Remember when Saturday Night Live was good? Me neither. But hey, let's not be too hard on them. Coming up with new jokes, especially when it involves writing for a different celebrity host each week, cannot be easy. I'm supposed to update this blog that often and I can't even do that. And that's nothing compared to an hour and a half variety show. Right?
Well I don't know. Let's look at a few things. First, there's the commercials. The commercials during the show are so long that the actually come back from the commercials just to show the set, and then return to the commercials without having done a single new skit. With that much time spent in commercial, that means nearly have the episode is commercials! Once you factor those out, the musical guests out, and the weekend update segments that are written by Seth Meyers alone, then what you're left with is only about 40 minutes of actual material. And considering that most hour long TV shows have run anywhere from 42 to 48 minutes per episode, that mens in this hour and a half show you are getting less material then your standard hour long TV show! That's almost nothing!
Then to make matters worse, they seem incapable of actually filling those 40 minutes most of the time. There is at least one skit EVERY. SINGLE. WEEK. that seems to be written specifically as filler. They're easy to spot. They go on kind of forever without ever really making any kind of joke, but the sort of half joke they have they keep doing over and over again until this thing that wasn't funny from the beginning has been beaten into the ground until death is more than certain.
And the worst part of all is that it seems to be an absolute requirement that they hire at least one person who is guaranteed to not be funny. Like Kevin Nealon. Or Dennis Miller. Or Jimmy Fallon. Ugh. Jimmy Fallon. I thought he was the lowest point, the absolute bottom SNL could have sunk. He was so bad, he blamed Will Ferrell for making him laugh in each skit. Too bad he continued to laugh in every goddamn skit regardless of whether Will Ferrell was still in the cast or not. But despite everything, he did not prove to be the worst. Oh no. However bad he was, skits could still be funny with him in them. He didn't suck the funny right out of it, not in the way that only Kristen Wiig could.
Kristen Wiig has hands down got to be the LEAST funny person to ever exist. I have a theory that she is not a person at all. Much like evil to good, she is the actual opposite, the antithesis, if you will, of funny. She is a black hole that sucks all the funny in existence straight out of the universe until nothing remains for the rest of us to enjoy. Yet despite this she appears CONSTANTLY on the show, in almost every single skit. It seems almost as if someone is paying to have her on the show so much, because I couldn't possibly imagine why else she'd be there. It's as though it were part of the Devil's secret plan to ruin life for all still upon the earth. I know this is going kind of far, but trust me when I say that she is that bad.
And in the end, they are paid mucho dolares and I am paid nothing, so it doesn't make a lot of sense to compare my failure to do, to theirs. SNL isn't always bad. They've been funny from time to time, and of course no TV show is always going to be funny. Nothing that runs for 30 years is always going to be perfect. I know that. You should know that. But that doesn't mean the show doesn't have some serious faults. Quite the contrary. And what I do on this blog is point those faults out. So SNL: fire Kristen Wiig and then attempt to fix yourself from this hole you have sunk in. I'm sure you can get out of it. You have before. Just...never that well.
Sunday, January 30, 2011
Saturday, January 22, 2011
Concern for Comedy
I know comedy, like most things, is subjective. I also know that it isn't my place to tell people what is funny and what isn't, because it's necessary for people to discern for themselves. Despite this, there are certain things I don't feel anyone could find funny, and yet I've seen a surprising amount of it in the past few years. Let's take a look at a few of them.
One of my biggest problems with Comedy movies has been the "Genre" Movie movies, i.e. Scary Movie, Disaster Movie, Epic Movie, Dance Flick. I've complained about them before, their tendency to simply re-hash a scene from another movie, throwing it at you hoping that it might be unexpected enough to elicit a laugh. The unexpected itself can be funny, but entire movies full of this takes the element of the unexpected away after a time. And when that's the entire joke during these segments, then it's bound to just start being tiresome. It's a clear sign of tired, uninspired writing. And whatever opinion writers may have of their audience, I think audiences have a tendency to pick up on this. You have to respect your audience. This is something I will probably say a lot to a lot of people for a lot of reasons. It was a big complaint for me regarding fantasy novels. Give your readers/viewers some credit. I know these "Genre" Movies are kind of brain dead comedies, but that doesn't mean the people who watch them are brain dead. Mix things up. At least try to provide some entertainment.
Another disturbing trend I see is pain to animals as comedy. A lot of comedies seem to end up involving animals being hurt or even killed. It deeply, deeply disturbs me that someone might find harm to living creatures to be funny. I guess it makes sense, in the vein of slapstick where the comedian receives physical punishment in order to elicit laughter, or the retributive pain to assholes with the idea that if it's justified then it can be funny. Even if you find this kind of thing to be funny there's still an important difference here. In those situations the people are basically asking for the physical pain. The asshole is asking for it, again, as retribution, and the slapstick character is asking for it by being ridiculous. You know it's coming and you expect it. But animals are not asking for it. The animal did not do anything wrong beside not being able to voice out opposition. Even Kant, who considered animals "things" and not good enough to obtain the ranking of "personhood" felt that animals should not be mistreated for fear of your personhood. Yet comedians seem to have a sickening fascination with this idea. I would like someone to explain to me why this sort of thing is supposed to be funny, because I don't really see why this would be anything but disgusting.
Which leads me into my last point. Much like what I described last week, the sense that assholes are not heros, neither are they comedians. I know there are "comedians" who's every joke is saying something incredibly mean, but that doesn't mean they are actually funny. I know I've said a number of particularly mean things on this site, but I don't do it to be funny. I do it to be mean, because I feel those people get far too much praise for being really bad at what they do. So what I'm saying is, Paul Rudd. YOU ARE NOT FUNNY. Sitting there, spouting out off-handed insults to the rest of your cast members does not make you funny. It makes you an asshole. And being an asshole is not interesting. It's insanely boring. I realize assholes are the fault of the writer, usually the writer lashing back with his (probably only) talent at a world he doesn't quite belong too. Wow. Self-reflective moment...aaaaaaand I'm back. What I suggest, writers, is that YOU GET THE HELL OVER YOURSELVES. Making one of your characters a sharp tongued asshole doesn't make you clever. It makes you trite. So cut it out already.
One of my biggest problems with Comedy movies has been the "Genre" Movie movies, i.e. Scary Movie, Disaster Movie, Epic Movie, Dance Flick. I've complained about them before, their tendency to simply re-hash a scene from another movie, throwing it at you hoping that it might be unexpected enough to elicit a laugh. The unexpected itself can be funny, but entire movies full of this takes the element of the unexpected away after a time. And when that's the entire joke during these segments, then it's bound to just start being tiresome. It's a clear sign of tired, uninspired writing. And whatever opinion writers may have of their audience, I think audiences have a tendency to pick up on this. You have to respect your audience. This is something I will probably say a lot to a lot of people for a lot of reasons. It was a big complaint for me regarding fantasy novels. Give your readers/viewers some credit. I know these "Genre" Movies are kind of brain dead comedies, but that doesn't mean the people who watch them are brain dead. Mix things up. At least try to provide some entertainment.
Another disturbing trend I see is pain to animals as comedy. A lot of comedies seem to end up involving animals being hurt or even killed. It deeply, deeply disturbs me that someone might find harm to living creatures to be funny. I guess it makes sense, in the vein of slapstick where the comedian receives physical punishment in order to elicit laughter, or the retributive pain to assholes with the idea that if it's justified then it can be funny. Even if you find this kind of thing to be funny there's still an important difference here. In those situations the people are basically asking for the physical pain. The asshole is asking for it, again, as retribution, and the slapstick character is asking for it by being ridiculous. You know it's coming and you expect it. But animals are not asking for it. The animal did not do anything wrong beside not being able to voice out opposition. Even Kant, who considered animals "things" and not good enough to obtain the ranking of "personhood" felt that animals should not be mistreated for fear of your personhood. Yet comedians seem to have a sickening fascination with this idea. I would like someone to explain to me why this sort of thing is supposed to be funny, because I don't really see why this would be anything but disgusting.
Which leads me into my last point. Much like what I described last week, the sense that assholes are not heros, neither are they comedians. I know there are "comedians" who's every joke is saying something incredibly mean, but that doesn't mean they are actually funny. I know I've said a number of particularly mean things on this site, but I don't do it to be funny. I do it to be mean, because I feel those people get far too much praise for being really bad at what they do. So what I'm saying is, Paul Rudd. YOU ARE NOT FUNNY. Sitting there, spouting out off-handed insults to the rest of your cast members does not make you funny. It makes you an asshole. And being an asshole is not interesting. It's insanely boring. I realize assholes are the fault of the writer, usually the writer lashing back with his (probably only) talent at a world he doesn't quite belong too. Wow. Self-reflective moment...aaaaaaand I'm back. What I suggest, writers, is that YOU GET THE HELL OVER YOURSELVES. Making one of your characters a sharp tongued asshole doesn't make you clever. It makes you trite. So cut it out already.
Saturday, January 15, 2011
Assholes aren't Heroes
I've been gone quite a while, but I plan to remedy that. From now on I expect to keep a regular update schedule. That said, let's get on with this update.
The more I watch of television and movies, the more I become disturbed by a bothersome trend. Assholes are everywhere. Much like Lord Dark Helmet, I feel like I'm surrounded by them. At one time, long ago, it seemed like assholes were in stories for the soul purpose of receiving their comeuppance. Now it seems that assholes are often in literature as the person you are supposed to cheer for, the person you are supposed to believe in, or even the person who's supposed to be making the funniest jokes. In short, it is much as though assholes have become the hero.
Some might argue that this is the rise of the antihero, but this is simply confusion. Typically, the hero is larger than life, a morally perfect person who continues to do the right thing despite overwhelming odds. Unlikely heroes are people who are relatively commonplace but are thrust into unlikely situations and manage to overcome the difficulties presented them. Antiheroes are people who exhibit morally questionable characteristics, often stumble down the wrong path, but in the end will always do the right thing, or try to. Villains are people who are larger than life, much like the traditional hero, but who maintain a moral ground that is considered morally reprehensible and works only to destroy rather than save or create.
Assholes occupy none of these areas. Why they are often morally reprehensible like the villain, they show no interest in affecting matters right or wrong. If they do act, either for good or bad, it is out of self-interest rather than any other motivation. Assholes also never learn from what they've done wrong, or even if they do learn from it, they fall back into their old patterns.
Yet it seems to me that more and more, assholes are replacing any form of hero in stories. Assholes, motivated by their own self-interest, often find themselves taking the role of the unlikely hero, thrust into extraordinary situations and attempting to make the best of it. On occasion they might befriend other assholes, extending their motivation, but mainly the continue to work for themselves. If they do what is right, it is only out of self-interest, not out of any interest in doing what's right or attempt to redeem themselves.
And for some reason, we're supposed to cheer these people on. For some reason, we're expected to laugh at their crass, biting insults. For some reason, we're expected to think of assholes as heroes. I don't know about anyone else, but I never buy into this. An asshole is always an asshole, and if he makes no attempt to redeem himself, I don't know why I'd stop thinking of him as an asshole. But maybe I'm just part of a dying culture, part of a group who still enjoys believing in heroes. Maybe I'm just not part of this new world order where everyone has caved-in to the idea that all people are assholes, there is no good left in the world, and so why shouldn't our stories at least be about assholes who lead interesting lives?
I guess I just want stories to represent hope, rather than a grim acceptance of a fate I don't believe we've really reached.
The more I watch of television and movies, the more I become disturbed by a bothersome trend. Assholes are everywhere. Much like Lord Dark Helmet, I feel like I'm surrounded by them. At one time, long ago, it seemed like assholes were in stories for the soul purpose of receiving their comeuppance. Now it seems that assholes are often in literature as the person you are supposed to cheer for, the person you are supposed to believe in, or even the person who's supposed to be making the funniest jokes. In short, it is much as though assholes have become the hero.
Some might argue that this is the rise of the antihero, but this is simply confusion. Typically, the hero is larger than life, a morally perfect person who continues to do the right thing despite overwhelming odds. Unlikely heroes are people who are relatively commonplace but are thrust into unlikely situations and manage to overcome the difficulties presented them. Antiheroes are people who exhibit morally questionable characteristics, often stumble down the wrong path, but in the end will always do the right thing, or try to. Villains are people who are larger than life, much like the traditional hero, but who maintain a moral ground that is considered morally reprehensible and works only to destroy rather than save or create.
Assholes occupy none of these areas. Why they are often morally reprehensible like the villain, they show no interest in affecting matters right or wrong. If they do act, either for good or bad, it is out of self-interest rather than any other motivation. Assholes also never learn from what they've done wrong, or even if they do learn from it, they fall back into their old patterns.
Yet it seems to me that more and more, assholes are replacing any form of hero in stories. Assholes, motivated by their own self-interest, often find themselves taking the role of the unlikely hero, thrust into extraordinary situations and attempting to make the best of it. On occasion they might befriend other assholes, extending their motivation, but mainly the continue to work for themselves. If they do what is right, it is only out of self-interest, not out of any interest in doing what's right or attempt to redeem themselves.
And for some reason, we're supposed to cheer these people on. For some reason, we're expected to laugh at their crass, biting insults. For some reason, we're expected to think of assholes as heroes. I don't know about anyone else, but I never buy into this. An asshole is always an asshole, and if he makes no attempt to redeem himself, I don't know why I'd stop thinking of him as an asshole. But maybe I'm just part of a dying culture, part of a group who still enjoys believing in heroes. Maybe I'm just not part of this new world order where everyone has caved-in to the idea that all people are assholes, there is no good left in the world, and so why shouldn't our stories at least be about assholes who lead interesting lives?
I guess I just want stories to represent hope, rather than a grim acceptance of a fate I don't believe we've really reached.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)