Can you stand another opinion?

My thoughts on the Finale were much like everyone else's. The show seemed to stop cold once they got in the courtroom. Seeing the Bubble Boy scene again was funny, but that's about it. I kept looking at the clock.

I would have personally prefered the show to be about Jerry and George going to California and working together - I was excited when I *thought* that was going to be the plot. Then, on the plane, I thought the plot was going to be that they died and went to hell, which also intrigued me. I'm sure they deliberately tried to throw us for loops.

My main thought - I am one of the people who have watched Seinfeld since Day One, and frankly I never thought of the characters as mean and selfish ... it seems like that's something they've added just the last few seasons. I mean, think about the first 4-5 seasons. George would tell stupid lies, but they always got him into trouble. Kramer eats Jerry's food, but Jerry basically lets him, so I wouldn't call that horrible. And remember how upset Elaine was after she lied to the driver about being deaf?

I actually always (until recently) thought the show was about very normal people that you were supposed to identify with somewhat - not a bunch of mean bastards. I realy think was an idea they got years later. Any other thoughts on this?

-Jen

On Mon, 18 May 1998 09:09:24 -0400, redhead1 wrote:

Question: If you say it "stopped cold" in the courtroom, what happened before that that was funny? I looked at my tape again and the time leading up to the trial wasnt funny, either.

It didnt stop cold. It didnt start.

Iconoclast wrote:

I'm not sure if that was just a rhetorical question ... but I was enjoying the show before then. In retrospect, though, I think it was because I kept expecting something great to happen. When the courtroom scene started, it became obvious that it wouldn't.

-Jen

Something I wrote elsewhere that I think relates to your comment/question: I'm struggling to understand this myself. HEre's what I wrote in my attempt to find words: These characters are not evil in need of punishment. They all represent aspects of ourselves, and there are 4 very different characters, all representing different parts of ourselves. For myself, George is my shadow side - the side I least show or would admit to. All of the characters express real feelings that real people have. We are all FLAWED. It doesnt mean that is ALL there is to us. Kramer is the spontaneous child side, and more that is way beyond words (also a comic genius). Seinfeld is the straightman, important as a foil for the others. He enables the opposites to express themselves. The negative aspects of ourselves are presented in a way that we can laugh about them and enjoy ourselves even in our flawedness, which is how it ought to be. Often they hurt people with no intention of doing so. Have you never done this yourself? Think of Jerry trying to help Babu. His intentions were good. Through a series of fluky accidents or mistaken judgments, Babu suffers.

The first reason I loved this show is because it is brilliantly written, a tight weave of stories brought together beautifully (marine biologist is just one of these). I once showed this to a class of college kids and it went by too fast for them, most didnt get it. How often does TV do this for us? And incredibly funny. The characters had chemistry. The acting (except for Jerry- in the end his being a stand-up comic rather than an actor in teh show worked because he was a foil for the others) was great. As others have said, all the supporting actors were chosen well - beyond well. Each was a work of art. Second reason I loved it was I began to see in all the "nothing" that the shows were full of, the things people do, say or think but dont want to admit to or show to others. People can be incredibly superficial, fearful, etc but who admits to this? It isnt ALL we are but it's an aspect of the human condition. Actually, in a way, Kramer represents idealism in a child-like kind of way. Totally free and also spontaneously goodhearted. The third thing I loved was the NY feel about it, which I miss as I"m in exile. The show has soul. Had.

The ending seems to be a misunderstanding of the show itself. It's as if it wraps up all the misunderstandings of what the show's about, as expressed by all the moral criticisms, and gives the characters their "just deserts". No wonder people feel let down. And now people like this poster say "they had it coming". This is the self-righteousness in our society that is the flip side of the loss of values. The folks who THINK they are so much better than everyone else while they continue to be as flawed themselves.

CC

In [email]

comment/question:

attempt to

represent aspects

representing

the side

are all

spontaneous

enables

laugh

ought to

done this

good.

suffers.

written, a

is just

went by

us? And

for Jerry-

worked

well -

the shows

admit to or

this? It

in a way,

and also

in exile.

if it

expressed by

deserts".

the loss

else

And this is a beautiful example of how life can imitate art -- these characters aren't "all of us;" in many ways, they represent the WORST in all of us, and they do it so often that when their actions are viewed in the aggregate, they really are BAD people, who deserve to be punished, in an existential sense, for living in a world of their own for the last 9 years. They are NOT us -- though we are all *them* in our most careless and selfish moments. You are living proof that this show has taught some of us that it is somehow OK, or socially accepted to be like Jerry, Kramer, George or Elaine. It's not -- and they got their just desserts in the finale.

Matt P

F.B. wrote:

I agree George had a very selfish and cowardly character but what do you think Jerry, Elaine and Kramer did that was so terrible? Jerry would not succumb to social niceties? But he never went out of his way to hurt people. In fact when he tried to help them he was sometimes mistakenly taken in a negative way - The Cigar Store Indian was a perfect example of his innocence being compounded as racist when it wasn't.

Please explain why you think they all deserved a year in jail. (Other than for acting in The Finale).

Please explain why you think they all deserved a year in jail. (Other than for acting in The Finale).

Nice touch! Yes, they did deserve it for acting in the Finale.) : )

Best post I have every read from an AOL service. I agree wholeheartedly with everything you have said especially about their not wanting to intentionaly hurt someone. eg: The Pony line, Babu, The pigeons, Cigar-store indian, even the flag burning...

However they are portrayed as cold-hearted and uncaring. But I believe that is poking fun at our 'feigned' concern to those around us. Jerry would not enter into that trap. eg: In the Hamptons when the Bubble Boy's father is telling his sad tale Elaine cries, the father cries, and they wipe tears from their eyes - Jerry wipes a crumb from his mouth - Brilliant.

So they did not get their "just deserts" (I like your dry humour) - but they were misunderstood!

In fact I was waiting for the warden to say - after Jerry's stand-up bit - "What we have here is a failure to communicate". Is that TOO obscure?

Raingluttn wrote:

In article , "The News Guy(Mike)" writes:

That would have been an excellent final line! (Or the warden could have said, "That's a shame.")

In article , [email] (Raingluttn) writes:

My take on the finale: after nine years of poking fun at a number of religious, political and sexual persuasions (among other groups), the joke was on them. Larry David, IMO, said in effect, "OK this was a comedy and nothing was sacred, not even ourselves. And I'll prove it."

I didn't see the jail term as an appeasement to those who were angered by or ridiculed in previous episodes or as a miscalculated writers' effort but as a final comedic toast to the writers and actors who didn't take themselves seriously ever. ANT

In a way the finale had the perfect satirical premise for the '90s. In the decade when our society seems to believe that no one deserves to be held responsible for their corrupt actions, no matter how hateful (not Clinton, not Microsoft, not OJ...), Larry David forces us to watch our "heroes" pay completely for everything they've done. The more you groove on the bleeding heart trend, the less you probably responded to this episode. It would have been so "'90s" to see them get off scott free, but that means it would have been straight. Comedy is about the unexpected, and satire is about pointing out the absurdity of social norms. The show worked as a conclusion by undermining the distorted reality that supported the rest of the series, but it also delivered on a higher and more subtle comic level than I think the series has ever reached for before.

-Eric S. ([email] or [email])

"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen." -Albert Einstein

redhead1 wrote in message ... (snip)

You're not the first person to point this out. Someone else here pointed out the episode in which George campaigns to get a chair for a store's security guard.

And when Babu got deported, Jerry tried everything he could to prevent it.

As for Kramer, the only two bad qualities he has are: 1) his constant mooching from Jerry, and 2) his tendency to blurt things out, with no tact. (At least he doesn't lie like the other three characters.)

Aside from that, Kramer, is a truly good-hearted person. I wouldn't mind having a friend like Kramer in real life. When one of his friends are in some kind of jam, they can always count on Kramer.

What's more, did you notice that during the carjacking, Kramer was the only one who didn't make fun of the situation?

They only character on the show who was truly a "mean bastard" was Newman.

BTW, I have a theory as to Newman's first name. It's "Hello." :)

"Eric Perlin" writes:

And let's not forget the intervention for one of Jerry's friends on drugs.

I've never considered the four to be out-n-out mean, either. In fact, I've always thought that they were basically just struggling to make their way in a society that had broken down, and "fighting back" the best way they could. That coupled with a basic philosophy on life that included a "shit happens - deal with it" attitude.

redhead1 ([email]) wrote:

The finale seemed to me as if they were thumbing their noses at the critics who were down on the characters for being selfish, childish, etc. (aka "Chill out, it's only a TV show, for crying out loud.")

Delighted with this thread, because when The Seinfeld characters are referred to as self-absorbed, etc., I remember how they actually visited people in the hospital who weren't even family members....who does that anymore?....and attended funerals......who does that? How they'd knock themsevles out trying to make up for it when they hurt somebody's feelings....how they visited and telephoned their parents whether they wanted to or not....who does THAT anymore? How they'd schlepp to the mall to help Kramer get a good buy on an air conditioner or pick each other up at the airport.....

Whatever else, they weren't as one dimensional as critics make them out....

Schatzi