Parnell's Firing: A Mistake
-
andopolislf — 19 years ago(November 12, 2006 10:28 AM)
i agree with everyone here- what a mistake on michaels part! chris parnell didnt mind being the less over-the-top characters and held his own next to even the biggest names (will ferrell, namely).. hes been consistently funny and always professional.. i dont think any of the new amateurs even compare
-
rmana247 — 19 years ago(December 23, 2006 06:52 PM)
Well, he's no Phil Hartman cuz in my opinion he was the greatest cast member ever, but Parnell was great on the show. The show is filled with too many new faces this year, most of which aren't that great. I don't see why they got rid of him this year just when he's really made a mark with people Was he actually fired or was it decided not to renew his contract or what?
-
Ndawg45 — 19 years ago(December 29, 2006 04:20 AM)
Yes, it was a mistake, but I look at it this way
Why do sports teams undergoing "rebuilding" years or "salary cuts" trade or release some their best players? Because of the ol' greenbacksmoney. Then they plug in newer, cheaper talent and hope they develop into stars. Of course, it's at the cost of quality (for a while at least). I see the same thing here
Though C.P. was never the showy type, his talent and professionalism was undeniableand probably not cheap. He was a veteran of the show, so he probably had steady raises. Plus, in the past SNL fired then rehired him less than year later (2002?). THAT probably wasn't cheap.
So, in comparison to other current cast members, he probably made a decent amount moreand is now established elsewhere(i.e; Anchorman). C.P will find work. Samberg, Hader,and Wiig are all talent with good potential but little name recognition. This is their big break, so it won't cost NBC much to have them in the fold. And if they do hit it big, hey, all the publicity at a fraction of the cost.
Regardless of talent, the big thing for SNL is the writing. Maybe cutting SNL down to 60 or an innovative 75 mins. would tighten it up and add some humor. Plus, less show means less cost, right NBC?
There's still hopebut I think there'd be more with C.P. there. -
williams_kendall — 19 years ago(January 04, 2007 08:25 AM)
I agree with you completely, Chris Parnell was one of the many reasons I tuned in to SNL, he was very polished and funny and ever since he did the rap about Ashton, I have been an even bigger fan. I hope he will do well in his other roles. They should really have thought about this before they did, while SNL is okay now, it is not as funny without him.
-
myersangl7 — 18 years ago(June 10, 2007 11:42 PM)
Wow! I had no idea that he was fired, I thought he left because he had been there for a while already. He is easily one of the most talented of the SNL castmembers. I would think that he was considered a gem to SNL and not someone to be fired and then re-hired. This is ridiculous.
-
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