Saturday Night Live recap: Sydney Sweeney’s hosting debut has boob jokes galore
SNL's treatment of the rising star is often painfully obvious
TV Reviews Sweeney
The question wasn’t, “Is Sydney Sweeney funny?” Anyone who’s watched the actress’s barbed takes on Gen Z teendom as The White Lotus’ Olivia Mossbacher and Euphoria’s Cassie “I have never, EVER been happier” Howard knows that Sweeney can very much do funny. (She deservedly earned Emmy nominations for both roles.) The question, rather, was, “Is Saturday Night Live going to let Sydney Sweeney be funny?”
Those worries seemed well-founded when NBC dropped teasers for Sweeney’s hosting debut, in promotion for the star’s new “Spidey-adjacent” Madame Web movie (her co-star Dakota Johnson hosted the show back in January) and in the wake of her sleeper-hit rom-com with Glen Powell, Anyone but You. Also featuring this week’s musical guest Kacey Musgraves (back in Studio 8H for the third time), the SNL promos leaned heavy on the fact that Sydney is a beautiful blonde with a famous decolletage (“Weirdly, a lot of my fans are men”) and, as was the case with Sweeney’s hunky Euphoria castmate Jacob Elordi, the episode itself didn’t let the performer stray far from her sex symbol status.
Opening monologue: Powell and push-up bras
We start off well enough—well, except for that humdrum Gavin Newsom impersonation in the cold open—with some self-deprecation: “My name is Sydney Sweeney. You might have seen me in Anyone but You or Euphoria. You definitely did not see me in Madame Web.” Good stuff. Where last week’s host, Shane Gillis, deliberately side-stepped his public controversies in the monologue, Sweeney tackled hers head on. That MAGA-themed 60th birthday for her mom? Check. That viral TikToker who falsely claimed to be the actress’s nutritionist? Check. (“I’m in shape because I run, avoid sugar, and do Ozempic.”) And those rumors that she had an on-set affair with her Anyone but You co-star Glen Powell? Double-check, including a fun bit that cuts to Powell himself in the studio audience.
The “Shoot, this is brutal” sketch of the night:
Sweeney apparently has that same “Zooey Deschanel without bangs” quality that if she remotely changes her hair, I can’t recognize her. However, the Bumpit wasn’t the problem in this one-joke wreck, with saw the host and cast member Sarah Sherman as wedding makeup artists whose bride gets bad news mid-session. Sydney’s New Joisey accent confoundingly sounded less Snooki and more South African as the bit went on, and there were a good two minutes and two “Shoots” too many.
The best sketch of the night:
While the majority of the live skits were lackluster, Sweeney fared better in the taped sketches, including a Please Don’t Destroy video about an absurdly tragic death and Chef Boyardee and this spot-on Airbnb faux-mercial, starring Sydney and Chloe Troast as Chanel and Chanel (pronounced “Channel”), the interior designers behind the “bland, generic, downright uninviting” decor of the company’s homestays. Among their signatures: a 12-page garbage packet, a foreboding locked closet and “a single, unsettling photo of the family that actually live here.”
The most eye-roll-inducing sketch of the night:
It was inevitable that the show would play up Sweeney’s blondeness and bustiness, but a Hooters bit just feels too painfully obvious in the year of our lord 2024.
The “Yay, someone else is hot!” sketch of the night:
Actually, the funniest way this week’s episode played up Sweeney’s attractiveness was by focusing on someone else’s entirely: in this silly, steamy bit, Sydney’s got the hots for Bowen Yang who, good news for her, has simply been “playing gay” this whole time because “it’s a shortcut to laughs.” In reality, he pulls women, including fellow sex symbol Gina Gershon. “Straight Bowen” is a wondrously jerky creation (his type is “blonde, smart, heavy naturals”) and Sweeney was fully game for all of the erotic absurdism. Extra points for Yang’s mid-sex scene declaration of “I’m on PrEP!”
MVP of the night: Chloe Fineman
Fineman got significant screentime opposite Sweeney in several sketches during Saturday’s show, but while that “Big Bench” bit was pretty abysmal, Chloe and Sydney’s “intern detectives” sketch had some good inter-generational jokes, with both performers pretty much doing their best version of Sweeney’s The White Lotus character. Armed with nothing but vocal fry and a few social-media apps, the interns are able to crank through cold case after cold case: “We’re 22-year-old girls in situationships. We can literally find out anything about anyone with literally no information.” Given that I once dug up the Instagram of a man named Tyler knowing only that he was blonde and from Texas, this tracks. (We also enjoyed that included jab at Jimmy from Love is Blind.)
Stray observations
- It was a surprisingly animal-forward show, from an adorable appearance by “Air Bud,” several mentions of the late, great Flaco the Owl, and a “Weekend Update” cameo from Charlotte, a stingray who mysteriously got knocked up at a North Carolina aquarium. Played by Ego Nwodim, Charlotte came on to hilariously confront the father of said mystery baby: Michael Che. “It was immaculate in that you immaculated and then I immaculated three times, back-to-back. I would say you broke my back, but I ain’t got no bones!”
- Having the preternaturally charismatic Glen Powell pop up not once but twice throughout Saturday’s show—he returned for the show’s final sketch, playing a boss having an affair with his employee (Sweeney)—was a painful tease. Get the man a hosting gig, STAT.
- Speaking of extramarital affairs, Ariana Grande is back as musical guest next week for the third time, with Dune: Part Two star Josh Brolin as host.
205 Comments
These are all freakishly talented and funny people at SNL, but for the life of me I can’t understand why they always always always go for the lowest hanging fruit in their sketch jokes. Like dude, it’s like all their writing is just “what’s the first thing I think of? Cool let’s write the whole week based on that.”This show would be so much funnier if they just… threw away that first thing and started from the second thing that comes to mind.
I’m pretty sure the writers feel the same way. The problem is that the older Lorne gets, the more broad and lowest-common-denominator he wants the sketches to be. He really HAS to go.
I don’t think it’s Lorne, I think it’s the writers. The writers are lazy. Very few sketches are interesting. Too many lazy jokes. They’ve overused “and this is real” when incorporating actual quotes in sketches, as well as other recycled jokes. Almost no sketch seems like it come out of the blue to surprise and delight. On the big bench sketch, I thought they would have all 17 judges (actually 15) talk at once, which would have been funny. Instead, it had no clear concept. And all too often, as with the wedding sketch, as the reviewer points out, they grind a single joke into the ground. They have a good cast (but too many of them), but the writing has been weak for almost a decade.
The host can also be a contributor. They often have to run with the hosts ideas for sketches and also write jokes that will, hopefully, work for the host. I don’t think that was the problem this week but there is a reason some of the worst SNL shows are when non-actors host(like politician or men famous for being really rich)
Don’t forget athletes. For every Payton Manning there’s a Nancy Kerrigan (to date the worst host I’ve ever seen).
It was 100% the problem.
A current trend I absolutely loathe is doing a commercial or film parody or what have you and then, via voiceover, explicitly and repeatedly explaining what they’re parodying and why. E.g., “Lesbian Period Drama”:THIS IS THE JOKE, BUT WE’RE WORRIED YOU’RE TOO DUMB TO GET IT. YOU GET IT RIGHT? WE’RE WORRIED THAT IF WE JUST WROTE A STRAIGHT FILM TRAILER PARODY AND THEN RELIED ON THE TITLE REVEAL AS A PUNCHLINE YOU MIGHT LOSE INTEREST HALF-WAY THROUGH OR NOT UNDERSTAND WHAT THE JOKE IS, SO HERE IS THE JOKE. HERE IS THE JOKE AGAIN. WE’RE JOKING ABOUT THIS. HERE’S SOME FAKE FILM REVIEWS TO EXPLAIN THE JOKE SOME MORE. GET IT? THESE ARE ALL COMMON ELEMENTS OF RECENT HISTORICAL DRAMAS INVOLVING LESBIANS. HERE ARE THE NAMES OF THE RECENT HISTORICAL DRAMAS INVOLVING LESBIANS SO YOU GET THE JOKE. WE GOOD? ARE YOU GOOD? DO YOU GET IT? THE JOKE?
A current trend I absolutely loathe is doing a commercial or film parody or what have you and then, via voiceover, explicitly and repeatedly explaining what they’re parodying and why. E.g., “Lesbian Period Drama”: Yeah, that’s Mikey Day’s bit!
They alway, always seem to drag out the worst skits.
I think people throw around the word “lazy” too much. I heard someone recently say someone’s shoes were lazy. wtf People make choices. I don’t think the writers are lazy—they’re trying to get their jokes on the air, and the cast is trying to get airtime. So they’re writing stuff that Lorne likes.The other option is that they’re just bad. There’s no reason to assign a moral failing (laziness) to someone who is just not good at something.All that said, I consistently get at least a couple laughs each week. Almost each week.
It’s your problem that you think laziness is a moral failing. Every labor saving invention came from someone who was so lazy that they hated their repetitive task so much, it inspired them to work hard to create something to eliminate that repetitive task.
If your takeaway from my comment was that I disapprove of time- or energy-saving inventions or choices, either you horribly misunderstood or I horribly miscommunicated myself.
My point’s only relation to your point is that you disapproved of “lazy” as the description of these folks, whereas I view “lazy” as an insult in general. I think the consensus we both were headed towards is that the writers aren’t lazy. They’re just talentless hacks. I’m sure they work hard to reach sub-Dane-Cook levels of funny.
No, I know what your point is. It’s just arguing against an opinion that I don’t hold, so I must have miscommunicated myself somewhere along the way apparently. I didn’t disapprove of “lazy.” I was noting that the OP considers laziness a moral failing. I don’t know that the writers are talentless either. I was just saying that being bad at their jobs is more likely than their being lazy.
Does he manage the pre-recorded bits less? Those seem consistently funnier and better written than the live portions.
I’ve always heard rumours that Lonely Island used to present as close to airtime as possible to prevent edits.
They’re also on a tighter timeline, having to get things actually recorded and whatnot ahead of time. So I would imagine it’s almost impossible to really note those segments to death.
I think the pre-recorded skits have other advantages. They tend to be short, which means it’s easier to rely on variations of a single joke. And the pre-recorded bits can be more polished than live TV, something that really helps when you have a host who is not a gifted live comedian.
I bet they have edits of different lengths too: Same pre-taped skit, but versions at 2:15, 2:00, and 1:45. That kind of thing.
Yeah that’s usually up to whatever sketch group they have at the time. Usually one or 2 cast members and a writer. Like with Good Neighbor and Lonely Island.
Man, why do people always blame the boomer like that, Lorne always let his writers be creative and free as long as they didn’t trigger the FCC censors. There is no way he forces his millennial writers to be lowest common denominator. This cast is just annoying, they are getting old fast. All have a pick me view on life. Just allow social media to dictate them, very exaggerated acting, very cliche overacting. Every sketch tonight was a showcase about why I am bored by this current cast, nothing ever feels real or natural. Screaming overemoting falling into patterns. Also remember when this cast wasn’t going to be lily white for 15 minutes? Marcello “Did I say I am short like a garden gnome yet?” Heidi Gardner “I am old and good looking!! Why will I never become a thing?” Sherman “I look and act like a clown and then clean up once an episode for my straight male fans” Kearney “I am a hosebeast blargh” Jost and Che “We hate each other and are seething with racism! Argh!” Mikey Day “I am washed up and here is my contribution! Woohoo!” Fineman “I am also quirky, cute and Jewish!” (Even though half the cast is Jewish we will never do an Israel parody! Oy vey!) James Austin Johnson “Can I be Biden or Trump now? Ahhh..man…” Dismukes: “I am trying to be cute and yet always an annoying kid!” Ego Nwodim “I am going to do another outrageous character that is intended to make me famous and steal the show, people will never stop talking about the Orgasmic Stingray after work I bet!”
That’s ageism. Lorne getting cranky got nothing to do with this type of sketches. As SNL been doing this to hot guests for ages. The most blatant one was in the 90s at the height of Sharon Stone stardom. In one of the sketch she shed her clothes down to her underwear at the gawking of the comedians and comedienne. That skit made Sydney’s Hooter skit pale in comparison.
I’m reminded as well of Lindsay Lohan’s “Hermione has boobs now” sketch.
A number of years ago one of the former cast members (possibly Bill Hader) was doing his Lorne impersonation on a talk show and he used this line (paraphrasing), “It will get a laugh but will it get the right laugh?”
I respect that question, honestly.
Look, give credit where credit’s due. This week, they went with the first two things they thought of.
It’s also incredibly likely that someone like Sydney Sweeney has a manager and PR staff who is curating her image and very specifically wanted sketch content that emphasized the image of her they are pushing and selling. She could have come into the week with a list of goals and branding ideas they wanted to reinforce with the very visible gig. And as lazy as all this seems, it is very much her brand at the moment.
Sure, that may be possible, but it’s not just her. It’s every celebrity host. Every joke is always so… predictable, over-played, and lazy. Sure, pr teams do want to push an image they’re curating, but it’s all so sigh-inducing.
To me, the show was always funnier when the cast and writers created great characters and then put them in sketches. The list is exhausting but includes Coneheads, Wayne’s World, Church Lady, cheerleaders, Farley’s guy who lived in the van, Sprockets, the alien abduction sketches, What’s Up With That … I dunno … there’s been a few dozen of them in 50 years.Right now, there is a huge cast and I can’t think of one breakout character who gets you laughing from the moment you see the set and realize what’s up next.
Ha, it’s interesting watching criticism swing back around the other way because people have been griping for decades about the show’s overreliance on recurring characters/bits. And, indeed, for every “Wayne’s World” and “Celebrity Jeopardy” there is a “Target Lady” and “Makin’ Copies.” But I see your point–everything is just so aimless and low-effort and no one’s really been stepping up to the plate.
Can we get this bitch a donut?
There is probably some balance to be struck between featuring some recurring characters and relying on them.Reading your response caused me to think about it a bit more and I’m thinking that having some recurring characters allowed some cast members to become the stars of the show. There are just too many cast members right now.I was thinking about when Kristin Wiig was on. She did a character called Jilly? Something like that. It wasn’t my favorite character, but whatever. What was more important, I think, was that Wiig was clearly one of the stars and the writers wrote for her a lot. I think a smaller cast would really help. I listen to Dana Carvey’s podast sometimes and he said when he started there were only like 7-8 cast members. He was in the cold open his first night on the show. I wonder if a smaller cast allows the writers to really figure out what works for each cast member?
There were seven in the original cast, IIRC. All killer, no filler.
I think there was pushback on how exhausting the Ferrell-era repeat characters got to be. At one point it felt like they made up half the sketches. Cheerleaders were funny by my god anything involving Kattan had me changing the channel.
“I can’t understand why they always always always go for the lowest hanging fruit in their sketch jokes.”Do you literally know nothing about the show? They pitch on mk day, have first drafts by wednesday and the live show on saturday. And they do it week after week.What part of that timeline do you think is conducive to a long process of pitching and re-writing?
I often think about how not-easy it is to get onto SNL. And then there’s material that is as you describe, that I wonder why it’s so hard if this is the best they can come up with.
I was also hoping that they would replace the real dog with a puppet one and have the two of them start making out, like Alec Baldwin did years ago in the Greenhilly sketch. Now THAT was writing.
April 21, 1990 – Alec Baldwin / The B-52’s (S15 E18) – The ‘One SNL a Day’ Project
for the life of me I can’t understand why they always always always go for the lowest hanging fruit in their sketch jokes Now you understand how people who aren’t fans of SNL have perceived the show for decades.
Honestly, there’s sooo many other and better American comedy shows out there. SNL doesn’t crack the top 10.
FUCKING THANK YOU. Watching it, it’s like the jokes are secondary, and it’s reached this weird level of meta where we’re…what? Meant to be impressed not by the content, but merely by the fact that they’re…doing it?It feels like the sort of thing that’s made to impress improv guys. For actual actors and celebrities, I guess it’s become like The Simpsons (or, rather, the Simpsons has become like it) – not something that’s good because of what it does, but because it’s…The Simpsons. For the guests? It feels like a mandatory stop on the PR tour. OK, you’re famous enough, time to get on SNL – again, kinda like the Simpsons is now.
There are things about the SNL “house style” that can be truly harmful to the entire product.It’d be nice if they were willing to experiment with shorter format sketches. Come in, hit the premise and the joke, move on while the laughter is still hot. Sure, keep the long form stuff. Throw in some off format and put some unpredictability back in. Move the musical guest around – maybe let someone carry the opening of the show with their latest hit song instead of someone else’s awkward opening monologue.Not that this would happen under the current writers/producer, but hey.
The issue with that is that it’s, well, live, so there’s a strong incentive to sttrreeetttccchh out the sketches so that the crew has the time to set up the next one.
It could be done. They have enough space in the studio to have multiple sets ready – they aren’t doing full strike/rebuild between each sketch. They’re rolling in mostly completed sets, finishing dressing the set, then shooting. It’d probably require having a couple more crew members to handle the extra work but that’d be about it.
That’s why we need Mick Jagger in the SNL writer’s room all the time to shout “Not Funny!” at the writers — not just when John Mulaney is writing a song for him.
“lowest hanging fruit”I can tell you from personal experience that heavy naturals always become the lowest hanging fruit.Hey-O.
Eh, now that I’ve seen her SNL promo pic, I wonder why people focus on her boobs when she’s got those killer legs.
The way y’all write about SNL episodes boils down to 1) do we like the host? If so, it’s going to be heavy on the why-didn’t-the-show-handle-them-better? If not, it’s going to be heavy on disdain.2) you seemingly hate SNL anyway, so it’s mostly why-wasn’t-the-show-better? And is heavy on disdain.Maybe don’t cover the show at all for a season, see how you feel? You ignore enough worthwhile entertainment, why keep harping about this one?
Her best letter grade episode was the Bad Bunny episode where she admitted she didn’t understand most of the jokes and judged their success on audience reaction.
lol!
I can’t tell if it’s an upgrade or a downgrade from Perkins’ “sketch about Aidy Bryant acting like awkward teen did not immediately end trump presidency – episode gets an ‘F’” reviews.
I know family who refer to Sweeney as Tits McGee and boy oh boy do I imagine this episode won’t change that perception.Also in that prono pic, is she wearing fingerless opera gloves? That’s something I’ve never seen before, looks kinda good.
but there can be only one Tits McGee, and she lives in San Diego.
Chesty McTitsalot is available now that Jennifer Connelly dieted or doctored her way out of the club
Alexandra Daddario still around.
She seems to be going the way of Connelly.
I heard she’s still on vacation.
Ok… judges rulingTits McGee – Kat DenningsChesty McTitsalot – Sydney SweeneyHooters O’Houlihan – Jennifer ConnellyJugs Johnson – Alexandria DaddarioMelons Miller – Christina Hendricks
Oh – Boobs Rodriguez – Sofia Vegara
This is Hooty McBoob erasure!
…but she’s on vacation.
Hiking the Grand Tetons.
Tits McGee is still Kat Dennings.
The Tit War could have been competitive if Kat Dennings still had a career and was frequently nude, but neither are true. Thus, Sweeney is the winner by default.
Kat Denning is getting sweet sweet Marvel “fun supporting actor we love to see in anything” money.
Speaking of Marvel, I know this post is ancient, but we have to add Hayley Atwell to any tit discussion. Call her “Knockers O’Neill”
Coming up on the outside, so short you can barely see her, is Melissa Rauch, the main reason I won’t throw BBT over the side entirely. “Boobies Bailey!”
Nah, she has ass and hips as well. Sweeney is Tits on a Stick.
Tits McLargeHuge
They’re called fingerless gloves or arm warmers. They’re very attractive when they fit snugly. The ones Sweeney are wearing are too long and baggy, imo. As I recall, they were popular with the Goth set.
They were invented for women who needed to get home from the theatre, or ambassador’s soirée, on their BMXs.
Ahhhh I’m gonna order a pair, thank you kindly.
I recommend the all lace variety 🙂
This is a great attitude toward women. Love it.
For the Hooters sketch to function at a higher level, she should have been the waitress who no one wanted for some reason, with Bowen as the favorite. I also wanted to see the Sydney Sweeney Todd sketch.
Me too.
Yeah. Seconded. That Hooters could have worked if Bowen was the money maker. Something against the grain.
SNL hasn’t sufficiently trafficked in “against the grain” since the 70s.
yeah the plot seemed to be, “this is an ad for Hooters. At Hooters you will see large-breasted women who will pretend to flirt with you.”
Or the joke could’ve been that she genuinely provided excellent service and the other servers were actually hilariously incompetent. A bunch of directions they could’ve gone besides “the lady has big boobs and guys like big boob ladies.”
Some credit to them: men tipping her tens of thousands of dollars made me smile/almost chortle, and her being a crossing guard and “thousands” died achieved chortle status.
OMG, yes instant fix. And even funnier if they were wanted him for different reasons – how fast his service was, the good advice he gave them about personal issues, upselling appetizers and drinks or sure maybe one guy thinks he’s hot, just ANYTHING but 4 dudes only wanting the girl with big boobs.
It would’ve been amazing to have the Sydney Sweeney Todd sketch show up after being teased. In an “Oh, it’s real!” moment.
Someone else pointed out the idea of AVClub not covering SNL for a weekend. What would be the consequences of doing that? Does the SNL story bump up engagement with AVClub significantly?
I can only assume the money stops…
Lorne’s check bounces
the previous SNL A.V. Club writer was way funnier and had a much firmer grasp on what makes for good live comedy. The current one is more like, “here is a show that happened this week. The host was okay.”
The previous reviewer wrote exhausting 10000 word essays disecting every single skit and performance.
True, but maybe that’s better than the current reviews often not mentioning the musical guest’s performance at all…
That’s probably because the sound mix was SO bad this week it sounded like Kasey was singing from the audience.
No, that was Perkins from old AVClub. And yes, he actually reviewed the show, which was his job. The guy that followed him, Trae DeLellis I think?, wrote like 20 sentences for the whole show and left out whole sketches. His reviews were pointless.
right I meant Perkins who did those wonderful write-ups, including the “They said there would be no math…” political humour insights.
Yeah I liked him. A lot of people complained about him that he griped a lot about the lack of incisive political commentary, and they weren’t completely off-base because he did harp on it a lot, but at the end of the day he watched the show and had something to say about it with a POV, which is more than we’ve gotten from following reviewers.
There are weeks where I will swear on my mother’s grave that the recap was written by ChatGPT.
I didn’t like the previous one at all. He would only talk about like 3 sketches from the whole show. I honestly miss Perkins, but this new person is better than the last one for sure.
Honestly, I think it would mean the only shows on this film and TV site that get reviews would be reality TV. For us old folks who started reading this site when it was a news paper published with the Onion, that is very very sad.
There weren’t any during the writer’s strike. I don’t recall anyone complaining. I didn’t.
What would be the point of not covering it?
It’s one of the few remaining scheduled appointment television shows out there, so like sporting events I expect it drives a fair bit of real-time engagement. Most of the other top shows are on streamers and people get to them in their own time.
I honestly am utterly baffled by how so many people online are utterly obsessed with this woman’s attractiveness. She has larger than average breasts. That’s it. Everything else is average.Don’t mean that as a knock against her, I just don’t understand the obsession, that’s all.
IMHO she is this generations pretty white blonde girl with nice rack. She’s not ugly by any means but she is definitely a type for a lot of people. Sixteen year old me would have studied her work extensively. I think it’s the fact that we have normalized and embraced attractive people of all body type and skin tone far more these days(which is a good thing imho) and the cute young blond white girl is more a rarity on screen and in shows.
As an old, she’s this generations “Heather” (aka Heather Thomas, Heather Locklear) – that blond sort of look you’re describing so well.
Locklear was legitimately quite pretty though.
Yeah, 15 years ago it was Christina Hendricks. Which, great for society going for a redhead for once, but still it was like, I just don’t get it. I guess there’s always someone that society had to possess over for a short amount of time in that way.
To be fair, I get the Christina Hendricks thing… but that’s me. Sidney Sweeney is, to me, generic pretty blonde woman. There will be always be another one. That said, I’ve never seen her in anything and she may be an incredible actress and be able to transcend the “pretty blonde” label (e.g., like Jennifer Lawrence).
What the hell was Hendricks’ appeal? She was busty, yeah, but that’s because she was built like a tuckshop lady. And she’s a ranga.She’s a great actress, but. She did do Joan Holloway perfectly.
They’re both fanatic actresses, that’s why it’s a bummer they’re both reduced to their bodies. But society does that.
You don’t get why it was Christina Hendricks? Christina Hendricks?!
Christina Hendricks and Sydney Sweeney have literally nothing in common physically. lol They’re both attractive but there’s no why they are comparable, and if you don’t “get” either of them, I have to wonder what you are attracted to because they are not the same. I don’t really have to wonder that, actually. I don’t care.
I mean, they’re both generically attractive women with large chests. And they both have really soft, uninteresting features outside of that. Like if an AI program was told to come up with someone everyone would find attractive and give them huge tits. That is what they have in common, acomplete non dynamic or interesting look, but all the definitions of what attractive “should” be seen as. That’s why I never got either of them. If you can’t see that they have in common then whatever man. Still, no need to be an asshole.
Genetically attractive women with large chests and uninteresting features is what you’ve reduced these women to? Are you serious? They look absolutely nothing alike. Christina Hendricks is full-figured and Sweeney is not. Hendricks has red hair. She’s taller. Her face is entirely different. Even if you just want to reduce them to breasts, which is apparently what we’re doing, Hendricks’s are like three times as big as Sweeney’s. What even is an “interesting feature”? You want them to have giant scars across their faces? I think the issue here is that you can’t see past a woman’s “huge tits” unless they’re missing a nose or something because that’s the only thing that can pull your eyes up. I guess your face is so fascinating. These are multi-Emmy nominated women, and all you can say is “I don’t get why anyone thinks they’re attractive,” because if you personally don’t find them attractive, you can’t possible perceive of why anyone else might, and furthermore, you can’t just keep your opinion to yourself and understand that maybe reducing accomplished women to how attractive they are to you is pretty damn whack.“That’s why I never got either of them.”And I’m the asshole? You make it a point to announce to the internet that you don’t find certain women attractive and making sure to mention their “huge tits” and you can’t live another second without people knowing this, and I’m the asshole. Got it.The only question I’m left with is what pretty girl with big breasts hurt your feelings this bad?
Wow dude, chill. I said they are attractive. I said they are just generically attractive, and I don’t get how crazy everyone has gone for them. You’re the one reducing them, I just noted that it seems to be those features. You really think the internet went wild for Hendricks or is currently that way for Sweeney because of their acting? Hell, SNL just spent a while episode reducing Sweeney to her tits, which I complained about, which is how this whole conversation started. If you don’t understand how a woman can have more interesting features than just generic attractiveness, then I don’t know what to tell you. Let me make it clear to you since you want to over-analyze: they both ARE very attractive (and talented, and worthy of award and acclaim beyond their looks). Their attractiveness is just bland, in my opinion, and I don’t get why everyone is crazy for them. It’s like sure a bowl of cheesy pasta is tasty, but like, don’t you enjoy things that are more interesting in flavor?And I’ll say it again, just chill and stop insulting me. Everyone has a right to what they find attractive or not attractive.
I’m not a dude.And it’s just the misogyny of this whole commentary is killing me. I mean *literally* no one asked you, and you still felt the need to announce that you just “don’t get it,” with *multiple* references to their “tits.”“If you don’t understand how a woman can have more interesting features than just generic attractiveness, then I don’t know what to tell you.”I know you don’t, because “generic attractiveness” is your insult du jour because you hate the fact that these women are getting attention despite not having qualities that you personally find very attractive. It offends you deeply that they are allowed to walk around getting compliments and feeling good about themselves when they have had the temerity not to be enormously attractive to you personally. (Which is a lie you’re telling yourself anyway—you’d shit yourself if either Hendricks or Sweeney looked in your direction.) You don’t know what to tell me because you have nothing of substance to say on the subject besides some vague assertion of “their features don’t interest me.”“Their attractiveness is just bland, in my opinion,”And this was an opinion that you felt it important to announce…why?“I don’t get why everyone is crazy for them”Again, you truly don’t “get” the fact that other people’s standard of attractiveness can be different from yours? You truly don’t “get” that a woman can be very attractive to someone else even if they have the gall not to be very attractive to you? This is truly something you want to admit to the world that you don’t “get”?“It’s like sure a bowl of cheesy pasta is tasty, but like, don’t you enjoy things that are more interesting in flavor?”This is not a question I’d ever ask because I truly, truly don’t give a shit what kind of pasta other people are eating. Also, cheese has a wide variety of flavors, so “interesting” is a vague and subjective standard that I don’t think means what you think it means.“And I’ll say it again, just chill and stop insulting me.”Is this serious? You came on Al Gore’s internet today specifically to insult these women and this is something you’re choosing to say? LOL
This is getting crazy out of hand. I understand where you’re coming from, but I still think you’re overdoing your response to me. My whole point started with this from a commentor named “ZeroWonder”: “I honestly am utterly baffled by how so many people online are utterly obsessed with this woman’s attractiveness. She has larger than average breasts. That’s it. Everything else is average.Don’t mean that as a knock against her, I just don’t understand the obsession, that’s all.” I didn’t say that, zerowonder did (why you’re coming after just me is weird, but whatever). I responded to them with: “Yeah, 15 years ago it was Christina Hendricks. Which, great for society going for a redhead for once, but still it was like, I just don’t get it. I guess there’s always someone that society had to possess over for a short amount of time in that way.”Notice how I didn’t comment on their attractiveness, just that society went crazy for them, and that it seems to be a trend for a woman actress to be obsessed over for a time. Then YOU came in and were the one to bring up their attractiveness and their physicality. I never brought it up until after that, just saying they’re generically attractive (which is the only thing I said they physically have in common) and that what they have in common is that society went nuts for them. I never insulted them, I just said they’re not for me. Maybe I’m gay, maybe I’m black and don’t really get into white women, maybe I only like brunettes, maybe you shouldn’t presume anything about me or my preferences, which I haven’t done for you. Every bit of misogyny have come from you accusing me based on something I didn’t really say. You just want to be pissed at me (but not the other commentor who more directly and unprompted said what you accuse me of showing up and saying unprompted). So just be pissed, i don’t know how else to assuage or make you see that I don’t feel or think the way you think I do. I don’t get why society has gone nuts for these two but not many others who are equally or more talented and attractive, but that’s a society thing, not a me thing. I know my place, and I know exactly my shitty place on life and my own attractiveness. I know these women are attractive and talented, as I’ve said. What else do you want from me? I’m sorry I tried to add context to a commentor who unprompted said Sweeney wasn’t attractive. I don’t know why you picked me out to respond to, but seriously, im sorry I said dude, it’s a non gender specific term in my experience. I don’t know what else to say sorry for, but I do hear you and I do understand what you’re pissed about. I’m not who you think I am and I think if you just took a second you would see that.
“(why you’re coming after just me is weird, but whatever”I’m not “coming after you”—again, this victim thing you’re doing is strange. I said the same thing to him. You’re just the one who keeps digging in deeper.“Notice how I didn’t comment on their attractiveness”No I don’t notice that, because it isn’t true. You specifically said “I don’t get it,” which means “I don’t understand why people think they’re so great,” and you started with “yeah,” which indicated agreement with the OP calling her “average.”“Then YOU came in and were the one to bring up their attractiveness and their physicality.”Well, this is a lie. Did you not read the OP, which you agreed with?“I never insulted them, I just said they’re not for me.”Maybe this is just a difference between you and me. I think calling someone average and saying you don’t understand why a lot of people are crazy for them is an insult. You apparently don’t…but I don’t really think you’d take it as a compliment if someone said the same about you. So, again, I don’t think you’re being honest here.“maybe I’m black and don’t really get into white women”Well, I’m Black, so I can easily recognize this as nonsense.“You just want to be pissed at me”Yes, that’s clearly what it is. It’s what it has to be, isn’t it? It certainly can’t be that you need to rethink your own actions. That would be nuts.
Yes, this. Christina Hendricks is an outlier in Hollywood, being a size 12/14. She’s not some average women, other than being her size. A lot of us love her – more than just her talent – because she’s shaped like actual women are shaped. She’s just the *chef’s kiss* version of that.And she’s not even really a redhead – that was for Mad Men. She’s a blonde in real life.
And she’s not even really a redheadThank you I was waiting for someone to say it…
Yeah but Christina Hendricks is a size 12/14 which is a much bigger deal than Sweeny’s Jennifer Love Hewitt deal of skinny girl with big boobs.
What would a knock against her sound like if “everything about her is average” isn’t one?
Average isn’t an insult.
With Harvard giving out 79% A grades, it is now.
It is when you say it in the context of not being impressed by someone, and especially when you’re saying it to describe everything about a person except a physical attribute.
Depends on how heavily you weight big tits (pun intended). In some minds, “and they’re not even that big!” would be a third-degree burn.
Before I respond to your surprise about men liking a young woman with large breasts, let me just say that Earth is honored to welcome you to this planet.
You made me laugh. I thought of the Simpsons’ episode where Marge accidentally gets a boob job, and, addressing her concerns that Homer won’t like it, the surgeon sarcastically says yes, men don’t want women with big breasts.
Im a woman and even I’m like, yes the large bosom is very attractive and nice, yes.
Hate the game, not the player.
Entertainment is about product, and products are about models. She’s a Baby Doll Face/Adult Body Jayne Mansfield/Marilyn Monroe/Goldie Hawn/Heather Locklear/Jennifer Connelly/Denise Richards/etc model, and as long as it works for her she can trade on that type. Good for her. I hope she uses this to get what she wants from her career.
She’s very pretty in a very generic way. Prom queen pretty with the requisite vocal fry.
I have only seen her in Euphoria and I’m guessing they cast her as the school bimbo because of her attributes. Still, props to the actors on that mess of a show; they all made it watchable.
I’ve never seen a single ep, but every review/recap of that show I read just made it sound like it was what a bunch of high-school dweebs who ended as thirty-something TV writers tell each other their life was like in their teens to seem cool.“OH, YEAH, I WAS, LIKE, SO HOT.”“YEAH ME TOO. I GOT SO SICK OF THE BOYS HITTING ON ME, I STARTED SLEEPING WITH A 40-YEAR-OLD BANKER. WHEN I WAS SIXTEEN. HE BOUGHT ME SO MUCH STUFF.”“OH YEAH. I DID THAT, TOO. WELL, I WOULD’VE, BUT IT WAS TOTALLY IN REHAB ALL THE TIME. BECAUSE I DID DRUGS.”“WOW YOU WERE SO COOL.”“YEAH. SO WERE YOU.”
She’s great in White Lotus, in a “man I want this character to fall off the boat and disappear” kind of way. Just wonderfully bitchy.
You have to admit that SNL having TWO actors from the laff riot “Euphoria” within a couple of months is…not what I would have guessed.
kate upton rode being a sentient pair of tits to the point people realized she had no talent beyond a vacant gaze, sweeney has already cleared that (admittedly low) bar by leaps and bounds at this point
The funny thing is she claims she was told before breaking into Hollywood that she “didn’t have the right look”. Like Hollywood and audiences hate big boobed petite blond girls with big doe eyes.
“I honestly am utterly baffled by how so many people online are utterly obsessed with this woman’s attractiveness.”She’s perfectly pretty. She’s definitely not average. I’m a heterosexual woman so I have no dog in this fight, but it’s always weird when someone feels the need to be all “What does everyone find so great about xyz?” What do you care? She’s not your type so you’re “baffled” that she’s other people’s type? You’re “baffled” that other people find someone attractive that you don’t? Why do you need to “understand the obsession”? Everyone needs to know that you don’t think she’s that hot? Why?
Also I love the idea that you think you’d say no if she asked you out because she’s “average.” LOL
My wild-ass human sexuality theory is that men, much more than women, believe at their core that “attractiveness” is an objective quality and if there is disagreement about it, somebody is wrong.
I find this to be completely plausible.
You’re not wrong…she’s quite mid and tits are a dime a dozen.
Eh her legs are better than her boobs anyway.
Every generation has their blondes. Marilyn Monroe, Jayne Mansfield, Brigitte Bardot, Farrah Fawcett, Suzanne Somers, Madonna, Pamela Anderson, et al…
You know that there is a such thing as being too horny, for cis males it hurts us to get too horny sometimes. I thought this episode went too far. You got Sydney fan service you don’t also need thousands of perverse sexual jokes too and even Kacey Musgraves had a plunging neckline. At least with the famous Lindsey Lohan episode it was just a sketch and then they quit with it. Just give me a break! *wipes brow* I was genuinely hoping for some writer cringe because of the Biden cold open but you decided to just skip it entirely I see why lol darn though. I really expected you to grade it an F because of the animal jokes. Seeing Trump wave to migrants got a huge rise out of my party.Kinda wish I skipped this one, but Sydney did a good job sometimes. I think she’s a generational talent though, she is the relaxed view towards sex that Gen Z has in a person. They are just breasts use them. Her Nun movie and Barbarella should be huge hits. Will people get sick of her is the question, remember you don’t need to always give your creepy fans what they want.
Having taught Gen z college kids for a few years, I can absolutely say that they are not nearly as sex forward as they present. Like, they conceptually understand that being sex positive is a good thing, they know how to sound sex positive, but have absolutely no concept of what that means on a fundamental level. Put them in any complex situation that isn’t black or white, and they suddenly revert straight to slut-shaming, conservative talking points and anti-women tropes. It’s all very performative and very disappointing. But they are all still very young, and eventually they’ll get there, but right now it’s super obvious they’re just parroting the way millennials talk but trying to dial it up artificially with no understanding why.
Every generation makes the last generation look like Animal House. I’m sure these kids popping Vyvance and drinking 12% ABV sparkling water are doing perfectly wild things to each other.
What is this 12% sparkling water you speak of? Sounds positively amazing. But also, I have no doubt they’re doing wildly crazy things to each other. Most (modern) generations do, regardless of their outward attitudes about sex. I’m just saying they’re performatively sex positive but have no concept as to why they should be.
That’s the thing. You see kids who are fine with pegging and analingus turn into Pat Robertson when someone has an ageplay kink or likes a bit of slapping. Yet somehow choking doesn’t count as rough? It’s wierd and confusing. Very piecemeal. Conservatives have won seemingly random bits of ground on the ongoing sex-positivity war.
It’s hard to know what things you come across online are genuine and what’s just trolling, but I’ve seen young people post, with apparent sincerity, that it’s morally wrong to have sexual fantasies about a real person without their consent. Which: apart from being some kind of new hyper-puritanism, how would that conversation go? “Hey, I was planning to get off later thinking about you, so I just wanted to run that by you first. Thoughts?”
While that’s pretty extreme, it actually makes a kind of sense to me lol.
Yeah this round of puritanism does ironically seem to be coming more from left than right. Expanding on your point, I’ve heard having a type or fetish referred to as sexist, racist, colonialist, etc. Like with many other topics, there’s a vocal slice of the population that makes enough noise that others don’t want to get sideways with and so just nod in agreement.
Yeah, I think they’re actually generally sex-negative, but very much in support of sex work, and I wouldn’t be surprised if it the black/white thinking. A girl sexting a guy she’s been seeing, could be fun and flirty, but it also could be him taking advantage of her, exploiting her, abusing her, her feeling pressured to do it, etc. But a girl sexting a guy for $50, is her being compensated for the work that she’s doing, and even if she does regret it later, she did it for the money, not the idea that she’ll have good feelings, so it’s still much less bad.I feel like I’ve read more than a few articles about Sydney Sweeney with some level of criticism for the choices she’s made, and I think it’s because her explanation is that it’s important for the character; she believes in the show; that it doesn’t really matter; that it’s fun to be hot and attractive. Those are all grey areas, people can argue that it’s not actually good for the character and that they think she’s being taken advantage of. But if she were like, “oh it’s great shooting nude scenes because they give me a big envelope full of extra cash every time I take my clothes off,” then it’s a totally different story. To them, it’s then not exploitation, because she’s being specifically paid for it. Money changing hands makes the contract fair and cleans up issues of consent.
Boy was that obvious from the insane discourse about sex scenes in movies last year.
As a crusty gen-xer who tries to be better, this is what frustrates me about my kids’ generation. So much is wrapped up in encoding things in a way that approaches a lawyers treatment of language to evade legal exposure. And yeah, under the surface, there’s a ton of hypocrisy and double-standards. I have the self-awareness to know I sound like I’m just grousing, but sometimes I feel like well-meaning members of older generations are struggling to be aware of, considering, and updating their points of view, while this generation is just gaming the system with vocabulary.
There is no such thing as “too horny”. For anyone. Even us cis white men
Sorry, can you repeat that? I was fucking my vacuum cleaner with the power on, and couldn’t hear over all that sexy, white noise.
If I had a rack like that I’d probably never talk about anything else. I might not even own any shirts. You’re only in your 20s once.
Most women I’ve known with large busts have wanted to keep them hidden in public, complained about back issues and thought men preferred asses anyway. It’s easy to fantasize about having what you don’t, but nothing good comes from being seen as busty. You’re instantly seen as dumber and people see you as only hot in your 20s when you’re in your 20s.
but nothing good comes from being seen as busty.I don’t know about nothing…
“but nothing good comes from being seen as busty.”
Fake news
Sydney Sweeney seems to have made an incredibly profitable career out of have a set of chest hams a lot of women pay good money for.
Yup. My wife has a massive bust, but was so shy about it for years. Hit 30~ and now she owns them completely. Something clicked by where she just said “fuck it….i get they are huge, so why not use them to my advantage.”
I mean, Sydney has certainly made something good come out of it for her and she doesn’t come across as unaware of this being a big selling point for her career.
I have a large bust as do a few of my friends and I wouldn’t say people instantly see us as dumber — that more hinges on how closely the rest of your appearance adheres to the “bimbo” stereotype. The issue is more that showing cleavage when you have big boobs draws a lot of attention. It’s like having a neon sign strapped to your chest. Not only men are going to look and comment. Women are too. It can be easy to start to feel like a walking pair of boobs instead of a person. I am very comfortable with my body but it’s tough when, for example, my husband’s family invites us on beach vacations and I can’t just wear any bathing suit or it’s going to feel awkward because it feels like people can’t *not* look/stare.
Most women I’ve known with large busts have wanted to keep them hidden in public, complained about back issues and thought men preferred asses anyway.I wouldn’t say most, in my experience it’s 50-50.The ones who don’t use their assets to their advantage always end up being the unhappy ones. If you got it and can make people do your bidding with them, flaunt it.
Dull witted men can only think about themselves
Of course you think this bc you’re only bothering to think about it thru your severely narrow male point of view. Like most men you’re pathetic.
That accent thing makes me happy, since it leaves the opportunity to bust out this gem.
I legit don’t understand the acclaim for her acting — from both women and men, so it’s not just her boobs. She’s so flat and breathy in everything I’ve seen her in. Feels like it’s the Blake Lively effect – the pretty blonde girl in a show popular with the younger generation gets picked by the execs to be the next star despite being the less talented one in the cast. The more things change!
Her generic-looking comedy just made $200 million. To the extent she was “picked by the execs to the be the next star despite being the less talented one,” they seem to have us figured.
Didn’t say they were wrong, just don’t get it. Though yes, clearly both the public and the execs picked her.
Did it really? I haven’t been to the movies much recently.
Granted I saw it during the Christmas break, but it’s was one of the most crowded movies I’ve seen in recent months; nearly sold out.
Women audiences definitely want more lead character who aren’t considered ‘highly attractive’ or even what we’d call ‘pretty’ because most humans don’t fall into those categories. And yet they have very interesting, even enviable lives and experiences. It’s the male heteros who demand that alot of the “10s” stay in circulation.
Did you seen Lively’s SNL episode? She was an all-star.
“Having the preternaturally charismatic Glen Powell pop up not once but twice throughout Saturday’s show…”It’s true what they say: one person’s “preternaturally charismatic” is another person’s “distractingly punchable.”
Perfectly cast in Top Gun 2 as local jackass nobody in class liked.
She’s talking about Glen Powell, but there’s no way he’s in the audOH MY GOD, THERE HE IS!!!!!
A few weeks ago I commented on Jacob Elordi’s hosting gig where they did an entire show about nothing other than “every lady on the set wants to #$@$ him”. I was like “they would never do this to a female host”. Well played, SNL. Well played.
You can just say fuck.
Fine…A few fucks ago I commented on Jacob Elordi’s hosting gig
so fucking tired of all these commercials masquerading as sketches. Old SNL would never have lowered itself to plugging for AirBnB, Hooters, etc…
The Olympia went under when it it stopped paying SnL for product placement.
That…didn’t seem like a plug for AirBnb.
Spot-on, too. You can instantly identify by the decor any property that was clearly purchased only to be put in the rental pool.
For sure.
trust me, it’s always an ad. Old SNL would have used a fake name, MAD Magazine style, to make the same joke. Lorne’s dalliance with the devil of product placement really undercuts a lot of their jokes these days.
I’ll take your word for it! I have a very deep disaffinity for AirBnB so maybe I assumed they were insulting it like I would. But it certainly didn’t look like a flattering portrayal, but I guess all publicity if good publicity, and there are way worse things they could have said about AirBnB if they were actually trying to skewer it. Now that I think about it “they have bland decor” is mild both as a criticism and as a joke.
Sweeney tackled hers head on. That MAGA-themed 60th birthday for her mom? Check. That viral TikToker who falsely claimed to be the actress’s nutritionist? Check. (“I’m in shape because I run, avoid sugar, and do Ozempic.”) And those rumors that she had an on-set affair with her Anyone but You co-star Glen Powell? Double-check, including a fun bit that cuts to Powell himself in the studio audience.I feel so out of the loop. Is this like, well known stuff to open a monologue with? Or just for the people that know what she do on social media?
I didn’t hear about her supposed nutritionalist, but the stories about her mom’s “MAGA-themed” birthday party and her on-set chemistry with Glen Powell were very much tabloid headline/Yahoo home page material that infiltrated the zeitgeist. It was Discussed.
Yahoo home page material that infiltrated the zeitgeist.what is this 2004?
There are people with Yahoo Mail addresses who think you have to go to their website to read it!
I have a close friend who worked in a high ranking production role on Anyone But You and they confirm both that the affair with Powell was real and that Sweeney is a MAGA asshole.
but a Hooters bit just feels too painfully obvious in the year of our lord 2024.Painfully obvious wasn’t the problem. It was just flat (no pun intended) since it wasn’t creative in the use of its setting. Like, one possibility was reversing things, where Sweeney was frustrated because she wasn’t getting any tips because it was Gay Hooters, or if they could have figured out a reason to get Fineman make a lot more than Sweeney. Those might have had possibilities.I compare that to one of the all time greats, Lindsay Lohan coming back to Hogwarts as Hermione after a growth spurt, which made the obvious really funny. Might have even been referenced with the weird owl line about Harry Potter in this one.
Mz. Izzo, I notice that on your stories, there are never any comments that are “editor’s picks”?
Most, if not all, of the most recent contributors here (& across this sad group of sites) do not engage with the commentariat in any way. Can’t say I blame them.
There are two reasons why I watched that Hooters sketch.
Oh wow oh man you like boobs? That’s so original and we’re all better off for knowing it.
Ugh, did I say boobs. No. My reasons were Mikey Day and Chloe Fineman. I think they’re funny.
I’m guessing there are soooo many comedy shows on TV that are sucking up all the talented comedy writers because SNL seems to have none. (Except whoever writes weekend update) it’s shocking that SNL has had such bad writing for the past … 8 years? Totally embarrassing
My partner was watching this, and I wandered in just in time for the obligatory “the host is so HOT” sketch. Caught the goodnights, and yeah, it was impossible to not notice her tits.
I don’t watch SNL anymore and had no clue who Sydney Sweeney even was until Twitter blew up with her amazing rack. I guess she has two notable talents. From what I hear, acting isn’t one of them.
This episode proved that Sydney can be boiled down to a pair of breasts. She was not funny and the hairstyle changes show how gigantic her forehead is.
This episode made you think it’s ok to boil someone down to one feature. This is a you problem, bb.
“preternaturally charismatic Glen Powell”Does this person know what “preternaturally” and “charismatic” mean? or for that matter, have they seen Glen Powell in anything? He’s, like, fine. He smirks a lot.
Isn’t the “Bowen is straight” but just a riff on “Neil Patrick Harris” from Harold and Kumar?
Never watched her shows, but I think she was pretty funny. Not a bad show. SNL is starting to do the same thing they did 5 years using the same couple people in each skit with more than a dozen people playing.
Deleted comment posted to wrong article
I think Sweeney did well, the writing this season is what has been lazy and lacking oomph.Part of that laziness was Heidi Gardner playing Dana Bash in the opening, where she asked “don’t people call him Sleepy Joe?” Trump and some of his supporters call the President that derogative, people don’t. Also, didn’t John Stewart his the same “behind closed doors” note three weeks ago? Can’t they come up with their own ideas? An old Jon Stewart rant and quoting a Trump tweet isn’t an original joke.