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