Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site brl-tgr.ARPA
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!godot!harvard!seismo!brl-tgr!wmartin
From: wmartin@brl-tgr.ARPA (Will Martin )
Newsgroups: net.tv
Subject: Re: Another good Saturday Night Live
Message-ID: <6637@brl-tgr.ARPA>
Date: Tue, 18-Dec-84 11:52:11 EST
Article-I.D.: brl-tgr.6637
Posted: Tue Dec 18 11:52:11 1984
Date-Received: Thu, 20-Dec-84 00:28:40 EST
References: <127@vax2.fluke.UUCP> <324@bonnie.UUCP>
Distribution: net
Organization: USAMC ALMSA
Lines: 23

The filmed "commercials" that SNL has been carrying for some years now are
just about their funniest and best stuff. They are worthy of repetition.
There are several reasons for this:

1) They are NOT live. Therefore, they can be rehearsed, redone, refilmed,
edited, and cut using all the techniques we are used to seeing on real
commercials or even sitcoms. Thus, they are technically more polished.

2) They are repeated. Therefore, the writing and production effort that can 
go into them is greater than can be expended on a one-time-shot live sketch
(even if the latter will be re-shown during rebroadcasts). Thus, they 
begin with an advantage.

3) They are the result of "natural" selection. (This is my supposition.)
For each one that gets produced, at least several ideas are proposed and
discarded. They are the result of competitive selection. While I am sure
that the same applies to the live sketches selected, the fact that these
filmed spots cost more to produce means that the competitive pressure to
improve them is greater. They thus are refined and optimized.

Will Martin

USENET: seismo!brl-bmd!wmartin     or   ARPA/MILNET: wmartin@almsa-1.ARPA