Viewer disappointed with current season episodes, feels they don't compare to earlier seasons and threatens to stop watching; other posters defend recent episodes as comparable to classic era.
I recorded the 11/13 episode, and when I got home that night I watched a few minutes of it. I was marginally impressed by the episode, but I really don't care. It simply doesn't compare to the old episodes. It's an entirely different show. If things continue the way they are now, I'll probably quit watching by the end of the year. I'll put together a review of this episode as soon as I watch it...which may be never.
Justin T.
Justin, This episode was very much like an older "Seinfeld". There was very realistic plotlines, and It was not over the top. It was low-key and funny. I think you are being WAY judgemental. I think this show has set standards in your mind, that they wil never reach, NO MATTER WHAT. How do others feel? I really felt that this episode could have aired in any season, what do you guys think? Jon B.
In article , [email] (Ergen) wrote:
Well, it definitely was the best episode of this season. Only parts I really didn't like were the drawing on the photo and Kramer starting to act like he thinks he's a real doctor, near the end of the show. I just don't like when he starts acting like an idiot instead of just being his weird old self. I find it a little childish. But those are minor complaints, really, and I enjoyed this show infinitely more than any other this season.
[email] (Justin Tribble) wrote:
Please don't hurry with your review, Justin. With an attitude like yours towards the new shows, we can wait forever. You criticize a new episode even before it comes on, and when one does air, you don't watch it and still trash it because it can't compare with the old episodes?
Bobby D. "Words are loaded pistols"
The new episodes are the epitomy of everything that our misguided society condones - and I simply will not take part in such a thing.
Justin T.
[email] (Robert DeMarco) wrote:
In article , [email] says...
Ahhh, that's a shame...
Didn't you play the library policeman? What a jerk.
Your ego's writting checks that your body can't cash.
dwalton wrote:
The nightly news gives me the same feeling. We let murderers go free and we prosecute parents who paddle their kids in a department store because the kid is screaming for some piece of junk toy knowing full well that the parent is bound by the law to not do anything. Seinfeld is a "TV" program. Nothing more, nothing less. It is my firm belief that some of the viewers are taking the show, and themselves way to seriously. Anybody who believes that the Seinfeld program, or any other situational comedy for that matter, is art imitating life, needs to do more reading and less tv watching.
I am not trying to flame you Mr. Tribble, just disagreeing without being disagreeable. Hope you understand.
I do believe that TV influences a part of our society a great deal. I think that most of all television's amoral attitude causes us to accept untruths and unhealthy thought patterns. I won't condone any TV show that promulgates the shallow, uncreative thinking of the "masses", or society.
Justin T.
[email] (BrackneyC) wrote:
Aren't just about all TV shows aimed at the masses, and prominently feature the members of these "masses"? That's why we're able to make up such a thing as Nielsen ratings.
--------------CBB8BA9A56E653C06CE44166 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Ah...I see. And that's why you post to a newsgroup devoted to everything that our misguided society condones. And you won't take part in such a thing!
Please tell us, what exactly is is that our "misguided" society condones on Seinfeld? Humor?
Ted
Justin Tribble wrote:
In article ,
I'm not sure that makes much sense, but anyway....
You should give it more of a shot. I actually thought it was much better than any of the earlier episodes. Slowly, I think the eps are improving. This last one was pretty good overall, IMO.
But by your own admission, you're not even watching now!
Somehow I doubt that this last statement is going to make too many people distraught.
Eric "objectively subjective" D
[email] (Justin Tribble) wrote:
Jesus...Justy has topped himself. Now he doesn't even watch and he disses. Wait. Not only did he NOT watch. He taped, and then didn't watch.
This is the best ever. Forget what I said earlier. The new Justy posts are every bit as good as the early seasons. He's rejuvenated. He's funny again. And, as you all know, Justy knows the physics of funny! I take back what I said earlier: Justy is BACK, BAYBEEE!
Soon he'll be selling his TV, but still telling us the new episodes are no good. "Fuck that Tom Brokaw; he hasn't been the same since Larry David left." Sheesh. I was having a great day today, but this post has made me feel even better. Justy, have a milkshake, baby, and smile. Go get some fresh air. You've made my day! Hahahahahahahahahahaha.
Why don't you tape Dick Van Dyke. (I still don't know what the Dick Van Dyke refs are all about, but I love saying them anyway...I think they're disses, but who knows!)
Best wishes, smiles, happy hugs,
WT
"if the truth will set you free and knowledge is power, what the hell am I doing watching so much TV?"
You are a vulgar, vile person.
[email] (WT Pfefferle, Ph.D.) wrote:
How old are you, and where do you live that you never hear anyone swear. You always act like it's the first time that you heard a new word.
I am 56 years old and I am the manager of Wells Fargo Bank (AU# 6315) in Sedona, Az. I've been litsening to ingrates swear all of my life, and I'm simply getting tired of it.
Justin T.
Rick R Streeter wrote:
In article ,
Justin, what are you talking about? Last year at this time, before you pressed "eject" and left the group in a fit of pique, you were 16.
And another thing: Why do you single out the ingrates who swear? What about the rest of us grates, you ^&%&^*^$^%$%#?> ?
Nathan Dietz
PS Definition #35 of "ingrate" is "somebody who dedicates large portions of his life to the incessant criticism of a TELEVISION SHOW, on NETWORK TV, that has provided him with MANY YEARS OF FREE ENTERTAINMENT." [emphasis added]
I think the original poster was dissing (I have a new word) The DVD show as being dated and/or bland. But in its time it had the same clever humour we now appreciate in Seinfeld.
In fact can someone confirm - was it Ann Morgan Guilbert (she played Millie Helper) who was a member of Jerry's parents' condominium.
If you quit watching, will you also quit the newsgroup?
On Mon, 17 Nov 1997, Justin Tribble wrote:
I'll continue to watch the old episodes, therefore I will contine to write about them.
Justin T.
Andrew Morris wrote:
Justin Tribble wrote in article ...
Say it ain't so! Good Lord, what would we do without your review? Woe is me! Woe is me!
--SS--
I recorded the 11/13 episode, and when I got home that night I watched a few minutes of it. I was marginally impressed by the episode, but I really don't care. It simply doesn't compare to the old episodes. It's an entirely different show. If things continue the way they are now, I'll probably quit watching by the end of the year. I'll put together a review of this episode as soon as I watch it...which may be never.
Justin T.
Slo wrote in article ...
I don't know about Justin, but I *really* like Nutterbutters.
--------------425052200600565980849ABD Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
But how can we live without your review! :0 Jeepers, if you hate the show that much, why don't you just stop watching altogehter? I mean, what's the use of watching/taping/reviewing something you despise?
I'd like to do a test where some new Seinfeld episodes and some old ones are shown to people who say the show isn't as good as it used to be. Then ask them to identify which are new and which are old. Of course, you'd have to watch for hairstyles, etc. that changed...but I still think it'd be intersting.
Ted
Justin Tribble wrote: