Ever since 1975, “Saturday Night Live” (SNL) has been a medium for comedic entertainment many enjoy. The past decade, however, has proven the live sketch comedy show isn’t what it used to be.
Every week is met with a new set of celebrity guests that join the season’s regular cast in a series of sketches, including pre-recorded skits.
The show opens with the guest celebrity delivering a monologue, often humorously addressing controversies they’ve faced recently. To me, the most memorable ones include Taylor Swift’s song to her exes and Ariana Grande’s Wicked spectacular.
While both artists handled the media’s reaction to their personal lives with comedic eloquence, others haven’t had the same effect.
I didn’t grow up watching “SNL.” It was only until high school that I discovered the satirical skits that would have me tuned in on YouTube every Sunday morning, searching for the skits performed the previous night.
Marcello Hernandez, the first Gen-Zer to ever be part of “SNL’s” cast, has become one of my favorite regulars. Not only is his line delivery loud and witty, but he’s also exposed the American audience to Latin humor by writing sketches that come from a Latin perspective.
In his “Protective Mom” skit, Marcello interprets the role of a son whose Latina mother strongly disapproves of his girlfriend choice, thereby satirizing stereotypes in an entertaining way. The skit was later replicated with artist Bad Bunny.
Hernandez also commented on the poor language skills U.S. teachers impart on their students when teaching them Spanish. He had artist Karol G and actress Ana de Armas join him in said skit.
However, besides Hernandez, “SNL” hasn’t felt all that new. Every season, new cast members are introduced and old ones are remembered, sometimes even making guest appearances in a few sketches.
With the promise of funny and engaging skits every Saturday, however, comes the Sunday disappointment of underwhelming writing.
Lately, the “Domingo” skit has been one that proves “SNL’s” recycled humor is really just lazy writing. “SNL” seems to have adopted the mentality that imitation is the best way to keep comedy alive when, in truth, it underestimates the audience’s need for fresh material.
In the “Domingo” series, Kelsey and her partner Matthew sit through a performance orchestrated by Kelsey’s friends that exposes her infidelity with the Latin lover known as Domingo.
Throughout the series, including “Bridesmaid Speech,” “Babymoon,” “Vow Renewal” and “Domingo Cold Open,” singers such as Ariana Grande, Charli XCX and Sabrina Carpenter intentionally showcase an out-of-tune vocal performance to mainstream songs as a way to reveal Kelsey’s cheating.
The fact this sketch has been replicated several times in less than a year leaves much to be desired from “SNL” writers and actors. We get it, it’s funny the first or second time, but third or fourth? That’s simply expecting the audience to settle with unoriginal humor.
Skits with the Debbie Downer character, however, exemplify how humor can be repurposed in a way that doesn’t seem like actors are fighting to grasp the audience’s attention.
Not only is the cast breaking character repeatedly and having fun, but the two-skit series is successful because of the space in between said sketches that allows for nostalgia to act as an immediate comedic supplement.
This was not the first time “SNL” had reused the same skit idea. In 2015, the “Close Encounter” skit acted as a chain reaction for other similar skits to follow the narrative of different subjects who had unbelievable experiences with extraterrestrial life.
Nowadays, “SNL’s” humor feels dry and done. My Sunday mornings are no longer met with excitement, but rather looking up the song performed by guest artists the night before.
It seems to me “SNL” has become a space where pop culture is merely displayed and not commented on with humor and wit.
Addressing topics like girl-bossing and tween discourse, “SNL’s” 2025 career is full of sketches that simply showcase current media, youthful humor and lines that lack irony and sarcasm.
Political commentary in the form of election and debate sketches are some of the few select skits that occasionally grab my attention. As an audience member, I can compare the real events and “SNL’s” take on it and decide whether the satire was well executed.
Still, the majority of sketches are based on fictional events that give actors the freedom of owning the humor the script was originally supposed to evoke.
While I don’t think “SNL’s” spark is completely lost, I believe its spotlight has severely dimmed over the years. It seems to me most skits are solely carried by the guest of the night, but shouldn’t skits be inherently funny no matter who performs them? Isn’t the character itself supposed to be funny on their own?
At times, it seems the writing is disorganized and poorly thought-out, which makes actors break character moments that elicit more enjoyment than the actual skit being acted out.
Casting more comedians as dual actors and writers might be something “SNL” has to consider to stay afloat on the comedy ship. For now, we must settle for cheap jokes and a cast that can’t bridge the generational gap of their new audience.
