November 21, 2000

12:00 PM

I didn't realize the Saturday Night Live Tom Green-Drew Barrymore wedding was real, with Drew cancelling the event five minutes before it happened, leaving Tom and producers to quickly improvise the left-at-the-altar bit.
posted by dan_of_brainlog (24 comments total)

I knew Drew would never go through with it!
posted by jacobsee at 12:31 PM on November 21, 2000

the only thing i could think when watching that was how sad it must be, feeling like you have to live your life so publically.
posted by sugarfish at 1:09 PM on November 21, 2000

In my most humble opinion, I think Tom Green is about as talented as Pauley Shore, and his brand of humor ruined any chance of Last week's SNL from having a least a few funny sketches. I turned off the TV after 20 minutes...
posted by Sal Amander at 1:14 PM on November 21, 2000

Good thing it wasn't Green who got cold feet. Then we would be hearing all these jokes about him having no balls. ouch.
posted by terrapin at 1:16 PM on November 21, 2000

Hmm. I'm skeptical. I saw Andy Kaufman's influence on Green's humor throughout the episode, and this kind of press release plays right into the hands of Kaufman's type of prank.
posted by jragon at 1:31 PM on November 21, 2000

Sal, Tom Green will certainly follow in Pauly Shore's terrifyingly erratic career footsteps as well. And Drew? She'll be fine as long as her looks last, and after that, well, then she would have to be relying on her brains. The brains that served her so well on one talk show I saw where she declared herself to be a vegan.

Five minutes later she was talking about how much she loved cheese.
posted by Skot at 1:35 PM on November 21, 2000

Sal, you shouldn't have turned it off. The episode got markedly better after the first half hour or so, which is unusual, because usually the good material is on first.

And I agree with the sentiment that Tom Green's do-something-weird-and-keep-doing-it-well-beyond-the-point-when-it-stopped-being-even-mildly-funny is heavily influenced by Andy Kaufman. As for whether that's a good comic style or not is debateable.
posted by daveadams at 1:46 PM on November 21, 2000

This just goes to further prove Drew Barrymore's forbidden love for me.

I'm serious guys.

*cries*
posted by pnevares at 2:12 PM on November 21, 2000

I lasted through the first ten minutes - including Green's non-monologue and the pulling of Barrymore from the audience - and I knew without even seeing it that "something would happen so they didn't get married" at the end of the show. Way too predictable, which is kind of a hallmark of all of Green's stuff that I've seen... She'll play an airhead on TV shows, since that gets talked and written about, but a friend who worked with her says she's actually pretty smart.
posted by m.polo at 2:16 PM on November 21, 2000

Drew is clearly a smart and capable woman who can play roles both with and against type in both drama and comedy. I think she's a great actress.

I, too, see the influence of Kaufman on Green, though I'm not at all saying he's as good. He's got it all over Pauly Shore, though. That "eagle" sketch may not have been one of the more sharply-written ones in the history of SNL, but it's the first one in a long time that I recall where the guest host was making the cast crack up. (The ultimate, of course, was when Don Rickles broke character and had Joe Piscopo unable to say his lines.)

As for the wedding, I thought it was just possible that it was for real, but he's pulled many of these so-close-to-real-life pranks before -- remember when he and Monica Lewinsky were squiring around Toronto and rumored to be engaged?
posted by dhartung at 2:25 PM on November 21, 2000

Worst SNL episode ever.
posted by mathowie at 2:38 PM on November 21, 2000

I've been watching re-runs over here in Froggyland of SNL since the first show (kind of bizarre), and I'd have to say that about .5% of what I've seen is funny. Mostly Eddie Murphy and what-his-face with the kittens in his pants (I can't remember if it was Michael Palin or John Cleese). A little Steve Martin, maybe. The rest is filler.
posted by Mo Nickels at 2:52 PM on November 21, 2000

they play SNL in froggy land? what do the frogs think?
posted by cell divide at 3:34 PM on November 21, 2000

dhartung: technically speaking, it was Ottawa land.

I like Tom Green. Is it stupid? Yup. Is it cliched shock shlock? Yup. Is it funny? Yup. Mostly because of Glenn. He's a brilliant straight man.
posted by cCranium at 4:59 PM on November 21, 2000

SNL died when it became The Murphy Piscopo Show, and has been doing the zombie thing ever since. It's long since breathed its last but doesn't have the decency to lay down somewhere.

I look back in anger.

The eerie thing about the "Andy Kaufman influence" for a performer is where one chooses to draw the line. Some may feel it's a hard way to live so publically, but some choose it. Some have it forced upon them, but Green and Barrymore are no greenhorns. They know what they're doing, and are no doubt having endless laughter about this, probably in some cases at the expense of the audience. God I hated Andy. God I miss Andy.

The wedding could very well have been real, and Drew did get cold feet, and they were both cool with it because they were playing real or acting real or pretend acting or whatever they call it between each other. I mean if Green's got the Kaufman bug, he'd have been cool with it either way. The whole concept of marriage among Hollywoodites is a mockery, anyway. They're both probably laughing at themselves with us when they do all that.

I just wish they picked a venue other than SNL. Maybe I wouldn't have missed it.


posted by ZachsMind at 5:01 PM on November 21, 2000

I have it on good authority that Kermit is a big fan of Saturday Night Live. This may have to do with the appearances that he and the Muppets made during the first season of the show. Whether or not Kermit speaks for the frog population at large is debatable, though. In Froggyland, Kermit is widely considered to be a sellout, having made frog values and beliefs widely accessible to a non-frog audience, not to mention his controversial, inter-species dalliance with the one that most frogs simply refer to scornfully as "The Pig".

In fact, the unnamed little hopper from the videogame Frogger is held in much higher national regard, due to his selfless, repeated martyrdom for the time-honored cause of "road-crossing", considered an unaleinable right of chickens and frogs alike.
posted by Optamystic at 5:05 PM on November 21, 2000

Tom's actually gotten a lot more extreme since he's gained popularity. He used to be more subtle. He'd toy with people's brains until they couldn't take it anymore and they lashed out with rage, to the delight of the studio audience and all of us loyal Rogers 22 community cable watchers.

I remember hanging out with Tom a few times back in Ottawa. He was a friend of a friend. Truly a strange guy. He appears to be always in character, like Kauffman. We walked into a video store and he just collapsed to the floor face-first and didn't get up for about 10 minutes. People crowded around. Some folks were thinking about calling an ambulance. Then, Tom just got up, brushed himself off, and started to walk away. He'd turn around and say "what? what's everyone looking at?"

Then, later, his friend ran behind the counter at McDonalds and started serving himself french fries.
posted by Succa at 6:25 PM on November 21, 2000

In Froggyland, Kermit is widely considered to be a sellout, having made frog values and beliefs widely accessible to a non-frog audience, not to mention his controversial, inter-species dalliance.

See, even Optamystic is funnier than SNL.

Froggyland is France. I said Froggyland because I get tired of saying "I'm in Paris," otherwise I always get two kinds of email, one kind saying things like, "Whatdya mean you get SNL re-runs every night? I never heard of that. What kind of bullshit are you talking?" and other kind saying,"What're you, some kind of fancy boy, thinks he's soooo cool living in Pay-ree?"

The frogs have no opinion of SNL. They are perhaps pleased that they do not have a hole to fill on the programming schedule. On French cable one can see long broadcast swaths of British and French comedy ensemble shows, some old, some new, nearly all funnier (even with my bad French) than SNL. SNL does not rate.

Also, while we're here: Phil Hartman? Not funny. Ever, never, not even as Lionel Hutz. I worry sometimes that he's not dead but in seclusion working on a new project.

posted by Mo Nickels at 12:08 AM on November 22, 2000

See, even Optamystic is funnier than SNL

Can I put that on my resume?
posted by Optamystic at 1:31 AM on November 22, 2000

Do you get NewsRadio re-runs in France, Mo Nickels?
posted by dan_of_brainlog at 2:41 AM on November 22, 2000

I think Phil Hartman was quite funny, but in a subtle way. Kind of like Adam Sandler in his really early movies. Nowadays, you expect him to jump into that Cajun / Operaman bit of his.
posted by Cavatica at 4:01 AM on November 22, 2000

I've seen NewsRadio and it didn't really do it for me. Every character he does, he draws his lips back and modulates his voice in the same way, as if that works, as if that's the way to create a believable character. Bah.

Maybe that should all be in past tense.
posted by Mo Nickels at 1:16 PM on November 22, 2000

dhartung writes:

Drew is clearly a smart and capable woman...

Um, if she's so smart and capable, what the hell is she doing with Tom Green?

If she's dumb enough to want him, maybe she deserves him.

Disclaimer: I don't like her. I can stand her now and then in certain movies, but the people who fawn all over her give me the *creeps*.

I just can't stand the whole "poor me I got rich and addicted to drugs and now I'm on the cover of People, take me seriously" crap, and the flashing-her-tits-at-David-Letterman thing really was the final nail in the coffin for me. Are these the actions of a person of substance? (I'm not talking about a substance *abuser*, mind you)

She's just a fluffy little tart. She's cute, sure, but so are those little marshmallow chicks covered with sugar (peeps). And they have about the same amount of substance.

Me, I prefer more... substantial actors. Has she done anything truly challenging, any role that required her to do anything much besides look cute? (and possibly pitiful and/or annoyed) I haven't seen or heard of any (and yes, I saw that fairy tale one, it doesn't count).
posted by beth at 2:57 PM on November 22, 2000

Hey, beth, to each his own. I have no opinion on the whole poor-me etc. thing. I came to my opinion of her after seeing darned good work in, yes, mainstream Hollywood movies. And of course if you place her next to Cameron Diaz it's clear who's the more versatile actress by far. I just don't see why people deride her so. But that's me.
posted by dhartung at 4:34 PM on November 22, 2000