A recent Saturday Night Live featured host Dwayne Johnson as its season-finale guest. Even for a satire-driven show leaning on a long-standing direction of political spoofs, Johnson’s opening was somewhat unexpected—to say the least:
— Saturday Night Live (@nbcsnl) May 21, 2017
[Source: Twitter/Saturday Night Live]
Being Johnson’s fifth time as SNL host, actor and Trump-spoofer Alec Baldwin congratulated Johnson on making it to the Five-Timers Club—a smoking jacket emblazoned with a “5” was included in the achievement.
As Johnson generously accepted the honor, he went on about describing the perfect, running mate—Baldwin thinking Johnson was alluding to him. Upon Hanks entering the stage, Baldwin conveyed rejection but threw in a quip about being part of the cabinet. They then stood there, figuratively patting each other on the back as great actors and quasi-presidential candidates.
[Video: courtesy of Saturday Night Live]
Not only did SNL’s writers generate this highly satirical, presidential-campaign sketch, but there was actually a moment (following the gag giveaway) where Johnson & Hanks conveyed themselves with a hint of sincerity—it seemingly wasn’t characterization either. The sad part was when the audience roared in support… (But all that’s ultimately conjecture, right?)
It’s all in good fun—Dwayne Johnson’s a kick-ass, action-movie hero and Hanks an amazing time-honored actor—but when a well-known news source goes out of its way to entertain and ultimately allude to placing real-world value on such a joke (re: “We would definitely be here for that.”), that’s saying something altogether different. Is the publication suggesting US citizens can’t make an educated assessment in realizing “that” would most likely not happen at the hands of informed voters? If so, “we would definitely be [there] for that.”