Parnell's Firing: A Mistake
-
CordoVanLoafers — 18 years ago(August 03, 2007 09:20 AM)
There's no point to SNL without Chris. I tried to watch it a couple of times after they dumped Chris and Rachel, but it was totally lame. Kristen would be the only one left with any talent, but the rest of the cast is too no-talent and sickening.
I stayed on watching SNL for a couple of years mostly because of Chris. Yes, Rachel and Kristen added a lot to it, too. But when they fired Chris, they lost me completely, too. -
myersangl7 — 18 years ago(August 07, 2007 08:24 PM)
Don't get me wrong, I still love SNL, I just can't believe Lorne would fire someone as amazing as him (hello, there were two people in Lazy Sunday). SNL still has talent in it's cast: Phoeler, Rudolph, Thompson, etc. but they lost one of the greats.
-
funnyboy88 — 17 years ago(August 10, 2008 09:52 PM)
It was more like he was "let go," than "fired" in 2006. He had been on for 8 years. Lorne was trying to develop the newer cast members to keep the show fresh, and keeping the old weight had become too expensive after the budget cut. It wasn't a cold-blooded firing. It was a "We like you obviously, but we can't afford you anymore. Time to move on."
-
VacuumMouse — 17 years ago(October 04, 2008 07:09 AM)
No doubt about it!
Agree with the OP that this is a major blunder on the part of SNL because Chris held the show together
Chris is the major draw;
he is the major draw anywhere. And the show couldn't help but to go anywhere but down the tubes without himexactly what it did, unbearable to watch, pointless and senseless even.
I hope Chris lands on his feet, too!
As you aptly say, "He's a talented, versatile guy who didn't deserve to be fired!" Best wishes, Chris! Your fans miss you.
M
e
l
l
o
w
S
a
l
u
t
a
t
i
o
n
s
! -
MrsPlanktonBuffpants — 17 years ago(December 11, 2008 12:56 PM)
NO!!! They needs to get Chris back!!!!!!!!!!!! LikeNOW!!!
irishdreams88@hotmail.com -