomenon. Cutting it to one hour just throws more staffers out of work. So I say keep it the way it is.
 
What genius SNL has left is generated by the fact that it's live and could go straight to hell at any minute. So no, leave it at 90 minutes and keep it live.

What needs to go is the mentality that was born in the early '90s that a successful sketch needs to be beaten into the ground. Think about classic SNL: How many "Wild and Crazy Guys" sketches were there? Like, four? How many "Deep House Dish" sketches have we seen in the past three years? Ten? Fifteen? At least that many.

SNL hit on some good characters that audiences liked and then Blues Brothers and to a greater extent Wayne's World made Lorne Michaels think there was some money to be made by beating them into the ground. This, of course, was antithetical to the whole show's initial premise. It was about fucking with the establishment, not developing a staging ground for it.

In recent years it's gotten much better, I think. However, if I'm home on Saturday night I never bother turning on my TV until it's roughly Weekend Update O'Clock (which is still and always has been funny) unless I have some vested interest in the host. Hugh Laurie was the first episode I actually anticipated sooner than Friday morning this year.

The main thing that chaps my ass these days is that the medium of TV is so incredibly ripe for the picking and SNL, formerly the bastion of dissenters, chooses the easy way out.

Think about Chevy Chase in the years following Geral Ford's ascending to the presidency acting like a douche in character. Is it particularly titillating in this day and age? No. But I think we need SOME SNL cast member as G.W. Bush to attempt something really risque. Something beyond "Is Bush Smarter Than a Fifth Grader?"
 
It's been 90 minutes for more than 30 seasons. Why fuck with the formula now? Uneven writing on the show is not a new phenomenon. Cutting it to one hour just throws more staffers out of work. So I say keep it the way it is.

But all staffers go out of work if its is canceled. Make it an hour long but still live.
 
Yeah, because it was so funny when shitty castmembers like Jimmy Fallon and Horatio Sanz couldn't make it through a single sketch without giggling at eachother and ruined countless jokes. The Live anything can happen bit only rarely works.

I watch SNL for the digital shorts and Weekly Update. And MacGruber. Will Forte is consistently gold. Keep it live if you have to, but drop it to 60 minutes, skip the shitty host intros, and stop letting Andy Sandberg do everything and anything he wants. You just know he was behind the fucking living dancing lamp sketch.
 
What needs to go is the mentality that was born in the early '90s that a successful sketch needs to be beaten into the ground. Think about classic SNL: How many "Wild and Crazy Guys" sketches were there? Like, four? How many "Deep House Dish" sketches have we seen in the past three years? Ten? Fifteen? At least that many.

Imo that a sign of the staff's lack of creativity, they just can't think of any funny sketches anymore so they re-use and re-use the old ones, just to somehow fit their celebrity guests into the show.
 
I actually liked the living lamp sketch. At first it was stupid and worthless, but then they abducted their owners when they were discovered, which was funny.
 
I've felt (and posted) for over a decade that SNL should go to an hour. But it MUST stay live.

Johnny Carson made the jump to 60 minutes from 90 and the resulting show was not only trimmer, but much less time was wasted, and fewer "book" guests were on as well.

Considering the amount of time (or lack thereof) needed to write so much material each week, going to 60 is long overdue.

--Ted
 
Last edited:
Yeah, because it was so funny when shitty castmembers like Jimmy Fallon and Horatio Sanz couldn't make it through a single sketch without giggling at eachother and ruined countless jokes. The Live anything can happen bit only rarely works.
That sounds more like a justification for firing shitty cast members, not taking the show to tape.
 
I've felt (and posted) for over a decade that SNL should go to an hour. But it MUST stay live.

Johnny Carson made the jump to 60 minutes from 90 and the resulting show was not only trimmer, must less time was wasted, and fewer "book" guests were on as well.

Considering the amount of time (or lack thereof) needed to write so much material each week, going to 60 is long overdue.

--Ted

I agree. It must stay live, but trimming off some of the fat could make for a meaner, fitter show.
 
Part of the reason it runs so long is because they have those long commercial breaks for set and costume changes. Does anyone know how long the actual content of the show runs?
 
Part of the reason it runs so long is because they have those long commercial breaks for set and costume changes. Does anyone know how long the actual content of the show runs?

About an hour; I watch all my current US television by ehm... piraty means and they edit out the ads. Most other primetime tv shows run between 40 and 45 minutes net.
 
SNL is crammed full of dead air. When we rarely watch it live we always watch a DVD on the commercials/songs and get quite a way into it.
 
I think a mixture of all these ideas is the best way to go.

If it ever did go to an hour they need to cut down to one musical performace. Maybe I am just getting old but some of the recent acts seem to completely clash with the hosts. Trying to go for two different demographics and displeasing both with either the host or the music.

More than anything the actual sketches need to be shortened!!!!
Too often they go twice as long as they should. Just repeating the same joke and deflatting any energy through the whole show.

They should learn from the likes of Mr Show with Bob and David or Robot Chicken. Which once they get a joke they quickly move on to a new idea. This will be more tricky with a live show. SNL will never be completely taped. But perhaps they could have more taped segments as transition pieces. Which could be used to allow costume changes for the live sketches.
 
I just said to someone on Saturday that nobody really cares if it's live anyway.
Just improve the quality of the show.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top