Jerry Seinfeld contemplates the end - must read

This is scary. In the next episode it is described that they will do everything in reverse and take us back to when Jerry first met Kramer. There's a one in a million chance that they will do this monumental feat correctly, otherwise I figure this episode could ruin everything.

Justin T.

[email] (Daniel Cohen) wrote:

What's the point Justin? This is twice now when you've bashed the show WITHOUT EVEN SEEING IT!!!! For you, the show is ALREADY ruined! Do us all a favor and go watch "Suddenly Susan" and leave the us alone.

For those of you less theater-knowledgable people, there is a show that Stephen SOndheim wrote called Merrily We Roll Along. The show used this exact same concept - doing scenes reversed, starting in the late 70s and moving back t the early 60s. The show bombed on Broadway at first, in large part due to the fact that the concept was simply too difficult for the audience to grasp. The show was reworked, and had a fairly successful revival off-Broadway. I've seen the revival, and if you're involved in the show, the concept is not very difficult to follow - in fact as a character study it can be a gascinating technique - seeing why people are the way they are. Considering the fact that we all know the Fearsome Foursome fairly well, this should prove an interesting technique. Side note - Jason Alexander was IN the original cast of Merrily - so all you theater people - keep your eyes and ears open for a possible reference! Jason

This just a futile attempt by the writers to do something "intelligent" and up-scale.

Justin T.

[email] wrote:

Justin, you snivelling, idiotic, moron. You haven't even seen the episode, yet you're calling it "futile"! If you want to complain about an episode, fine. But what good is your opinion to this newsgroups when you've already shown yourself to be totally biased AGAINST this WHOLE season? To most of us reading this group, you've disqualified yourself from adding "intelligent" conversation. Really, you should move one, Justin. Get over it and pick something else to whine about.

Lance

Justin T. writes:

"intelligent" and up-scale.>>

Is there anything that makes you optimistic? You haven't even watched the episode yet, and you're already making generalizations. I just can't believe what you write sometimes. I have high hopes for tonight's episode, and I don't believe I'll be let down.

--MFLuder848

I "bashed" a show without even seeing it? HEAVEN FORBID I EVER DO THAT AGAIN!!!! OHHH DEAR LORD!!!!

Justin T.

Lance Allred wrote:

Hey Justin, it seems from your recent posts that you think the show is already ruined. That being the case, this episode could only make it better.

Jeff

DETROIT RED WINGS! STANLEY CUP CHAMPIONS!

Justin Tribble wrote:

You would love that, don't you?

You're like a guy who goes to the circus expecting to see the trapeze artist fall...

In , Michel writes:

Tight rope walker Joy Boys!

Has anyone thought, however, that Mr. S/f no doubt has been bluffing, and continues to bluff, and that he's not going to end the series at least until the show beats the record for longest running sitcom (which is probably now held by MASH, but shouldn't be)?

If I were he, that's what I'd do.

Thanks for posting the article, it is greatly appreciated. Jon B.

In , [email] (Daniel Cohen) writes:

Cool. I was just working on the 'How do the characters know each other?' question for the FAQ. I guess I'll hold off until Friday.

You're working on an F.A.Q.? Splendid! Here's a suggestion for inclusion (don't know how many times I've seen it): "Was Newman in NATIONAL LAMPOON'S ANIMAL HOUSE?"

I think Justin should be able to write what he thinks and if he doesn't think the shows have been up to par, then he should post how he feels. You can't have a discussion in a newsgroup with everyone feeling the same and certainly, it is always interesting to have a Devil's advocate in the group. If he didn't like the show on the whole he wouldn't bother to be posting here.

Jennifer

It's not the opinion, it's the offensive ways in which they're presented.
It's that holier-than-thou/voice of reason/condescending manner he
uses that I find most irritating.
--------------------------------------------
             [email]
(Hammer nail here--> <-- for a new monitor.)
          (Remove XXXX to reply)

It's not the opinion, it's the offensive ways in which they're presented. It's that holier-than-thou/voice of reason/condescending manner he uses that I find most irritating. --------------------------------------------

Dave....perhaps he just comes off that way. You know how many times someone can write a post and not to come off the way it does to the readers. Ofcourse, you have the right to be irritated... don't get me wrong and to your opinion. I am just suggesting that perhaps he be cut some slack. Even if he is coming across the way that he actually is, I think that perhaps the readers can just take it with a grain of salt. Justin often posts very thoughtful critques and viewpoints of the show and sometimes people who do this often tend to have a bit of sharpness attached.

Jennifer

Hmm. You have a point. Everybody has a bad day once in a while. I've posted stuff that was 'out of character' for me, and have been flamed for it. But consistantly negative posts, regardless of how in-depth the analysis may be, wears very thin, very fast. Life is too short. Since I've killfiled him, I have a better outlook about this ng, but people keep responding, so I still have to read some of what he says.

I'll tell you this much. I WILL read what he has to say about "The Betrayal". As the first legitimate A+ episode of the season, if he trashes it, I will assume there is no hope, and my opinion of JT will be firmly and inexorably established. (Emphasis on 'inexorably')

Yeah, well, at least I didn't tell him to watch some other show, right?
--------------------------------------------<<<<<

Yes and good for you!!!!!!!!! Usually that is what everyone says to a dissenter on the newsgroups <G>. I can understand that reading alot of negative posts can make enjoyment of the newsgroup leaving alot to be desired. I think if there are particular people whose posts you don't like to read it is a good thing to be able to elminate them from what you get to see. No point in going to a newsgroup and not enjoying it. On the other hand, with me, I don't mind reading the negative posts since it does present other perspectives. What I can't stand are the really obnoxious and arrogant notes that I have seen on other newsgroups. Those I try to eliminate. Jennifer

Aggreed. It's like eliminating spam in your e-mail.

Bill Quigley

Perhaps a lot of posts are objectionable. But there are a lot of people who have a right to express their opinions even if a lot of people disagree.

[email] (Dave) wrote:

People who don't even wait until they actually *see* the show to bash it are pretty sad. If you're going to bash, fine, I'm all for free speech so go ahead and do it. But at least wait until you see it and can form your own opinion.

-Jessica

Well said..... Jon B.

You don't suppose he took Julia Louis-Dreyfus' suggestion on how to end the show, do you? In case you forgot, last year in an interview she proposed that the show end with everyone finally resolving their life problems (Jerry landing a sitcom deal and finding true love, Elaine and George each meeting their ideal lovers, and Kramer finally figuring out what to do with his life)...going out to a celebration dinner... and getting creamed and toasted by an out-of-control fuel truck. That'd be full blazing color, wouldn't it?

     Actually, we should hope he decides to end it
the way Cheers did...by not really "ending" it as
such. Cheers' finale made clear that whatever changes
the characters went through in the future, they'd contin-
ue to be a part of each others' lives. Seinfeld should end
the same way...with a truly funny episode that leaves the
viewer with the illusion that the Seinfeld world will go on
and the characters will continue meeting and obsessing
over "nothing" even though we won't be getting any more
fresh glimpses of them every Thursday night. (It'll make the coming decades of
reruns that much more enjoyable as well...
and make a reunion special or theatrical film possible too.)
     When you come to think of it, last night's episode
("The Betrayal") might well have filled the bill for a
series finale. Fortunately we're not at that stage yet...

Bob Smith, afternoons WXXI-AM 1370, Rochester NY

In a previous article, [email] (JennWa1234) says:

FANTASY must become reality, and reality FANTASY!

Seinfeld's proper ending is, somehow, to get in a traffic accident, and then, from his attorney's incompetence, finds himself plea-bargained into being somebody's BUTLER! Now, would that be ironic, or would that be ironic?

Seinfeld should end the same way...with a truly funny episode that leaves the viewer with the illusion that the Seinfeld world will go on and the characters will continue meeting and obsessing over "nothing" even though we won't be getting any more fresh glimpses of them every Thursday night. (It'll make the coming decades of reruns that much more enjoyable as well...

Yes...I like that idea of yours alot. I hope that they do end the show like that....with NO end. Jennifer

alot??? Jennifer there are A LOT of issues to resolve for the characters and then perhaps they should kill them all off so we are not subjected to...

... their 30th reunion special (Gilligan, Partridge, and all the other old shows..) The year is 2027 - we are telling our kids about this old show we used to watch...perhaps getting out all our old tapes... and there it is... Jerry in a Florida retirement home, Elaine raising her daughter's children, Kramer on his yacht, George complaining about INFESTATION,