Rate & Review: "Lisa the Boy Scout" (UABF21)

How would you rate this episode?


  • Total voters
    73
@Smear-Gel I remembered it from a prior episode, but thought the clip they used may have been newly animated.
I would have had a much bigger laugh from it if I remembered that was real, because its so goofy in a bad way I just assumed they had to have made that up.
 
Was intrigued by the discussion around this episode and ended up watching it. I really wish this was funnier, the majority of the clips had good premises (future Bart giving the old Simpsons all their "future" predictions, Martin being an undercover cop in his 30's). But then some were just lame/confusing (Lisa only speaking French, Seymour cheating on his mother). It kind of felt like I was watching an episode made up entirely of those "fourth act"/filler scenes often put in before the end credits for the last few years. Worst part of the episode was everything with the two hackers falling in love. You didn't need any of that, just keep the focus on the clips.

Appreciate the show doing a radical format bending episode without advertising it. I didn't laugh much, but I was invested the entire time watching it, so not bad. 3/5.
 
pretty entertaining enough than what i'd usually get from these new seasons, highly doubt i'll see anything as interesting this season but we'll see, that montage of some of the notorious scenes made me laugh, though homer's subplot from dial n for nerder was genuinely funny fight me, 3/5 for the poll and overall 5/10 i guess.
 
This was the long-awaited answer to 22 Short Films? That episode managed to do funny sketches that illuminated various character relationships without breaking continuity (Smithers' bee allergy notwithstanding)...so what was this? Seemed no more "out there" than any "real" episode at this point....and of course they underscored this by throwing in a few wacky clips. WHO FUCKING CARES? Any attempt by Selman to critique the show's proclivity for sucking is gonna fall flat because, I don't know how to break this to you all, but Matt Selman has been around since Season 9. He's as long in the tooth as Jean, and his jokes suck even more, cuz he's a pretentious foodie. Also he still hasn't apologized to the people of East St Louis.

0/5
 
Dangit I wanted to see the Boy Scouts plot :(

... but considering the sub plot that would have been tied to it we surely got something better. Unlike previous episode this one took a lot of risks and it paid off. The jokes came at you at a machineguns pace with most of them landing. I liked the format but it doesn't quite live up to 22 Short Films About Springfield (and didn't give us the next Steamed Hams meme). Its definitely more of a modern Simpson take where they go more meta and add some rather unnecesary scenes that didn't make the episode better, with the worst offender being the hackers and them falling in love which took too long.

As for all the segments they were mostly hit with a few misses. I found myself enjoying the short ones more with the SLH one ending up being one of my favorites. I liked seeing Carl turning out to having made up Lenny and a bunch of other guys. Seeing Willie and the Sea Captain interact (well if you call that interacting) had a funny dynamic to it. Bart traveling back to the future was pretty fun but it feels like it could have been more, it surprised me that they didn't use the scene from Bart to the Future with Lisa going like ''I still can't believe we even predicted Trump to win to this day'' if they were gonna make a Trump joke anyway.

Martin being an undercover agent was definitly something, good watch but a bit too long. Lisa learning French was also funny, didn't care for the football one. Frinks segment was meh, Homer apologising to Finland was like... wut. Spongebob made the best Finland joke by just having Patrick randomly yell ''FINLAND!'' as an answer. Skinner and Agnes make for a great duo and their segment didn't dissapoint, its a pretty straightforward single joke but the rather surprising ending paid off. Homer using Ned's mustache as a goatee was pretty funny. CBG's segment wasn't that funny to me until he ended up rating Heaven a 2/5. The origin of that mustache guy is also one of my favorites. Then we get some ''you are not my actual parent'' segments which were decent, its kinda sad how Millhouses parents were actually cheering though. Hans Moleman topped it off with what should be seen as his canon origin story, it could also explain his immortality.

Overall a fun episode that is worth rewatching from time to time. Its always good to see them try something different rather than doing some generic thin story that they probably already done before. I guess they were going for it with the Boy Scouts gag which they kinda did already, although in a military camp. I do think that this episodes biggest flaw is the pacing, some segments are just too long while others could benefit for being a little bit longer. And some other fluff like the hackers took too much unnecesary time. For some reason they also randomly showed some old clips for a time with little to no substance to it. This is the only thing that actually made me close to vote this a 5/5, but I could see myself reconsidering. As for now it gets a:

4/5
 
Currently watching this video regarding the recent episode right now, thought I would share it here:
As an addendum to this video, I'd like to direct you all to a wonderful post written by our very own @Brad Lascelle on the ResetEra forums.


Some brief thoughts on the subject:

When Jean was running 18+ episodes every season, blanket criticisms and dismissals of modern Simpsons was fairly justifiable. The show had been resting on its laurels and meandering for the better part of 17 years, endlessly churning out new episodes that did little more than reconfigure the same basic plot templates and tropes. Casual and hardcore fans alike had good reason to categorically dismiss what was often a banal if not incompetent show, even if that meant overlooking the occasional standout. However, since Selman has taken on more of the showrunning duties from season 31 onwards (supported by co-runners this production cycle henceforth), those prevailing criticisms have become less tenable.

Anti-Simpsons sentiment is no longer consensus; it has become dogma.

Many ‘fans’ are completely dead-set against giving the show a chance and are unwilling to modify or update their expectations and perceptions of what the show can be and what it can do. We’ve still got people who vocally ascribe classic-era standards and criteria to episodes that are now 25 years divorced from that point in time for chrissake. It’s completely insane. Is The Simpsons as funny as it was in the 1990s? Is it as relevant? Is it as good? No, of course not! It never will be again. Period. That doesn’t preclude the show from still having some value. It doesn’t mean the show can’t be a different kind of funny, good and relevant.

The myopic and obstinate negativity in this fanbase that has persisted since the turn of the decade simply does not reflect the current quality of the show on its own terms. It is their failure to apprehend the changes it has undergone, some of which have unequivocally been for the better. They have, essentially, fallen behind with their increasingly antiquated viewpoints. One of the most exciting things right now is that we really don’t know what we’re going to get from one week to the next. After so many years of interminable drudgery, how freaking cool is it to be able to say that?
 
Last edited:
It's pretty funny how there are still people complaining that "modern simpsons" isn't funny at all.

Like, come on man, one of the major failings of the HD Jean era was that they sacrificed plot for comedy, which is a mistake mainly because a lot of the jokes weren't even funny.

Selman somehow recognized this and it is one of the main complaints regarding his episodes. He tends to lurch the show more into the drama category with hints of humor and in my opinion that's the best thing he could have done.

The Simpsons is a show that has run for 33 seasons and you know... It gets to the point where fatigue sets in with the staff and where the status quo of the show starts to take its toll on them, it gets to the point where the show MUST change to a different version of itself, it comes at a time where the show must experiment and try new dynamics and yet there are still people who refuse to let the show change... But maybe it's for the best they can do, the show cannot be in the shadow of its former self
 
Not to say that everyone does that, but I think quite a number of people tend to forget that any show or franchise is bound to change overtime, especially when they run for so long, for several reasons : from keeping viewers on their toes to avoiding routine fatigue, from trying something they didn't allow themselves to do before to appeal modern audience. Sometimes it works, and sometimes it doesn't. Compare season 5 of South Park with their most recent season. And yet, it's still one of the most beloved animated series currently going on.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that changing automatically makes something good again. The Simpsons, as of now, is still at a rather fragile state, quality-wise. But here's the thing : we gotta accept that it's different now, to try and become exciting again. If one doesn't (again, I get it), then they still can go back to seasons 1 to 8/9/10/12/15 (whenever you believe the show stopped being good), they wont fade away just because they were followed by dull and mediocre seasons.
 
I agree about the recent discussion above about Selman and what he's doing (including trying new things and freshen up the show, such as with this episode, 'Lisa The Boy Scout'), the current state of the show & those doggone negative bitter haters that cannot try accept the show as it is at the moment, over 20 years after the classic era wrapped up. The show will never go back to as it were so if one is still watching yet is still skeptical and cynical, I wish those would be a little more open minded for the good stuff.

Also, I did watch the video above ('The Simpsons Think You're Stupid') and it was great. Always lovely to see folks on YouTube taking their time to analyse modern Simpsons and highlighting Season 33 & what Selman has been doing and trying to inspire people to give the new episodes a shot: 'A Serious Flanders' & 'Pixelated And Afraid' are definitely good format bending examples

Like, come on man, one of the major failings of the HD Jean era was that they sacrificed plot for comedy, which is a mistake mainly because a lot of the jokes weren't even funny.

Selman somehow recognized this and it is one of the main complaints regarding his episodes. He tends to lurch the show more into the drama category with hints of humor and in my opinion that's the best thing he could have done.

I've always liked how Selman pulls the series into more of a dramedy territory, with less humor and more story & drama (though the humor there is often hit better than in most concurrent Jean episodes) which is deftinitely the way to go rather than do a comedy with little to no story or plot in it (which really is the way Jean tends to go about it a lot of the time).

Maybe this is an unpopular opinion, but had an episode like 'Pixelated And Afraid' had a lot more humor interjected into it, I don't think it would've been as good & certainly not as great. Making such a character-based, dramatic story more overtly funny and humoristic would've pushed it into more of a farcical territory and it would've conflicted with the emotional side and the drama so yeah, I'm glad that something such as the wolverine scene was taken as seriously as it did (I was afraid they'd make it some silly joke with it, but nope, they played it really straight & dangerously. Unusual for this show, but it felt like an exciting and fresh approach).
 
Last edited:
(I was afraid they'd make it some silly joke with it, but nope, they played it really straight & dangerously. Unusual for this show, but it felt like an exciting and fresh approach).
Off topic, but do you know what I love about that scene? It brilliantly subverts your expectations. When Marge threw the club to Homer, I was prepared for an obligatory 'Homer pain' gag where he misses it and it hits his head instead. When Homer is bashing the wolverine with the club? I was waiting for a gag of Homer smashing the wrong thing. It did neither of those very obvious things and it's so much better for it.
 
@B-Boy, Yeah, I completely understand that the subversion of expectations would be your favorite part and I agree, I also felt the subversion was great. Actually, I think I got the same feeling as you when I saw it, as like I said in my post above, was prepared for some jokes inserted into the scene, but then they had none of that and just had Homer beating the animal to a pulp.

Also, there's the fact that Selman had the restraint to not show the bloody results of Homer killing the wolverine, which I think most other modern adult animation would have (I often see an obsession in adult animation to show a lot of graphic violence & gore & clearly displaying the bloody results, with no real punchline if it's a comedy), but here all Selman showed was a view of Homer doing it (just off screen), a little blood on the club & absolutely no shot of the beaten animal's corpse (to shock the viewer). That restraint stood out.

It was adult animation done right, knowing how to set up a dark and serious scene, subvert expectations & knowing what to show and what not to (letting the viewer make things up in their heads instead of pushing a lot of gore), letting it just be a dramatic scene with no humor forced into it (shock or otherwise). It was just right. Probably another strength of Selman's showrunning.
 
Last edited:
Not everybody critical of the HD era expect it to be on the same level as the classic. Even with the pre-HD Jean seasons I'm just expecting the show to entertain me in some way, shape or form. Of course I still hope for it to maintain a modicum of respect for the earlier years, but that doesn't mean I can't find it enjoyable in its own way.

That's the problem I've had with pretty much all of the HD years. Even without comparison to the classic era, I just don't find it all that entertaining in general. And eventually I got so burned out I decided I don't care what happens in the show anymore. Whether an episode gets poorly received or praised to the skies doesn't matter, since I don't trust it to give me the basic level of entertainment I expect.

I'm starting to reach that point with Family Guy too. If the recent season doesn't get better soon I'm gonna have to give up on that show too. It's about finding something I can sit down and watch without worrying that this episode is gonna suck again. As long as that trust isn't naturally there, I don't see myself returning back to it. I gave it a far bigger chance than any other show actually, my huge attachment to The Simpsons from my childhood made it very hard to stop watching.
 
Last edited:
Retroactive recognition is definitely a thing. Actually, speaking of, John Carpenter's The Thing was utterly trashed at first but is now looked upon rightly so as a masterpiece of suspense, nightmarishly fantastic special effects and paranoia. On the other hand, comparing The Thing to Selman-Simpsons... nope. I mean, I never hated the Scully Era. Nor did I have any kind of burning hatred for the Star Wars Prequels.

And... I dunno. The gimmicks are kinda different I guess but I've gotten used to them and they've worn thin pretty fast on my end. Or maybe they're just half-realized or it's just kinda... shallow. That word's been on my mind a lot the past few days.

Like okay, this episode isn't a perfect example of what I'm thinking about because it was alright, if disappointing (my sense of humour is fully into "chaotic stupid" and I actually expected more this time?) but I can give it some praise. Anyway, does anyone know about "Unfriended"? I think it got noticed at the time for being a horror movie done entirely in one shot and on skype. But under that it was a generic "a bunch of teens did a bad thing and now someone's killing them for it" movie.

It's kinda how I feel about a lot of these "Never done before wow!" types of episodes. Like yeah, some like this are uniquely weird but under that, it's still mostly just tepid Simpsons writing where I'm not going to remember a ton in a few months time... meanwhile even if Halloween of Horror wasn't special in any way it'd still be a standout episode, and not just by modern standards either. It's just a damn good episode and a lot of it still sticks in my head like a very enthusiastic leech.
 
Last edited:
I wonder when we'll see the actual episode. Strange that the hack not only effected live broadcast, but even on hulu they managed to hack it. Hmm


Humour - 0.50/1.00
A couple of light chuckles, such as comic book guy's tombstone. Genuine laughter out of the dog sketch. I was expecting them to lay in absurdity, but just the briefness and stupidity of it I fount that moment to be pretty funny. I can't think of any cringe humour. Some jokes fell flat, but at least they didn't drag them on.

Characters - .75/1.00
Interesting use of characters. Martin's double life, with drinking and having a wife, stand out, with how odd it was. And the writers acknowledging what some fans may of theorized with Ralph and the police officer who kind of looks like ralph (Eddie, right? I know Lou, never realized the other had a name). Possibly my favorite bit was the Frink one, great payoff.

Flow - 1.00/1.00
For a mismash jumble of odd segments, it all flowed pretty well. They hung on to the hacker's blossoming romance a bit too long, and that whole side story of their romance could of been done without. But it wasn't heavily obnoxious.

All things considered - 1.00/1.00
Nothing really terrible, consistent, one bit of laughter, a few light chuckles. For modern Simpsons, this episode worked really well.


Overall - 3.25/4.00
I feel this is too high of a score. But considering how the past 500 or so episodes have been, this was entertaining throughout. Nothing too cringe-inducing, and genuinely funny at times.
 
I'm starting to reach that point with Family Guy too. If the recent season doesn't get better soon I'm gonna have to give up on that show too. It's about finding something I can sit down and watch without worrying that this episode is gonna suck again. As long as that trust isn't naturally there, I don't see myself returning back to it. I gave it a far bigger chance than any other show actually, my huge attachment to The Simpsons from my childhood made it very hard to stop watching.
I'm always a little surprised when people hold out longer on Family Guy than The Simpsons. Opnions, of course, but I feel FG is at the point where even the event episodes that try to be interesting suck. Once the Lost in Cutaway Land episode turned out to be garbage that was the final nail in the coffin for me. Ironically The Simpsons is probably the one show on AD Im happy to watch each week, Family Guy and Bob's Burgers have been coasting for so long imo and I pretty consistently enjoy both less than a Simpsons episode, honestly even the Jean run ones. With Bless the Harts done I'd honestly say Simpsons is the only show Im not just watching out of habit on Sundays. Stopping there before this comment gets too off topic
 
I think for quite a time Family Guy had a very "so bad it's good" quality. For me at least, I've found them to be much more consistently entertaining to watch. Even if it's seen as a Simpsons knockoff (and not without merit) under the surface it's a different beast to The Simpsons. Sometimes a bad Family Guy episode can be funny for how bad it is, Simpsons almost never gets that after the Scully Era. It's a very low-investment show you can easily flick to and not worry that much about storytelling. Maybe like some mid-point between The Simpsons and Beavis & Butthead.

... Actually, Seth McFarlane wouldn't have been too bad a guest writer for something like this given FG's affinity for nonsense. Or Scully. Especially if they had a line early on where someone asks out loud who would want to destroy The Simpsons or could destroy it or something and then "Written by Seth McFarlane" appeared in the credits below... that would have been amazing!
 
I want to start by saying, WTF did I saw? We started with another predictable story with Lisa wanting to have equal rights but then suddenly, we see hackers and we have all the characters in bizzare situations. Some were clever like the smart kid who is really a grown up and cop to others that fell flat like Homer having Ned's mustache as a beard. I liked it when (its' either Patty or Selma) one of Marges' sisters threw the glass and hit Homer. This was a strange episode but at least it saved us from Lisa the boy scout being an actual episode. This comes second to 22 short films.
 
.

Anti-Simpsons sentiment is no longer consensus; it has become dogma.

Many ‘fans’ are completely dead-set against giving the show a chance and are unwilling to modify or update their expectations and perceptions of what the show can be and what it can do. We’ve still got people who vocally ascribe classic-era standards and criteria to episodes that are now 25 years divorced from that point in time for chrissake. It’s completely insane. Is The Simpsons as funny as it was in the 1990s? Is it as relevant? Is it as good? No, of course not! It never will be again. Period. That doesn’t preclude the show from still having some value. It doesn’t mean the show can’t be a different kind of funny, good and relevant.

The myopic and obstinate negativity in this fanbase that has persisted since the turn of the decade simply does not reflect the current quality of the show on its own terms. It is their failure to apprehend the changes it has undergone, some of which have unequivocally been for the better. They have, essentially, fallen behind with their increasingly antiquated viewpoints.
Okay. How is that my fault if I don't like Season 33? You make it seem like if you don't like S33, then "fuck you, it's your fault for not liking it" Guess what, I gave every episode of that season a chance and while I agree that episodes like A Serious Flanders and Pixelated and Afraid are very enjoyable. It doesn't justify the season being seen as some sort of "renaissance". You just have next to no standards for the show because Al Jean has been running it for 2 decades. Just because Matt Selman started to run more episodes now. That doesn't mean all of his episodes deserve all the praise in the world. This isn't a participation trophy for bad writing.



To me, Season 33 is still a very bad season despite these great episodes I just mentioned due to it being so fucking saccharine to the point where Full House looks dark and cynical by comparison. It's like if you took Muhammad Ali (who's considered one of the greatest boxers of all time) and have him be addicted to drugs, to the point where he is scrawny as shit and made him dress like a little girl and have him play tea parties and have him gushing over Justin Bieber. That's how I feel about the show at large.


In short, I lost faith the show will ever be good again and I stopped watching after S33. It's not my failure to not like the season. It just means I have standards and I have a brain where I can realize that just because Matt Selman co-runs this show with Jean doesn't mean he's good whatsoever. The only difference is he's more willing to be experimental than Jean. Have some damn standards.
 
Okay. How is that my fault if I don't like Season 33? You make it seem like if you don't like S33, then "fuck you, it's your fault for not liking it" Guess what, I gave every episode of that season a chance and while I agree that episodes like A Serious Flanders and Pixelated and Afraid are very enjoyable. It doesn't justify the season being seen as some sort of "renaissance". You just have next to no standards for the show because Al Jean has been running it for 2 decades. Just because Matt Selman started to run more episodes now. That doesn't mean all of his episodes deserve all the praise in the world. This isn't a participation trophy for bad writing.



To me, Season 33 is still a very bad season despite these great episodes I just mentioned due to it being so fucking saccharine to the point where Full House looks dark and cynical by comparison. It's like if you took Muhammad Ali (who's considered one of the greatest boxers of all time) and have him be addicted to drugs, to the point where he is scrawny as shit and made him dress like a little girl and have him play tea parties and have him gushing over Justin Bieber. That's how I feel about the show at large.


In short, I lost faith the show will ever be good again and I stopped watching after S33. It's not my failure to not like the season. It just means I have standards and I have a brain where I can realize that just because Matt Selman co-runs this show with Jean doesn't mean he's good whatsoever. The only difference is he's more willing to be experimental than Jean. Have some damn standards.
I think you're being a bit too aggressive here. You don't have to agree with someone's opinion but don't make them out to be stupid for having a different view. That's just proving his point about the dogma surrounding the fanbase. I agree S33 isn't the best but don't disrespect people who like it.
 
@bart678 / @TheMysteriousMarkTurner

Any chance you two can enlighten me as to whether or not the above is a difference of opinion between family members or split personalities?

9UH99Ay.jpg


Because when @Szyslak100 was logging multiple votes in weekly episode thread polls, he wasn't in the habit of arguing with himself. So I'm genuinely curious as to what the circumstances are in this particular instance.

(And, yes, I am aware that there weren't two votes logged for this particular episode. But there was last week for One Angry Lisa - despite the fact that bart678 specifies above that they "stopped watching after S33" - and there have been dual votes in many episodes prior to that as well. Sometimes even three votes if @FX568($) - who also shares IPs with these accounts - gets in on the action, too.)
 
Last edited:
Back
Top