Dreary 'Saturday Night Live: UK' is dead on arrival



It took less than a minute. Not for the show to find its rhythm — that never arrived — but for viewers to reach for the remote.

A more generous critic would say "Saturday Night Live: UK" stumbled out of the gate. Someone actually grounded in reality would say it arrived DOA, was resuscitated by optimism, flatlined again during the opening credits, and spent the rest of its run time as evidence that nobody in the commissioning process had ever actually watched British television.

The live format, in particular, punishes British reserve. The Brits, much like the Irish, don't do collective euphoria on command.

The opening sketch — a Downing Street caricature so limp that it needed medical attention — felt like it was written by people who had heard of the place the way most people have heard of Uzbekistan: aware that it exists, entirely unclear on the details. Keir Starmer reduced to a bed-wetting schoolboy: accurate enough, but executed with all the surgical precision of a drunk toddler.

Satire requires stones. This was neutered at conception

Fey's lemon

The host was former "SNL" head writer Tina Fey — parachuted in to anchor the spin-off in the history of television's most durable comedy franchise.

Rather than evoking "Saturday Night Live," however, her appearance called to mind "30 Rock" — Fey’s own sitcom about a sketch comedy show flailing within an absurdly corporatized NBC.

She stood there less like a master of ceremonies than like a faintly embarrassed consultant, as if tasked with explaining why this seemingly gratuitous product was actually a masterstroke of synergy and brand extension. You could almost hear the Jack Donaghy pitch behind it: familiar logo, international rollout, scalable format. Somewhere between the greenlighting and the greenroom, the only premise that mattered — making people laugh — had been quietly lost.

The audience noticed immediately. They always do. Forty seconds. One minute. Five, if you were feeling charitable. The reactions weren't angry. They were worse. They were bored. There is no harsher verdict for comedy than indifference.

Stupid and sublime

It wasn’t always this way, of course. "Saturday Night Live" was once genuinely great. Not good. Not fine. Great. Belushi, Aykroyd, Eddie Murphy — dangerous, deranged, alive. Bill Murray doing a sort of dollar-store Sinatra. Chris Farley destroying every piece of furniture within reach. Phil Hartman doing impressions so precise that the subjects should have taken it personally. They probably did.

These were performers who understood that live television was a dare, not a format, and they took it every single week. Comedy that felt like it could go wrong at any moment, and sometimes did, and was better for it. Sharp, stupid, sublime in equal measure.

Those days are long gone — the show swallowed by Trump derangement syndrome and the passive-aggressive ritual of swiping at conservatives until the writers' room mistook a political position for a punch line.

In its prime, it was still political, but at least it was anchored in something real — American culture, fast, furious, and occasionally brilliant. If today's "SNL" is but a degraded facsimile of the show in its prime, this transatlantic fiasco is a facsimile of that facsimile: edges blurred, ink fading, soul entirely absent.

RELATED: 9 must-have devices for detecting leftist threats in your area

CBS Photo Archive/Monika Graff/Getty Images

Fawlty hour

The failure here is structural, not superficial. British comedy is built on irony, understatement, and a very specific species of darkness. "Fawlty Towers." "Brass Eye." "The Office." "I'm Alan Partridge." Comedy that watches you squirm and enjoys it. Comedy that finds the precise point of maximum discomfort and builds a home there. Comedy forged in restraint and bad weather, in class anxiety and institutional distrust, in the particularly British conviction that authority is always, at some level, ridiculous. You cannot import that.

If British comedy runs on slow-burning cringe and the precise calibration of discomfort, the "SNL" format runs on volume — loud, broad, relentlessly American, built around celebrity cameos and political impressions that reset with each news cycle and evaporate by Sunday morning.

Hiring Lorne Michaels doesn't transplant the institution any more than putting a McDonald's in a country farmhouse makes it rural. The live format, in particular, punishes British reserve. The Brits, much like the Irish, don't do collective euphoria on command. They do collective embarrassment, the kind that makes you leave the room on someone else's behalf, change your name, and book a one-way ticket to the aforementioned Uzbekistan.

Nothing much

Crucially, nobody asked for this. Nobody petitioned. Nobody wrote in. Sky's decision to commission eight episodes before a single one had even aired suggests the company was already nervous — hedging against failure by pretending it was a plan.

The deeper problem is one of fundamental incompatibility — a cultural mismatch so obvious that it's almost impressive that no one in the commissioning process named it aloud. Or perhaps they did and were overruled by someone with a spreadsheet. Comedy, at its best, feels dangerous. This felt focus-grouped. Safe. Sanitized. A show that promised the sun, moon, and stars but instead delivered, with full confidence and considerable expense, a urine-scented underpass.

Of course, the next episode could be great. Revelatory. The best television in years. But judging by the first, almost anything else would have been better. Including nothing. Nothing would have been better. Nothing, at least, doesn't waste your Saturday night.

UN Relief chief makes startling claim about what his organization really thinks about Hamas



A top U.N. official prompted outrage this week with the suggestion that Hamas is not a terrorist organization — once again bolstering critics' suspicions that the U.N. has a soft spot or, at the very least, a blind spot for terrorists.

Martin Griffiths, a British diplomat who formerly served as the U.N. special envoy for Yemen and now serves both as U.N. under-secretary-general for humanitarian affairs and as emergency relief coordinator, appeared Wednesday on Sky News to discuss humanitarian concerns in Gaza and Israel's war on terrorism.

After telling Sky News' Yalda Hakim that the situation in Gaza amounts to the worst humanitarian crisis he has observed in his 50-year career — apparently worse than the genocide of up to 3 million people by the Red Khmers in Cambodia or the civil war in Syria that claimed roughly 600,000 lives — the bureaucrat suggested an Israeli ground operation in Rafah, where Israeli captives were recently liberated, would be ruinous.

Hakim asked Griffiths, "In terms of Israel's plan to eliminate Hamas and have them never be part of any future negotiation when it comes to Gaza, do you think that's realistic?"

"I think it's very difficult," answered the U.N. official. "As you've said, I've worked with many, many different terrorist and insurgent groups. Hamas is not a terrorist group for us, as you know. It's a political movement."

— (@)

While the collective to which Griffiths belongs may not regard Hamas as a terrorist group, much of the civilized world does.

Hamas is an acronym for Harakat al-Muqawama al-Islamiya, meaning "Islamic Resistance Movement." According to the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, the bloodthirsty Islamist group "is committed to armed resistance against Israel and the creation of an Islamic Palestinian state in Israel's place."

Hamas' revised and slightly toned-down 2017 charter indicates it seeks Israel's annihilation and intends to make Jerusalem the capital of an alternate Islamic state.

"Not one stone of Jerusalem can be surrendered or relinquished," says the terrorist charter. "The measures undertaken by the occupiers in Jerusalem, such as Judaisation, settlement building, and establishing facts on the ground are fundamentally null and void."

The charter adds, "Resistance and jihad for the liberation of Palestine will remain a legitimate right, a duty and an honour for all the sons and daughters of our people and our Ummah. ... Resisting the occupation with all means and methods is a legitimate right guaranteed by divine laws and by international norms and laws. At the heart of these lies armed resistance, which is regarded as the strategic choice."

Hamas is responsible for countless attacks on civilians and Israeli soldiers as well as to terror plots around the world, including in Germany and Denmark. In October 2023, Hamas terrorists butchered thousands of Israeli citizens along with dozens of American citizens. The group also took hundreds of hostages.

The United States, the U.N.'s largest donor, has recognized Hamas as a terrorist organization three times.

Matthew Levitt, a specialist on Hamas at the Washington Institute of Near East Policy, told Voice of America the first designation "predates the current terrorism lists and came in the process of the peace process under the Clinton administration in 1995."

The U.S. formally recognized Hamas as a foreign terrorist organization on Oct. 8, 1997, roughly 10 years after the group was established. When the Bush administration created a special global terrorism list after the 9/11 attacks on the homeland, the U.S. designated the Hamas a terror group once more.

"The simple, most basic definition is targeting civilians for the purpose of effecting social or political change," said Levitt. "Personally, I simplify it a little bit more: It's about the tactic. Terrorism is a tactic and if you engage in this tactic of targeting civilians for the purpose of effecting social and political change then that act is an act of terrorism."

The United Kingdom, Israel, Australia, Argentina, Canada, and Japan are among the other relatively civilized nations that have designated Hamas a terrorist group.

Despite an attempt in 2014 by a top court to annul the bloc's decision, the European Union has nevertheless maintained that Hamas, including Hamas-Izz al-Din al-Qassem, is a terrorist organization.

Griffiths, who does not regard Hamas to be a terrorist organization, told Hakim, "I think it's very difficult to dislodge these groups without a negotiated solution, which includes their aspirations. I cannot think of an example offhand of a place where a victory through warfare has succeeded against a well-entrenched group."

Despite having trouble imagining a Gaza free of influence of Hamas terrorists, Griffiths indicated he could appreciate why it might be difficult for Israelis not to pursue the terrorist group's eradication.

"I've seen the horrors of what happened to Israelis [on Oct. 7.] I have met hostage families. I have total understanding, I believe, of the trauma that that's caused," said Griffith. "But I would add that if you want to have safety and security with people who are going to inevitably continue to be your neighbor in some form or another, you're going to have to create a relationship based on some shared values."

The watchdog group StopAntisemitism responded to Griffiths' suggestion that Hamas is not a terrorism group, writing, "We have no words."

Following this and other critics of his comments, Griffiths wrote on X, "Just to clarify: Hamas is not on the list of groups designated as terrorist organizations by the United Nations Security Council. This doesn't make their acts of terror on 7 October any less horrific and reprehensible, as I've been saying all along."

The official X account for the State of Israel responded to the suppose clarification, "Just to clarify: @UNReliefChief you're a Hamas apologist and your statements are an insult to every single victim of October 7th. Pathetic."

Just to clarify: @UNReliefChief you\u2019re a Hamas apologist and your statements are an insult to every single victim of\nOctober 7th. \n\nPathetic.
— (@)

Israel War Room responded, "Can you clarify *why* Hamas isn't on the UN's list of designated terror organizations? because we can't think of one good reason."

The German Foreign Office rushed to reiterate that the EU "has listed Hamas as a terrorist organization and so have many others."

Karoline Edtstadler, an Austrian federal minister for the EU, also noted, "The EU has listed Hamas as a terrorist organisation for more than 20 years. We always saw Hamas for what it was. No excuses for those who turned a blind eye before 7 October."

The U.N. not only fails to recognize Hamas as terrorists; it apparently works hand-in-glove with the group.

The United Nations Relief and Works Agency was recently exposed for its alleged infiltration by Hamas. The New York Times reported that Israeli military officials have provided U.S. officials with a dossier indicating roughly 10% of the UNRWA's employees are members of Hamas.

UN chief: Gaza the 'worst humanitarian crisis' he's seen | Israel-Hamasyoutu.be

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Sky News Australia Suspended For Violating YouTube’s Ever-Changing COVID Rules

Google-owned YouTube suspended Sky News Australia on Thursday for violating their ever-changing coronavirus policies.