Gary Johnson wrote:Humor-wise, SCTV's strength were parody and satire. SNL's was anti-establishment. Even though both shows dug into the same talent pool of Second City, SNL had just as many National Lampoon alums on their staff, which played into the post-Watergate "fuck you" attitude that permeated the country at the time.
To me these two shows (and for SNL I am speaking of the first 5 years) are Astaire and Kelly. They both excel at dance - just in different ways.
I think of them more as "apples and offal", with SNL the latter, and it began to smell a lot quicker the less fresh it became, instead of fermenting into a fine wine or a hardy hard cider.
Rewatching those SNL shows, my main feeling was "what was it I thought was funny?", especially that first year, where Chevy Chase's stardom is now completely incomprehensible to me (he's nothing but smug, even on SNL, which was the only place I ever thought he
was funny). There are occasional good sketches, but there is a lot more dross. SCTV just keeps getting better and better, the writing and construction, especially on the 90 minute shows, is good, and the performances were more focused and on the money.
SCTV not anti-establishment? Yeah right, I think it was way more successfully counter-culture and subtly subversive than SNL, which became an "institution" in it's tragic-hipness and predictability. It should have been cancelled decades ago.
Say what you want Johnson, I'm going to continue comparing them, and saying SNL was basically lame.
RICHARD M ROBERTS