LogFAQs > #909716171

Chewster posted...

Dikitain posted...

While I technically wasn't watching it live then (too young) I pretty much caught all of the re-runs on Comedy Central

Lol way to prove my point. You were missing the worst third of every episode in your "golden period".

2/3 of the show being good is still better then all of the show being horrible (like it is now).

Also, MadTV sucked. It had some funny moments sometimes too but it was too, I don't know... lowbrow? Not that SNL is all that highbrow either, that's why I have a hard time describing it. But SNL is more fun. There's more structure to the show and they have a host and it's live. MadTV was just a bunch of pre-taped sketches thrown together.

Sketch comedy should be lowbrow, that is what makes it good. SNL was great when it was lowbrow, once it became mostly political (and not in a Dana Carvey doing a lighthearted impression of George Bush Sr way) I stopped caring. Political comedy is the cheapest form of laughs, it is the adult equivalent of playing peekaboo with a toddler.

Part of the problem with SNL is that it is basically a brand new show every 5 years or so. Most sketch comedy shows have a steady cast for their entire lives (maybe a bunch of people swap out from time to time but the core cast remains steady). If the major actors that make the show what it is leave, the show ends. As a result, the shows are overall even in quality and don't have "eras".

With SNL they change the cast all the time, so it is hard to stay a fan of it for more then one or two "eras". Add on to the fact that they have a host that has to be in every skit and it is absolutely a hindrance. One bad host ruins the entire show.
---

I am a senior software engineer. If you see me post here, I am tired of writing TPS reports.