What's wrong with the show?

As much as I hate to say this, the show is definitely going down the tubes. too many contrived situations, too many coincidences etc. the last few shows have been of the type that the on-screen Jerry & George would have written for "Jerry"- lame. The show's not about "nothing" anymore, but is definitely about "something" and that something's not pretty. MAY is the best show on right now. sure, they get too lovey-dovey at times. but, some of the comic moments are sublime. MAY is more about "nothing" than Seinfeld. --- later, sunil

In article ,

I like MAY, but if you want to talk about contrived plots, how about their Regis episode, the Jerry Lewis episode, the VR episode, or the last one involving Yoko Ono? As for being about nothing, I've always felt that that was a media invention that never accurately described the show. Some of the best episodes (IMHO) have involved coincidences or unbelievable situations (Keith Hernandez, the limo episode, The Junior Mints)

In article , [email] (HO ROBERT

i personally hated the Regis and the Jerry Lewis episodes. The VR episode was pretty good because it was handled well. Yoko Ono was only a voice on the phone (if there was a voice on the phone). However, nothing as bad as Kramer's golf ball lodging in a whale's blowhole or Elaine stealing a mannequin. Some episode this year have been very good (i liked the TV guide episode a lot), but some have been very bad. --- later, sunil

I'm getting tired of hearing everyone complain about the last couple of seasons. IMHO this season has been every bit as good as any other. Especially the last couple of episodes have been hilarious. Watching Jerry shake his head no at sloppy Poppie's had me in the floor crying. I realize a lot of people like to flame things when they get popular in some sort of perverted attempt to show everyone that they were "cool" enough to be in on it before everyone else. Kramer getting scratched, George being a smug SOB buying the suit, last night's episode was full of classic moments. Lighten up, naysayers.

SWOOSH, SWOOSH, SWOOSH Thomas L. Jones

In article [email] writes:

Hear, Hear! perhaps some people havn't noticed that this newsgroup is named alt.tv.seinfeld, not alt.tv.mad.about.you, and it doesn't contain the word flame or hate... What's the deal? If you don't like the show, then don't watch it, and us people here who want to bitch over what happened to the cookie, the wrist, elbow, etc. don't want you to waste space complaining about it in a group in which it doesn't belong. I don't subscribe to the group that talks about 90210... why do these people subscribe here?

Andy

Agreed. It frankly sucks now, when it once shined. Nothing will ever approach the first 2.5 years.

All four main characters have come to act so maudlin that I wanna puke.

The situations are good. The responses have become predicatable, and the acting double sucks.

For all you guys complaining about the show:

If you hate it so much, why do you still watch it and why are you in this newsgroup?

Karyn

In article , [email] (Karyn M

oh, i see, this newsgroup is only for people who want to mindlessly gush over the show. there's no place for criticism. i watch the show because i used to love it, and because occasionally they do come up with a good show. but everyone has to admit that the shows lately are nowehere near as good as some of the classic episodes. criticism is healthy for any show. if you're going to brainlessly adore every- thing that the seinfeld gang does, perhaps this is not the group for YOU!!

--- later, sunil

In Spaceman Spiff writes:

I don't agree with that. I have laughed as hard, if not harder, at the past 2 or 3 episodes as I have at *any* Seinfeld in the past 3 years (and no, I didn't just start watching this season :) I think a couple of the shows earlier in the season were somewhat sub-par, but certainly not as bad as many in this newsgroup would say.

I think some people are putting *way* too much pressure on the show to live up to impossible standards. I think if you take each show as it comes, without trying to compare it to what you consider to be a *classic* show, you'll enjoy it more. Just MHO, of course.

Also, I find it kind of funny that at the beginning of the season, the shows were blasted for not living up to the *classic* standards of past seasons. Now, many people are comparing the current episodes to ones from earlier in this season, and saying how *classic* those earlier episodes were. I'm not flaming anyone, and I know everyone has a right to his/her own opinions. Just thought I'd point it out.

Dave

In article ,

the early episodes of this season are *NOT* classics. some of them were good, but very few compare to the true classics (1990-1993 seasons). --- later, sunil

Spaceman Spiff writes:

Interesting, considering that the show's first *full* season was 1991-2.

(The show aired for a short while in the summer of 1990, then for a few episodes in the winter of '91, then began in earnest in April of 1991. The original pilot aired on 7/5/89, but the *series* is only in its *third* full season, plus a half+ season before that.)

BFD. i meant the shows aired in the periods 1990-1993. you're being unnecessarily pedantic. --- later, sunil

Unfortunately, none of this critizism is gonna reach to the writers, execs, etc at NBC, or any place else that could make a difference, so it is useless posting subjects which the majority doesn't like.

Andy

In article , [email]

I see. This group is only for people who post *nice* things about the show. How incredibly boring that must be. Perhaps you forgot to include that in the group charter. Criticism is healthy because hopefully it will provoke some intelligent discussion, not the mindless babble you seem to be putting forth. Maybe you could actually contribute something of value for a change. Yes, "Seinfeld" is about nothing, but that "nothing" seems to be getting more complicated all the time. compare: 1. forgetting where your car is parked in the mall and 2. waiting for a table at a restaurant to 1. hitting a golf ball into a whale's blowhole! 2. a mannequin that looks like elaine.

what seems more like "nothing" to you? --- later, sunil

   But criticism that is not constructive and is presented as fact when it
   can only be subjective is not healthy.  I think that's what a lot of
   people are reacting to.  Everyone has their own opinion of each show.
   Some find this year's episodes as funny as those from past seasons,
   whereas others do not.  Nothing wrong with that.  The problem comes when
   some people present their opinion as fact (e.g., "You have to admit this
   this year's shows suck" etc.).  Those who have the opposite opinion end
   up feeling that they are being personally attacked because what they
   find funny is being challenged, even though humor is completely subjective.
   As a result, it's not surprising to see a lot of people becoming
   defensive when attacked like this (e.g., "If you don't like it, don't
   watch and leave us alone.").

   Praise can be just as valuable as criticism.  Both can be used as vehicles
   for offering insight and perspective that are not apparent to others.

    Was it really hit there on the fly or did it eventually wind up there?
    Nevertheless, a circumstance that's hard to believe either way.

    Why not?  A lot of people resemble other people.  It may even be true that
    everyone has their own personal lookalike.  Why not a mannequin, whose
    features are less defined and thus more open to interpretation than a real
    human being?

  A somewhat selective choice of examples.  Which of the following seem
  more like nothing?
     1.  Finding a hair in a pastry.
     2.  Having communication problems with someone who is deaf.
	  or
     1.  Going to Coney Island with a naked guy you met on a subway train.
     2.  Two jewish guys stealing a limo ride from the airport without
	 knowing it was destined for a Pro-Nazi rally.
  There are several counter examples to the examples you gave.  The point is
  that almost every episode contains one or more unlikely premise or
  coincidence.  But then again, I'd guess that each one of us has a few
  stories about an improbable premise or coincidence that has happened to us
  in real life.  Fact can be just as strange as fiction.

--The Rodman

----------Form .sig-----------Cut Here-----------Form .sig--------------
Brought to you by [email].
	 	         (clever handle/net address)

Obligatory Disclaimer:  The (views/flames/falsehoods) expressed above
   are not representative of those of ______________________________.
                                         (reputable organization)

Obligatory Rhyming and/or Philosophical Verse:  The road foresaken,
                                                Is the road worth taking,
                                                For the man unshaken,
                                                In himself.
----------Form .sig-----------Cut Here-----------Form .sig--------------

[email] (The Rodman) writes: (I missed who submitted this, sorry)

:

I like the bit about getting into trouble by "smiling and nodding" when someone speaks too quietly. Not too out of left field for me, anyway.

Yes, I agree. It seems to be more obviously about nothing - almost fanatically so. A bit too self indulgent, maybe.

In article Hank Kingsley writes:

Here's an excerpt from an Associated Press article about MAY that mentions Seinfeld, and I think offers some intersting insights on the path both shows have taken. This article appears in the 2/22/94 Boston Globe, and I'm sure in other AP papers as well.

excerpt begins here:

     " Like 'Seinfeld,' with which it is sometimes compared, 'Mad About You'
is about little things. But unlike 'Seinfeld,' 'Mad About You' doesn't make a
big thing out of it.
     "Hunt says, in fact, that 'my fear was that we would get bigger and
bigger, wackier and wackier.'
     "  'Instead, we've stayed true to our goal, which is to get smaller and
smaller, where we can get into stickier territory with these two characters,
just as you do in a relationship as it goes along. Sometimes we get so small,'
she adds, smiling, 'that it's almost not there at all.' "

I seriously doubt that there could ever be a show that contains less than Seinfeld does. I think the thing that makes show seem like it's going down the tubes is that they are now concentrating on the "nothing" aspect and not letting it flow naturally. The situations are too entwinded in each show also. It was better when there were at most 2 (maybe 3) subplots going on in the same episode.

Andy

Newsgroups: alt.tv.seinfeld Subject: Re: What's wrong with the show? Summary: Expires: References: Sender: Followup-To: Distribution: Keywords: Cc:

In article ,

Since my favorite episode is still "The Limo", I see nothing wrong with that.

IJ>I'm getting tired of hearing everyone complain about the last couple of IJ>seasons. IJ>IMHO this season has been every bit as good as any other. Especially the la IJ>couple of episodes have been hilarious. Watching Jerry shake his head no IJ>at sloppy Poppie's had me in the floor crying. I realize a lot of people li IJ>to flame things when they get popular in some sort of perverted attempt to IJ>show everyone that they were "cool" enough to be in on it before everyone IJ>else. IJ>Kramer getting scratched, George being a smug SOB buying the suit, last IJ>night's IJ>episode was full of classic moments. Lighten up, naysayers.

IJ>SWOOSH, SWOOSH, SWOOSH Thomas L. Jones

I think a lot of people were referring to the first coulpe of episodes of this season, which I agree with, but around after the Christmas break, it started to get very good again. I don't think last season had many bad shows though, although I can think of a few.

20 Feb 94 20:08, George J. Sabini wrote:

GJS> Agreed. It frankly sucks now, when it once shined.

So call the police and tell them you want to press charges against the guy that's holding the gun to your head for 30 minutes every week, forcing you to watch Seinfeld...