According to the Simpsons FAQ on http://www.snpp.com/guides/lisa.html, the answer to the question "How long does it take to produce an episode?" is:
As of this writing, the series has been on for 12 years and two months. If it takes six months to finish each episode, that means that by now, there should have been a total of 24 episodes produced in the entire run of the series.
Talk about "fuzzy math!"
Well, the production staff works on several episodes at any given time. One might be in the early draft stage, another is in Korea, yet another might be in the final looping stage, etc.
I believe Nancy Cartwright's recent book about the show has some observations about that.
--Mark
Talk about fuzzy thinking!
Uh..could it be possible..uh..could you possibly believe..that they work on more than one episode at a time? How about 10 at a time?
Do you still think that Matt G. draws every cel in every episode?
"Eric Perlin" wrote in message news:hn9_7.3058$[email]...
answer to the
it takes six
been a total of
Keep in mind that the simpsons doesn't concentrate on only one episode at a time. That is why different episodes are written and directed etc. by different people.
Eric Perlin wrote:
I think that's what happened to tonight's episode. Different people were working on different episodes, and there was a tornado in the room, and a whole bunch of episodes got mixed up, creating "Brawl in the Family".
That's the only way I can explain the um, stuff, that was on for a painful half hour tonight. Any episode that garners more puzzled looks than laughs is not a good one.
Rebecca
"David B." wrote in message news:[email]...
the answer to the
If it takes six
been a total of
Rebecca wrote:
That seems like an accurate assessment.
This is my third least favorite episode of the entire series, with only "Homer Simpson in: Kidney Trouble" (my second least favorite) and "Alone Again, Natura-Diddly" (my least favorite) ranked lower in my mind.
David Levy
On Mon, 7 Jan 2002, David Levy stated this considered view. Waking from my doze, I hastily scrawled -
Those are two unusual episodes to have as your least favourites, what particularly didn't you like about them?
Paul Hyett wrote:
"Homer Simpson in: Kidney Trouble":
* Homer was in rare form; it's one thing for him to be dim-witted, self-centered and inconsiderate, but this episode portrayed him as a cruel, inhumane monster.
"Alone Again, Natura-Diddly":
* Maude's passing (which, _of course,_ resulted from Homer's asinine behavior) was treated as nothing more than a sick joke. The fact that she was killed by projectile clothing was bad enough, but the writers continued to add insult to injury by piling on the most distasteful material in the program's history. (Homer's requisite insensitivity, the "twenty-one T-shirt gun salute" and countless similarly morbid gags, Homer's blurred dating video, etc.)
* On a similar note, why wasn't there a shred of uninterrupted solemnness? Maude was a relatively minor character, but she was Ned's wife! Couldn't Ned have been portrayed as something other than a victim of Homer's shenanigans, just for one measly episode? (See "'Round Springfield" for an example of the correct way to handle a character's death.)
Here's my response from when the episode first aired:
--------------------
To begin, I must state that I have seen all 240 aired episodes. (most of them several times each) Since its inception, "The Simpsons" has always been one of my favorite television series, and it remains one of the best comedies on the air. Unlike many seemingly unsatisfiable Internet "fans," I am rarely critical of the show. As a matter of fact, I seem to enjoy a much wider range of episodes than the majority of viewers. (I seldom rate an episode any lower than a "C.")
I will now explain why I despised last night's episode: (Please forgive any misquotes that I make. For the first time ever, I actually stopped my VCR, rewound the tape, and recorded over the program.)
In my opinion, the entire thing was unbelievably distasteful. With the notable exception of Frank Grimes, (under incomparable circumstances) every previous death on this series has been handled with a reasonable amount of compassion and dignity. (even Krusty's fake death) This episode was simply mean-spirited about the entire situation.
The disturbing jokes began even before Maude's death. I'm sorry, but I see nothing funny about hoping for a car crash. Several racecar drivers have been killed in such wrecks, and that is nothing to poke fun at.
Homer was at least partially to blame for the fatal accident. Why did he have to be involved? (A better question might be: "Why did I KNOW that he would somehow be involved?")
After Maude's death, the resulting events were beyond disrespectful; they were sick and disgusting. A twenty-one T-shirt gun salute? "Let her R.I.P."? They actually have the nerve to mock the already insulting way that she died? None of them were memorable enough for me to recall, but there were numerous jokes about Maude's death that I considered grossly inappropriate.
Homer's dating video was absurd and unfunny. (How the heck did he even shoot footage from those angles?) I'm no prude, but the blurred shot of Ned in the shower may be a new low for this series.
Aside from the many things that I disliked, there simply wasn't anything that I liked. This is only the second episode that didn't elicit a single laugh from me. (the other being "Homer Simpson in: Kidney Trouble") I'm probably more tolerant of out-of-character behavior than 90% of this group. I've actually DEFENDED Ian Maxtone-Graham in the past, for this very infraction. The difference is that those incidents seemed to be deliberate. The jokes actually resulted from the unusual actions of the characters. In last night's episode, the out-of-character behavior was ridiculously over-the-top, and it served no apparent purpose. It now seems that Ian Maxtone-Graham either has absolutely no grasp of the characters' personalities, or he simply doesn't care.
Having said this, I assure you that I will continue to be a loyal viewer, and I will not allow this episode to alter my perception of the series as a whole. Every show is entitled to an occasional dud, and "The Simpsons" has a better track record than almost every comedy in television history. I also realize that personal taste is highly subjective, and that many of you enjoyed this episode. That's fine with me, and I would never fault a person for disagreeing with me. After all, "Two Bad Neighbors" is one of my favorite episodes, and that seriously goes against the popular consensus of this group.
--------------------
David Levy
Drunk and full of pie, David Levy wrote:
BZZZT. Dead characters appearing in clouds isn't a real "ungoofy" way to treat death, IMO. Lisa's only able to put the incident behind her after her "vision". I agree with your comments about a need for some kind of serious touchstone moment in "Alone Again", but 2F32 was one of the first really poor episodes, IMO.
The Rack wrote:
I never said anything about goofiness. It's possible to supplement a somber topic with good-natured levity. (The scene in question was not disrespectful.)
No one wants to sit through "a very special Simpsons," but that doesn't mean that the writers have to spit on the grave of a long-running character.
What's wrong with that?
It's one of my all-time favorites. :)
David Levy
Drunk and full of pie, David Levy wrote:
If you want a moment of uninterrupted solemness... IMO you won't find it in 2F32. Lisa's sad, but in limbo with her sadness until the cloud scene.
No argument here. A moment of humanity wouldn't have hurt.
If that's a realistic enough way to deal with death... nothing. As for any moral lesson, it's shallow. "Don't worry; if a loved one dies, they'll appear to you in a vision and comfort you."
Overall it was just not funny to me, though there were a couple good gags. But, this is my numero uno "worst ever" (or "numero dos", behind "Lard of the Dance"). Almost every episode is pretty good, and many are fantastic.
The Rack wrote:
In my opinion, Lisa's inability to cope with her sorrow was a genuinely human (and genuinely touching) reaction.
We each deal with death in our own way. As a relatively introverted person, it makes perfect sense that Lisa would look beyond the confines of ordinary channels.
It wasn't intended to be taken literally. To me, it conveyed the message that while mourning is an important step, it's better to cherish the memories of the deceased than to allow their loss to permanently disrupt the existence of those whose lives they touched.
David Levy
Is there any chance that the vindictiveness stemmed from the real reason for writing her out? (Financial demands of the voice of Maude, IIRC.)
Could it have been a "we'll show you" kind of gesture to the voice actors? Mess with us and your character gets the chop *and* we'll spit on your grave.
Not in any way classy or mature, but there you go.
dave
Dave Paisley wrote:
That's the explanation that I've always leaned toward, and this was extremely unfair to the program's fans.
David Levy
Yep, I hadn't thought about this in great detail until I read this thread, but if true, it would be one of the meanest spirited pieces of petty revenge ever.
dave
On Mon, 7 Jan 2002, David Levy stated this considered view. Waking from my doze, I hastily scrawled -
Good point. That did grate with me a bit too.
Who was the writer for this episode, btw?
Paul Hyett wrote:
The main writer was Ian Maxtone-Graham.
David Levy
Somebody claiming to be "Eric Perlin" wrote in news:hn9_7.3058$[email]:
I hope someone got fired for that!
In case you're wondering how they could actually produce some 280 episodes in that time span, a wizard did it.
Uhhm, you can work on episodes simultaneously. They don't wait for an episode to be complete before they start writing another one...that would be stupid.
Kevin
Drunk and full of pie, Eric Perlin wrote:
Principal Skinner makes 25,000 dollars a year... times 40 years old...
HE'S A MILLIONAIRE!
"The Rack" wrote in message news:[email]...
the answer to the
If it takes six
been a total of
He also paints houses in the summer...
HE'S A BILLIONAIRE!!
Drunk and full of pie, Charles Norwood wrote:
He wasn't a principal when he was *1*! They're just not responding to logic, anymore.