One problem with the later *Simpsons* episodes

I think "Louse Detective" had a couple of good examples of one reason the show is less funny now: the writers no longer know when to quit.

The Tom Brokaw thing was funny. And then he said that dumbass "greatest regeneration" line, and suddenly it wasn't funny. If they couldn't think of a decent line, they should have quit while they were ahead.

And I had a hearty laugh at Moe's line about the pickle jar. It was a good gag. But again, the writers go too far with the pictures of Moe and the pickle jar, which not only added nothing to the gag, but actually sucked the humor out of the gag. Suddenly, the thing I had just been laughing at seemed completely unfunny.

Note to the writers: when the gag is over, STOP!

I don't ever remember them doing that in the first eight seasons or so. In fact, in the early seasons, I can't remember a single gag that just fell completely flat.

And it's not as if I'm *that* difficult to please; I thought the "he liked hookers" joke was amusing.

"Scott Munro"

I totally agree with you on this. The joke to start with wasn't that funny, but to throw in the pictures was pretty pointless. I enjoyed the episode for the most part though.

What are you talking about, the pickle jar gag wouldn't have been funny at all without the pictures. A slight comment like that is barely amusing, it's the type of comment you'll hear everyday in a normal conversation, that might yeild a slight grin. But when the picutres are there, that is what brings it out of the ordinary, and makes it funny.

When the 'camera' moved over and showed the pictures, thats when my gf and I bursted out laughing.

Man, Moe's so great.

Matthew Russell wrote in message news:...

This isn't the Family Guy forum.

The odd thing is, when I saw that scene, I told my BF that that was a very Family Guy-esque kind of joke, then later we get the song. Very odd indeed.

Besides what's wrong with FG? =P

i would list what is wrong with it but i really don't have the time just now, as i have work in six hours

i get jokes.

--Lurky McLurkerson

I agree on that. Another thing I find annoying is that the animation is now hovering a few seconds too long over the "freeze frame" items, like the clever signs and other visuals. It's like the directors decided "ok, now that the show has become famous for these quick clever gags, let's make them more obvious so even the dim-witted folk out there can see them!" Hey, you snooze, you lose, people.

so true... i'd only add that one of the great things about classic simpson's episodes is that you don't expect to pick up each joke on the first watching - that's why you can watch them over and over. the new ones, you pick up everything the first time through.

so true... i'd only add that one of the great things about classic simpson's

I wholeheartedly agree with that. I wonder if there is a proper label for that quality? Do you call it meta, hypertextuality, depth of perception, what? I think it should go into any assessment of Simpsons greatness.

But, you know, the thing is, if that thing you mentioned is not organic to the plot I really don't have any desire to see it again to find out those things. Remember the "Barbershop Quartet"? It was totally awesome when i saw it again recently to catch that the follow up album of the quartet was called "Bigger Than Jesus." God, that works on so many levels....

In article , Digital Puer wrote:

Plus ca change. . . some folks out there may remember the short-lived series "Police Squad!" (In Color). One reason that it wasn't picked up by the network as a regular series (even though it was incredibly funny) was that the producers refused to allow the network to throw in a laugh track to warn the audience that something funny had just happened in the background.

----- Richard Schultz [email] Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University ----- If you can keep your expectations tiny You'll go through life without being so whiny. -- Matt Groening

You actually have to pay attention to the TV screen while watching PS to catch most of the jokes. You can't just turn it on and wash the dishes or something while wathcing it. ________________________________________________________________

If love of money is the root of all evil, why do churches want it so badly?

Remove "bination" to reply.

So you would prefer a Simpsons with a bunch of one liners that you can just laugh at and then move on to the next one? The joke didn't make me laugh at all. I rarely laugh at all during sitcoms that are on anymore so i'm not asking this from a defensive point of view. I'm simply curious if you're just into instant gratification and then move it on to the next joke or what?

On 16 Dec 2002 12:56:42 GMT, [email] (Weebil28) wrote:

Actually, I'd prefer a *Simpsons* with real character development and decent story lines, but I'll settle for funny jokes.

I'm into jokes that are funny. If that means that a single joke goes on for fifteen or twenty minutes, getting funnier and funnier, that's fine. But if extending a joke makes it less funny, then it shouldn't be extended.

just

No. You're absolutely right! What we need to see more of is organic jokes that are integrated to the story line. Not a bunch of slapdash seasoning to a flavorless plot. And, you know, after you laugh at them once, you forget about them completely unless, that is, there is a strong edifice to adhere them to our minds.

The joke didn't make me laugh at

asking

That's a good point. Most sitcoms are not really into character development. The bits you'll most often see in them is a witty repartee or a clever insult. Sometimes they properly rely on the situation to make themselves funny, but, you know, infact situation comedy, at its best, is so subversive that few sitcoms manage to pull it off. Best instance of this is Frasier. The lead characters in Frasier often place themselves in situations where they have to pretend that they are gay, and the only way out is to tell the truth, but their vanity or consideration for the feelings of others prevent them from doing so.

I'm simply curious if you're just into

That's a question we all should ask ourselves.

Scott Munro wrote:

Please. I thought that was one of the funnier lines in the ep.

My gf even laughed at that one, and she hates the show.

Oh, you mean like Homer falling down the canyon again and again, and 138th episode spectacular (which tried to take formerly amusing jokes and make them funnier - unsuccessfully) or how about Cape Feare and the infamous rake scene with Bob?

On Mon, 16 Dec 2002 09:47:17 -0500, Greg Bair wrote:

OK, I forgot about the rake scene.

["Scott Munro"; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 14:54:50 GMT]

Ah, rakes ... my old archenemy.

That's right! These jokes were played out before. Why don't the Simpsons writers come up with proper character development that we all enjoy instead of recycling old funny bits. That in my mind confirms that this episode sucked, deep and hard.

"volkan unsal" wrote in message news:...

Why don't you just write your OWN episodes that YOU would perfectly enjoy? The Simpsons isn't written to make you laugh. It's written to get you to watch 10 minutes of advertisements. No matter how "deep and hard" the last episode sucked, the writers know you'll be back for more to get your fix. Even better, turn your tv off altogether.

Now you're being nasty. I did nothing to you. I am merely expressing my opinion.

Now you're being nasty. I did nothing to you. I am merely expressing my opinion. I'm sure others have said much worse things about some episodes, but they are still fans of the show. I am not saying you have to like what i write, but I am just like you. I am a fan who wants Simpsons to try harder.

On Tue, 17 Dec 2002 03:31:42 GMT, "volkan unsal" wrote:

I'm sorry. I didn't mean to come off so mean. I too wish that the writing was better. I think you have a perfectly sensible opinion. I just think it's getting alot harder for the writers to come up with funny ideas. I think if someone thinks a certain episode isn't funny, I dare them to write a funnier one. It probably isn't easy. Especially with 14 years of expectations to live up to.

Perhaps that's because it's been running for 14 years. I don't know of any other TV sitcom that has had so many episodes, and they're bound to run out of jokes. So, why not do the decent thing like Seinfeld and so many other shows did - stop on a high?

The Simpsons is just being driven into the ground with the crap that they're putting out nowadays.

this is true, but the simpsons appears on fox unadulterated matt groening can be found in the Life in Hell cartoon strip series

volkan unsal wrote in message news:YToL9.87$[email]...

instead

I thought it was a pretty funny line actually... I think the pickle jar joke was pretty stupid...and could Sideshow Bob have been shocked anymore? Every time you turn around he was being shocked...that's the only part that got old fast...

Otherwise...I thought the episode was one of the best (so far) this season...it had alot of laughs...I thought the Chief Wiggum/Lou jokes were great...and the Swordfish museum/shop - classic...definitely a better ep. than "helter shelter"...

scott

"Scott Munro" wrote in message news:[email]...

Erm, don't forget the swinging door... unfortunately, it was all too predictable.

Rebecca