SNL Movies - Why are they so bad?

Why do Saturday Night Live movies suck so badly? (multiple choice)

  • They are 3 minute sketches dragged out to feature length.

    Votes: 13 72.2%

  • Movies that don't suck require actors that don't suck.

    Votes: 4 22.2%

  • The movies are reflecting the sorry state of the show itself.

    Votes: 4 22.2%

  • They are forced to go for a PG-13 rating.

    Votes: 8 44.4%

  • Mandatory fart gag in every movie is getting old.

    Votes: 4 22.2%

  • "Hello ensemble comedian troupe. POOF! You are now actors" concept is fundamentally flawed.

    Votes: 8 44.4%
  • Total voters
    18
Shaitan

Shaitan

der Besucher
Joined
Dec 7, 2001
Messages
6,546
Location
Atlanta, GA
Last night I was subjected to "Corky Romano", a vehicle for Saturday Night Live alum Chris Kattan. It was so godawful I began to wonder what horrors I had committed in a past life that I was being punished so terribly in this one. Once the blessed credits had begun to roll and my wife slapped me out of the vacuous daze into which I had fallen I began contemplating how generally awful SNL movies have become.

SNL movies had such a fantastic start with the likes of Jim Belushi paving the way for Chevy Chase, Dan Ackroyd, Eddie Murphy and Michael Meyers to break into showbiz. But who in their right mind would allow Chris Kattan to be the star center of an entire feature? What mental midget decided to take a 3 minute skit about a fat guy/girl and make a movie about it (It's Pat)? Or another 3 minute skit about a psycho catholic student with a glandular problem (Superstar) or one about a blaxploitative talk show (The Ladies' Man) or a couple super loser bar flies (Night at the Roxbury)?

Where is the next Animal House? When will we see something that can compare to Wayne's World? Why do SNL movies suck so badly?
 
The Wayne's World movies were classic. Blues Brothers was passable, although it now has an underserved "cult hit" status. Other than that, none were worth the cellulite.

Of course, I don't count it as an SNL movie if it isn't based on a skit. So I don't call Animal House an SNL movie.
 
I actually liked The Ladies' Man, and Night at the Roxbury had it's moments, but there is a long streak between Wayne's World and Roxbury of some very forgettable movies. I think it's partly due to using amateur actors, and partly due to the fact that most gags that work in a short sketch simply don't have the content to be full length features. In fact, the only reason I liked Ladies' Man and Roxbury is because the characters crack me up. As for the actual movies themselves, the plot and story is non-existent, and if you don't find yourself able to laugh at the same gag for 90 minutes, you'll hate the movies.

I don't think the rating has anything to do with it - plenty of funny movies have been PG-13 rated, although the funniest movies usually are rated R. As for the show itself, I think the talent of the comedians still keeps it fresh, although I only see it on Comedy Central these days, and they are about 9 months to a year behind on the shows they run.
 
Blues Brothers beats Wayne's World.
 
Originally posted by Gastric ReFlux
Blues Brothers beats Wayne's World.
Click to expand...

BAN HIM!! BAN HIM!!

Seriously, you're off your rocker, man. WW and WW2 are some of the best movie comedies ever. Blues Brothers was...an SNL skit stretched into a movie.

"Didn't you think it was a trifle unnecessary to see the crack in the Indian's bottom?"
 
Hey I'm not saying Wayne's World isn't a terrific movie, just that Blues Brothers was better.

Wayne's World was more of a stretched-out comedy skit than Blues Brothers. In lots of ways, to fully get into Wayne's World, one needs a familiarity with the SNL skits. Blues Brothers doesn't need that.
 
Waynes World was good. Didn't like the second one as much.

NATR was a lot better than I thought it would be. But then, I thought it would suck rotten eggs, so of course it ended up being better than that.

It's Pat was okay, at first, but once the neighbor started obcessing about him/her, it went south on me. That, and Pat seemed just a little too out of it. Although when they fired Pat from the USPS, that was pretty funny.

I think, the main answer is because it's a 3 minute sketch turned into a 90 minute movie. I remember seeing an interview with Dana Carvey on HBO after WW was realeased, and orginally, they went all out, and only had about 25 minutes of film. So they had to keep adding things to get it up to 85 minutes. Most of the other movies can be boiled down to about the same. . . .
 
They are cheap movies that are planned to make money only. The less it costs to make the movie, the more they can spend on marketing to make you beleive that the movie is good until you pay to go see it.


Spec.
 
The Wayne's World movies being two of those exceptions.

Actually, most all "comedies" are quite bad. I can't think of many that are good movies.
 
I liked Coneheads. Blues Brothers is really a quality musical and add to that that it's hilarious.
 
I voted 3 minute sketch stretched out but the more I think about it, I should have said sorry state of the show. The movies success/failure are due to 2 things : the acting and the writing.
Pretty much all of these movies were at least partially written by the actors. Usually, the other writer(s) is a SNL writer so if he's good(and SNL is funny) there's a good chance the movie will be funny.


Blues Brothers - written by Akroyd and John Landis(directed Animal House, Trading Places, Michael Jackson's Thriller Video)
Both had multiple good movies.

Wayne's World - written by Mike Myers and Bonnie&Terry Turner(TV Shows "Third Rock From the Sun" and "That 70's Show" and SNL)
Myers is always good creating characters for movies (So I Married an Axe Murderer and Austin Powers)

The Ladies Man - written by Tim Meadows, Dennis McNicholas(SNL), and Andrew Steele(SNL)
Meadows only had 1 character. Will he be seen again ?

Night at the Roxbury - written by Will Farrell, Chris Kattan, and Steve Koren("Seinfeld", SNL, and Superstar)
Farrell is usually funny. Katten is annoying and Koren has
two crap movies to his name so I blame them.

It's Pat - written by Julia Sweeny, Stephen Hibbert(the gimp from Pulp Fiction), and Jim Emerson
With "Pat" and the Gimp, I can't imagine who green-lighted this flick. Glad Emerson learned his lesson, has done nothing since.

Corky Romano - written by David Garrett(4 failed TV series) and Jason Ward
Kattan learned from Roxbury he couldn't write. These 2 are either his roommates or his drinking buddies.

A pattern ? You need both a good, creative SNL actor and a decent writer. Obviously, I really needed a break from the war threads....:crazyeye:
 
Blues Brothers is one of my top 10 movies. I also really liked Ladies Man as a one time watch. I would not spend the mony to buy it though. Wayne's World was good as well.
 
The Ladies Man was great! I own it. Alot of it was funny just because it was stupid like the wrestling and the part where he tries on the German Chocolate suit. Corky Romano was funny, but would have been better as a reacuring character skits as a wussy in the mob. Night at the Roxbury just didn't fly with me. Never found those two characters funny. Blues Brothers was the best.
 
I happened to like all the SNL movies so far with the exception of It's Pat...

But that's just me.
 
I think that when one tries to turn a 5 minute sketch into a 2 hour movie, something is bound to go wrong. The little jokes here and there that would be fine for a good sketch go bad in a movie. Also, a movie requires you to work in something that resembles plot...
 
Originally posted by CrackedCrystal
Blues Brothers is one of my top 10 movies. I also really liked Ladies Man as a one time watch. I would not spend the mony to buy it though. Wayne's World was good as well.
Click to expand...
That is so much like me, it's scarey :eek:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom