I didn't find the sketch funny at all. And the character breaks seemed forced. What made the Carol Burnett breaks funny was the involuntary hilarity that occurred mostly between Harvey Korman and Tim Conway. Conway was arguably one of the funniest comedians of that era, and it seemed genuine when Korman would attempt to stifle his laughter.
Exactly. I often allow myself to forget how much I dislike Lorne Michaels, as I love sketch comedy and improv as much as he loves his proximity to fame and magic wand of granting his faves success. (Jerry Seinfeld and Lorne live in the same brain file as not-funny jerks.) Anyhoo, if you can, read or listen to the audio version of this excellent recent New Yorker Carol Burnett profile. She addresses his characterization of her as an example of what not to do. I hope she's cackling right now. https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2025/10/06/carol-burnett-profile
They broke me in a different way when they had Alec Baldwin do his terrible Trump impersonation, instead of going with Darrel Hammond, who was terrific, but not overtly political enough for Lorne.
Also, an alleged comedic sketch show, paying homage to Hillary Clinton. You can tread into Stephen Colbert territory if you want. But you won't be funny anymore.
Yeah I feel like this is the more obvious comparison for the passing notes sketch—the audience is aware that the breaking isnt completely natural. In the case of John Mulaney changing the cue cards on Bill Hader the audience doesnt know. I’m an SNL fan and I didnt know about that till just now.
Here the breaking is natural in that Padilla (who by the way OP correctly identifies as the best cast member right now—she’s electric) and Gosling presumably didnt know at least at first that the point of the sketch wasnt to tell the four jokes they’d written. It’s unnatural in that the joke explicitly is to try and force them to break. But the audience is in on that.
The result is funny, I think, because as in the Jost/Che joke swaps the joke is the format itself rather than the content. For the joke swaps, the joke is only 33% that “zoo employees realized the monkey had a weight problem when black guys kept hitting on it” and is 66% that a black comic wrote that pretty good racist joke specifically with the intention of forcing his straight laced white co-host to read it on air, at the height of the woke era, sight unseen. That’s a funny idea and even if it doesnt hold up to Lorne’s initial loftiest ideals for sketch writing, the first step to writing a good sketch is a comic coming up with a good premise. Black guy forcing white guy to read racist jokes he wrote is funny.
Here the joke is isnt each individual note which of course arent each all that funny. The joke is that it’s prank pulled on Padilla and Gosling and it hinges on the fact that the lines arent being delivered by cue cards but by in-sketch props. Whether anyone thinks it’s all that great an idea is neither here nor there, really. It’s still a joke that hinges on a comic’s idea for how to create a funny sketch. I think it’s a fairly clever workaround to avoid Padilla and Gosling knowing before the sketch is live that they’re the butt of the joke rather than delivering the joke.
It avoids exactly what Lorne told Bill Hader excused breaking-as-part-of-the-bit. Neither Padilla nor Gosling was breaking intentionally to draw attention to themselves nor to intentionally steal cheap laughs for jokes they didnt think would get any. And what they were saying was funny, I thought, because the jokes were written in a way that was clearly aimed at the situation itself—wordy, rather long, weirdly specific, forcing Padilla and Gosling to try and stay in the moment as their eyes dart further down the page (something just changing the cue cards wouldnt have accomplished) and they put the joke together in their head at the moment they’re delivering it.
Whatever someone thinks of how successful the sketch was, it’s not quite fair to take it as an artless chucking of comedic integrity. It’s a new kind of joke and it got just as much attention from the writers as any other sketch you’ll see in the least half hour of any random SNL episode.
The only way this can become an issue is the same way the Christmas joke swap tradition has run its course—if they do it too often for too long it’ll stop being as funny.
Kate McKinnon was famous for breaking other people while she stayed firmly in character. (I think she broke Gosling more than once….in a single sketch!!😂). I used to love watching that play out …because while the people around her were doubling up, she never gave an inch. Amazing talent!
And of course…one of the most iconic sketches “More Cowbell” - which is absolutely fantastic on its own - is actually made better by both Fallon and Kattan breaking hard…feels like they’re paying homage to the insane comedic genius of the writers and actors in that sketch!
I love the "Alien Abduction" skits - the dialog that was written for Kate was hysterical and she pulled it off with a straight face while other cast members were breaking.
And Carol Burnett's show is still funny. Even when you know what's coming. Including and perhaps especially when the cast experiences the laughter as well.
Twenty years ago? How about 50? NBC Saturday Night had A Film By Gary Weiss in just about every early episode that served the same purpose, only no little rectangles to watch them on,
Albert Brooks would also beg to differ. The real reason the Lonely Island shorts were revolutionary was because up to then, NBC was ruthless about anyone posting clips of the show on YouTube. Lonely Island finally opened their eyes to the publicity value of having their stuff out there.
It has become a social media cliche at this point. Someone writes something about SNL and 15 people comment about how “it just isnt funny anymore. I liked it back before they got all these new cast members.” And the people all rejoice for feeling better about themselves for thinking their humor is somehow superior than others’. But see the thing is…if you constantly turn yourself off to new things, you'll never grow or change or recognize how awsome Gorrilaz was doing “Clint Eastwood” live with Del the Funky Homosapien. You will miss 100 percent of the cool new or artsy things if you shut your mind off before even trying to enjoy it.
And maybe you just cant get into it. Thats fair. Everything doesn't have to appeal to everyone. But be open to being surprised sometimes and willing to change your mind.
I have only watched it once in the last decade or so—when Eddie Murphy made a guest appearance. Eddie was the funniest cast member ever and he did not disappoint.
This has been probably the worst season for SNL I can remember. That scene with Padilla and Gosling was one of the few times I can remember laughing in a while. And I’m not one of those “It hasn’t been funny since Belushi died!” either. That era had hits and misses as well. But if all they have left is getting the cast to break maybe it’s time to call it a day.
Love Gosling, but it was one of the least funny shows I’ve seen in a long time. Turned it off before Update. ‘Breaking’ is funny when the material or the acting is so good, you can’t contain yourself. Not when it’s the goal itself.
Nobody watches these sketches so it doesn't really matter what happens in them. Typical SNL viewing: Cold open/monologue >> ff >> musical guest if you are into them >> ff >> weekend update >> ff >> musical guest >> ff >> check out what Chloe fineman is wearing at the cast sign off. Delete
Having watched the shows evolution from its inception in the mid 70s to today, I find the show is rarely funny. We usually tape it, so we can fast forward through all the Duff. Usually only watched the cold open, the opening monologue, and we try and stay up until we end update. But I think the show has lost much of its bite.
I didn't find the sketch funny at all. And the character breaks seemed forced. What made the Carol Burnett breaks funny was the involuntary hilarity that occurred mostly between Harvey Korman and Tim Conway. Conway was arguably one of the funniest comedians of that era, and it seemed genuine when Korman would attempt to stifle his laughter.
I can’t comprehend the phrase “That’s Carol Burnett” being anything other than high praise.
Exactly. I often allow myself to forget how much I dislike Lorne Michaels, as I love sketch comedy and improv as much as he loves his proximity to fame and magic wand of granting his faves success. (Jerry Seinfeld and Lorne live in the same brain file as not-funny jerks.) Anyhoo, if you can, read or listen to the audio version of this excellent recent New Yorker Carol Burnett profile. She addresses his characterization of her as an example of what not to do. I hope she's cackling right now. https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2025/10/06/carol-burnett-profile
exactly. this is how i felt too lmao it was soo forced
Check out the number of views on some of those old Carol Burnett skits. They’re golden.
I'd watch any Carol Burnett sketch over any SNL sketch.
Carol was awesome. The humor is in being able to laugh at oneself no matter how hard you tried not to. It had its time and place.
Carol IS awesome.
They broke me in a different way when they had Alec Baldwin do his terrible Trump impersonation, instead of going with Darrel Hammond, who was terrific, but not overtly political enough for Lorne.
Also, an alleged comedic sketch show, paying homage to Hillary Clinton. You can tread into Stephen Colbert territory if you want. But you won't be funny anymore.
Breaking is the entire point of Colin Jost reading lines written by Michael Che.
Yeah I feel like this is the more obvious comparison for the passing notes sketch—the audience is aware that the breaking isnt completely natural. In the case of John Mulaney changing the cue cards on Bill Hader the audience doesnt know. I’m an SNL fan and I didnt know about that till just now.
Here the breaking is natural in that Padilla (who by the way OP correctly identifies as the best cast member right now—she’s electric) and Gosling presumably didnt know at least at first that the point of the sketch wasnt to tell the four jokes they’d written. It’s unnatural in that the joke explicitly is to try and force them to break. But the audience is in on that.
The result is funny, I think, because as in the Jost/Che joke swaps the joke is the format itself rather than the content. For the joke swaps, the joke is only 33% that “zoo employees realized the monkey had a weight problem when black guys kept hitting on it” and is 66% that a black comic wrote that pretty good racist joke specifically with the intention of forcing his straight laced white co-host to read it on air, at the height of the woke era, sight unseen. That’s a funny idea and even if it doesnt hold up to Lorne’s initial loftiest ideals for sketch writing, the first step to writing a good sketch is a comic coming up with a good premise. Black guy forcing white guy to read racist jokes he wrote is funny.
Here the joke is isnt each individual note which of course arent each all that funny. The joke is that it’s prank pulled on Padilla and Gosling and it hinges on the fact that the lines arent being delivered by cue cards but by in-sketch props. Whether anyone thinks it’s all that great an idea is neither here nor there, really. It’s still a joke that hinges on a comic’s idea for how to create a funny sketch. I think it’s a fairly clever workaround to avoid Padilla and Gosling knowing before the sketch is live that they’re the butt of the joke rather than delivering the joke.
It avoids exactly what Lorne told Bill Hader excused breaking-as-part-of-the-bit. Neither Padilla nor Gosling was breaking intentionally to draw attention to themselves nor to intentionally steal cheap laughs for jokes they didnt think would get any. And what they were saying was funny, I thought, because the jokes were written in a way that was clearly aimed at the situation itself—wordy, rather long, weirdly specific, forcing Padilla and Gosling to try and stay in the moment as their eyes dart further down the page (something just changing the cue cards wouldnt have accomplished) and they put the joke together in their head at the moment they’re delivering it.
Whatever someone thinks of how successful the sketch was, it’s not quite fair to take it as an artless chucking of comedic integrity. It’s a new kind of joke and it got just as much attention from the writers as any other sketch you’ll see in the least half hour of any random SNL episode.
The only way this can become an issue is the same way the Christmas joke swap tradition has run its course—if they do it too often for too long it’ll stop being as funny.
Padilla reminds me of a cross between Carol Burnett and Bonnie Hunt.
SNL and it’s “humor” has escaped me for the past couple of decades…
Has Lorne Michael ever realized he wasn't talented enough for Carol Burnett?
Kate McKinnon was famous for breaking other people while she stayed firmly in character. (I think she broke Gosling more than once….in a single sketch!!😂). I used to love watching that play out …because while the people around her were doubling up, she never gave an inch. Amazing talent!
And of course…one of the most iconic sketches “More Cowbell” - which is absolutely fantastic on its own - is actually made better by both Fallon and Kattan breaking hard…feels like they’re paying homage to the insane comedic genius of the writers and actors in that sketch!
Are you thinking of the alien abduction sketch? Kate's performance and Ryan breaking--it's one of my favorites!
That’s the one! 😄👍
I love it and I totally agree with your post!
I love the "Alien Abduction" skits - the dialog that was written for Kate was hysterical and she pulled it off with a straight face while other cast members were breaking.
And Carol Burnett's show is still funny. Even when you know what's coming. Including and perhaps especially when the cast experiences the laughter as well.
Twenty years ago? How about 50? NBC Saturday Night had A Film By Gary Weiss in just about every early episode that served the same purpose, only no little rectangles to watch them on,
Albert Brooks would also beg to differ. The real reason the Lonely Island shorts were revolutionary was because up to then, NBC was ruthless about anyone posting clips of the show on YouTube. Lonely Island finally opened their eyes to the publicity value of having their stuff out there.
It has become a social media cliche at this point. Someone writes something about SNL and 15 people comment about how “it just isnt funny anymore. I liked it back before they got all these new cast members.” And the people all rejoice for feeling better about themselves for thinking their humor is somehow superior than others’. But see the thing is…if you constantly turn yourself off to new things, you'll never grow or change or recognize how awsome Gorrilaz was doing “Clint Eastwood” live with Del the Funky Homosapien. You will miss 100 percent of the cool new or artsy things if you shut your mind off before even trying to enjoy it.
And maybe you just cant get into it. Thats fair. Everything doesn't have to appeal to everyone. But be open to being surprised sometimes and willing to change your mind.
idk man, it's just market feedback: "SNL has sucked for a long time so why bother writing about it" is valid feedback for a culture commentator.
I have only watched it once in the last decade or so—when Eddie Murphy made a guest appearance. Eddie was the funniest cast member ever and he did not disappoint.
This has been probably the worst season for SNL I can remember. That scene with Padilla and Gosling was one of the few times I can remember laughing in a while. And I’m not one of those “It hasn’t been funny since Belushi died!” either. That era had hits and misses as well. But if all they have left is getting the cast to break maybe it’s time to call it a day.
Love Gosling, but it was one of the least funny shows I’ve seen in a long time. Turned it off before Update. ‘Breaking’ is funny when the material or the acting is so good, you can’t contain yourself. Not when it’s the goal itself.
SNL hasn't been funny since mid 90s.
Nobody watches these sketches so it doesn't really matter what happens in them. Typical SNL viewing: Cold open/monologue >> ff >> musical guest if you are into them >> ff >> weekend update >> ff >> musical guest >> ff >> check out what Chloe fineman is wearing at the cast sign off. Delete
Having watched the shows evolution from its inception in the mid 70s to today, I find the show is rarely funny. We usually tape it, so we can fast forward through all the Duff. Usually only watched the cold open, the opening monologue, and we try and stay up until we end update. But I think the show has lost much of its bite.