Before you "so-call" review last night's episode

Just remember one thing, the Simpsons are a cartoon. You can have anything in an episode. Realism has nothing to do with it. I say this because I already expect a whole bunch of people being obsessive whiners over Kang and Kodos being in a regular episode.

Well, I don't have a problem with Kang and Kodos in this episode because I don't think clip shows are meant to be canonical. However, I don't agree with you and you won't find many who do. To say that just because the show is animated it can break from it's self-imposed reality at anytime is ridiculous. Of course the simpsons realism isn't the same as ours, but they do have their own realism and continuity that one expects they will follow, or at least not break intentionally. Kang and Kodos have only ever appeared on halloween episodes which are clearly non-canonical and the usual rules of the simpsons universe don't apply. The people who believe that clip shows are canonical will obviously have a problem with kang and kodos being in it. The people like me (hoping I'm not the only one) who don't believe clips shows are canonical might be a little disappointed that they used them outside of a halloween show but don't think they necessarily broke any rules.

Kevin

"Jack Of Spades" wrote in message news:[email]...

Deal. In that case, I propose that next week, Santa's Little Helper should learn to talk, be elected President and single-handedly bring about world peace. Meanwhile, Snowball, in a fit of jealousy, unleashes a killer virus that kills everyone in Springfield.

The next week though, everything would be back to normal, and no explanation would be needed,cause it's just a cartoon. :p

Seriously, just cause the Simpsons is animated doesen't mean it still doesen't have to be believeable. Perhaps not as much as most live action shows, but certianly more than say, Disney or Looney Tunes. It's part of the tone the show sets for itself; there are certian unspoken rules about how far you can bend reality and they vary in different works of fiction; the level of beliveablity is up to the writer(s) to establish, and once they are established, stepping out of those lines will severly harm the credibility of a story. Just as Bugs Bunny can get away with stuff we should never see on the Simpsons (talking animals, people being blown up, shot and falling off cliffs and being fine again seconds later, etc) alot of the stuff you see on the Simpsons would never fly on a more serious animated show like, say, Batman: The Animated Series. ("it turns out a baby shot Commisoner Gordon, Robin!")

Anyway, the point is, The Simpsons' success is based partially on the fact that it is animated yet it sticks to many of the same rules of live-action shows, since it's supposed to be a satire of real life (although wether or not it still is is up for debate) if you break these rules, the shows' creditbility goes with them.

So there.

-Wyvern

[email] (Jack Of Spades) wrote in message news:...

I wasn't offended by K&K being in a regular episode. (I didn't even realize this was the first time.) But I would have preferred if it was funny.