tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17517257.post116515550533077372..comments2024-03-25T19:18:14.047-04:00Comments on What's Alan Watching?: S-A-T-U-R-D-A-Y, Night!Alan Sepinwallhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03388147774725646742noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17517257.post-1165244607918250182006-12-04T10:03:00.000-05:002006-12-04T10:03:00.000-05:00The Sale*Mart ad had apparently been cut from ever...The Sale*Mart ad had apparently been cut from every episode since the premiere this season. Don't quite know why, since it was actually funny. The elevator sketch was OK, but didn't have an ending, and I admired the bizarre meta-ness of the "Mountain Man" sketch, even if it, too, didn't have an ending.Matthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00295270766215749309noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17517257.post-1165234333809097742006-12-04T07:12:00.000-05:002006-12-04T07:12:00.000-05:00Fred, I hear what you're saying, and the good stuf...Fred, I hear what you're saying, and the good stuff is still really good. But for the most part, we've only seen the good stuff in clip shows or the 30 and 60-minute repackagings of the show that have been on Nick at Nite and Comedy Central and E!. In the original format, the chaff-to-wheat ratio was incredibly high.Alan Sepinwallhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03388147774725646742noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17517257.post-1165214037712857202006-12-04T01:33:00.000-05:002006-12-04T01:33:00.000-05:00If nothing else, "SNL: The Complete First Season" ...<I> If nothing else, "SNL: The Complete First Season" makes a very strong argument that, three decades in, it might be time to cut down to 60 minutes. Because once you start going past that, all kinds of badness tends to happen.</I><BR/><BR/>But wait, any good sketches generally appear at 12:50, right? Cutting it to an hour wouldn't get rid of the dull ones, it would get rid of those end-of-show "what the hell" sketches. And those are often the best.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17517257.post-1165203244972666412006-12-03T22:34:00.000-05:002006-12-03T22:34:00.000-05:00You've got to remember that some of the sketches t...You've got to remember that some of the sketches that seem tame or tired now were cutting-edge at the time. So they may not impress us today, but, then again, neither do the special effects in "Star Wars." The point is not whether 1975 SNL is better than 2006 SNL. The point is that the 1975 SNL was so much better than anything else at the time. You can't say the same about the current version.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17517257.post-1165169085579084292006-12-03T13:04:00.000-05:002006-12-03T13:04:00.000-05:00Comedy (especially pacing-wise) doesn't age well.B...Comedy (especially pacing-wise) doesn't age well.<BR/><BR/>But last night's show was DOA. While the monologue is always bad, has anyone ever sucked the life out of a show the way Fox did? Some of the pro athletes that have hosted have had more lively delivery. Couldn't they get Sawyer or Hurley or Mr. Eko or -- hell, what are the kids who played Owen on <I>Po5</I> up to?<BR/><BR/>And the writing was so bad (other than the Safe*Mart ad, which was smart) I was checking the credits for Aaron Sorkin's name.<BR/><BR/>SNL: After 31 years, still fun to bash.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com