Has anyone in this thread claimed this, or is it a strawman?
Well, one difference is that near me I can get hamburgers at Wendy’s, Five Guys, Z Burger, Checkers, McDonalds, and Burger King, as well at a lot of other restaurants that serve a more general menu. SNL is the only sketch comedy show I can watch on broadcast television. I don’t consider McDonalds to serve the best hamburgers and I don’t consider the Harry Potter books to be the best children’s/YA fantasy books. I have a list of 37 children’s/YA fantasy series that I give to nieces/nephews/grandnieces/grandnephews/miscellaneous children at about the time they reach the age when they might read the Harry Potter books. I tell them that there are lots of good fantasy series out there and they should try some of them. I don’t bother to mention that I consider the Harry Potter series to be somewhere in the middle of those series in quality. I haven’t eaten a McDonalds hamburger in decades. I don’t consider SNL great or poor in quality. It’s just what we have left to watch.
AH, the old cry of the snob: “the masses are asses.” I had friends that used that when I was in college. It was a stupid arguement then, and time has done nothing for it.
I submit that popularity IS in fact a small measure of quality. Because people like things you don’t doesn’t mean they are wrong or “stupid”. Countless millions of people think Budweiser is a very good beer. The fact that beer snobs and German brewmasters disagree means very little. People enjoy Bud, and telling them they are stupid or “enjoying it wrong” isn’t going to change their opinions. To millions of people, it is a good beer.
Would these same people like a better beer, given the chance? Maybe. But to say Bud is “bad” is patently untrue, and I cite its popularity as the prime evidence. The masses don’t drink things they don’t like just to piss you off.
This is the same tired criticism that has been hurled at popular culture since Aeschylus. Ben Johnson thought Shakespeare to be too glib, while Samuel Johnson hated Shakespeare’s puns, and believed his plots were thrown together and poorly resolved. The New York World called Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, “a piece of careless hackwork in which a few good things are dropped amid a mass of rubbish.”
Compared to those critiques, “IT’S NOT GOOD” is pretty high praise.
All TV is excrement -Jebediah Atkinson
I never thought Kaufman was in any way funny or even good. His best bit was mouthing the words to the Might Mouse theme, which any child of 8 could do as well.
Racist humor is not “relevant” and is in very bad taste.
Surely you realize the ‘joke’ is that they are making each other say horrible things that are designed to get them in trouble. People aren’t laughing at the jokes that they tell, they’re laughing because they are making each other say horrible things. Che is always trying to get Jost in trouble. On Twitter, he uses #CancelJost, and tried to make him look like a horrible racist. It’s funny because most people understand that they are actually close friends.
The joke exchange happens twice a year - at Christmas and on the last show of the year. It’s a well-loved tradition.
It seems to me that there are relatively few sketch comedy television shows today. Can someone tell me all those currently being made either for broadcast or cable television? I guess I should limit this to English-language ones, since it’s unlikely that I could appreciate those which aren’t in English.
Six episodes total should be wall to wall awesome, and yet I Think You Should Leave STILL had filler.
I’ll bite the strawman. Yes. McDonalds is the best burger for its price point by the metric that matters for anything subjective: what do most people think as proven by their purchases which are their votes. The is no other objective scale to measure by.
Now an elitist food critic may decree that it is crap for the masses, but reality is that taste is subjective and millions voting with their wallets means more than the declaration of a food snob.
People watch SNL because they are amused by it. At least often enough to watch regularly. They watch it more than those other shows because more are more amused by it than by them. You are of course entitled to have your own tastes. Funny to you is funny to you and not is not. But apparently your tastes, valid for you as they may be, are not shared by most.
But- they aren’t. The writers are making them say racist jokes.
Racist humor is never funny.
They are the writers. Some of the performers also write.
So, that makes racist humor funny, because one of them wrote it?
You’re missing the whole point of the bit. They wrote jokes for each other to deliver.
Ok, maybe “relevant” was too strong a word. The humorous jokes were “topical”.
I got that. Racist jokes.
Why are racist jokes funny?
You know the answer to this but I’ll explain it again to you. I get that you don’t think it’s funny. The humor is two good friends making each other say offensive things on live tv.
Michael Che and Colin Jost are two of the four head writers. Che is literally the guy writing the racist jokes. The joke is that he’s making his friend say horrible things. If Michael Che finds it hilarious, as he evidently does, well, it’s funny to at least one person. Write HIM and ask him why it’s funny.
Racist humor is not funny. You don’t think Che answers to directors and producers? And that he can fake a laugh?
This isn’t something that Che and Jost just sprung on the audience last month; they’ve been doing it for, I think, several years. If it wasn’t working or Lorne Michaels objected, they would not have continued.