Tag Archives: Lorne Michaels

It’s Official: ‘Sesame Street’ Rules the Internet

Move Over Betty White, ScarJo, Anne Hathaway, and any other Hollywood starlet, young or old, who had her sights set on hosting SNL.  Get in line behind the chocolate chip chomper, the macadamia mastictor, the snickerdoodle scavenger himself, Cookie Monster.

Is there anyone on the Internet these days doing better work than Sesame Street (and that includes my mom’s emails)?  After firing off one viral sensation after another, from the Katy Perry-Elmo music video (yes, we thought it was good, clean fun) to a terrific True Blood spoof to a brilliant take on the Old Spice commercials, this one could be their magnum opus.  Who would have imagined that the most reliable source for viral video genius in 2010 would be Sesame Street?

SNL, Lorne, you have about a month left in the year to make this happen.

And, realistically, wouldn’t it be amazing if this actually worked?  But beyond just the novelty, and joy of seeing Cookie Monster take the stage at Studio 8H, it would be especially poignant for the Muppets, original SNL contributors, to return to the show after 35 years.  In many ways it would be a return to the scene of the crime, as their brief run during the first season of SNL was one of Jim Henson’s few failures, with the abstract Muppet segments proving unpopular with audiences.  So now, three and a half decades later, and twenty years after Henson’s death, Cookie Monster can make it right. He can bring it full circle.  Like a perfect cookie (see what we did there?).

It’ll never happen, but at perhaps Cookie Monster can at least make a cameo.  That’d be worlds better than relying on Seth Rogen to play him.

via THE ENTIRETY OF THE INTERNET

Leave a comment

Filed under Intersection of the venn diagram of things that I love, Muppets, Virulent

Meanwhile, Over On ‘Late Night’…

…Jimmy Fallon just keeps rolling along, delivering the best, most innovative comedy on the long side of midnight.  Adding to their already great pantheon of short videos, like “Late,” “6-bee” and “7th Floor West,” Late Night recently debuted the series “Suckers,” which simultaneously parodies/pays homage to Twilight, True Blood, Broadway and probably two or three other works that we missed (Vampire Diaries, maybe? Help us out).

Vodpod videos no longer available.

According to Bill Carter’s new book, The War for Late Night, when NBCU Chairman Jeff Gaspin phoned the Late Night brain trust – Lorne Michaels, Fallon, producer Michael Shoemaker – to inform them of the possibility of moving their show back 30 minutes to 1am, they acceded, with Shoemaker telling Gaspin “We love what we’re doing. Don’t worry about us.”  And that idea, that they love what they’re doing, is so obvious, and is also contagious.  Already somewhat left to their own devices at 12:30am, a move to 1am probably wouldn’t impact them that much, as long as they got to keep producing the same slick videos and playing the same silly audience games.  Whereas we argued in an earlier post that while Conan is changing the late night game by moving to basic cable, it’s Fallon who’s genuinely doing something different with his hour.  And for all the talk of the Team Coco and I’m with Coco web campaigns, it’s Fallon who has truly embraced new media (launching an online version of Late Night before debuting the broadcast show, hosting one of the best blogs on the net, as a couple of examples).  As he’s gone on record saying, Fallon doesn’t really care when his show airs, because his audience will find him on their DVRs or online.  Of course, if the product isn’t good, no one will watch, even if the show is readily available through several media outlets.  Luckily for Jimmy Fallon and Late Night, their product is real good.

And for more on the subject, you’d be a fool not to read this much more illuminating profile of Jimmy Fallon in this week’s New York Magazine.  He also graces the cover, adorably:

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Good Humor, Internet Killed the Print Media Star, Other people's stuff, Talkies

The Real Women of SNL: They are Fambily; Plus: a Totally Unnecesary Look Back at the History of Female Not Yet Ready for Primetime Players

Well, despite our reminder to you last week, we eagerly arrived home on Monday night only to be severely disappointed when we realized that we had neglected to set our DVR to record the Women of SNL special.  We had been looking forward to it ever since Jon Hamm delivered his goodbyes the day before, but the thought never occurred to us that our SNL season pass would not apply to the female-centric primetime special.  OUR BAD.

To add to our dismay, neither NBC.com nor Hulu is hosting the full special.  However, it appears that the only original material included a few one-on-one interviews and this excellent take on the Real Housewives (we’re going to go ahead and say they’re primarily targeting RH of NJ over the other installments, with Amy Poehler, Julia Louis-Dreyfus and Laraine Newman channeling the nascent RH of Beverly Hills via satellite).

Vodpod videos no longer available.

Read on: We speculate on what was in the special and then give an SNL history lesson. Get out your notebooks!

Leave a comment

Filed under Analysis, Good Humor, Lists, Saturday Night Live, Yasmine Bleeth, Yvonne Hudson

‘SNL’ Shake-Ups & Sensationalism: Slate & Sudeikis

It’s hard to believe that a year has passed by since we waved goodbye to Michaela Watkins (we hardly knew ye) and Casey Wilson (probably for the best) and welcomed with skeptical arms the rookies Jenny Slate and Nasim Pedrad.  And it’s sad to report that a year later we’re already saying goodbye to the former of that dynamic young duo.  And once again, the changes are sure to raise eyebrows.  However, this time around, we don’t have a good theory as to what precipitated the moves.

With Will Forte’s departure two weeks ago the whispers began to circulate and the dominoes began to fall.  Except, they really didn’t fall so much as erect themselves next to already firmly planted playing pieces, with Taran Killam (best known from Scrubs), Paul Brittain and Vanessa Bayer from the iO Chicago, and Jay Pharoah, a comedian and talented impressionist, joining the cast, while veterans Andy Samberg, Jason Sudeikis, Kenan Thompson – rumored to possibly be following Forte out the door – remain (as of press time) at their posts.  So it came as a bit of a shock when word got out yesterday that the show had released a cast member, but not one of its established male veterans with s burgeoning film careers (or even Kristen Wiig, who may have already over-stayed her welcome a season or two), but, instead, Slate, who had only put in a season’s worth of work.

Now, if you recall last year’s history lesson on women & SNL, you’ll recall that going into the season with four women (Slate, Pedrad, Wiig & Abby Elliott most recently) was on the high side.  In fact, going a whole season with four veteran female cast members is just about as good as it’s ever been on the show.  So, with the addition of Bayer, it’s not surprising that SNL & head honcho Lorne Michaels decided to cut loose a lady.  It was a numbers game.  That we understand.  But then why add one in the first place?

Read on: The curious case of Jenny Slate. Also, Jason Sudeikis is the new Ben Affleck.

1 Comment

Filed under Analysis, Flashback!, Saturday Night Live, Yvonne Hudson

“Presidential Reunion”; Or Will Funny or Die Kill ‘SNL’?

By now you’ve all seen this Funny or Die sketch (because it was uploaded almost a week ago, which this day in age classifies it as old) that brings together the all time team of SNL presidential imitators.  It’s great, right?  Totally awesome (especially Chevy, doing what Chevy does best).

Vodpod videos no longer available.

However, what concerns me is what this video, and videos of its ilk, means to SNL.  Why I am so concerned about a show that has basically been skating by since 1993, if not earlier, and has never really faced any real competition, I don’t know (and no, MADtv doesn’t count).  But the more I see the Funny or Die videos featuring both SNL and non-SNL talent I wonder how long the show will be able to compete (especially now that Funny or Die has its own show on HBO, although the one episode I saw was rather underwhelming).  And this Presidential Reunion, directed by Hollywood heavyweight Ron Howard, really caused me pause.

Keep reading: Does this spell the end for ‘SNL’?

Leave a comment

Filed under Analysis, Good Humor, Saturday Night Live, Virulent

What, Lorne Michaels Worry?

And SNL week continues:

In honor of the release of Beatles Rock Band

This photo is relevant. Beatles Rock Band. Duh!

In yesterday’s Washington Post columnist Tom Shales previews the trepidation that is coming with the soon to arrive 35th season of Saturday Night Live.  He is right on when he asserts that SNL

“…has been up and down in ratings and quality (never falling as low as it has risen high) over the decades…”

It does seem that every year there is the traditional “Saturday Night Dead” headline, but then SNL rises from the ashes and continues to the be preeminent sketch comedy in our popular culture.  Where Shales I think missteps is suggesting that Lorne Michaels is nervous about the upcoming season, since they will no longer have the election to exploit.  Shales writes,

“Still, for Michaels, the good news can barely hide a world of worry. ‘It comes and goes like everything else,’ he says, with his usual nonchalance, of the show’s success.  But this season seems predestined to be worrisome. There’s no election, for one thing.”

To me, that doesn’t sound like someone who is worried.  Shales, himself, seems to indicate this, noting Lorne’s signature “nonchalance.”  No, despite the fact that the cast and writers can no longer mine the cultural and political zeitgeist that was the 2008 electoral drama, I don’t think Lorne Michaels is worried.  SNL goes through this cycle every four years; it has sourced material from nine presidential elections and it’s always managed to survive, even if it sorta treads water for three seasons until the next round of primaries.  But the truth is Saturday Night Live is now an institution, a fabric of our culture and just as permanent a television fixture as 60 Minutes.  The cast will change, and so will the targets and the comedic sensibilities, but as long as there is TV (or semblance of it.  Hello Hulu.), there will be SNL.

————————————————————————————————————————

Shales also attributes concerns over the news season to Tina Fey’s commitments to 30 Rock and in effect her inability to reprise her defining (and campaign derailing) Sarah Palin impression.  Well, despite the fact that Tina Fey is the nexus of 30 Rock, and that appearing on SNL last season exhausted her, and the added responsibility of being a mother, her show shoots at Silvercup Studios in Queens, and I think if Lorne asks really nicely she can manage an appearance or two.  But you know what?  Sarah Palin was so 2008.  If SNL wants to repeat a fraction of its success of last year it needs to stay relevant.  And to do that it needs to forget last season, no matter how acclaimed it was.  Because if they try to imitate 2008 it’ll be just that, an imitation, a poor, disappointing copy of the original.

However, that being said, here is my favorite politically themed sketch from S34:

Vodpod videos no longer available.

Leave a comment

Filed under Analysis, Saturday Night Live, Who's the Boss?

Lorne Michaels Dismisses Michaela Watkins and Casey Wilson & It Makes Sense: SNL Past, Present and Future

Michaela WatkinsThe news broke late on Friday that Michaela Watkins and Casey Wilson were not asked back for Saturday Night Live’s 35th season.  This development came on the heels of the announcement earlier in the week that comediennes Jenny Slate and Nasim Pedrad had been chosen as the newest not yet ready for prime time players.  The addition of these two was to the relief of many who thought that SNL needed a greater female presence, especially to spell Kristen Wiig, whose MVP performance last season has been well documented.  In light of the two new cast members, the news Watkins’ and Wilson’s departures has been met with surprise, but a closer look indicates that the selection of new blood was a portent of things to come.

Full disclosure, I had heard a rumor a couple weeks ago that Wilson would not be back, and since that time I had scoured the web for articles supporting the claim.  When I heard of the selection of Slate and Pedrad I immediately thought it led credence to Wilson’s departure.  Still, there was no news on that, and I was surprised that none of the reports I read introducing the new cast memberCasey Wilsons speculated on what it meant for the future of the current cast.  I last searched for stories relating possible SNL exits late Thursday night, the evening before we learned that Casey Wilson, along with Michaela Watkins, had been let go.  So yes, it seemed like a shock.  But while the timing might have seemed like a blindside, SNL history proves we should have seen this coming.

SNL has always been a boys club, and, despite the Wiigs and Poehlers and Feys, will likely continue to be so.  A look at the math demonstrates it highly unlikely that Lorne Michaels would have started the season with the two female additions without cutting one or two incumbents from the squad.  Slate and Petrad are joining current members Wiig and SNL legacy Abbie Elliott, and had Wilson and Watkins been retained that would have totaled six female cast members to begin season 35.  No SNL season has ever started a season with six females in the cast.  The closest they have come was 1991-1992 season in which Beth Cahill became the sixth female in mid-November (joining Victoria Jackson, Julia Sweeney, Ellen Cleghorne, Siobhan Fallon and Melanie Hutsell).  In addition the the half dozen mark not being reached until mid-season, one must recall that this came during the over-capacity casts of the early 90s when Lorne Michaels was admittedly building a JV team of comics (Farley, Sandler, Spade, etc) to succeed the the old guard (Carvey, Myers, Hartman, etc).  So the high volume of estrogen was more a biproduct of a bulging cast, not a real movement to emphasize the talents of budding comediennes.  This was also the season that employed so many cast members that the opening credits contained two sets of Featured Player introductions, the first being “spontaneous” moments of Beth Cahill - Featured Player BRob Schneider Featured Player A

the cast in various situations (Rob Schneider buying a movie ticket!) and then a second round of featured players shown only through head shots.  Beyond this six female aberration, the show has mostly subsisted with 3 -4 female members.  Indeed the first five seasons brought us only three women, Gilda Radner, Jane Curtain and Lorraine Newman, and from 95-99 we were treated to another funny female threesome (Cheri Oteri, Molly Shannon, and Ana Gasteyer).  Later the number did reach five,  but this included Tina Fey who only appeared on Weekend Update, and seasons when several of the women missed significant time on maternity leave (including Amy Poehler last season, followed by her exit to star in Parks and Recreation).  So while I in no way intend to imply that it would be wrong to present a cast with six women, the SNL’s past shows that there is no precedent for this.

So six was too many.  However, could they have settled for five?  Most reaction has indicated little surprise that Lorne Michaels waved goodbye to Casey Wilson.  Indeed, in one and a half seasons she had yet to make her mark, and despite earnest efforts it did not seem that she was embraced by the audience in the studio or at home.  To her credit, she did poke fun at her standing with fan in a recent Funny Or Die video, so at least she’s a good sport, and I think this Tango and Cash re-creation she did with Janeanne Garafalo served her better than anything she ever did at SNL.   And you don’t get on SNL by accident, so I have no doubt that she’s talented; however the annals of SNL  are filled with Yvonne Hudsons and Jeff Richardses and broken dreams, and now she’s another victim (but lest we not forget Wilson’s web video co-star Garafalo once upon a time had a miserable experience on the show and she turned out okay.  Likewise Sarah Silverman).

Vodpod videos no longer available.

But if you understand (or agree with) the firing of Wilson, what of Michaela Watkins?  Couldn’t they have kept her on.  There seems to be some moderate outrage at her dismissal, much being made of the in-roads Watkins had already established in less than a season as a featured player.  Indeed, EW’s Michael Ausiello writes,

“Watkins gave birth to a slew of memorable characters and impersonations, most notably bitchpleeze.com blogger Angie Tempura and Today’s Hoda Kotb.”

However, while those two specific personas did gain some traction, I don’t think she birthed a “slew” of memorable characters and impersonations.  Beyond bitchpleeze and Hoda, I’d be hard pressed to name another memorable performance outside of her well regarded Ariana Huffington impression (which is admittedly excellent, but something she had perfected before joining the cast).  Also, I don’t understand the appeal of the bitchpleeze Weekend Update segments or the perspective of the character, nor why SNL would want to mock much of its fan base (all bloggers are snotty teenagers?).  As for The Today Show sketches, they had some enjoyable moments but never quite felt like they flew as high as they could, and all Watkins could do was react to Wiig’s Kathy Lee Gifford (which is effective, but one-note).

Vodpod videos no longer available.

However, this is not to say that Watkins is not talented, but that the outcry over her dismissal is a bit unfounded.  Moreso, additional analysis argues that it is precicely because of her talent that she was let go.  Before joining the cast, Watkins, a veteran of the Groundlings, most recently supported former SNL player Julia Louis-Dreyfus on The New Adventures of old Christine. So she had taken a step back from prime time to not yet ready for prime time.  But the truth is she is polished and ready to make that leap into a sitcom, and Lorne Michaels told her that much (via Watkins interview with Ausiello):

“The only explanation I got from him — and he’s not known to say things just to make people feel better — was that he felt deep down that I should have my own show. And I agreed.”

Thinking in that context, I think the move makes sense.  Looking back even further, it’s not a stretch to think that Michaels brought her on last season because he needed someone talented, experienced and ready with a arsenal of characters and impressions.  Much was made about the workload heaped on Kristen Wiig, and recognizing this, maybe Lorne brought Watkins in as a ringer of sorts, slightly akin to the 1985-1986 season in which then-producer Dick Ebersole enlisted comic mercenaries Billy Crystal, Martin Short and Harry Shearer.

So perhaps all along Lorne Michaels only thought of Watkins, 37, as a temporary solution.  As for Wiig, with roles in this year’s Adventureland and the just-released Extract, not to mention her previous scene stealing turn in Knocked Up, her film career has already started taking off, so it can’t be long before she moves onto greener pastures.  However, with Jenny Slate, 27, and Nasim Petrad joining the 22 year-old Abby Elliot, the show has now formed a stable of young, smart, female comedians.    So, maybe, in Lorne’s eyes he’s put together a new dream team of funny young ladies, a group that can grow together and entertain us for years to come.

4 Comments

Filed under Analysis, Saturday Night Live