You know, a lot of people don't like to watch the first season of the Simpsons (actually, I might also add the first part of the second season). It's because it's so different from the later shows, the voices and animation are jarringly different from what most casual viewers are used to. It took me a long time to finally appreciate what those shows had to offer for those reasons. On paper, they're as funny as any shows, but with the substandard animation and voices that weren't quite right, they don't immediately come across that way on the screen. So here's what I'd like to hear from you, the die-hard fans. Would it be worth watching to you if those episodes were re-done with the voices the way they are now, and re-animated? Nothing in the script, or anything else about it changed, just the updated animation and voices. I, personally, think those shows would go over better that way.
Something I was recently wondering about season one.....
What would be the point? They're already finished. All cartoon characters go through design and voice changes. It is always interesting for the fan to go back and watch the first cartoons to see how it evolved into it's current status.
Personally, what I liked about the first season was that there were no subplots, the stories all centered around a family member, and the animation wasn't as stiff as it is now (even though the designs are now more refined).
I love season one, bad drawings and all - but i know that part of that is because i remember seeing them when they first came out. for someone who has discovered the show since then, i can see how it might be a bit odd seeing those episodes.
"Markc65" wrote in message news:[email]...
go
go
animation
refined).
Have you ever seen a good remake of an old movie? No...and thats the end of that chapter...
"David McCleary" wrote in message news:qX_z9.1166$[email]...
of
Actually, I think there've been a number of good remakes (I can't be bothered to look any of them up, of course). Most of the time, you never heard of the "original" version. I think "Maltese Falcon" was a remake, for example.
Go back to Russia.
I didn't start watching the show until 2000, and I think they're fine the way they are. It would just seem awkward for them to be re-done, not to mention I don't trust the current animators to top the original animation (despite some crude drawings I think the general direction and subtle facial expressions are better in season one then now), plus even the voice acting would probably be ruined. Anyone notice a change in Marge's voice lately?
Where have you been? Just started watching in 2000?
"UnderdunkT" wrote in message news:[email]...
way
mention I
some
are
be
Yep, caught up via syndication (which is why I need those dvds more then probably most people here. I never saw seasons 1-10 and parts of 11 when they were knew, so I still haven't seen most episodes from seasond 3-11 uncut (save for that 10 and 11 went largely uncut anyways). My perception, though, is that I probably wont want seasons 9-13 on dvd anyway....
But, I guess the fact that I started watching in 2000 indicates something about season one, which is that they're truly fine the way they are (and of course I'm not speaking out of nostalgia). Even in terms of animation, I find Moaning Lisa to be better animated then, say, the dismal in just about every way "Strummer Vacation".
[email] (Jeff Cox) wrote in message news:...
I've seen some of those recently in rerun; my impression is that they don't get played as much.
But my feeling while watching them wasn't about the animation, but that it was a show that still hadn't worked everything out. Nelson has a different gang. Some of the school kids seemed to be in a very different style from the later ones. I'm sure there were some other things. My thought was that things changed because the early shows were too weird for mass consumption. Maybe weird is wrong, but there seemed to be a certain style that wasn't what we are used to in cartoons. It almost seemed as if the original intent was to draw the characters a certain way (say as stick figures), but either they thought better or in wanting the show to be accessible to a larger audience, made the characters to be less "cartoon-like".
I've only nibbled at South Park, but I think it explains what I'm saying. The animation seems crude, basically static figures that are moved around a background. Some might say it's a cost-cutting measure, but my impression is that from the beginning they were trying to use a deliberately different style.
Michael
no, the first season was a HUGE hit. i don't know about actual ratings, but it was clear early that this show was a hit; they didn't have to worry about it being taken off the air. also, fox wasn't nearly as big a network then, my sense is that the simpsons helped get them on the map as much as anything did, until they got the contract with the NFL.
that was also when there was counterfeit simpsons stuff everywhere, including the "black bart" shirts. so the reasons for changing the simpsons weren't because they were some sort of fringe element.
In alt.tv.simpsons, on the "Re: Something I was recently wondering about season one....." thread, Michael Black wrote:
You are right when you say the producers hadn't worked everything out. They even say as much in the commentary for the 1st season DVD. However, the show didn't change beause it was "too wierd for mass consumption." The production cycle was so long that by the time they got the first complete episode back from Korea, the writing, character design, and some of the initial animation had been done for all thirteen episodes. The writers, animators, and producers really didn't have a complete idea of how everything would look until it was all finished. When they finally got the episodes back, they had a better idea of what to keep doing, and where they could make improvements. That's why the show began to change in the second season.
Oh, and getting back to the original question: Part of the charm of the 1st season episodes is in seeing how different (and in some cases, how similar) they are to modern-day ones. Remaking them would be kind of pointless. I think the effort would be better spent on producing new shows.
no. the jokes are mostly very thin and the actual plots aren't great.
erm, this is perhaps too harsh
despite the Matthau, the not-quite-sharpened pens and the poor, sometimes unwatchable animation, the there were two or three excellent episodes and another couple of good efforts. Moaning Lisa is - as Lisa centered episodes usually are - superb and indeed was the defining moment for her character when previously she had been in the background behind Homer's oafish naivety and Bart's mischief. Krusty Gets Busted has some awesome subtle satire, and Life On The Fast Lane, ...Open Fire and Crepes Of Wrath are all decent too.
However, I despise the "classic" Bart The General. This has been championed by many people, but to me the story is formulaic and predictable, and the ending is patronising and ridiculous. As for Homer's Odyssey, Some Enchanted Evening and Homer's Night Out, they are not very good at all, and the remainder of the season was about average.
"Adrunk" wrote in message news:...
My point wasn't that the first season wasn't good, it's just that, to me at least, some of the jokes would go over better in the later style. Especially a lot of Homer's lines. No wonder Castellaneta changed Homer's voice. I wholeheartedly agree that the first season had some great episodes. I just wondered if anybody had even thought about how those shows would play out if they were re-done. Do you really think it wouldn't work, even with the same voice actors?