5F09 "Trash of the Titans" [Review]

S09E22 Trash of the TitansretroOct 16, 2001, 9:16 AM ET3 years later13 posts by 11 posters
13 posts
Chris Pfeiler

After two very friendly reviews this time a rather unfriendly one about the possibly worst season 9 episode. An episode with lots of potential which is almost completely wasted, 5F09 "Trash of the Titans". The review is a little bit shorter than usual.

There are IMO various different but typical problems of modern episodes which all lead to the same result, namely to the loss of balance (as I always say). Whatever, there�s one typical problem we can especially see in episodes like 5F09. I�m talking about the too frequent use of over-abstraction or the use of over-abstraction in inappropriate situations. I�m also talking about the forced "transformation" of serious issues (which would have been treated in a semi-serious way in older episodes) into a mere farce. And for what reason? To make it as hilarious and funny as possible.

What do I mean.

Well, the episode tries to deal with the garbage problem in a satirical and overly funny way and that�s its main problem and the reason why the episode failed. The garbage issue itself is a serious problem, it�s a down-to-earth problem that should be shown in a somehow reality-based way to be a good satire. A little exaggeration of reality would be no problem but 5F09 goes way too far. It shows the garbage issue more like a funny bizarro cartoon with a crazy musical number and lots of (often too forced) visual gags. There�s again a lot of character distortion and we even have the "Ultimate Jerkass" Homer - rude, angry for no apparent reason, intentionally mean and thus an empty tool of nonsense - shouting, pushing, kicking people. It�s one of the first episodes where you can really hate Homer for what he does and that�s very bad as he�s supposed to be a likeable character.

There would have been a lot of potential but what did the writers? They constructed just another one of the "Homer has wacky new job and fails because of his idiocy" episodes and added U2 as special celebrities (we have no good plot but - hey - we have U2). So Homer stumbles through the episode, a cheap tool of slapstick, first humiliated by garbage men, then rapidly turning into a character full of mindless rage and later an extremly overdone idiot who ruins the entire town. Is that really funny?

I�m aware of the fact that the episode tries to be a parable about how people pollute the environment and then simply turn away and leave the place so that they�re no longer responsible. They go away or close their eyes and don�t want to see the problem they caused. In principle a good concept with real potential but I think the episode ruined most of that good potential with a too strong abstraction of the real problem, an over-abstraction that transformed the garbage issue into a "hilarious" fun show with extremly thin implications of real satire. It would have been "crazy" enough if the people would have voted for Homer as sanitary commisioner (another satirical element about the manipulation of masses with a stupid slogan) but the episode didn�t stop here, didn�t stop at the right time. I think there�s always a suitable amount of comedy and slapstick and that amount depends on the topic. There�s a line that shouldn�t be crossed if the topic is serious but 5F09 went extremly over the line.

Homer snips with his fingers and becomes the garbage man, he sings in a weird musical where even Elmo is among the crowd, he acts so crazy and stupid that it�s simply annoying and finally they move the entire town to avoid the trouble. All that goes IMO way too far and the down-to-earth garbage problem is transformed into a wacky farce without much meaning. A symptomatic scene is maybe the one where Homer throws garbage on Flanders through a middle window over the Simpsons front door. That special window appears from time to time in modern episodes if the writers need it for a joke but it�s usually not there and in 5F09 its gone in one of the very next scenes. I�d say that�s the mentality of many of the modern writers. There�s no window? Who cares. We need one for the joke. Homer acts out-of-character? Who cares. We need him that way for the joke etc etc.

At the end they try to go back to a little seriousness and darker humour when they show the crying Indian but that dark/symbolic scene seems too tagged on after all the nonsense and is also ruined by the "hilarious" freak-out of the Indian. The final Monty Burns scene with U2 is another addition that spoils even the ending, I guess I don�t have to explain the meaning of the British term "wankers". Bad stuff for a show like The Simpsons.

Some 43 seconds are cut in syndication, including Homer shaking Ray Peterson�s parrot. I�d say missing scenes aren�t of much importance in an empty episode like that, it�s just missing slapstick.

There are of course some better and slightly funny scenes like the one where Lisa speaks with her brain and decides to hear classic music instead of Homer�s rambling but on the whole most of the humour concentrates on Homer slapstick and Homer idiocy and that�s a bad recipe for an episode. The garbage parable and the subtle moral is IMO mostly ruined by a too strong over-abstraction of reality and of the serious problem and also by an awful Homer characterization (that�s almost similar to "Two Springfields" where we have nearly the same problems, over-abstraction of the wall parable and terrible character distortion). Crazyness, visual gags and a loss of contact with reality and a too far-fetched ending and conclusion are the main problems of 5F09. IMO Grade D.

Chris

maus743Chris Pfeiler

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

weird

that

That's Oscar the Grouch, and you know it. It means lamb. Lamb of God!

ws

Per Esben SvelstadChris Pfeiler

Every time I see your name I think: "Oh, he's gona ruin a perfectly good episode again!" And you do. I guess I should thank you for awaking me. Thank you, Chris.

Chris PfeilerPer Esben Svelstad

You�re welcome ;-)

Seriously: I never meant to ruin episodes for anybody. I�m just saying my personal opinion which nobody has to share. After all, I gave two times grade A+ in my last two reviews.

Chris

Internet KingChris Pfeiler

Chris Pfeiler wrote:

Everytime I see his name, I think of that god awful show "The Secret World of Desmon Pfeifer". Sincerely, Little Girl

AcK!RevolverNo9

On 19 Oct 2001 04:03:05 GMT, [email] (RevolverNo9) wrote:

Not if you're the one being shot by the president's men...

TTYL

... A "sucking chest wound" is nature's way of telling you to slow down. [email] remove "spa" to email
KatijaikatAcK!

You get three secret murders a term.

AcK!Katijaikat

On 28 Oct 2001 02:40:46 GMT, [email] (Katijaikat) wrote:

Only three? That's so limiting...

TTYL

... What color is a chameleon on a mirror? [email] remove "spa" to email
GarryAcK!

"AcK!" wrote:

Brown

RichChris Pfeiler

Couldnt put it better myself! I havent written to this group before, but after having the misfortune of seeing some of the recent Simpsons episodes on Sky One, I felt compelled to find out what other people are saying about this tripe that passes for entertainment!

I believe the episode in question was one in which Lisa enrols at a tap-dancing class, and the professor gives her some self-tapping shoes. My God, this utter crap has been rehashed so many times in the lifetime of the series that I simply do not want to watch more of the recent stuff... Over-dramatics, Homer becoming even more stupid, crap gags with even worse timing... I actually switched off that episode at the hilariously predictable 'tapping shoes go out of control' part.

Also, Homers lack of intelligence is very amusing, but making him stupider and crazier does not result in many laughs for the 10 years and over age group, it just serves to alienate the more mature audience.

No other show has provided me with more amusement over the years than The Simpsons and I feel sad that the show has been left to dredge the bottom of the barrel for comedy in the name of profit.

Rich

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

the

is

little

which

say).

like

use of

forced

reason? To

and

episode

down-to-earth

way

a

again

Homer -

tool

episodes

he�s

because

good

cheap

into a

ruins

people

that

want

potential

strong

of

voted

here,

that

the

weird

that

problem is

is

window

time in

there

need

way

when

on

the

spoils

British

Peterson�s

episode

where

Homer�s

slapstick

parable

of

characterization

a

Grade

The RackChris Pfeiler

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

and

episode

down-to-earth

way

a

again

Homer -

tool

episodes

he�s

I don't have a problem with excessive exaggeration, if the frame of reference isn't lost. A musical number, while creative, was an unlikely event... and too tangential a reference to movie musicals to be called a parody. It was a decent song parody of "The Candyman Can", but IMO unremarkable.

Homer was pretty obnoxious, but I think your words "FOR NO APPARENT REASON" are key. If there's a reason for it, it would be fine. Homer having to take out the trash "stupid, rotten stinking trash... hate world... revenge soon... take out on everyone" is probably the point where Homer gets his motivation. IMO it's not enough to sustain his level of "jerkiness", however.

I agree with Homer that taking out the trash is an annoyance sometimes, and I think the garbage-piling on the front yard was a good start to the satire. I think the problems come from the fact that Homer will yet again fail because he's stupid. The issue would be more satirical had they made the plot about the unresolved garbage problem, not Homer's botching of his job. Yes, Homer's stupid; but the plot becomes another "let's explore Homer's intelligence" instead of "let's satirize the problem of waste disposal".

because

Eerie :). I hadn't even read this part of your post before I wrote the above paragraph. Of course, I agree.

For the record, I don't have a problem with Homer's idiocy. I think Homer should be characterized as an idiot. But, the plot gets way too character-specific. It becomes a plot about Homer's inevitable failure, rather than about waste management.

Yep.

humiliated by

and later an

Again, I don't have a problem with Homer's stupidity. I love Homer's stupidity. He becomes an unsympathetic character in some of his reactions, though, and thus we can't relate to him. I can relate to not wanting to take the garbage out. I can relate to wanting to let it pile up, sometimes... (the satirical exaggeration of the huge garbage pile in the yard was good; of course, none of us would let it go that far). The issues and starting points for satire were well done--I REALLY enjoyed the satire in "Costingtons" right at the beginning, with all the money-grubbing retail industry people wanting to create a new holiday.

But, as you (and I) said, in the end 5F09 is too character-specific. The garbage problem isn't solved, because Homer's an idiot. It would have been nice as "the garbage problem isn't solved, because we just don't have any place to put it. Why is there so much garbage, anyway?" At any rate, we know Homer's an idiot. 5F09 just reinforces the fact. I hope we continue seeing Homer as an idiot, however, in every new episode--because if he weren't, he'd be wrong. The plots should go new places instead of re-iterating aspects of Homer's character, however (IMO).

people

that

want

potential

strong

of

The ideas and issues raised in the first several scenes were a good starting point. It became a plot about Homer's character, instead of a plot that focused on those starting points.

here,

That may be another way of saying that it began well, but didn't finish well.

amount

topic is serious

That's a very subjective statement, though I agree with it.

weird

I thought it was Oscar the Grouch...(?)

move the entire

down-to-earth

A creative solution to the plot was moving the town, and it may even have worked had the episode been about the issue it started with. The meaning of the ending instead became "we're moving the town because of Homer's foul up".

Flanders

appears

it�s usually

that�s the

need

way

Well, that's a different issue. I think it goes more into the idea that the writers don't care (I don't necessarily agree). I like the fact that the show can change small details and still have a frame of reference to reality (or pop-culture). The episode's problems didn't come from a lack of caring, IMO. It just came from the plot focusing on Homer's character. How many times has his idiocy been reinforced on the show? It's like we've been told the same thing over and over again.

Again, I love Homer's stupidity. But, plots like this are akin to telling the viewers "Homer's stupid, you know" every week. After they tell you that 100 times, you just have to stand up and say "We KNOW that already!" Explore different aspects of Homer's character, or social issues, or other characters, or something. Many plots (as well as many smaller jokes throughout all episodes) have established Homer's stupidity. It doesn't need to be established any more. All that being said--I love seeing the jokes in episodes that explore Homer's stupidity, if they're new, creative and fresh.

when

on

the

That is a reference to an 1970's Ad Council commercial about littering. The parody wasn't all that creative IMO. It was a reference to something some viewers would recognize, and it was like--that's enough for a laugh. There wasn't much of a creative spin put on the reference, or anything more than 1) the reference to the commercial 2) the "freak out." "I told you not to turn around". IMO that's why it wasn't funny. It's just a recognition gag. "Ha ha. I remember that from TV", and then the slapstick "freak-out".

British

A repetition joke. David Letterman is famous for that type of humor. He'll talk about something early in the show, and if one of his jokes bombs, he'll go back to the earlier quip--usually getting a big laugh.

Peterson�s

episode

I thought that scene was funny, if only for Homer's interpretation of the slang phrase "rattle some cages". Of course, he takes it literally...

where

Homer�s

slapstick

Another way of saying the plot focuses on Homer's stupidity. Again, Homer's stupidity is O.K., but we've explored it so many times that plots like this are useless.

strong over-

Homer

have nearly the

I agree. I think "Tale of Two Springfields" has much the same feel as "Trash of the Titans". The plot focuses more on Homer's failure (and, if nothing else, stubborn refusal to believe that his stupidity is what caused the problem) instead of the issues raised. The "Homer's stupidity"-centric plots that I like are the ones in which he confronts his problem, and attempts to overcome it. "HOMR" is a good (recent) example of that.

far-fetched ending

Good analysis. I think episodes like 5F09 come up when conflicts go unresolved. What is the *real* conflict in the episode? Homer's brain power vs. waste management. We can't have the conflict resolved, because that would require Homer to become intelligent. We don't want that (at least, I don't). The writers created an unresolvable conflict, one that if resolved would have compromised Homer's character.

Ironically, it would have been more satirical had the waste management problem NOT been solved. If the ep would have ended with piles of trash everywhere, the conflict would have been resolved. "Homer's brain power (zero), Waste Managmenet problems (one)". It STILL would have been a bad episode (as I discussed before), because the plot focused on Homer's stupidity for the umpteenth time.

In contrast, the conflict in HOMR was intelligence vs. social acceptance. Homer goes one way and Lisa goes the other in the end, but they still love each other as family members. Conflict resolved.

"Oh my gosh! There's a SIX--no, TEN-foot cucaracha in my bedroom!! He hit me with a log and... and screamed 'Pardon Spiro Agnew'!" - P. Opus Chadderack