Saturday Night Live Forums

Saturday 11:30 PM on NBCIn Season

Favorite Cast Member (Of All Time and Present)

  • Avatar of drudager

    drudager

    [202]May 27, 2012
    • member since: 07/07/11
    • level: 13
    • rank: Regal Beagle
    • posts: 1,282
    HelloStuart wrote:
    Ruckhappy wrote:

    Mary Gross was such a stud hoss of the cast in the Ebersol era, and then her career just evaporated.


    That's a shame. She appeared in a few movies in the late '80s, but none of them turned a profit. I guess Mary just didn't have the cutthroat instinct other actors do.


    I don't want to sound mean, but Mary also lacked something else. Tho if she was in her prime today, she would definitely would be on some kids or cable show.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of Nickycd

    Nickycd

    [203]May 27, 2012
    • member since: 11/14/05
    • level: 3
    • rank: Soup Nazi
    • posts: 78

    I can't come up with just one favrote but these are my favorites for every 5 years. 75-80 Gilda Radner. There was just something special about her. 80-85 Eddie Murphy and then Billy Crystal 85-90 Dana Carvey and Phil Heartman 90-95 Mike Myers 95-00 Will Farrell 00-05 Tina Fey she was the rock of the Show those 5 years 05-10 Kristin Wig She show won't be the same without her current cast - Vanessa And Taren - There Stars will shine brightlyv Next year I also Like Abby and Nasim as well Well I could not pick just one but this is my list anyway.

    Edited on 05/27/2012 8:48pm
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of mrjimmyjames

    mrjimmyjames

    [204]Jul 1, 2012
    • member since: 05/13/10
    • level: 7
    • rank: Talk Show Host
    • posts: 424

    As a kid it was hard to think anyone was funnier than Bad Boy cast members like Farley, Sandler, and Spade. But now, while good, I feel they pale in comparison to a few earlier cast members: specifically Dana Carvey and Phil Hartman. These two were just brilliant; I still can't believe Carvey isn't a huge star, he should be. You can't beatsketches like Church Lady, Lyle The Effiminate Heterosexual, and Derek Stevens Choppin Broccoli. Hartman, with all his subtle nuances, could go from sounding fatherly like Mike Brady to a wound up lunatic at the drop of a hat. Fantastic. Oh and did I mention that he was on what I would consider to be the greatest sitcom of all time? And of course, gone too soon. I can't tell which cast member was better. Runner up: Mike Myers for the Simon (did you look at my bum?) in the bathtub sketch (among other things)

    Edited on 07/01/2012 2:54am
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of HelloStuart

    HelloStuart

    [205]Jul 1, 2012
    • member since: 06/03/05
    • level: 63
    • rank: Browncoat
    • posts: 27,282
    mrjimmyjames wrote:

    As a kid it was hard to think anyone was funnier than Bad Boy cast members like Farley, Sandler, and Spade. But now, while good, I feel they pale in comparison to a few earlier cast members: specifically Dana Carvey and Phil Hartman. These two were just brilliant; I still can't believe Carvey isn't a huge star, he should be. You can't beatsketches like Church Lady, Lyle The Effiminate Heterosexual, and Derek Stevens Choppin Broccoli. Hartman, with all his subtle nuances, could go from sounding fatherly like Mike Brady to a wound up lunatic at the drop of a hat. Fantastic. Oh and did I mention that he was on what I would consider to be the greatest sitcom of all time? And of course, gone too soon. I can't tell which cast member was better. Runner up: Mike Myers for the Simon (did you look at my bum?) in the bathtub sketch (among other things)


    "Newsradio" was funny as heck, but it was a mistake to go on without him. The final season with Jon Lovitz just didn't work.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of mrjimmyjames

    mrjimmyjames

    [206]Jul 2, 2012
    • member since: 05/13/10
    • level: 7
    • rank: Talk Show Host
    • posts: 424

    HelloStuart wrote:
    "Newsradio" was funny as heck, but it was a mistake to go on without him. The final season with Jon Lovitz just didn't work.



    I disagree. Although Phil was absolutely the best on the show, even without him the cast was fantastic and IMO probably the best ever. I mean it still had Dave Foley, who I think is very underrated and should be in more sitcoms and movies. Stephen Root, Maura Tierney, Joe Rogan, and even Andy Dick when he was actually tolerable. And its because of this that I think that duringthelast season it was still one of the best shows on television. Sure, not quite as good as the first 4 seasons with Phil but still at a really high level. If Newsradio w/Phil was a 9 or 10 then w/o Phil was at least an 8.

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of drudager

    drudager

    [207]Jul 3, 2012
    • member since: 07/07/11
    • level: 13
    • rank: Regal Beagle
    • posts: 1,282
    No offense, JimmyJames, but losing Phil was like the Beatles losing John or Paul. To me, while Foley was basically the show's star, his character was incredibly one-dimensional & dare I say: neurotic & a tad unlikable. I just watched ep 1 sea 5 on Sunday (thank you, Antenna TV) & while that was a 9 or 10, it was still incredibly depressing & in retrospect the rest of that season ranged a 3 to 6. I'm going to have to agree with Stu that sea 5 was a mistake with no offense to Lovitz or the rest of the cast.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of drudager

    drudager

    [208]Jul 3, 2012
    • member since: 07/07/11
    • level: 13
    • rank: Regal Beagle
    • posts: 1,282
    mrjimmyjames wrote:
    specifically Dana Carvey and Phil Hartman. These two were just brilliant; I still can't believe Carvey isn't a huge star, he should be.


    It always astounded me how poorly (outside of Wayne's World) Carvey's movies fared. You're only as good as your writers & script, yet his short-lived TV show was a masterpiece and it never caught fire. Tho I think that show should have been on cable to be honest. I think we just can't compare or assume every SNL alumni heavyweight will succeed like Chase, Murray, Aykroyd, Sandler, (briefly Myers) & Ferrell at the box office. Probably the most overlooked and surprisingly successful one who found steady work was Spade in the past 22 years.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of JustinRAn

    JustinRAn

    [210]Jul 3, 2012
    • member since: 12/30/09
    • level: 12
    • rank: Evil Bert
    • posts: 1,307
    drudager wrote:
    mrjimmyjames wrote:
    specifically Dana Carvey and Phil Hartman. These two were just brilliant; I still can't believe Carvey isn't a huge star, he should be.


    It always astounded me how poorly (outside of Wayne's World) Carvey's movies fared. You're only as good as your writers & script, yet his short-lived TV show was a masterpiece and it never caught fire. Tho I think that show should have been on cable to be honest. I think we just can't compare or assume every SNL alumni heavyweight will succeed like Chase, Murray, Aykroyd, Sandler, (briefly Myers) & Ferrell at the box office. Probably the most overlooked and surprisingly successful one who found steady work was Spade in the past 22 years.


    What do you mean he never caught fire? Have you not seen Jack & Jill? (Note: Sarcasm)
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of drudager

    drudager

    [211]Jul 3, 2012
    • member since: 07/07/11
    • level: 13
    • rank: Regal Beagle
    • posts: 1,282
    rishabhpb wrote:
    New cast members are learning. From the last decade, Tina, Amy, Maya and Jimmy all have their own shows on NBC!


    I don't know if I would call any of those shows a smashing success; especially since this is NBC's (probably) all-time lowest era. Many ex-castmembers have found work (even Cleghorne had a WB show) and Rob Schneider had the abortion known as "Rob!" on CBS recently. I often wonder if some of these NBC shows would ever fly on any other network. It's also a NBC brand factory thing; for better or for worse.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of HelloStuart

    HelloStuart

    [213]Jul 4, 2012
    • member since: 06/03/05
    • level: 63
    • rank: Browncoat
    • posts: 27,282
    rishabhpb wrote:
    drudager wrote:
    rishabhpb wrote:
    New cast members are learning. From the last decade, Tina, Amy, Maya and Jimmy all have their own shows on NBC!


    I don't know if I would call any of those shows a smashing success; especially since this is NBC's (probably) all-time lowest era. Many ex-castmembers have found work (even Cleghorne had a WB show) and Rob Schneider had the abortion known as "Rob!" on CBS recently. I often wonder if some of these NBC shows would ever fly on any other network. It's also a NBC brand factory thing; for better or for worse.


    I'll set Late Night aside because we all know that it gets the numbers, but 30 Rock and Parks and Rec are top notch, right? Up All Night, not so much.

    Those shows have the critics in their corner --especially "Parks & Rec"-- but you'd be hard-pressed to say any of them are ratings juggernauts.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of TheDiamondDog

    TheDiamondDog

    [214]Jul 4, 2012
    • member since: 06/14/05
    • level: 61
    • rank: Gold Monkey
    • posts: 19,860

    HelloStuart wrote:
    rishabhpb wrote:
    drudager wrote:
    rishabhpb wrote:
    New cast members are learning. From the last decade, Tina, Amy, Maya and Jimmy all have their own shows on NBC!
    I don't know if I would call any of those shows a smashing success; especially since this is NBC's (probably) all-time lowest era. Many ex-castmembers have found work (even Cleghorne had a WB show) and Rob Schneider had the abortion known as "Rob!" on CBS recently. I often wonder if some of these NBC shows would ever fly on any other network. It's also a NBC brand factory thing; for better or for worse.
    I'll set Late Night aside because we all know that it gets the numbers, but 30 Rock and Parks and Rec are top notch, right? Up All Night, not so much.
    Those shows have the critics in their corner --especially "Parks & Rec"-- but you'd be hard-pressed to say any of them are ratings juggernauts.


    I've never had an interest to watch either. Granted, I stopped watching prime time tv a while ago. I'm told they are good shows, bu eh.

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of avmon

    avmon

    [216]Jul 4, 2012
    • member since: 09/07/06
    • level: 17
    • rank: The Crazy Neighbor
    • posts: 1,861
    drudager wrote:
    I think we just can't compare or assume every SNL alumni heavyweight will succeed like Chase, Murray, Aykroyd, Sandler, (briefly Myers) & Ferrell at the box office.
    Hey, don't forget Murphy!
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of HelloStuart

    HelloStuart

    [217]Jul 4, 2012
    • member since: 06/03/05
    • level: 63
    • rank: Browncoat
    • posts: 27,282
    avmon wrote:
    drudager wrote:
    I think we just can't compare or assume every SNL alumni heavyweight will succeed like Chase, Murray, Aykroyd, Sandler, (briefly Myers) & Ferrell at the box office.
    Hey, don't forget Murphy!

    Agreed. Most cast members are meant to be TV actors with sporadic movie roles; a high-wattage talent like Ferrell or Wiig only comes by every 5-10 years. Look at the entire Renaissance cast, save for Myers and Stiller.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of mrjimmyjames

    mrjimmyjames

    [220]Jul 4, 2012
    • member since: 05/13/10
    • level: 7
    • rank: Talk Show Host
    • posts: 424

    drudager wrote:
    No offense, JimmyJames, but losing Phil was like the Beatles losing John or Paul. To me, while Foley was basically the show's star, his character was incredibly one-dimensional & dare I say: neurotic & a tad unlikable. I just watched ep 1 sea 5 on Sunday (thank you, Antenna TV) & while that was a 9 or 10, it was still incredibly depressing & in retrospect the rest of that season ranged a 3 to 6. I'm going to have to agree with Stu that sea 5 was a mistake with no offense to Lovitz or the rest of the cast.



    True, losing Phil was akin to the Beatles losing either John or Paul. But think about this: if you had planned on seeing the Beatles in concert and then found out that Paul was leaving the band before it, wouldn't you still go? It's still John, George, and Ringo (well, you might not care about Ringo) and isn't that still a concert involving all time great musicians? It might not be as great as it could have been, but there would still be plenty that was good. Same with season 5.

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of mrjimmyjames

    mrjimmyjames

    [221]Jul 4, 2012
    • member since: 05/13/10
    • level: 7
    • rank: Talk Show Host
    • posts: 424

    drudager wrote:
    You're only as good as your writers & script, yet his short-lived TV show was a masterpiece and it never caught fire.



    It might be the perfect time to bring that show back and try it again. Also, he was NBC's choice for succeeding Letterman on Late Night but he turned them down. I could definetely see him being able to do a late night talk show.

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of JustinRAn

    JustinRAn

    [222]Jul 5, 2012
    • member since: 12/30/09
    • level: 12
    • rank: Evil Bert
    • posts: 1,307
    avmon wrote:
    drudager wrote:
    I think we just can't compare or assume every SNL alumni heavyweight will succeed like Chase, Murray, Aykroyd, Sandler, (briefly Myers) & Ferrell at the box office.
    Hey, don't forget Murphy!


    With the exception of Ferrell (Stranger than Fiction), All of them haven't really done anything good in the last 5 years. Especially Murphy.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of drudager

    drudager

    [223]Jul 5, 2012
    • member since: 07/07/11
    • level: 13
    • rank: Regal Beagle
    • posts: 1,282

    mrjimmyjames wrote:


    drudager wrote:
    You're only as good as your writers & script, yet his short-lived TV show was a masterpiece and it never caught fire.



    It might be the perfect time to bring that show back and try it again. Also, he was NBC's choice for succeeding Letterman on Late Night but he turned them down. I could definetely see him being able to do a late night talk show.



    Maybe on Comedy Central or HBO but basically the essential core of that show is already in other projects. Maybe it would be nice to see Carvey do the Tonight Show instead of that Jay "I'm Too Cool" Leno whom apparently we'll have to pry TTS out of his cold dead hands. Here's another problem: Carvey just turned 57. Johnny Carson was 66 when he retired. Letterman is 65, Leno is 62. It's going to be very interesting what the late night scene looks like 10 years from now.

    Edited on 07/05/2012 8:23am
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of drudager

    drudager

    [224]Jul 5, 2012
    • member since: 07/07/11
    • level: 13
    • rank: Regal Beagle
    • posts: 1,282

    rishabhpb wrote:
    thacrowbar wrote:


    Favorite now: Will Forte. Hader is pretty good too. It's time to exit Hammond, Rudolph, and Thompson.


    Five years later, this is hilarious.


    Yeah, what's up with that?


    edit: Actually, I don't see what's so funny or what the big deal is.

    Edited on 07/05/2012 9:08am
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of drudager

    drudager

    [225]Jul 5, 2012
    • member since: 07/07/11
    • level: 13
    • rank: Regal Beagle
    • posts: 1,282
    mrjimmyjames wrote:

    True, losing Phil was akin to the Beatles losing either John or Paul. But think about this: if you had planned on seeing the Beatles in concert and then found out that Paul was leaving the band before it, wouldn't you still go? It's still John, George, and Ringo (well, you might not care about Ringo) and isn't that still a concert involving all time great musicians? It might not be as great as it could have been, but there would still be plenty that was good. Same with season 5.



    With a little help from a Beatles song book I have, Paul was basically 47%, John was 48%, George was 4.9% & Ringo was 0.1%. Based on your hypothesis, you have to ask if the trio would perform Paul songs & if not, well that's a pretty chunk big missing. Maybe Ringo could have done "Yesterday" but I don't think John could have done soft numbers like "Good Day Sunshine" or "Here, There & Everywhere" or George taking the lead on "Eleanor Rigby", "Oh! Darling" or "Let It Be" just wouldn't have the same effect. Maybe before 1965 era songs but not after. As the rule for the Beatles, they had astronomically much more value together than they ever did as solo entries.

    NewsRadio for argument's sake, Phil could had been John, Dave/Maura/Vicki/Khandi/Stephen/Joe/ would all be Paul combined; Lovitz was George & Andy was Ringo but much, much less loved. Aside from Dave and his Kids in the Hall late night (at least in the States) fame, Phil was most definitely the most well known of anyone in the cast.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.