I think I have officially given up!

Suspension of disbelief is necessary no matter what the TV show or movie but whether or not the audience is willing to go along with it hinges upon it being entertaining or amusing and the plot itself being engaging. From the very beginning we've had to suspend disbelief; it's unlikely that men and women of science would not be able to tell whether Homer was a human or an ape but it's humourously insulting that they can't. It's unlikely that Homer would survive falling down the gorge but it was a funny moment and a fine episode all around so I'd say for most fans, it doesn't matter.
 
Controversial idea I know: Less Simpsons spotlights after 20 years it's impossable to make something original and funny about a family that's been on for 20 years. Give more episodes to 2nd line charachters like Skinner, Wiggum, Loveloy, Apu, Ned etc.
 
I think it was the commentary for '22 Short Films About Springfield' that the idea was tossed around to make a show titled 'Springfield' for just that purpose.
 
simpsonsfan20 makes a few good points. Marriage episodes have become incredibly stale. Bart seems to be an ignored character, though they shouldn't necessarily "give the spotlight" back to him - Homer has been the prominent character from Season 3 onwards.

Get Groening to direct and write episodes? You do know that he's only ever written one episode by himself (plus the shorts), and three others as part of a team? And he's never directed an episode.

What they really need to do story-wise is make one coherent story throughout the episode, instead of having some crazy antics in the first act with a very tenuous link to a completely different main story. Case in point: Last Exit to Springfield. Although there are a few different plot strands, they are all related to the dental plan theme which starts at the very beginning.
 
Rich Uncle Skeleton said:
Get Groening to direct and write episodes? You do know that he's only ever written one episode by himself (plus the shorts), and three others as part of a team? And he's never directed an episode.
Click to expand...

Yeah, he shouldn't necessarily write episodes, there are many writers much more profusive and successful than him. However, from what I've heard, he doesn't seem to be very involved with the show anymore. He is after all the creative consultant, and had a good bit of input on the show a while back, like trying to cut the crossover in "A star is Burns", for example, and should be more involved.
 
CalculatedChaos said:
I think it was the commentary for '22 Short Films About Springfield' that the idea was tossed around to make a show titled 'Springfield' for just that purpose.
Click to expand...

I haven't got a DVD/VCR player so i haven't heard any commentaries but i had a similar idea myself a while back. Thinking how theres so many great characters in Springfield... and even after seeing the episode in question... i came up with the idea of creating a show called 'Springfield' so that it could feature a random characters adventure each episode, whilst The Simpsons could have Bart as its main character. (I prefer Bart to Homer as a main character... which is a reason why i like seasons 1 and 2 so much) But i don't think they'd ever do something like that because it would be unprofitable... you'd still require the same writers, voice actors etc from The Simpsons which means twice as much effort and money would have to be used by Fox... and i doubt it would generate as much profit... although of course merchandise wise it's the same thing
 
I don't understand why people think the show suddenly sucks.

One of my friends says "[such and such] has gone down-hill like a babystroller full of bricks," which could be used to the discribe the show, but I don't think it's one of those 45-degree-break-your-neck kinda hills, more of a gentle slope. In my opinion, the babystroller is around the giant, smoking hole that was once called "The Principal and the Pauper." That means we've got a few good seasons left of the show if they continue as is. I don't think people need to say the show is over. Unless they pull another "The Principal and Pauper" episode, in which case, I hope the show gets blasted into bits during the explosion that will follow.

Really though, the show is just fine right now. It could use some improvments but what show couldn't?
 
The show may not be as good as it once was...but you shouldn't just give up! A man named Harvey Dent once said "The Night Is Always Darkest Before The Dawn" Then he assured me that the dawn was coming.
 
zizzy said:
I don't understand why people think the show suddenly sucks.

One of my friends says "[such and such] has gone down-hill like a babystroller full of bricks," which could be used to the discribe the show, but I don't think it's one of those 45-degree-break-your-neck kinda hills, more of a gentle slope. In my opinion, the babystroller is around the giant, smoking hole that was once called "The Principal and the Pauper." That means we've got a few good seasons left of the show if they continue as is. I don't think people need to say the show is over. Unless they pull another "The Principal and Pauper" episode, in which case, I hope the show gets blasted into bits during the explosion that will follow.

Really though, the show is just fine right now. It could use some improvments but what show couldn't?
Click to expand...

:D i like this guy someone that agrees with me
 
are the simpsons as good as the olden days?
no
is it because i grew up with the olden days
probably


I still love watching the simpsons so... thats what i think of reviews and critics
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top