Viewers debate whether the bad acts cited in the Seinfeld finale were actually morally wrong, arguing most were unintentional or misunderstandings rather than genuinely evil deeds.
I saw the finale again last night, and it struck me even more the second time how ridiculous most of the "bad things" they've done were. Let's see if I can remember ...
1) Babu - a mail mix-up is not Jerry and Elaine's fault, and they were very upset and tried to help
Kramer as a pimp - completely untrue; a misunderstanding
3) Elaine's nipple - completely unintentionally; she was incredibly embarrassed that it happened
4) Elaine tries to kill Mr Pitt - again, completely untrue; a misunderstanding
Elaine and Terri Hatcher - Elaine slipped; no harmful intent
The Bubble Boy - Who's strangling who?
The Contest - This makes people evil??
There was a letter to the editor in the the Atlanta paper saying they "felt unclean" watching the finale, because they were showing all these "grotesque acts" the group had done over the years. They indicated that it was sobering to watch because we as an audience found all these awful things entertaining. Huh? The only things that I would really consider bad or wrong was parking in a handicapped space and stealing bread. Makes me even more confused about the writers' intent.
i thought elaine slipped on purpose (with teri hatcher), because jerry put her up to it. no? (i did see the episode, but don't remember why she did it.)
I had always thought she went in the sauna to get a *look*, but that the slipping was unintentional. Does any dialouge in that show indicate one or the other?
I saw the finale again last night, and it struck me even more the second time how ridiculous most of the "bad things" they've done were. Let's see if I can remember ...
1) Babu - a mail mix-up is not Jerry and Elaine's fault, and they were very upset and tried to help
Kramer as a pimp - completely untrue; a misunderstanding
3) Elaine's nipple - completely unintentionally; she was incredibly embarrassed that it happened
4) Elaine tries to kill Mr Pitt - again, completely untrue; a misunderstanding
Elaine and Terri Hatcher - Elaine slipped; no harmful intent
The Bubble Boy - Who's strangling who?
The Contest - This makes people evil??
Thanks for enumerating these "crimes" and showing specifically what the intention was. And yes, Elaine's fall was unintentional.
There were also lots of incidents where a good intent was badly responded to, like when Jerry got the wig for the guy who was faking cancer. Even George finally confesses the truth that he's not really a marine biologist after the miraculous whale rescue only to have her leave him at the beach and drive off.
Unlike the finale these were so artfully done. So funny.
It's almost as if in the absence of any real humor, in that vacuum swarmed all the people who are disgruntled with our society blaming it on the victims. If you think about it tho, isnt this perfect - These characters are usually getting screwed. Just as they were screwed over by other characters who misunderstood them, the public is doing the same thing by jumping on the bandwagon. It's amazing to me that people see them in this light. As the problem in society. I see them as comic victims of a society that we all live in that is all screwed up.
There was a letter to the editor in the the Atlanta paper saying they "felt unclean" watching the finale, because they were showing all these "grotesque acts" the group had done over the years. They indicated that it was sobering to watch because we as an audience found all these awful things entertaining. Huh? The only things that I would really consider bad or wrong was parking in a handicapped space and stealing bread. Makes me even more confused about the writers' intent.>>
Yes, exactly. The reactions are so bizarre and the anger that they represented evil in our society- it had me wondering too. Did the writers INTEND this response. I dont think so. I have come to the conclusion that we were supposed to be laughing at the injustice being done to them but since there was nothing funny about it (It was just a comic failure), people took it seriously and thought the message was that they got what they deserved. Actually, throughout the series you see them frequently getting what they did NOT deserve. But it was funny.
I think that maybe because they were trying for too much - trying to bring together all the characters - that it was all to orchestrated. The writing maybe was not spontaneous because it had to serve this need. Just a guess.
Here's what I think. For years there have been enemies of the Seinfeld show. They always said that the characters were bad people, uncaring, not role models, etc. That's what they SAID. IMO their real gripe was, a) they had no sense of humor, b) they didn't approve of the characters engaging in sex outside of marriage without punishment, and c) they have no sense of humor.
I believe that Larry David, et al, read these complaints for so many years that they took them to heart.
" Maybe Elaine IS an evil woman. And Jerry's observations certainly seem a little self-absorbed. Let's punish them in the last episode!," thought the writers. That ill show everyone that we don't approve of actions such as: making out in Schindler's List, rating men by 'spongeworthiness', eating your neighbor's Cocoa Pops, and such thoughtless and destructive acts!"
Personally, I thought Jerry, George, Elaine, and Kramer were interesting, engaging and fun people. I would have liked them as real-life friends, and Thursday nights will never be the same.
And to the critics who have been saying, "What's funny about this? Why can't we have sitcoms with nicer people who will act as better role models to our children? " I have four words: Bill Cosby, and Fuck You.
Well, I agree with you, but I don't see why the show can't be hilariously funny AND feature unlikeable, self-absorbed characters. Each character has at least three or four acts that they did that are obscenely bad, and deserve reproach for. Jerry worst moments are stealing the marble rye and falsely reporting George for stealing book. Elaine's worst momement has to be when she maliciously ripped George's toupee off and threw it out the window. These aren't the acts of good people. I'm not saying that they are despicable or bad, but they really aren't particularly "good."
On Wed, 27 May 1998 20:26:28 -0400, "Melissa \"Budgie\" Dirmeyer" wrote:
Remember when Jerry and Elaine waited all that time for the cake for the party? Wonder why they didnt just have Jerry steal the one the lady ahead of them took.
Most of what goes wrong is just bad luck, as in the case where Jerry scratches his nose and the angle makes it look like he's picking it. Or when George is wiping coffee of the guy's window and his fiance's mother thinks he has sunk to squeegeeing windows. In George's case, he DOES make a lot of his own bad luck, but certainly not all of it.
On 24 May 1998 20:10:59 GMT, [email] (Raingluttn) wrote:
Was it bad luck or a mistake that she also saw him eating garbage (It
was just sitting there, Jerry, right on top)?<
Was it bad luck when the burgers started burning at the kid's birthday
party and George tramples kids, the clown and knocked over the old lady
in a walker to get out?<
Was it bad luck when George tries to poison his boss?<
Was it bad luck when George screws up his girlfriend's parole in hopes
of conjugal visit sex?<
Was his reaction to Susan's death bad luck?<
Want more?<
Yeah, he has bad luck, but he's also a pretty dispicable guy.<
On Mon, 25 May 1998 12:21:23 -0700, John Ford wrote:
You notice, I did make an exception for some of George's misfortune (whereas it was just bad luck that he had "shrinkage"....which by the way is one of my favorite Seinfeld bits)
The fire certainly was bad luck, given George's phobia.
I know I saw that, but I don't remember enough of the details to answer.
No.
Definitely.
Did I even want this?
Well, they won't be holding him up as a model in school. But then they won't be holding Kramer up, either. In fact, name ANY character on Seinfeld who you'd want your kids to use as a model! I mean beyond the NY4. I can't think of any. Babu? Soup Nazi? Bania? The Maestro?
It isnt just a problem for JGK & E. Its the entire human population.
It isnt just a problem for JGK & E. Its the entire human population.
This seems a very important point to me. We are watching ourselves. maybe we dont steal rye bread. BUt in a million small ways, these characters are flawed like we all are.
Well, they won't be holding him up as a model in school. But then they won't be holding Kramer up, either.
I'm not so sure about Kramer. I really do love all the characters, but of all of them, I think Kramer really does represent something wonderful. I havent really thought out what it is.
On 26 May 1998 00:00:21 GMT, [email] (Raingluttn) wrote:
No kidding? Well, I can imagine Kramer hearing someone say that.
No who I think Kramer is? Zaphod Beeblebrox from the Hitchhiker's Guide. I think he was CAST by someone who saw the British TV version of that story because he CLOSELY resembles the actor who played Zaphod. In the novel, Zaphod comes out of this crisis relieved to know he IS the most important person in the universe! Fits Kramer precisely.