Saturday Night Live

Looking for life in all the wrong places

Thanks to snorefests like the Umbilical Brothers' "Thwack," comedy is deader than Lester Bangs -- and someone is not amused.

  • more
    • All Share Services

It’s been one of those weeks where the real-life happenings, the stuff of the present, the real human beings perched before me, fizzling their atoms in dynamic play against the screen of time, have been nothing but hackety, tepid suckwater bores — and practically inanimate compared to the books I’ve been reading, which have taken on a far more demanding vibrancy and a thicker presence of immediate human feeling.

I was to cover some comedy performances this week. Mainstream comedy is an endangered species, because political correctness is doing everything it can to clip all its limbs into useless stumps and/or kick it in the head until it stops moving altogether. Comedy, at its most potent, tends to be based on cleverly viewed insights about the eclectic differences between people and miscommunication between groups. These hearty revelations can now be identified not as comedy but as sexism, racism or frightening and offensive to our corporate sponsors. The funniest people in the world, I’ve always felt, were smartly cruel teenaged boys, and those who recognized this natural comic supremacy and emulated it.

Very little that is astonishingly innovative and funny has happened in comedy since the 1970s, which was the absolute zenith — the adolescent male comedy renaissance of the world. “Saturday Night Live” was the gold standard, up until the original members started dying. National Lampoon writers were comedic Sun Gods. All the comic greats were wretched cocaine fiends, and were boldly and dangerously sly and irreverent about everything. And somehow, back then, major corporations were less Maoist and killjoy-esque about censoring them to death.

The current corporate oligarchy that controls fame would never bring us another vague, disturbing wonder like Andy Kaufman; only low-brow, obvious, scatological sports fan humor enjoyed by Adam Sandler and other mullet-necked dipshits can get any serious backing these days. The more weird, nervy and sophisticated stuff either gets ghettoized to HBO or never makes it out of the dining room. Robin Williams, Whoopi Goldberg and Billy Crystal are America’s beloved comic laureates now, and who cares? Does anyone actually find them scathingly, electrically funny? As far as I can tell, they’ve just become incredibly adept at provoking thoughtful semi-chuckles while carefully being totally inoffensive to anything that ever walked or crawled. Thank God for the Onion, the great hope of comedy today, which previous to its new mega-popularity seemingly subsisted solely on ad sales for Wisconsin subway sandwich shops and a tall, round student apartment building that apparently never got any tenants, ever.

I’m absolutely stupefied by what people will laugh at lately. Last week, I saw two “comedy” events that caused me varying degrees of terrible pain. One was Richard Belzer, an actor from the defunct TV show “Homicide,” having a “comic conversation” with talk show maven Joy Behar as part of a lecture series at the 92nd Street YMCA, which is where the white, middle-aged campus that is New York’s Upper East Side goes and gets its middle-of-the-road, leather sandal-wearing, intellecto-yucks.

Belzer was unscripted and a little wine-smeared, telling stories from his life, peppered liberally with the “f” word; a “lively” discussion about how he bought his summer home in France by suing Hulk Hogan, who accidentally choked him into unconsciousness on live TV, once upon a time. I think I might have been the only person in the audience actually thinking of writing the Hulk a glowing fan letter for this accomplishment. I snuck out of the auditorium before the first half-hour; it was just too gruesome, all those gray-haired, expensive glasses-framed people tittering in a civilized fashion, ho ho ho, their tired, pear-shaped desktop-computer asses slog-full of Chardonnay and goat cheese, having a little low-volume fun-time before collapsing from the weight of their adult responsibilities into a seven-hour rest. Belzer was the laugh-show equivalent of the calisthenics done in old-folks’ homes, where anything but raising your arms and wiggling your fingers is too strenuous for the withered, juiceless body. Real, hard laughing is too demanding, apparently, for the jerky-dried baby boomer spirit.

I couldn’t seriously cover the Belzer travesty, I decided, so I checked the New York papers for some off-Broadway thing that promised serious, jugular entertainment. I chose the show with the most hyperbole: “Thwack,” whose press suggested its two stars were the Next Big Thing. Now, I know from being close to theater and its workings that having a full-scale Off-Broadway show in New York is about as easy as getting together a bobsled research expedition to Antarctica. You have to make a whole lot of people with money and connections fanatically believe in you. Then you have to convince them to give you money with solid blood-pact contractual commitments, which, given the palsied economic norm of American theater, is tantamount to hustling someone into gambling thousands on a long shot double-exacta. Then, you have to sustain this hypnotism of the investors for the six or seven months it takes for various time-eating fuck-ups to happen, i.e. other shows’ unplanned extensions to peter out, too-similar shows to close, etc.

The Umbilical Brothers, the stars of “Thwack,” were apparently able to
cultivate this rare enthusiasm and now have an astonishingly
well-reviewed “hit show.” The brothers are two “wild and crazy guys”
from Australia who were about as wild and crazy as you’d expect
“cut-ups” who are “real class clowns” who really “got in a lot of
trouble in drama school” to be. They were nerdy, footloose bastards,
wearing what I’ve come to identify as the “a cappella singing-guy
outfit,” i.e. suspenders, brightly colored wife-beater shirt, pleated
slacks. Capezio jazz-dance flat shoes (optional). Christ, they were
un-hip. Their absurdist, fairly physically inventive show was sort of
cute, but remarkably non-vital. Kid’s birthday party kind of cute.
Tourist mime-act kind of cute. Stultifyingly non-vital. Ho ho ho clever.
In short, mildly amusing. A fucking snorefest.

Now, a good movie is a great cocktail for the psyche, but a good live
performance practically initiates the audience into lavish pagan
mysteries. You get a feeling of exploding magnificence from a radiant
performer who gives you physical pain that either A) you’re not them,
having that much exalted, free-blasting, soaring joy and brilliance, or
B) you can’t take them home, and have that exciting power-creature
around you all the time, like a pet leprechaun. Seeing someone truly
great blows your bangs off your forehead like a strong prevailing wind.
Your heart crawls up into your neck and you liquefy, you laugh out all
the air in your lungs, you cry real tears. It’s a stunning, spinal
experience of excruciating pleasure that almost scars you in some way.
Their sorcery changes you; you drive home in a dazed, heart-dipped fever
and you demand better of yourself, for weeks afterward.

I was 0-for-2 this weekend, for inspiration and sanguine entertainment,
and feeling desperate, as if I’d been coated up to my scalp in beige
stucco. All of my senses were weakening, and all of my spiritual
energy-seeking tendrils were curling brown and dry into themselves like
a dying fern, and I made my third mistake : I saw “Star Wars: the Phantom
Anticlimax,”
in the hopes of catching a moment of escapist numb. I was
stunned how utterly devoid of connective human feeling it was — how all
of the potentially emotional moments were subservient to the
multimillion-dollar explosive juggernaut techno-wank; what an empty
fluorescent ejaculation it was. George Lucas must be so drunk and bionic
in his daily life that he can only get passionate about stuff like laser
cornea surgery.

Natalie Portman’s queen outfits were by far the most awe-inspiring thing
on the screen. In the original “Star Wars,” I remember being thrilled by
the two shimmering moons on Luke’s home planet. Simple, maybe, but there
was lingering delight to these brilliant, easy touches. You didn’t need
the whole fucking galaxy to explode. When Han Solo took the ship to
light-speed and all of the stars stretched into straight lines, you
believed it.

The good news is I’ve got a book for you that is so full of swervy
ectoplasm and life-roaring vividness you won’t need to leave the house
for weeks: “Psychotic Reactions and Carburetor Dung,” by the late, great
Lester Bangs, rock critic for Creem magazine in the good ol’ ’70s.
I actually can’t live without Lester now. I sat in the bathtub and
cried the other day because I would never get to meet Lester; we’d never
talk at 2 in the morning all fucked up on inferior whiskey; I’ll never
get to sit on his lap and tug on his handlebar mustache. But his words
are still here; Lester is more brightly here, in a lot of ways, than the
majority of dim bozos who are still up and dorking around in front of
us, those Next Big Things, consuming our cash and time, boring us like a
degenerative disease into complacent, empty-faced neutral, hacking a
grateful chuckle out of us every here and there. Dead Lester is 10
times more alive.

Cintra Wilson is a culture critic and author whose books include "A Massive Swelling: Celebrity Re-Examined as a Grotesque, Crippling Disease" and "Caligula for President: Better American Living Through Tyranny." Her new book, "Fear and Clothing: Unbuckling America's Fashion Destiny," will be published by WW Norton.

As Kristen Wiig departs “SNL,” what’s next for women?

"Saturday Night Live" says goodbye to a star -- and leaves late night without a queen

  • more
    • All Share Services

As Kristen Wiig departs Mick Jagger and Kristen Wiig during the season finale of "Saturday Night Live"

What, you didn’t get to dance with Mick Jagger, hug Jon Hamm and be serenaded by Arcade Fire the last time you left a job? I guess you’re not Kristen Wiig.

After seven years on “SNL,” Wiig said goodbye on Saturday night’s season finale that will go down as one of the sweetest, most choked-up moments on the show since Steve Martin said goodbye to Gilda Radner on the day of her death almost exactly 23 years earlier.

Even without an official announcement, Wiig’s twirly, teary departure is enough to make even the most casual fans of the show crank up the Adele and mainline a tub of Edy’s Grand. It doesn’t matter that fellow castmates Andy Samberg and Jason Sudeikis have reportedly moved on from the show as well. They leave behind established male cast members like Seth Meyers, Fred Armisen and Bill Hader. Wiig, on the other hand, blows a gaping hole in the show’s female lineup. The 24-year-old Abby Elliott, who moves up the rung to the show’s senior lady cast member, is now its biggest female star. But she’s yet to display that versatility or command the clout that Wiig has. Kate McKinnon may yet bust out into full-blown “SNL” stardom, but she’s only been on the show for five minutes.

And so, after years of cultivating a stunning roster of formidable female talent — Tina Fey, Maya Rudolph, Amy Poehler and Wiig — the show is, for the moment anyway, back to a state of relative desolation it hasn’t seen since the ’90s, an era that reached its nadir when Janeane Garofalo bailed midseason. It’s a strange, disconnected moment for “SNL,” right as women are making grand enough strides in television and film comedy that we’ve magically attained “labia saturation.” And though Wiig will no doubt continue to dominate in movies as a writer and performer, it’s sad that she leaves behind no true heirs on a show that, especially in an election year, remains so influential.

Visibly emotional and flanked by current cast members as well as the likes of Chris Kattan, Rachel Dratch, Steve Martin and Chris Parnell, and an especially rollicking Amy Poehler, new alumna Wiig didn’t depart “SNL” alone. She took with her Gilly,  the tiny-handed Judice,  Target Lady, Suze Orman and even Tan Mom. Why were so many people red-eyed on Saturday? Because on the stage that night stood a woman with incredibly big shoes to fill – and one very small hat.

Continue Reading Close
Mary Elizabeth Williams

Mary Elizabeth Williams is a staff writer for Salon and the author of "Gimme Shelter: My Three Years Searching for the American Dream." Follow her on Twitter: @embeedub.

As ‘SNL’ season ends, signs of a coming shift

With election season looming, SNL will have to quickly replace several departing regulars

  • more
    • All Share Services

As 'SNL' season ends, signs of a coming shiftFILE - In this Nov. 14, 2011 file photo, Saturday Night Live cast member Kristen Wiig attends the Labyrinth Theater Comany's 9th Annual Gala Benefit at The Highline Ballroom in New York. Wiig, Andy Samberg and Jason Sudeikis have been reported to be leaving SNL, though Michaels has said any decision will wait until the summer. With a presidential election looming, an immediate exodus of all three is unlikely. Sudeikis plays both Republican candidate Mitt Romney and Vice President Joe Biden, and “SNL” has previously taken an all-hands-on-deck approach to election season shows. (AP Photo/EricReichbaum)(Credit: AP)

NEW YORK (AP) — How can “Saturday Night Live” possibly replace (fill in the blank)?

How many times have we asked that question across nearly four decades?

“Impossible!” said some in 2006 when Tina Fey, Chris Parnell, Horatio Sanz and Rachel Dratch headed for the door, only to be followed two years later by her friend and “Weekend Update” co-host Amy Poehler.

But in their wake grew one of the most versatile, multi-threat casts in “SNL” history, one that firmly established its own “SNL” era. Kristen Wiig, Andy Samberg, Bill Hader and Jason Sudeikis all became cast members in the 2005-2006 season, joining a group that already included Seth Meyers, Fred Armisen and Kenan Thompson.

At the time, “SNL” creator and executive producer Lorne Michaels pronounced them “the wave of the future” and Fey likened herself to a senior seeing “exciting freshmen” arrive. But as this latest season of the sketch institution comes to a close this Saturday night (with host Mick Jagger, and musical guests Arcade Fire and the Foo Fighters), there’s a growing sense that another “SNL” class is nearing graduation.

Wiig, Samberg and Sudeikis have been reported to be leaving, though Michaels has said any decision will wait until the summer. With a presidential election looming, an immediate exodus of all three is unlikely. Sudeikis plays both Republican candidate Mitt Romney and Vice President Joe Biden, and “SNL” has previously taken an all-hands-on-deck approach to election season shows.

Of course, the 2008 election season was a historic one for “SNL,” one that saw record ratings for the show as Fey returned — to much fanfare — to play Sarah Palin. This time around, no one is expecting Romney to choose a running mate that looks exactly like Andy Samberg.

A transition period, whether sooner or later, seems on the horizon. Perhaps more than any previous cast, this one has already expanded considerably from the show.

Wiig, of course, starred in and co-wrote the hit “Bridesmaids,” but even before that had notable roles in “Friends With Kids,” ”Paul,” ”Adventureland” and “Knocked Up,” among others. She has six films in some form of development, along with plenty of interest in a “Bridesmaids” sequel from her and her writing partner, Annie Mumolo.

Hader, who played Wiig’s husband in “Adventureland,” co-starred in “Superbad” and has numerous projects lined up, including a bit as Andy Warhol in the upcoming “Men in Black III.” Samberg, who made the film “Hot Rod” with his Lonely Island cohorts, Jorma Taccone and Akiva Shaffer, costars with Adam Sandler in the soon to be released “That’s My Boy.” Sudeikis’ films have included “Horrible Bosses,” ”A Good Old Fashioned Orgy,” ”Going The Distance” and “Hall Pass.” He’ll also be in Jay Roach’s comedy “The Campaign.”

The typical path used to be to exit “SNL” with a film based on a popular character — as Will Forte did recently with the box-office disappointment “MacGruber.” But this cast has been as visible outside of “SNL” as it’s been on it. Armisen even managed to launch another sketch show at the same time: IFC’s “Portlandia.”

With a cast of half-a-dozen stars, there hasn’t always been a lot of airtime for younger cast members. Most avid viewers would like to see more of featured player Jay Pharoah, whose knack for impressions of Denzel Washington and Will Smith is so good that he deserves a chance to show more range. The same goes for the more consistently used Bobby Moynihan (who’s made his strongest impact on “Weekend Update” appearances, including as “Drunk Uncle” and as “Jersey Shore’s” Snooki) and Nasim Pedrad, most famous for her sharp Kim Kardashian impression.

But this season has made clear that if anyone is being groomed for a larger role, it’s Taran Killam. As a featured player, he’s become a regularly highlighted performer, including impressions of Brad Pitt, Michael Cera and Bravo’s Andy Cohen. More than the other of the younger cast members, he’s frequently gotten sketches into the show, like the Parisian parody “Les Jeunes de Paris” and “J-Pop America Fun Time,” a similar, Japanese spoof of American perspectives on foreigners.

Still, it’s been an uneven season for such a strong cast. The show has sometimes been overly reliant on predictable cable news frames for political sketches and leaned too heavily on recurring character sketches with so little variety as to seem like reruns.

But when “SNL” is firing on all cylinders, it can be as good as it’s ever been. This year, those moments have typically come when an alum has hosted: Maya Rudolph in February and Jimmy Fallon for the Christmas show.

Such occasions usually bring back other former cast members, as well. If anything, the “SNL” universe has grown larger, spread out across TV shows and myriad movies — making a kind of constant revolving door for “SNL” cast members, past and present.

In that way, “Saturday Night Live” has more in common with the mafia than any other TV show: No one ever really leaves.

 

Continue Reading Close

Hollywood’s worst screenwriter strikes again

The man behind "Click" and "Jack and Jill" also wrote Eddie Murphy's latest bomb.

  • more
    • All Share Services

Hollywood's worst screenwriter strikes againScenes from "A Thousand Words," "A Night at the Roxbury" and "Bruce Almighty"
At the request of the writer, we've made the decision to remove this story from the site. The writer had promised not to write about the movie screening in question, which he did not reveal to Salon prior to submitting the piece. Since the writer had agreed in advance not to cover the event, we've agreed to take the piece down.

Toph Eggers is a screenwriter in Los Angeles.

Was Lana Del Rey really that bad?

A disastrous "Saturday Night Live" turn derails pop music's latest girl VIDEO

  • more
    • All Share Services

Was Lana Del Rey really that bad?Lana Del Rey

Just one week ago, Lana Del Rey was pop music’s new It Girl, riding high on the hype from her “Hollywood sadcore” YouTube sensation “Video Games.” Her lushly pouty “Born to Die” was iTunes’ pick for single of the week. And, with almost zero live experience, she landed the plum spot as musical guest on “Saturday Night Live.” Then she got up and sang live on national television.

It took just moments for a scorching hot career to take an unexpected detour into the ditch of public scorn. Del Rey opened up her mouth and a collective “WTF?” went up across the land. Standing onstage with her glossy hair, dragon nails and slinky gown, she droned her way through “Video Games,” swaying awkwardly, fiddling with her hair, and rubbing her hands on her thighs in a manner that seemed more “I’m just wiping off the palm sweat” than “Come over and feel me up, Big Boy.” How bad was her performance? At one point she did a full 360 twirl. During a ballad.

As the horror unfolded in real time, the Twitterverse gaped in astonishment. Juliette Lewis dryly noted, “Wow watching this ‘singer’ on SNL is like watching a 12 yearold [sic] in their bedroom when theyre pretending to sing and perform #signofourtimes.” And though Lewis graciously later deleted the tweet, praising her “great haunting melodies!” others were not as generous. As Eliza Dushku asked, “Who…..is…..this wack-a-doodle chick performing on #SNL..? Whaaaa?”

In the aftermath, the horror did not subside; it seemed to take on a morning-after life of its own. Mediaite opined that “The level of excruciating badness was so palpable, it felt like a wake” and none other than slow-jam master Brian Williams sent a note to Gawker about “one of the worst outings in SNL history… booked on the strength of her TWO SONG web EP, the least-experienced musical guest in the show’s history,” in the hope of receiving a trademark Gawker “withering, detailed critique.”

How did no one see this coming? Del Rey told MTV last week that she was “a little nervous” about the gig. “You just hope it goes well and you don’t f*** it up,” she said, but promising  “I’m sure it will be good.” And when she did a similarly catatonic performance on Jools Holland’s show in the U.K. last fall, the performance passed without notice. Anyway, with her distinctively David Lynch movie sound and the kind of looks that have landed her a modeling contract, you’d think she’d be money in the bank.

But putting a virtually untried performer on such an iconic platform was a move fraught with potential pitfalls. And for all her moody, Guess? jeans posturing, there seems an air about Del Rey of a woman who has not yet found her true voice. She is, after all, a self-proclaimed “gangsta Nancy Sinatra” — which is perhaps her way of warning us that she’s intentionally going for that naughty blond deer in the headlights effect. And just like Nancy — and Rebecca Black, for that matter — she owes a big career debt to her bigshot dad. Del Rey’s father, millionaire investor Rob Grant, helped with the marketing of her first album two years ago. Back then, she was still Lizzy Grant, the rich kid who grew up in upstate New York and went to boarding school in Connecticut. Months later, she had morphed into Lana, a mystery lady who “at one time lived in a New Jersey trailer park” and whose name sounds like a Mexican brand of cigarettes. The image, she explained, “came from a series of managers and lawyers over the last five years who wanted a name that they thought better fit the sound of the music.”

The former Elizabeth Grant will likely solider on. Both Ashlee Simpson and Ke$ha managed to bounce back from their disastrous “SNL” performances and, God help all our ears, live to sing another day. Del Rey has just been booked for a coveted spot at the South by Southwest festival, and “Video Games” is a respectable No. 44 on the iTunes singles chart. It’s far from the kind of post-national television debut bounce any artist would hope for, but it’s a better deal than most working singer-songwriters ever get. And if you saw the rest of the “SNL” episode, you know that Del Rey was far from the only cringe-worthy element of the show.

The week’s host, the ever-gracious Daniel Radcliffe, said this week that “It was unfortunate that people seemed to turn on her so quickly. I also think people are making it about things other than the performance.” But really it’s just the opposite. In an elegantly orchestral music video or on a well-produced track, Del Rey is all smolder and pouts. She can sing of being a “bad girl” and sell it. On live national television, she’s a still inexperienced girl, awkward and stiff and, frankly, boring. Her album will be released Jan. 30. Only then will we learn whether anybody’s really buying the woman who seemed to be the next big thing.

 

 

 

 

 

Continue Reading Close
Mary Elizabeth Williams

Mary Elizabeth Williams is a staff writer for Salon and the author of "Gimme Shelter: My Three Years Searching for the American Dream." Follow her on Twitter: @embeedub.

“Saturday Night Live” phones it in, again

In a campaign so crazy that the jokes should write themselves, "SNL's" political humor has been flat and uninspired

  • more
    • All Share Services

Andy Samberg as Rick Santorum (Credit: NBC screen shot)

After a week in which Mitt Romney’s “I like to fire people” gaffe caught fire and fellow Republican candidates denounced him as a vulture capitalist, his campaign must have winced when they tuned into “Saturday Night Live” and saw Jason Sudeikis, as the GOP front-runner, sitting in a South Carolina diner. Turned out it had nothing to worry about — on “SNL,” Romney was the same mildly robotic guy as ever, only now he also liked to fire his breakfast. When his waitress asked him how he liked his eggs, Sudeikis-as-Romney cracked, “laid off.”

But even that was funnier than the cold open the week before, following Rick Santorum’s near-victory in the Iowa caucus. Santorum lost to the monotoned Mormon by just eight votes, and his statements on the trail since his rise in the polls must have seemed like belated Christmas presents to comedy writers. Surely Andy Samberg, the goofiest cast member, would let his freak flag fly, right? Instead, Samberg spent five minutes setting up a joke about Santorum’s 100-day, 99-county Iowa campaign, pledging to visit every county in America to beg for votes, even braving the “heavily armed population” of Monroe County, Tenn., that inspired “Deliverance” and the “thousands of angry pillow biters and doughnut bumpers” of San Francisco county. Why? Get ready for the punch line: “This is about the country that has given so much to me and to which I want to give something in return,” says Samberg-Santorum, “so that maybe one day, long after I’m gone, my grandchildren can look me up on Google and find something, you know, different from what’s there now.”

Samberg’s Santorum would’ve gotten more meaningful laughs if he’d just turned up wearing a foamy mocha-latte mustache, promoting the chocolate-frothy caffeinator as his official campaign beverage. Even Jay Leno had sharper barbs (“He lost by only eight votes … You know what’s ironic? He could have won if he’d just gotten the gay vote”).

It’s been that kind of year on “Saturday Night Live.” The Republican presidential field is an embarrassment of crazy-train riches. But the writers have been lazily broad-stroking caricatures of the candidates, and the result has been surprisingly edgeless and increasingly lame sketches. There’s no bite to Sudeikis’ Romney, played as a mere socially inept square. Kenan Thompson’s Herman Cain was a clueless, oversexed black man with dumb luck and box loads of pizza metaphors. “Fences. Jesus. Papilloma. Eyeballs,” is the essence to Kristin Wiig’s Michele Bachmann — exact words borrowed from Wiig-Bachmann’s actual post-Iowa closing statement on the Jan. 7 “Weekend Update” (even the pith of “Weekend Update” anchor and “SNL” head writer Seth Meyers has dulled this year).

The “SNL” writers wrote off Newt and Ron Paul as viable candidates early in the game — surge be damned — so Bobby Moynihan has been left to grin idly in his Phil Donahue wig, when he could have, at the very least, seized an opportunity to spoof Gingrich’s amazing concession speech in Iowa, a study in aggressive passive-aggression, directed at Romney. Why wasn’t more made of Romney’s relationship to Jon Huntsman, a distant relative from a rival Mormon clan — where’s the “Big Love” sketch? At the very least, a “Romeo and Juliet” number with one of Huntsman’s daughters and one of the Romney boys. I’d even take a “Brady Bunch” skit. With each GOP contender flitting away — after Huntsman’s exit on Monday, we might never see two Republican Mormons running for president — so too goes another missed opportunity, the unrealized jokes piling up like stacks of yesterday’s newspapers.

Though “SNL” is not strictly a political-satire show like “The Daily Show” or “The Colbert Report” — two shows that have had no problem doing both smart and funny work in recent months — it does have a reputation for edgy political commentary, for shaping the national conversation. And while the “SNL” cast and creators often dismiss criticism of the show by suggesting that everyone believes the show’s heyday is when they were in high school, you don’t have to go back far to find a golden age of political comedy. During the 2008 election, the sketch-comedy show was even lauded for being a game-changer: Tina Fey’s entitled, ignorant Sarah Palin (“I can see Russia from my house”) was spot-on, and Amy Poehler perfectly evoked the rage and righteous indignation of her Hillary Clinton, and made viewers appreciate her plight for the White House, her resentment of Obama, her outright hatred for Palin. Neither required too much embellishment — that was the beauty of the sketches, and the performances — and as a result, our hunches about the various candidates were confirmed, through these laugh-out-loud depictions, during an election when so many Americans were sitting on the fence. And so these enter the pantheon of iconic “SNL” political impressions: Chevy Chase’s buffoonish and clumsy Gerald Ford, Dana Carvey’s catchphrase-obsessed George H.W. Bush, Phil Hartman’s white-trashy fast-food-bingeing womanizer Bill Clinton (and later, Darrell Hammond as a cool-headed smooth-talker through Whitewater and Monica), and Will Ferrell’s willfully ignorant playboy Dubya.

“SNL” has had an undeniable impact on the culture, on the way candidates are perceived, and as recently as the last election, it has proven how persuasive it can be — or, at least how it can nudge us in a direction we were considering. And edgy is best left to the professionals, the Stewarts and Colberts. To be fair, that’s not “SNL’s” aspiration or mandate. They just need to make viewers laugh. Because if viewers are laughing, it means they’re listening.

And this is where “SNL” is failing viewers right now, by resting on those laurels of 2008. They’re writing as if, in the words of Vanessa Bayer’s moderator in “Yet Another GOP Debate” sketch from October, “No one is watching, so the stakes are low.” As the race whittles down, and Republicans seem more and more likely to settle for Romney, pens need to sharpen — right now, it is too easy to watch “SNL” on DVR, with a finger on the fast-forward button, searching for a chuckle. Sudeikis is leaving at the end of the season: It’s an opportunity to have more fun with Romney (please let it be Taran Killam). And must we really endure another year of Fred Armisen’s Obama, as a too-calm, emasculated, disempowered world leader? It’s a dreadfully boring narrative thread.

But if these writers had a hard time making the present cast of GOP characters interesting, it’s hard to imagine that they’ll be inspired by the next 10 months of Romney and Obama. We expect Romney and Obama to be cautious candidates — but that’s hardly an excuse for such timid and uninspired satire.

Continue Reading Close

Kera Bolonik is a freelance writer. She lives in Brooklyn, N.Y.

Page 1 of 17 in Saturday Night Live