I'm feeling nostalgic, let's have a Simpsons thread. It can be for anything, just wanna post funny bullshit related to the series? Want to wax lyrical over the good old days when you loved it? Want to bitch over how fucking terrible it is now as a lumbering zombie of a series? Go nuts!
Gonna storytime this fan comic as a starter, cuz its not bad at all.
>>438708 Seriously for a retard Homer has done alot with his life. And since the creator was clearly a fan of the show there's alot of callbacks sprinkled across this comic, as you have well seen up to this point.
oh yeah, I saw this on twitter before. It's a really nice comic.
Les Kassos just did a Simpsons episode right now, but I'm not sure if it's funny, other than highlighting how dysfunctional the Simpsons are. Les Simplon - Les Kassos #74
>>438724 Did it say anything about how Lisa became an insufferable know-it-all who the writers always give the viewpoint they themselves consider correct?
What even fucking season are they up to by now, haven't watched an episode of the simpsons in yonks since I don't watch teevee. >The series is currently in its 32nd broadcast season, and has already been renewed for two more. For fucks sake!
>>439322 The whole "Don't take the money you're owed just because it comes from a Bad Guy" cliche is so bloody stupid.
By taking the money you're at least draining it away from their resources, and if you really want to show off how moral you are why not spend/donate that money towards aiding a worthwhile cause rather than on yourself.
Its just egotistical showboating and pointless to the point of being counterproductive as a Good person.
It occurs to me that both Marge and Homer have cheated on each other (not talking about the near affairs with Jacques & Mindy) Homer probably fucked his Vegas wife while drunk, Marge engaged in efficient-German-sex with the Homer impersonating replacement with the heavy accent in the episode that was a cheap parody of The Prisoner.
Image:164084807882.jpg(1.31MB, 4960x7429)Its not stealing in the engine if you lift an object and carry it out of their sight without adding it to your inventory.jpg
These images are an entire thing online, fusing Fallout with the Simpsons.
>>440450 Absurdity and Banality go together like caramel and salt. The banality of the outdated boss over for dinner sitcom plot combined with the absurdity of Skinner's denials pumped up to 11 combine to make a masterpiece. Skinner straight up gets out of a tight spot by resetting the conversation by exiting the room an immediately coming back in.
>>441699 The fact Chief Wiggum bloodily ground up two youths who were spraypainting a wall into burger meat with a giganto turbine-powered jetpack in a non-treehouse of horror episode is messed up.
>>443795 Did not know, highly impressed. I always thought the in-game character models looked MEH due to time constraints and the dev team not being the best at designing something that looks good and moves good while not having too many polygons.
Has there been some pushback going around in recent times about the removal of Apu from the Simpsons?
Don't know the details specifically, just heard about it in passing. Like its actual Indian people that want him back who aren't the kind of brats that want to get rid of characters such as Apu or Speedy Gonzales for being 'stereotypical'?
>>447155 The guy who rose a stink about it in the first place claims that he didn't actually want them to remove him from the show; just change him to be less stereotypical. Most people just chalked it up as another reason not to watch the Simpsons. I think most Indians never gave a shit about him. He wasn't like how Speedy Gonzales is to Mexicans; he was very specifically an 80s joke that no one really cared about.
>As Roger Meyers Jr., the owner of the park I'd like to thank you for stopping the killer robots, and to show my appreciation, here are two free passes. >But there are five of us. >Here are _two_ free passes.
Al Jean had sent the NoHomers admit the following email back around 2004:
"As you well know, Mr. Shearer has been vocal in his criticism of the show's quality in recent years. Thus, I am forwarding you this email and would like you to repost it in my name.
Our show has won every award it could possibly get in the past year. Dan Castallaneta received an Emmy for his performance in Today I Am A Clown. All this was made possible thanks to people who worked much harder than Mr. Shearer. He complains about his gradually-reduced roles in the show. Whenever I schedule a Thursday afternoon table read, I can never be sure that he will show up. Many times I've been told that he wasn't coming. Therefore I've made sure not to give him too much to do in any given episode.
Mr. Shearer has told me that he's upset with the show's current state and he was happier in Season 4. Well, I ran Seasons 3 and 4 along with Mike Reiss and I don't remember him being very happy back then. In particular, I remember him strongly objecting to Homer At The Bat, an episode that is now regarded as a classic.
In addition, Mr. Shearer has said that he feels cheated by the show financially. He is set to make just shy of 5.5 million dollars this year for what can generously be described as a few hours of work a week. When I consider how much our firefighters and teachers make, this attitude makes me want to vomit.
>>474758 >>474762 I've often heard the term "Jeanisms" within his episodes, and while I think I have an idea of what that means, I need more explanation to what that means.
So the question is what to you, are what makes a Jean episode, a Jean episode, and therefore, a godawful or bad episode (or good episode)?
>>474826 >having to explain the joke to the audience >jokes around Homer's grotesque appetite >bad visual gags, usually related to body humor as well (cf. Smart and Smarter) >rushed story development
>>474826 To me it's mostly forcing celebrities to play themselves without adding anything meaningful to the episode. Another aspect would be nonstop "Marge and Homer have a fight" plots . And characters often being reduced to their most obvious character trait only makes it worse (Bart - prankster, Lisa - smart adult in a kid's body, Marge - mum, Homer - dumb, fat alcoholic).
>celebrity appearances that do nothing but dick suck the guest star ala Lady Gaga >explaining the joke to the audience as anon said above >overly long couch or blackboard gags >marriage crisis episodes (are 3-4 of those per season really necessary?) >B plots that are inserted for no reason. If the episode is about the adults, the subplot is about the kids, and vice versa--often they don't intersect and only exist to fill time or give Bart and Lisa something to do >Flanderizing characters
>Refusal to think outside the box. There’s a lot of reports that Jean likes to shoot down any episode pitch that deviates too far from his personal vision of how the show should work, choosing instead to go for the same kind of episode every single time. This has led to entire seasons of his work feeling samey, making them all feel like this unified blob of gray mush aside from the occasional standout.
>>474848 i sometimes think he gets inspiration from ZAZ movies (Airplane, Naked Gun etc) which would be fine if the episodes didn't pretend they want to tell a story, but yet again they try to have a plot/stakes which often completely doesn't work for the same reason.
>>474850 not sure I agree here, there were definitely ''outside the box'' episodes under Jean (Seemingly never-ending story, 24 minutes, The man who came to be dinner etc.) especially around the movie, just not that much in regards of his whole career.
>>474850 >i sometimes think he gets inspiration from ZAZ movies (Airplane, Naked Gun etc) which would be fine if the episodes didn't pretend they want to tell a story, but yet again they try to have a plot/stakes which often completely doesn't work for the same reason. ^this x100 but the hilarious part is that none of his comedy is ever worth it to make this structure feel needed. He wants to be Airplane but all he gets is a boomer's Facebook feed minus the AI.
I think he just has a box where he’s most comfortable. It seems weird for such a longstanding writer to have a comfort zone, but he definitely seems to have one perhaps out of a sense of pride. Usually, he dismisses criticism for his work with the excuse that the show still earns Emmys. Obviously that means everything is fine and we don’t need to change anything. So not only does he stay within his comfort zone and rarely leave, he comes up with any cope and excuse to stay there.
>>474840 regarding marriage crisis plots: Homer and Marge are a couple, they surely love each other, this has been shown many times over the series but in Jean episodes their idyll must be interrupted by anything else. Because in his view in reality couples can't live in calm or have mutual understanding - true love is too ideal to be implemented, even in a cartoon.
>>474840 Dare I say Jean always kind of had problems structuring episodes as far back as the classic seasons as well as getting enough material to fill 22 minutes. This was somewhat apparently in Seasons 3-4 when you had stuff like Sideshow Bob stepping on rakes to pad out the run time (the writers also admitted that Itchy & Scratchy episodes were often used to burn time).
>>474868 The limitations of Jean's showrunning abilities with story length, pacing and whatnot did show a bit back then in the classic era such as with some of the Jean & Reiss episodes which you stated with your examples: The last third of Season 4 I think had some elements that were early indicators of the fallacies of his showrunning such as a bit wonky/thin writing and bit of padding such as extra jokes or extensions. The jokes and gags were still usually really funny and made up for the shortcomings, but I think many do not see that even then there were some slight problems (I am aware that both Jean & Reiss were the showrunners back then and for the most part things worked out, but I don't think Jean is excempt for blame with things like structuring problems).
When Jean took over full time, it started to become all the more apparent with more noticeable instances of episodes that didn't quite work in terms of showrunning and things getting more egregious in the HD episodes, especially as Jean really started to get long in the tooth with more of the limitations of his showrunning becoming all the more apparent with each passing year.
>>474871 >>474868 depending on who you ask he and Mike Reiss were responsible for the golden age of the show.
>but Season 4 felt off-kilter towards the end that's rather easily understandable because the staff were extremely tired by that point. most of the OG writers left after the 8Fxx episodes were done and showrunners could only stand two seasons before they'd had enough. i'm sure Mike Reiss never wanted to come back again for that reason. Cape Feare was 100% the result of a totally tapped out staff who knew they would be leaving the show anyway.
>>474871 >>474879 anyone who has their doubts about Al Jean need only check out his DVD commentaries, interviews, and Twitter posts to realize that he always played second fiddle to Mike Reiss and really should not have been made solo showrunner.
>Reiss is a naturally funny guy, still is--check out his book Springfield Confidential >hearing Jean talk about the show you always get the impression that he wanted it to be like Family Guy with cynical characters that are always at each other's throats >i'm sure he'd do a plot where Homer gets drunk and molests Lisa if he could get away with it on network TV >in most of the DVD commentaries while the rest of the staff are like "aw, this scene is so heartwarming" or "you can feel Bart's pain" Al is like yeah Homer is a dick nobody should be like him or Bart was a real cunt for what he did to Mrs. Krabapple in Bart The Lover
tl;dr he seems to get off on the idea of characters who want to kill each other most of the time and it goes a long way to explaining why the show turned out the way it did after he took over in Season 13
>>474904 I never explored the DVD commentaries much so I guess I missed out on a lot of insight there, or lack of it on Jean's end. But it does fit with how he was on Twitter. It always seemed like he was disinterested compared to some of the other staff, at least the ones that used Twitter. Though it's probably fair to say he liked Lisa, since she was almost the only one actually presented positively even if she really wasn't acting good in context a lot of the time.
Though the assessment of Homer not being likeable wouldn't be entirely wrong. In many ways he is not a good person at all. But the thing that still makes him click is not "we shouldn't act like Homer" but because most of us do act like him from time to time. He's absolutely a jerk to Flanders but many people have that one guy who just rubs them the wrong way even if everyone else loves 'em. People can be petty, impulsive, thoughtless and even volatile and in a way it makes Homer very relatable. He can make people laugh at the parts of themselves that suck.
>>474904 It does seem he needed Reiss as a foil. Once he proved he could function as a solo writer during the Scully era he became a valuable asset to the show and there was really a lack of other viable options to succeeed Mike Scully and they thought he had showrunning experience and was very organized and disciplined.
Jean's particular takes on the characters became increasingly apparent including continuing asshole Homer from the Scully seasons (framing Marge for DUI is still in the top 5 worst things Homer has ever done). He never liked Bart very much so Bart became increasingly irrelevant as time went on. Lisa of course was his perfect daughterfu who can do no wrong. Marge is the totally helpless victim of Homer's douchebaggery.
Having seen a fair amount of Season 13-16, their biggest sin if anything is being...functional. They rarely do anything grossly wrong, but while Scully tends to have the feeling of a show unable to figure out what it wants to be, Jean is 100% content in doing absolutely the bare minimum of anything creatively. Most of his stories are so automatic that they barely even register as actual stories, the only really change they register is how increasingly sloppy his basic construction becomes as time passes.
The Simpsons in the classic seasons worked because they had relatively regular turnovers of the show's staff. Oakley and Weinstein had threatened to leave the show if they didn't get to be made showrunners. They happened to think Season 2 was the show's peak and wanted to recreate that with their own twist on things. Like the previous showrunners they got tired out after two seasons and quit.
Easy as it is to shit on Mike Scully, it makes sense why he became showrunner. He'd been there since Season 5 and John Swartzwelder and George Meyer had no interest in the job. Again if Scully had only stayed two seasons like his predecessors it might have been ok but he was afraid to step down because he thought the show would be ending soon and he wanted the credit for being the last showrunner. Scully also got it to the point where the writers were a lot lazier than before, they'd put in a few hours a week instead of staying up all night reworking scripts like they formerly did. I would guess Jean made things even lazier.
I mean any institution needs new people once in a while; twenty years of the same guy running things leads to stagnation.
Oakley and Weinstein began the decline of the Simpsons; Season 8 was a minor step down in quality at the time, and the infamous The Principal and the Pauper aired at the end of their time as showrunners. However, Mike Scully perpetuated the show's downfall and is far more to blame for changing the series from a provocative comedy to just a commercialized sitcom.
>>474862 I will say that I definitely don't think the marriage crisis stories as a concept is bad per se but it's just that the immense overexposure to it in the post classic era by Al Jean (who is obsessed with this type of premise, it seems) has actively done a lot of damage to the premise and tarred its reputation by loads of uninspired, if not forced, marriage crisis plots, many of which feel poorly written and at worst turns Marge into kind of a monster when Homer hasn't really done anything to deserve it and sometimes being assumed to be the bad guy, but this we have discussed in other threads so I won't get into that again). A good marriage crisis episode is still good, but yeah, seem like at this point the premise is so overdone all too many attack those on principle.
>>475082 FWIW Al Jean's "defense" with marriage crisis episodes is that IRL married couples fight all the time so those plots make perfect sense. Which leaves me...very concerned about Jean's views on marriage.
>>475107 That seems to be the distinction. It's normal for couples to have occasional disputes but being kicked out of the house or contemplating divorce shouldn't happen almost every time as it does here. If you're having too many fights, you have to consider whether the relationship is toxic. It has gone beyond normal marital squabbling at that point.
The part of the video when Jims covered the more petty fights reminded me that I'd be okay with more of that from the show. I'm less okay with episodes that imply Homer and Marge really shouldn't be together because the premise of the show is that they should.
>>475116 >>475112 >>475107 >>475106 i hate marriage crisis episodes so much damn why can't they do something else with Homer and Marge's relationship? Homer gets a job plots at least have comedic potential. Maybe a more interesting poll would be marriage crisis vs Bart gets a girlfriend vs Lisa feels insecure and sad.
marriage crisis plots are always exactly the same thing
>Homer does something douchebaggy like frame Marge for DUI but be forgiven almost instantly >Homer and Marge both act like douchebags this has happened so much that Marge is almost as unlikeable as Homer >Marge acts like a douchebag either Homer didn't do anything or he did some trivial thing that doesn't warrant the overreaction she produces the wacky nature of the act makes her less sympathetic for being angry about it or my personal favorite they don’t want to present Marge as being in the wrong so a Marge centric episode will suddenly turn into a marriage crisis in the third act out of nowhere.
>>475038 A pretty good example of Scully's problems (in part because it's easily one of the least cartoonish premises of his latter three seasons) is Insane Clown Poppy. Despite the basic idea being very simple and if anything quite grounded (Krusty dealing with the child of a past relationship), the episode wastes no less than seven minutes on filler up until Sophie actually appears on screen, then another two on the extended Gulf War flashback. The episode is more or less halfway done by the time the actual premise is established and then much of the latter half is left on mafia shenanigans rather than on Sophie's character and how she effects Krusty. We learn pretty much nothing about her beyond that she plays the violin.
>>475122 Actually that raises a very legitimate question--what were the potential reasons for the sudden and dramatic drop in quality from 5F to AA production runs? While there is pretty well-agreed to be a run-off in Scully's first production season, it genuinely feels like the scripting quality utterly self-destructed the moment his second season as showrunner began.
>>475126 That's probably because Scully had a brother growing up and has kids of his own so he understands how to write those plots. You can tell with some writers like Oakley and Weinstein or Swartzwelder who don't have kids and don't really know how to write child characters.
>>475106 i kind of agree that Jean has a very weird and uncomfortable idea of what relationships are like and he really doesn't seem to get Homer and Marge's dynamic at all
i mean in the classic seasons Homer and Marge are plenty of times shown to be soul mates and have an active sex life but Jean just always wants to show them as being ready to kill each other--in the Mr. Plow DVD commentary he even asks wtf does Marge find this gross lardass attractive for?
Let’s not pretend Jean is the only one who writes shitty marriage episodes and/or Marge as a jerkass. Werking Mom was a Carolyn Omine episode. Just saying.
>>475134 this doesn't actually mean much. The credited writer for an episode only actually writes the first draft, not the finished episode. Everything after that is the collective work of the writers' room, directors, and most primarily the showrunner. Marge being the subject of Strong Arms of Ma for example wasn't even Omine's idea - it was supposed to be Homer until Jean wanted the "Marge becomes a bodybuilder" angle. (Which means he can be blamed for the rape joke)
I'd say Life on the Fast Lane, Two Cars in Every Garage and Three Eyes On Every Fish and a few others like, of course, A Brush With Greatness, did show Marge had more potential. Actually it goes for a lot of female characters that existed during the Season 1-2 period where Groening/Simon/Brooks were showrunners. And of those three, I'm gonna go out on a limb and say it's mostly down to James L. Brooks. He's in a way the real creator of Lisa Simpson as she's shown past the Tracy Ulman shorts. Noted in one David Silverman Twitter post that they basically had nothing to work with for her and it was up to Brooks to give her more of a character.
>>475136 too bad really because the premise of the episode seemed like a good one but Jean completely fucked it up and it's easy to see which parts were and weren't Omine's
>>475143 Brooks was also a co-creator of the Mary Tyler Moore show, credited as groundbreaking for having a lead that was not only a woman but one who wasn't married or dependant on a man at all. And if he also had a hand in some of the side characters at the time, it'd explain a fair bit. They actually had some cool female characters that even if they might've had some connection to a male character, weren't truly defined by them. Except Maude, I suppose. Brooks seemed like a pretty cool fella for the time! But they were always gonna be fighting against Sam Simon enforcing a boys' club in the writers' room in particular. And the effects felt pretty quick once Brooks was no longer a showrunner (probably compounded by one of the new showrunners being our old friend Al Jean).
>>475149 thing is Maude wasn't really intended to be a character in the sense that, say, Mrs. Krabapple was, her main purpose was just to show that Ned is happily married and nothing more than that. that also applied to the other wife characters like Luann (pre-A Milhouse Divided), Bernice, Sarah, etc. all of whom exist strictly to show that Homer isn't the only married man in Springfield.
one of the reasons they could kill Maude off was that she was a virtually disposable character and Alone Again Natura-Diddly even kind of makes that point. Yet because of the dramatic effect it had on Ned's character and the substantial amount of attention that was given to the episode in marketing, the character has taken on a retroactive degree of importance that she literally never had, both in the show and outside of it.
which, incidentally, makes Helen the very conspicuous outlier in being an actual character with her own personality separate from her husband. We really were robbed on getting stuff with the Lovejoys, huh?
>>475152 but most of the screentime Maude had separate of her husband show her as part of the gang of gossipy ladies who exist only to hassle Marge ala The Twisted World of Marge Simpson
>>475152 ok so in the five major Ned episodes of the classic seasons (When Flanders Failed, Dead Putting Society, Homer Loves Flanders, Home Sweet Home Dum Doodly, and Hurricane Neddy) Maude barely does anything and her dialog is merely incidental to the story. because, again, Maude's entire purpose isn't to be a character, it's to accentuate Ned's status as the happy and perfect family man, just as much as Rod and Todd exist to be overly cliche "good Christian boys" who are saccharine to the point of irritating both the audience and Bart (that's a nuance I don't see people bring up often - Bart dislikes the Flanders sons almost as much as his father dislikes Ned).
Maude being changed into more of an openly judgemental and hostile character in the HD episodes do bother me. There were some signs of it in the classic era but they never crossed any lines with it and kept her an alright side character to Ned and who had a bunch of fun moments, even though she was pretty one-dimensional, but as soon as they started essentially demonizing her in a sense (such as in 'Manger Things' pretty much openly hating Homer in spite of him not having done anything to earn it but for merely existing), it started to go too far.
I think they could hsve done a much better job at trying to add more character and development to Maude than essentially making her a posthumous Helen Lovejoy 2.0 by giving her a nasty streak (but then again, seems like most of the Springfield women, ranging from Helen to Luann to Bernice etc. fall into the stereotype of "judgemental women criticizing Marge and her family/kids", which I've noted before).
>>475157 >>475155 I wouldn't know for sure how Maude could be best handled but I kind of like the idea of focusing on how she's the one non-genetic Flanders. Sure she wasn't truly intended to be more than "Ned's wife" but tbqh, being stuck on rigid framing or whatever else is death on creativity. I doubt the problems in the Jean era especially would have gotten so bad if they weren't so laser-focused on intent and framing and all that junk. Sure it's interesting to look at it as a means of examining why things turned out like they did but treating intent and stuff as some unbreakable golden rule just leads to characters flattening and acting unnaturally or looking worse than they should or storylines being stale and repetitive. A lot of problems feel like they could be summed up by only looking at what is vs what could be.
Also I agree they never really did know how to write female characters a lot of the time.
>>475159 Absolutely agree with that The way a character was conceived and originally introduced doesn't mean they have to stay in that initial box forever. Characters develop and their roles in the series can change and expand as the series itself develops and that's a very good thing! You already mentioned this in a previous post and I know I'm comparing the shorts and the series here (which are quite different things), but Lisa wouldn't be very much of a character if she never evolved past a vague sidekick for Bart's antics.
On the topic of Maude specifically though I agree there was a little more to her than just being Ned's wife even if we didn't see much too much of it. There are moments like this
which paint her as someone with strong feelings about what the "right" and "wrong" approaches to motherhood and family life are which gives her a way to potentially be in conflict with Marge similar to how their husbands are. There's little things like her usually being seen with Helen that makes me imagine her as the potential number two in that group and stuff like that as well. I do think it makes it more of a shame that she was killed off really because of all the "wife" characters (besides Helen of course who doesn't really fit into that category) she did seem like the one with the most potential to stand on her own two feet with enough development since there were some fleeting signs of an actual character there unlike say Sarah Wiggum.
>>475187 At the time Mike Scully claimed they killed off Maude to open new storylines for Ned similar to to Apu getting married and it had nothing to do with Maggie Roswell's pay dispute. But at the same time it's a little hard to believe since while they didn't kill any of her other characters the timing of the episode's production seems to line up perfectly with when she left (in about April 1999 and AAND aired February 2000 and Mike Reiss said each production run of episodes takes about nine months from start to finish.)
Reiss said that when he came back to work on the movie he'd not been involved with the show for quite a number of years and was unaware that they'd killed Maude off in the meantime. He wanted to include a Ned/Maude interaction in the movie script and as he recalled it the writers looked around the room nervously for a few moments before Ian Maxtone-Graham said "Ah ha ha ha sorry but we kind of...killed her off."
>"I'm the one who drove her out of her seat" >"I'm the one who provoked the lethal barrage of T-shirts" >"I'm the one who parked in the ambulance zone, preventing any possible resuscitation." >"But there's no point in playing the blame game."
That's Scully Homer alright.
If they wanted to make new storylines for Ned, maybe killing Maude off might not be the greatest idea to do when there's many other options to choose.
>>475187 the issue of Maggie Roswell's salary was between her and Fox, the writers had nothing to do with that. also Roswell has been fairly open about exactly what happened there since the show passed to Disney's ownership and she's no longer beholden to Fox.
To this day I haven't found a clue that really points to the staff at the time killing off Maude to take revenge on Roswell or something like that. The payi dispute was related to FOX as far as I know. The 'death plot' was of course an idea that came after Roswell had left the show, but I truly don't think there was any bad blood. I mean, Luann didn't have a single line of dialog between Seasons 10 and 13. As far as we know they just thought it was a good change to Ned for Season 11, like Apu's paternity or Barney's sobriety.
>>475179 i find it amusing how in the HD episodes they actually developed Sarah Wiggum into a character and gave her a back story that she used to be a petty criminal who met her husband while in jail.
>>475149 it was always a pretty significant fault/limitation of the Simpsons that they were unable to develop most of the female cast very much while many newer shows do not have a problem fleshing out their female characters. though i will say when they tried fleshing out Miss Hoover some it was at least consistent with her character as she'd always been shown unlike Sarah or Brandine where they basically invented personalities for them out of thin air.
>>475228 ok but still they made Sarah into something completely different and i don't mean just her voice although i can understand why they did it; the voice Pamela Haydn had always used for her would have gotten really grating to hear over an entire episode.
>>475228 That's kind of unfair because even though in Seasons 1-9 the only secondary female characters to be significantly developed were Mrs. Krabapple and Selma, in total only a dozen secondary characters did get any significant development those including Apu, Ned, Burns, Krusty, Skinner, and (arguably) Milhouse. And while I would say Marge is also the most underdeveloped of the main four characters, it's a little false to say they never cared about the female cast at all, even if Mrs. Krabapple and Selma's episodes are largely the same lonely femcel plot.
It also seems that among other bad changes that happened in the Scully era there was an increased emphasis on gag characters like Duffman, Crazy Cat Lady, and Rich Texan. Plus Mrs. K and especially Selma became a lot less relevant after Season 8 (Goo Goo Gai Pan was the first real story Selma got since I think A Fish Called Selma) so the show really had no secondary female characters (unless maybe Shauna but she gives you the ick anyway)
>>475157 >but then again, seems like most of the Springfield women, ranging from Helen to Luann to Bernice etc. fall into the stereotype of "judgemental women criticizing Marge and her family/kids", which I've noted before those kind of women were meant to represent the typical judgemental nagging shrew GI/Silent Generation housewives of the writers' childhoods and it was a trope that was already obsolete by the time the show started.
>>475264 >It also seems that among other bad changes that happened in the Scully era there was an increased emphasis on gag characters like Duffman, Crazy Cat Lady, and Rich Texan.
characters like Mrs. Krabapple (jaded public school teacher) and Chief Wiggum (corrupt retard cop) were based on IRL archetypes and they served an important purpose for social satire. Even Comic Book Guy represented an archetypical nerd. But characters like Frink and Disco Stu are just cartoony gag characters that serve no point beyond that. Which was why the female characters sort of became irrelevant because they weren't immediately funny the way the Sea Captain was and especially by the Scully seasons the show had turned to be mostly cheap gags without involved writing.
btw if anyone ever wondered about Al Jean and who he's always been let it be known that he absolutely _loves_ Simpsoncalifragilisticexpiali-d'oh-cious. Mike Reiss has said that he pitched the plot for it as early as Season 2, but in 2014 he went so far as to say it was one of the show's top five "essential" episodes next to Simpsons Roasting on an Open Fire, Homer at the Bat, Eternal Moonshine of the Simpson Mind, and Once Upon a Time in Springfield. It says a lot about Jean that this episode ends with an entire musical number about how shitty and retarded the Simpsons are and features Shari Bobbins sucked into an airplane engine but even worse of all the hundreds of episodes he could have picked was one that he pitched, personally worked on, is a satire of one of his favorite movies of all time, and was the last episode Mike Reiss had a writing credit on. Note also that OUATIS was written by his wife. It's really quite a revealing glimpse into his mentality.
>>475264 Then again, other ones who do have those quirks and act outside of being the love interest (or being flatly "nice") are also the ones people keep calling for to be killed off. Or ignore entirely. it figures that Alex Whitney gets so forgotten that she's not even in tapped out. A quirky, fun, interesting female character with no attachment to any male ones whatsoever and a personality that goes beyond "nice girl" who can actually carry her own jokes too? Never stood a chance. And that sucks ass, legitimately. Whether or not she was intended to be a regular or anything, she deserves so much more credit.
>>475296 Um no? Alex isn't brought up as often because Lard of the Dance is well past when the majority of people note the classic series as ending, it has nothing to do with people having some kind of grudge against her being a female character not attached to any male ones. If anything, the fact that Alex is remembered at all is evidence of some fan attachment - the vast majority of post-classic guest characters are forgotten entirely, I'm not really sure where you're getting this assumption from.
>>475301 For a start, I didn't say grudge. You're putting words in my mouth to strawman. And that's even if I wasn't using Alex as an example of someone who goes forgotten, which she does. She's not in Tapped Out, she barely ever cameoed even in the comics and most Simpsons fans seem to barely remember her as well. Besides, Sophie exists even further beyond the classic era but not only gets brought up but gets to be part of the show too. Incidentally, as an attachment to a male character.
>>475305 you're suggesting Alex was forgotten because of sexism or some other bullshit reason Which doesn't hold up I would say, because by that logic Allison would also be "forgotten", and she most definitely is not. Also remember Alex isn't the only well-remembered guest character absent from Tapped Out - Karl and John are also both missing. It likewise took 7 years for Allison to be added, six for Jacques, literally none of the Allison clones have been added, Mike was only added recently despite Go Big or Go Homer airing in mid-2019, Richard still hasn't been added after more than a decade...there's a lot of oddities in Tapped Out's priorities. The comics were likewise often very cagey about using guest characters connected to the kids most likely so to not risk contradicting the show in some fashion (this is in large why they kept falling back on the twins to fill the "girl" role, in spite of them having as much nuance to their personality as a sack of doorknobs).
>>475309 IDK while she isn't as forgotten as Alex, I would say Allison is pretty forgotten about too. Then again, I would say that for majority of the kid characters outside Bart, Lisa, Milhouse, Nelson and maybe Martin, and by extension Sherri and Terri Then again, I'm thinking about the more casual viewers who aren't into the fandom, or those that like the series but just don't care for the kid characters.
I will say that Alex is more memorable than the other Allison clones, ESPECIALLY Tumi & Sam.
When it comes to the sexism accusation, I would want to see proof if anything, but part of me wouldn't be surprised by it somewhat.
>>475305 >Besides, Sophie exists even further beyond the classic era but not only gets brought up but gets to be part of the show too. Incidentally, as an attachment to a male character. Sophie was resurrected because of Al Jean's ego, he had a large part in creating her even though she has never been popular with fans or anything.
>>475309 >The comics were likewise often very cagey about using guest characters connected to the kids most likely so to not risk contradicting the show in some fashion (this is in large why they kept falling back on the twins to fill the "girl" role, in spite of them having as much nuance to their personality as a sack of doorknobs). That is something I noticed as well, its usage of guest characters is surprisingly small, and it's usually background appearances. Even Jessica & Allison, who did appear a bit more than Alex, were mostly relegated to the background, although it didn't help that Allison was often drawn to look like Jessica and vice versa with Jessica looking like Allison.
>>475322 I get that and the other showrunners have also upboated episodes they were involved with making but in their case it was the ones they considered their greatest achievements. who the fuck thinks Once Upon a Time in Springfield was any kind of series highlight?
>>475309 Ah, the classic sidestep. Funny thing, outside pedo waifufags I rarely see anyone care much about Allison either. Certainly nowhere near to the extent of pretty much any of Bart's girlfriends. And oh yeah, none of the other Lisa friends are in Tapped Out. Yet they added Annika, Gina, Nikki and even Jenda, who all happen to revolve around male characters. Kind of adds to my point.
Also yes I read the comics. They were actually pretty spammy about guest stars. There's even several plots involving Dr. Colossus of all people. Bear Patrol and Bartman were just facts of the comics' continuity also, and several characters had extra relatives. They even gave Sideshow Mel a whole backstory about being a super ace at everything but his parents wanted him to be a sidekick and also an origin story for his hairdo and bone too. So yeah, excuses.
Also it's totally backwards, Jessica would be shoehorned constantly for a token "girl" role, usually because of her looks or how she used to date Bart. Even that "Scooby Don't" comic was blatantly her being cast because her looks alone. Not because of any biased measurement of being a "real character" that's never been an actual factor in anything. Daphne is considered the "pretty girl" of the bunch. That's literally it.
>>475338 that's true i wager most non-pedos don't care about Allison and i bet a lot of Simpsons fans find the Homer subplot in Lisa's Rival more memorable than the main plot. ofc there is the fact that a lot of Simpsons fans will care more for the adult characters than the kid characters which does make sense given that most of us are also not pedos.
>>475342 Yeah it's a bit unfortunate. Even if probably a rather low key character, it feels like she could have been used in some capacity. Probably more one of those ones for world building but it's still value of a sort, being some sort of "always someone better" figure to Lisa. Or like her own personal Ned Flanders (character who has a better family and out-performs her that she's constantly jealous of)
for a character to develop there needs to be _something_ there to work with. Sherri and Terri just weren't that compelling characters and don't really do anything outside bug Bart and Lisa. that would explain why they were rather quickly dropped despite the staff's plans to use them more--this is mentioned in the Season 1 DVD commentaries where they say audiences also found them grating. That Bart and Lisa had no developed relationships amongst their recurring classmates is a structural issue undeniably, but that issue ironically goes to show some of the show's creative strengths in how it was able to develop actually strong characterization with just a single episode.
but i mean Allison does interact with Lisa in a meaningful way that stuff could be developed off of while, say, Janey despite being a recurring character has nothing to work with and serves no real purpose.
>>475338 i never got Simpsons fans' love of Jessica Lovejoy. the writers honestly had a lot better judgement in figuring that she didn't have much use beyond the immediate episode she was in.
>Jessica is simply a punk/smart alleck with no positive qualities >has a non-sequitor excuse for it >despite being written around the plot still needed another character to act as a crutch >and has no other obvious character traits ouside of "boys" >so little personality or independence from men means she has no interactions with Helen or Lisa >she isn't even written like a 10 year old, more like a sociopathic teen >and if standards towards Sherri & Terri are applied with any consistency then Jessica is just generic femme fatale, completely boy-centered to the point where she has no interactions with Helen or Lisa let alone a relationship, making anything said about either a matter of extrapolation at best.
if your standards to S&T are applied at all to Jessica then no she wouldn't make a good antagonist of Lisa. No, she's not neglected that's head canon. Even if wanting attention actually added up. She has no relationship with Helen at all and the closest we get is Helen being at least attentive enough to know her daughter's averages. And how exactly is their relationship complicated? Especially at the end? Jessica moved on, already got a new bf. Bart was over her crap, the ending even having him only pretend to fall for her request, vowing to deliberately do a second-rate job and get her in trouble again.
If not for some good Lisa writing (the actual interesting relationship) and some good Homer and Lovejoy gags Bart's Girlfriend would be as bad as any Zombie Simpsons episode. "Bart gets treated like crap by a sociopath." There's zero ambiguity or nuance about the relationship, even Moonshine River got that much.
>>475453 and Allison factually isn't Lisa's equal. She's better. That was so obviously her point. Lisa disliked her for it. In the original draft she even fantasizes about snapping Allison's spine (yeah figure a typical Mike Scully gag). Allison took her place as "the best" and Lisa couldn't deal with it. That "me too" obviously was making fun of Allison repeating herself. Also their friendship is extremely thin if, again, we apply standards with any consistency. The only episode where they're truly friends is Lard of the Dance. She tries to be encouraging and Lisa yells at her. That's it. In the "grand narrative" they were friends that barely did anything then I guess Allison got sick of Lisa and decided to hang with the other girls instead (I mean you'd probably get sick of Lisa too). Anything else is headcanon and theoreticals and I'm not entertaining the double standards. It doesn't even seem like a lot of people see her as a significant friend, not anymore. If we deal only in facts, she's had less of a friendship than even Janey, and the latter is supposed to be not particularly strong. Isabel at least got to bond a little with Lisa too because they actually did start as friends.
But even then, considering the show as a whole narrative, most guest stars are meaningless blips, that's why I don't like overrelying on them instead of characters that'll exist after the credits. Extremely few manage to have any real significance like Mona or Herb. Even then it's mostly to someone else. Allison could be argued to have some significance as her episode showed a bad side to Lisa that was an interesting part of her character. The closest to real significance Jessica had was probably inspiring the "children written as teenagers" trend and a bunch of romance episodes.
>>475463 >In the original draft she even fantasizes about snapping Allison's spine (yeah figure a typical Mike Scully gag) yikes. i agree the original draft of LR (which btw was mainly Mike Scully's writing which proves who he was all along) had some pretty godawful moments that seem to predict what was coming in Seasons 10-12 and fortunately at that point there were smarter people in the room to edit out his worst tendencies.
>>475472 Scully isn't alone in that tendency, a lot of draft scripts have really excessive or sociopathic gags that were edited out in the finished version. for example in the draft of Homer's Odyssey Sherri & Terri torture Bart a lot more than they do in the actual episode.
>>475453 I'd make an argument that Jessica is not flat-out evil with nothing redeeming about her.
She does exhibit a lot of signs of being a sociopath (the lack of empathy and tendency to manipulate), but I still think that her episode does give her some character depth to show that she's a tragic character whom turned out like she did much due to her parent's neglecting her, making her insecure and giving her some obvious mental problems to some degree. She is definitely not a saint and very rotten, but I'd at least her give her some credit for not being some pure evil character but having some depth and nuances. But this is my interpretation of the character and you can have yours, even though I disagree.
That said, I do think you make some good points such as her being written more like a teenager and is pretty much a walking femme fatale trope and lacking in interactions with other characters such as Lisa and her mother (which do show that she was more of a gimmick character that many fans took to being fans), but that doesn't mean that someone else's opinion is not valid or made up. This is definitely not some clear cut black & white issue but a matter of interpretations that should be respected.
>>475472 oh yeah i forgot the draft script of Lisa's Rival where the sugar subplot originally ran 3x as long and Homer throws acid in Mrs. Glick's face
>>475463 One offs were generally not that big a part of the classic era. What happens when you force them to be the main focus above all else? Everything else gets neglected. It stagnates. Martin for instance slid out of relevance until Russi died (and that pisses me off so much, Russi's talent was wasted) and even while we still had Mrs. K the classroom scenes were fizzling out, because they often needed him too. Milhouse and Nelson became Bart's Lenny and Carl so it was effectively Bart, Mrs. K and nobody else unless there was a guest star.
>>475437 >say, Janey despite being a recurring character has nothing to work with and serves no real purpose. Anything is possible with enough effort. As someone else said Ullman shorts Lisa was a total blank the writers had to build a character from. There are other examples as well. So they could have absolutely made Janey or somebody into a proper character if they really wanted to.
>>475636 >>475453 >>475437 if you saw the DVD commentaries they were quite adamant about characters like Jessica being plot devices and they never intended to use them again. i don't get why so many Simpsons fans can't seem to figure that out.
>>475640 I understand they were trying to do that with CBG but it didn't really work because Kumiko didn't push or challenge him far enough. I wish they went cartoonier and more stereotypical with her portrayal.
>>475661 yeah I agree about Martin but Sherri & Terri are seriously not funny or even endearing and serve no point beyond harrassing Bart and Lisa, the show's staff figured this out early on
they could use Allison for something there's some potential there. as for the resurrection of Sophie that was just because the writers needed a girl to round out Bart's e-sports team and fill the Marie role in the When Harry Met Sally homage and and in both instances there happens to be literally only one character who happens to fill the very specific conditions of being a defined girl character Bart/Lisa's age with a relatively available voice actor. Why he decided to recast Sophie specifically is another question but not really relevant here.
again Sherri and Terri don't have any character traits beyond annoying Bart and Lisa so wtf can do you with them?
>>475664 You can't really write twin characters well anyway it just comes off as awkward (yes I know TLH kind of pulls it off) which is why in most cartoons where twins exist they're background or gimmick characters.
>>475679 >>475664 if you think Sherri & Terri should have been developed more you probably also think Disco Stu or Duffman should have been made a major character even though that would obviously be horrible. besides it would be like Rerun Van Pelt whom nobody cares about because he was only relevant in the last 12 years of Peanuts when nobody paid attention to it anymore.
>>475633 Do one thing and you gotta sacrifice something else. Maybe if they did more plots with the kid characters you'd be complaining they didn't give enough focus to Burns or Flanders or somesuch.
>>475683 i think it was always apparently that the Simpsons staff didn't really have much interest in the child characters. it's not like Bob's Burgers where the kids gets lots of stories and screentime, actually to the show's detriment at times.
>>475681 I don't think it's strictly impossible to have twin characters both work in tandem and apart from one other. The Loud House as anon said sort of pulled it off by giving Lana and Lola separate identities as characters.
Then again this is all theoreticals--Selma has a child and a pet iguana and Patty is a lesbian and I haven't seen any of those things matter in forever, they're still basically just a unit.
>>475681 >besides it would be like Rerun Van Pelt whom nobody cares about because he was only relevant in the last 12 years of Peanuts when nobody paid attention to it anymore. every time we had a Peanuts thread on /co/ over the years it was mostly just Charlie Brown/Lucy/Peppermint Patty shipping anyway and i never heard Rerun mentioned once because hey who cares about him, right?
>>475708 Giving Selma a kid kind of ruined the essential point of her character which was that she was an aging lonely femcel and there was nothing else really to do with her after that.
>>475708 >>475706 ok we don't really need to bring up Ling or any plots involving Maggie in grade school because it smacks too hard of MS Paint Chinese baby guy and nobody needs to revisit that bullshit
>be me >rewatch The Bart Wants What It Wants >observe that post-Season 8 eps try too hard to make these stories into adult romance plots if you compare New Kid on the Block and Bart's Girlfriend they're much more innocent and kid-like in how the episodes are constructed--Bart has an innocent crush on an older girl and Jessica is just toying with Bart/making him her simp/fall guy. But TBWWIW? Greta is an absolutely pointless character and in all these eps there's either an overly creepy age gap (Bart/Shauna or Lisa and that cowboy douchebag in Dude Where's My Ranch) or the love interest is just a total nonentity. Even Nikki is just a more psychotic and less subtle Jessica.
>>475634 Milhouse really hasn't been developed all that much. His screentime is 90% about his friendship with Bart which isn't explored that much and his having a love interest in Bart's Friend Falls In Love. But he's also too important to the show to just make a totally irrelevant filler character like Janey, so what do you do? Well, Lisa.
And that's funny because in Seasons 1-8 Milhouse didn't really display any romantic interest in Lisa, it was more a Zombie Simpsons development and even then he's mostly shown to be pathetic/creepy/a stalker. So tl;dr his relationship with Bart has very little depth to it and his relationship with Lisa is borderline creepy and makes him come off as a would-be rapist.
>>475720 i know Matt Selman has been open about disliking Lisa love stories because he thinks it's stupid and also borderline creepy for a 2nd grader to fall in love
Life depends on change and renewal but The Simpsons never really did.
try for example Musicradio 77 WABC (NYC, NYS) in the last 'real' year of its Top 40 format (1978) to WABC as it was in its first full year of that format (1961) -- same format but very different music flow, jingles, promos, adverts it chose to air and what the DJs were allowed to say and how often they could crack open the mic because of course a _lot_ had changed in culture and society over 17 years. Much more than today, the difference between 1961 and '78 was much more vast than the difference between 2025 and 2008. Yes a lot has changed since 2008 but nowhere near as dramatically as it did back in that time.
while we're on this subject, can anyone figure out just what the point of making Barney sober was especially since they never really followed up on it?
>>475767 I had heard that the writers starting in Season 5 had almost run out of good gags that could be done with Barney to the point of even considering making him the gunman in Who Shot Mr Burns and getting rid of him by having him go to jail and it's significant that Barney gets a lot less screentime in Season 6 onward and by the Scully era they're mostly using Lenny and Carl as Homer's foils.
>>474919 >He never liked Bart very much so Bart became increasingly irrelevant as time went on what were you supposed to do with Bart post-Season 9 anyway? Bartmania died with the 90s if not before the decade was over.
>>475787 Maggie really feels like a vestige of the early developmental phase of the show (much like Sherri & Terri) that became irrelevant as soon as they got the main cast's characterizations down pat. In the Ullman shorts and some of Season 1 she's a third wheel between Bart and Lisa but that angle was quickly dropped.
>>475773 It's more a matter of liking the character or not. When it's a character you really like you have no problem coming up with storylines for them almost effortlessly. I mean you see how Schulz quickly dropped Frieda from the Peanuts cast because he just didn't like her that much and came up with the excuse that there were only 2 or so gags he could do with the character. If he actually liked Frieda he could have easily used her more but he didn't and that was that.
Season 27 had a whopping seven Lisa episodes in it which I think is a record in Simpsons history beaten only by Season 9 which had nine Lisa eps, and then Season 28 had none for some odd reason.
>>475793 >Season 27 had a whopping seven Lisa episodes in it which I think is a record in Simpsons history beaten only by Season 9 which had nine Lisa eps, and then Season 28 had none for some odd reason. oh that's easily explained. Yeardley Smith was injured in an accident around that time and was recuperating so they didn't do any Lisa episodes for a season so she could get some rest.
>>475790 And it's almost ironic, really, because in the process of people arguing that Lisa is "the favorite" or "the writers' pet," it becomes more and more obvious that Bart is the fandom's pet.
>>475800 This kind of shines another light onto many of these obsessive anti-Lisa, pro-Bart autists whom not only comes off as misogynistic and deluded (to some degree) to idolize and whitewash Bart while Lisa is constantly shit on, but sounds kind of like /pol/ and /r9k/ escaped from their containment boards, speak of "chads" and "stacies" and various other much more troubling things, are active with their meme talk, hate "feeeemales" and feminism &and generally sneer at everything progressive, etc.
So yeah, I can't help by be really concerned about many of these Lisa haters whom think Bart is to idealize, such as this of his string of one-off relationships (and which they seem treat as being one of his admirable aspects, rather than his creativity, for instance).
>>475801 Lisa absolutely cannot really do or represent anything without getting the collective dismay and ire of the hater fandom as, much like I said, the ideals, morals and various personality traits and aspects she represent tend to be those reasons that a lot of folks out there don't take kindly to.
the idea of Lisa being a totally friendless aspie always ground my gears a little bit because even an annoying liberal douche like her can find friends, IRL she would just hang out with other liberal douches and they would all sit around complaining about toxic masculinity and whatnot
>>475864 that doesn't mean much. a lot of times IRL kids will hang out with each other just because they're the only people available and as they get older lose interest in one another.
Classic Lisa got Valentines, Ralph was the outcast she felt sorry for and shared a card out of pity. Nu Lisa would probably complain about the over-commercialization of Valentine's and ruin it just like she ruined Love Day.
I'm somewhat joking around here. I still like the character but prefer when she is sensitive and empathetic and not sounding like a jaded college liberal with a ton of student loan debts and whose only relationships are tinged with regret.