I thought that was not funny at all, and kind of creepy. Did anyone else?
Posted by Kelly (Member # 9576) on :
*Agrees with Tatiana*
Posted by Reticulum (Member # 8776) on :
Very funny!
Posted by Leonide (Member # 4157) on :
I thought it was an amusing premise, but the skit went on too long (as SNL skits are wont to do)
Posted by Primal Curve (Member # 3587) on :
That video's been floating around for a long time- mostly on the wings of Lindsay Lohan's formerly curve-tastic basungas.
In other words: "Seen it."
Posted by Shawshank (Member # 8453) on :
Wow- that was... different. Wow- that's pretty funny. Definitely disgusting in its content- but oh so very funny.
Posted by Evie3217 (Member # 5426) on :
I'm with Shawshank on this one. I didn't know whether to laugh or find it disgusting. I suppose I can do both.
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
I thought it was kind of funny when it came out years ago. I still think it's amusing.
Posted by Sterling (Member # 8096) on :
I'd find it funnier if some of the regulars didn't seem to be tripping over their lines.
Though I admit I find some of the attention Emma Watson (who plays Hermione in the movies) has attracted of late is more than a little unsettling.
Which I suppose, in a sense, is part of the point of the sketch.
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
It wasn't the boobs that were funny, boobs are boobs, Rachel Dratch's and the twin's reaction to the boobs were funny.
Maybe in some world, boys are supposed to be immune to boobs, and many a young girl has been hurt or demoralized because her classmates can't concentrate in the presence of her chest, but there is a line between sketch-comedy funny and distasteful, and I thought the skit fell in sharply on the side of sketch-comedy funny.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
quote:boobs are boobs
I read that as 'hobos are hobos.'
I don't know why.
Posted by Edgehopper (Member # 1716) on :
It started as funny...and kind of dropped off into "nauseating". It didn't take the source material seriously enough to be funny.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
Like almost every SNL skit since the dawn of time, it was twenty seconds of funny in a five minute skit.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
Which is why the only SNL you really need to watch are the anniversary specials. You get years and years of 20 second funnies in about an hour and a half.
Posted by Chris Bridges (Member # 1138) on :
So how long before the inevitable bad SNL movie comes out based on twenty seconds of funny in a five minute skit?
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
Here's the problem: you cannot build a five-minute skit around one joke.
This is in my opinion a basic freakin' principle of humor. But no one seems to get this. SNL. Letterman. Bob and Tom. Mancow. MadTV. The Onion.
All these groups think that they can goof and elaborate on a given punchline after the punchline has been revealed. And for the most part, they're wrong. Sometimes -- like with The Onion -- it's possible to explore some additional funny through nuance, especially if you're making some sort of humorous analogy. But if there's no more depth to be found, plumbing the depths of your joke won't dredge up additional humor unless you slip into slapstick.
You know who understood this? Laugh-in. And, oddly enough, early seasons of "The Simpsons."
Posted by JennaDean (Member # 8816) on :
Yep, that's what it was. Thanks for defining that. It started out funny, but then didn't go anywhere.
Well, I guess it did go ... downhill.
Posted by Nighthawk (Member # 4176) on :
quote:Originally posted by Chris Bridges: So how long before the inevitable bad SNL movie comes out based on twenty seconds of funny in a five minute skit?
Aren't they all like that?
And, for the record, you are aware that there is only one SNL-based movie that didn't make a huge profit (Stuart Saves His Family). With those numbers, why shouldn't they keep doing what they do?
Posted by b boy (Member # 9587) on :
I agree, the joke died long before the end of the skit. But you have to admit, they were pretty good at spoofing the characters. That was much more funny than the boob humour.
Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: Here's the problem: you cannot build a five-minute skit around one joke.
This is in my opinion a basic freakin' principle of humor. But no one seems to get this. SNL. Letterman. Bob and Tom. Mancow. MadTV. The Onion.
Yep. That's why the best bits of The Onion are the headlines themselves and the "man on the street" section.
Posted by Primal Curve (Member # 3587) on :
Dude. You have to read the horoscopes.
Anyways, I usually just skim the onion and skip back to the AV Club section. There's a lot of great stuff to read there.
Posted by SC Carver (Member # 8173) on :
"This video has been removed due to copyright infringement."
Who was upset by this video HP or SNL?
Posted by Nighthawk (Member # 4176) on :
quote:Originally posted by Nighthawk: And, for the record, you are aware that there is only one SNL-based movie that didn't make a huge profit (Stuart Saves His Family). With those numbers, why shouldn't they keep doing what they do?
Huh. I hadn't realized It's Pat made a huge profit.
Posted by Nighthawk (Member # 4176) on :
Well, OK, maybe not "huge", but I can't bring myself to look that one up.
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
Here's why I thought it stayed just on the right side of the creepy/funny line: In my opinion, since Alfonso Cuarón directed Azkaban, the movies themselves have increasingly been calling attention to Emma Watson's developing chest. Note that in that movie, the uniform was apparently mysteriously repealed, in favor of tight sweaters and tight jeans for Hermione. Frankly, I found Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban to be a little bit creepy. And so I saw this skit as not merely a sophomoric riff on a girl developing, but as a social commentary on the way Hermione was becoming increasingly sexualized in the movies, and the way television and movies sexualize children in general.
Posted by Leonide (Member # 4157) on :
the thing i enjoyed most about the skit was the little references to the books they snuck in the sketch, ones that you might even miss during a one-time viewing: Parnell's mention of Butterbeer, Hermione talking about a cloaking spell, etc. It just makes me happy to know that one of the writers on SNL is a huge Harry Potter dork. Posted by GForce (Member # 9584) on :
Hey, you gotta admit, you can certainly tell that Emma Watson's gonna be hot.
Posted by Nighthawk (Member # 4176) on :
As if this thread wasn't creepy before that comment...
Posted by GForce (Member # 9584) on :
Ah, lighten up. The girl's going places. No reason to be ashamed of it.
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)