Yes, very much the same for me, but allow me to wander off on a tangent for the moment. What's the score? 9/10. What? Read on for my reasoning.
---
I feel that the reason why people accuse Homer of acting as a jerkass in Mirkin's season 5 is because, at core, he's an absolute jerk. They don't level the accusation because of some retrospective virus given to them by watching Scully episodes, they don't start blabbering on about some crazy ass theory of post-Scully trauma, they identify the fact that in episodes such as Boy Scoutz 'n the Hood, Homer's an asshole. He throws Rodd's walkman into the sea, he washes his socks carelessly with limited supplies of water and eats almost all of their food.
Is that such a problem though? Yes, it can be. At core, humans are selfish, manipulative, self-centered assholes who care mainly, nay, almost entirely for themselves. Not all humans, but most anyway. Am I a psychologist? Hell no, but do you dare disagree with such an idea? Think about it? Yes, there are some good samaratins amongst us all who steal from the rich and give to the poor, but perhaps only to rid themselves of guilt. A matter of personal satisfaction. Are Simpsons characters, a hilariously exaggerated characterture of real people exempt from such properties? Of course not. They're meant to be real people, and damnit, real people act like jerks! Swartzwelder himself has identified the fact that Homer is, at the core of it all, a dog. His emotion can change on the flip of a coin, he's fiercely loyal and can't be looked at like a regular human. As such, we have a character that still embodies all the asshole like qualities of a regular human, with typical Homer logic (believing that running an administrative sector could be solved by amphibious trucks, for example), and Homer's dog like personality. Why is it such a surprise to people that in a lot of cases, he'll come across as an asshole? I mean, he's a real person. In fact, because Homer is at core an asshole, perhaps it's a better idea to label him as a buffoon. He doesn't know what he's doing wrong (Homer's logic), he just does it. He acts on impulses and goes from there. He's an idiot, therefore a buffoon.
Granted, there are little exceptions to that general idea. Homer's a father, and being the dog that he is, he's fiercely loyal to his family and to his kids. When the story calls for it, by all means, throw the above idea out the window and let him act like he does in say, Lisa's Substitute. Then again, one can still have a caring, heartfelt Homer at the core while he acts like an exaggerated buffoon, much like he does in episodes such as Homer's Enemy (wanting to be Grimey's friend).
If a character can go on one side of the line, isn't it logical that the character might venture over to the other side of the line and take on a form that's, "less pleasing to the eye." I mean, if characters didn't deviate from standard formulas, we'd be left with one of the most dreadfully banal TV shows of all time. It'd be like the ending to King of the Hill, week after week after week. You know the best possible ending is going to come, and bam it hits you with some happy-go-lucky guitar riff accompanying it. The Simpsons shouldn't suffer the same fate. It should dare to be different! It most definately should not stick to the middle of that line and never dare to cross over to surprise and to entertain us. Of course, I'm not suggesting that every week we go from one extreme to the other. The focus should be on that line, but every so often the writers should throw a curve ball to interest us. They did it with Homer's Enemy, they did it with Trilogy of Error and by God they did it with Trash of the Titans.
The problem, my friends, stems from the fact that at times, people can get carried away with these things. One could argue that Mr. Jean, or whoever is in charge these days, has got a bit carried away with marriage crisis episodes. One could also argue that Mike Scully got a bit carried away with having Homer act like a jerk. I think it was DotheBartman who mentioned that while episodes should be judged on their own, that's a bit hard to do. Even if that's true, one should at least make every humanly possible attempt to look at Trash of the Titans as one of the first curveballs of this nature, before the entire game was taken up by these curveballs. One should acknowledge that it was fresh, or at least quite fresh at the time, not becoming hackneyed to the point of mass suicide by this point.
Of course, anyone can get away with saying "well, i don't like Homer being mean, therefore jerkass homer is a jerk and i dont like him." To those people, I say stop kidding yourselves!
Moving on!
---
Trash of the Titans? Now that my feelings are known, we can look at the episode and say with certainty that while Homer may be acting mean, it's not all that strange that he does, and it's not much of a crime to have writers acting in a creative manner to acheive humour. Homer's mean, but by golly he was absolutely screwed over by City Hall. The garbage men didn't collect his garbage, Pattison patronised him when Homer went to speak with him and his wife DID rob him of the dignity that he wanted to hold on to in this fight. The man was angry, and for good reason.
With that anger, I find it quite it quite admirable that instead of just letting Homer do a whole bunch of wacky shit, that the writers actually stick him in office. They show us that Homer, "the last angry man", has acheived what he wanted. That's pride man! Homer's sticking up for the little guy, and it's completely likable to have Homer in such a situation. We get a happy song and dance roultine, an intrinsicly linked host of guest stars and we see the real consequences of Homer's buffoonary. Homer's not fit for office, he's not fit for running a nuclear power plant either. In the same way that Homer is shown to fail constantly at running a power plant, he always fails miserably at running the sanitation department. How do they show us, they show us with EX-AG-GER-ATION. Hear that people? Exaggeration is a funny comedic technique, used all the time and to good effect. For the umpteenth time, when it's overused (like having Homer act as a jerk, or having their marriage breaking down at the drop of a hat) it's totally uncool, but when it's used rarely and with good comedic effect, it's funny! What do I mean by comedic effect? Anyone who says that the idea of a town getting up and moving isn't funny is a liar, and a bad one at that. It's not a nice idea if you're incredibly uptight about The Simpsons sticking to a rigid formula the whole way through, but it's a neat idea within the rubberband reality of OFF. That's the way it works, that's the reason why Homer was in outer space, that's the reason why scraping someone's throat creates a high pitched voice.
I'd also like to add that the initial ideas are hilarious in every way. The tidy, exaggerated but awfully true satire of the greeting card industry is limited to a few minutes and there it stops. It gives us a bunch of jokes and then moves on. The garbage observational humour? Outstanding. I guess you have to be able to identify with it to find it funny though, who knows? The garbage heap? Dunno about you, but our family entertains this idea constantly. Trust Homer, in his dog like logic to actually carry it out.
Did Homer go too far? Not really. Did he cut his brakes? Yeah, but once more, I really don't think Homer did it with the intent to kill. He seemed to be expecting Pattison to show up, what with that well prepared one liner. Did he shake the cage? Yeah, but he was blinded by rage, in the office of a man who he clearly doesn't like and he was trying to make a point. Rattling a bird cage isn't that funny, but the fact that he comes back to it again and again is. Much like stepping on a rake, with repetition comes humour.
All in all, a hilarious, extravagant and all around enjoyable romp for those like me, who enjoy the show with flexible definitions of what's good. 9/10. Man, that went for waaaay too long.