"Large marge" and my two cents

AOL problem number 2 - I replied yesterday to a post by NRobin1027. My reply didn�t appear in the NG, at least not on my newsreader and not on google. Strange stuff.

I wrote a pretty long reply and I don�t want to waste it (though it�s highly repetitive) so I�ll post it again with another provider. Sorry if it appears twice now.

NRobin1027 wrote:

Someone? It�s the usual discussion topic in this NG.

Ah, the old "as good as ever" topic. Here we go again. Well, here are my two cents (in a short version, a long version would need at least 10 or 11 pages and nobody wants that ;-))

Sorry if my following post sounds a little too angry but I think certain things have to be said to comment such a "still as fresh as ever" post. I guess I really need a life ;-).

Do you really think it�s still on air because of its "freshness"? It�s still on air because FOX can still make lots of money with it and because (too) many fun-oriented viewers don�t really care about things like quality, content, respect for characters, depth, and subversive satire.

Do you really think there is any freshness in the generic gag rows with plain one-dimensional slapstick characters and standardized plots that appeal to the lowest common denominator? Farts, boobs, vomit, genitals, slapstick - is that what you call a "still as fresh as ever" satire? It was a complex and multi-layered satire, working on various levels of meaning and reference, an open concept (I know, I�m too repetitive) and it has become just another gag show, an almost directionless row of "funny" sketches, caricatures, weird visual gags, and slapstick with a very thin storyline, a simplified and closed concept.

Let me ask you something.

Would you really say an episode like "Large Marge" has the same class and satirical quality like "Itchy & Scratchy & Marge" or "Sideshow Bob Roberts" or "The Day The Violence Died"? Or would your really say a generic episode like "Louse Detective" (which IMO wastes Bob�s potential as cultural pessimist and uses him as empty slapstick sidekick for dumbed-down "superstar" Homer) has the same great classic Bob spirit like "Krusty Gets Busted" or (again) "SSB Roberts"? Would you really say an episode like "Helter Shelter" has the same human feel and the same character depth like "Lisa�s Substitute" or "Mother Simpson" or great "Summer of 4 Ft 2"? Would you say any new episode has the same innovation like "Bart Sells His Soul" or "Homediddly"? Would you...well, it goes on like that.

That�s the problem - "Large Marge" is no real satire to me. It�s a fun cartoon with the main idea (as Jamie already said) "Big boobs => funny shit". There�s some in-your-face satire but it�s no satirical concept, just some pieces in the sketch row. Of course, there is the obvious social commentary about the advantages of good looks. But is that social satire in classic style or just an alibi function? I have written my opinion about "Large Marge" more detailled in another post. It�s no truly bad episode but it�s just so...so...meh. I don�t care about what�s going on and I can�t relate to the story.

Matt Groening said once what he tries to make with the show is a kind of subversive entertainment. He wants to show that the government isn�t always the friend of the common man, he wants to make some fun about certain aspects of society, to provide social commentary, to make points against right-wing beliefs in society and politics etc etc etc. Someone else (Jim Brooks?) said once the show tries to explore the inner being of cartoon characters.

They always had a balance between fun, satire, complex references and character depth and development, they had always a real balance between fresh innovation and classic spirit. Is there anything left in the modern show?

Don�t misunderstand me, it�s still no bad show (but Futurama is better) but it�s IMO lightyears below its classic quality nowadays. Lightyears. It has become a completely different show.

Have you read my latest reviews at http://members.aol.com/Chris84792/bust.htm

Can you say the same things about any recent episode? Well, I can�t.

But that�s just my two cents. People watch the show for very different reasons and many people can�t find the things that made them love the show any longer in new episodes and seasons.

That�s just another problem - to enable us to have a humorous look at ourselves and our own society, the stories must have a base in reality. Satirical exaggeration is no problem (it was always there) but all the modern wacky adventures, the pointless slapstick, and overdone visual weirdness make it difficult to see it as a satirical reflection of our lives.

I don�t know whether you�ll agree with anything I said, but it was worth a try ;-).

Chris

It's still on the air, because even the current Simpsons - which are around one-tenth as funny as the classic episodes - are still as funny as just about anything on TV. The thing is, most other sit-coms aren't funny at all. Most current episodes of the Simpsons still have funny jokes in them.

Other than that, I agree with your post.

Maybe it�s just a problem of my computer (I start to doubt it) but I can still see no AOL posts in ATS when I use another provider than AOL.

That problem really bothers me. Has anyone else the same trouble?

Chris

Chris Pfeiler wrote in message news:...

Yes, AOL posts do not show up in ANY newsgroups with any other providers than AOL. So you can see other AOLers posts, but no one else can (Google can't either).

Then why doesn�t AOL fix it? It�s like that since Saturday. At first I blamed my old computer but it�s indeed a general AOL problem. People post with AOL (e.g. some comments about the new episode) and only other AOLer can see their posts? Someone should tell AOL, especially AOL US.

I use AOL since many years as second provider and I�ve never seen such a weird mistake. When I post with AOL, I post for all people and not for other AOLers only.

Chris

P.S. I know, my system time is wrong. I usually don�t use that program for NGs so the settings aren�t correct.

"Chris Pfeiler" wrote in message news:[email]...

It is my understanding that some people have contacted AOL already. You should too. If they get enough angry customers, maybe they'll get their heads out of their asses and fix it.

I can, but I'm on AOL, too.