I'd like to give SNL an chance. They still write some funny sketches and quite frankly it's a lot easier to watch them on sites like this one or on youtube. Quite frankly, I hate all the commercial breaks they take during their hour and a half. I was starting to think that "Saturday Night Commercials" would be a better title for the show. The other thing that gets me is that you would think Lorne Micheals could have learned something from being a producer of "Kids In The Hall". Those guys were hands down some of the best sketch comedy people in the business, right up there against the original SNL cast and Second City.

SNL is awesome. This one was funny. Everyone's memory is messed up. Not everything Sandler, Chase, Farley, Akyroyd (sp?) or Hartman did was gold. The reviews thought they wouldn't make it past the 1st season. With every new cast, people like you say, "they are not as funny as the last." Give it a rest, just watch it and laugh. Every one is a frickin critic nowadays.

... its not mad tv...

While I may agree with some that the premier of SNL this season wasn't the best, I think the show is still hilarious. I love the show, its one of my top favorite shows. I'm not saying that it is the same show it's always been, it's changed sure, but I thinks it's still awesome. The writers and the actors are great! For those who don't like or love it anymore, just stop watching...

Thats exactly what my response was when I watched the episode the other night. Some of the other reviewers have said the same thing and SNL should listen.

To have a few funny moments doesn't warrant having a show anymore and to think of there not being an SNL anymore makes me sad.

They have had some bad years but always come back from. Hopefully we'll see an upswing soon.

All of the performers are more talented than any of us reviewers. It's the material they have to work with that blows chunks. Fire the writers.

The OJ sketch was funny...EVERYONE has an opinion about the guy...if they don't, they must be out of touch or not that bright. It's unrealistic to say they can seat an impartial jury. That was the point, and they made it well.

With the recently released Season 1 to Season 3 of SNL, it's a big reminder on the differences between the original, 90s, and now the 2000s crew of SNL compare. I have to say, for me it's just not entertaining and it's also jarringly annoying. When SNL started, it was a lot of work to get things ironed out, but they took to it with passion and quickly made the show not only entertaining, but a true live performance in many respects. In the 90s, it was more hilarity, but with a bigger focus on well-written jokes but not as good at acting or staying in character. Now, though, I neither find myself laughing or being able to grate my teeth as half the crew blatantly stares off stage at the big cue cards. The only parts of the recently SNL episodes I've enjoyed have typically been the Digital Shorts, which are pre-recorded and don't rely on people taking their time to learn their lines so that they can then deliver them without looking like cardboard stand-ins.

when they bring on new people they either step up, or fall back. Trainwreck800, you are absolutely right. He has nothing to offer. They just have to have 'the black guy'. At least he stopped moving his lips when others were talking. The second they hired him I thought "WTF is the goodburger kid doing on here?!" What I didn't expect was how bad James Franco was. He was like the kid in a school play who didn't practice at all. I could have been funnier than that guy. I like Adam, though. I think he'll be the next breakout success.