The SimpsoffsHell, d'oh, Bart must go.
By Seth StevensonPosted Thursday, Feb. 8, 2001, at 3:00 AM ET
In its prime, it was among the greatest TV shows in history. Even now, it has moments of brilliance. It's still better than 95 percent of television. But it's time to cancel The Simpsons.
During The Simpsons' peak years (roughly coinciding with Conan O'Brien's tenure there), the writing and performances were near flawless, week after week. But no one maintains perfection forever, and indeed, the show has been slipping of late. Jokes often fall flat. Timing isn't as razor sharp. Punch lines are overexplained, and the show's light touch is gone. Where before there were hilarious grace notes—clever tidbits caught in passing—now everything's a ba-dump-bump: setup followed by laugh line.
More alarming, the show has no vision. With Matt Groening gone to Futurama, and the reins handed to folks with little institutional memory, The Simpsons has lost its soul.
It was never one-liners that made the show what it was. Sure, they were great, and the show thrived on zany creativity, but its humor was always grounded in well-formed, honestly drawn characters. To quote Homer, "It's funny because it's true." But lately, plots are far-fetched. Characters do anything for a laugh instead of staying in, well, character. Before it falls any further, I say take it off the air. I know fellow fans will call for my head, but surely they admit the show's lost a step. Do they wish to watch it die slowly, wasting into something unrecognizable? Already, its animated Sunday night colleagues surpass it: Futurama does one-liners better, and King of the Hill excels at character-based comedy.
If I don't sound the death knell, who will? The (truly genius) actors who perform the voice-overs have a lovely gig—no makeup, no hairstyling, presumably very lucrative—that they won't want to abandon soon. Much of the animation process is outsourced to Asia. The ratings will stay strong for years after the sell-by date because Americans suffer from TV inertia. (Look at the continued success of ER.) Fox won't murder its flagship show until it absolutely must.
But calling it quits right now might give The Simpsons a brief shot in the arm. Writers could concentrate quality into a few final episodes. And imagine how America would gather for a Simpsons farewell tour! The show could go out on top, by choice, as it richly deserves to. Join me in my cry: Cancel The Simpsons!
Reader Comments From The Fray:
[Notes from the Fray Editor: Readers were outraged. Zac Johnson, below, practically accuses Seth Stevenson of being a chubby guy with a faint mustache. John's post "Cancel Seth Stevenson" was so deeply unfair and mean that we are not featuring it (or only this part: "Much of his writing process is probably outsourced to Asia anyway… Seth could concentrate quality into a few final columns…"). And there were many other posts which were shocked at the very idea of canceling the show. One reader said if it went "I will sit on my couch like a lazy fool, and be forced to do my homework." And in a low blow, SP quotes some dialogue from the show: "Let's put it on the Internet!" Bart: "NO, we have to reach people whose opinions actually matter."
A comment from Fray star Tony Adragna produced a very wide-ranging argument--starts here. And Sammie Woodfin makes an unusual analogy: "Think of The Simpsons as a beautiful super model that is slowly growing older and losing perfection quite rapidly. Do you kill the super model immediately? Or do you just let nature take its own course?" (Apparently the answer is Save the Simpsons, though after reading another "Culturebox" article, we think perhaps Bart will get some magazine covers).]
I agree that it's time to cancel The Simpsons, but not for the reasons given in the article. Part of the greatness of the show was its initial subversiveness. Bart became the poster child for bad behavior everywhere. But lately, The Simpsons has become just another half hour family values morality play. Like every other sitcom, it seems, it always has to wrap up with a moral. TV entertainment has become a means of sugar coating morality medicine for the masses; The Simpsons was refreshing because it didn't do that. Not any more, unfortunately; it's joined King of the Hill as one of the leading moral messengers on TV.
--Vic Riley
(To reply, click here.)
It may have been Samuel Johnson who asserted he was always pleased to hear of a poet dying "for then I can be sure of having all of him on my shelf". That reason ("closure", if you like) is about the only one that would make me agitate for cancelling The Simpsons. On all other grounds, I say let Fox keep churning it out. If future episodes go downhill, I don't have to watch them. Even if they turn to complete crap, it will not tarnish the brilliance of what has come before. At least, not for me.
If you insist on judging The Simpsons as a complete opus, that's a different story. But it's taking the suspension of disbelief a bit too far, I think, if a few "worst episodes ever" seriously diminish your enjoyment of the rest.
--Tony Prentakis
(To reply, click here.)
The Simpsons is still the funniest show on television. Any time a group of Simpsons fanatics get together (chat rooms, conventions, rehab) there is always the chubby guy with the faint mustache who proclaims last Sunday's was the "Worst Episode Ever" and bemoans the loss of Conan O'Brien/John Schwartzwelder/(Insert name here) and proclaims that the show is a mere shadow of itself, acting as if they've made some sort of scientific breakthrough. The fact is, that when that huge tree came crashing through Kentucky Fried Panda and Homer screamed "NO!!! It was finger Ling-Ling good", that's some fine television, full of bizarre spark and genuine comedy. For shame Seth Stevenson, for you know not of which you speak.
--Zac Johnson
(To reply, click here.)
(2/12)
What did you think of this article?
Join The Fray: Our Reader Discussion Forum
SPONSORED CONTENT
PRINT
DISCUSS
E-MAIL
RSS
RECOMMEND...
Facebook
MySpace
Mixx
Digg
Reddit
del.icio.us
Furl
Ma.gnolia
Sphere
StumbleUpon
Sarah Palin's Brand of Populism Is Dangerous and Deceptive
New York Times Amazed To Find Jews in Montana
All Your Nagging Amanda Knox Questions Answered
No One Writes a Great Letter Anymore
New Evidence That Buying Green Products Can Make You a Worse Person
Could a Tea Party Candidate Actually Win an Election?
Reader Comments From The Fray:
[Notes from the Fray Editor: Readers were outraged. Zac Johnson, below, practically accuses Seth Stevenson of being a chubby guy with a faint mustache. John's post "Cancel Seth Stevenson" was so deeply unfair and mean that we are not featuring it (or only this part: "Much of his writing process is probably outsourced to Asia anyway… Seth could concentrate quality into a few final columns…"). And there were many other posts which were shocked at the very idea of canceling the show. One reader said if it went "I will sit on my couch like a lazy fool, and be forced to do my homework." And in a low blow, SP quotes some dialogue from the show: "Let's put it on the Internet!" Bart: "NO, we have to reach people whose opinions actually matter."
A comment from Fray star Tony Adragna produced a very wide-ranging argument--starts here. And Sammie Woodfin makes an unusual analogy: "Think of The Simpsons as a beautiful super model that is slowly growing older and losing perfection quite rapidly. Do you kill the super model immediately? Or do you just let nature take its own course?" (Apparently the answer is Save the Simpsons, though after reading another "Culturebox" article, we think perhaps Bart will get some magazine covers).]
I agree that it's time to cancel The Simpsons, but not for the reasons given in the article. Part of the greatness of the show was its initial subversiveness. Bart became the poster child for bad behavior everywhere. But lately, The Simpsons has become just another half hour family values morality play. Like every other sitcom, it seems, it always has to wrap up with a moral. TV entertainment has become a means of sugar coating morality medicine for the masses; The Simpsons was refreshing because it didn't do that. Not any more, unfortunately; it's joined King of the Hill as one of the leading moral messengers on TV.
--Vic Riley
(To reply, click here.)
It may have been Samuel Johnson who asserted he was always pleased to hear of a poet dying "for then I can be sure of having all of him on my shelf". That reason ("closure", if you like) is about the only one that would make me agitate for cancelling The Simpsons. On all other grounds, I say let Fox keep churning it out. If future episodes go downhill, I don't have to watch them. Even if they turn to complete crap, it will not tarnish the brilliance of what has come before. At least, not for me.
If you insist on judging The Simpsons as a complete opus, that's a different story. But it's taking the suspension of disbelief a bit too far, I think, if a few "worst episodes ever" seriously diminish your enjoyment of the rest.
--Tony Prentakis
(To reply, click here.)
The Simpsons is still the funniest show on television. Any time a group of Simpsons fanatics get together (chat rooms, conventions, rehab) there is always the chubby guy with the faint mustache who proclaims last Sunday's was the "Worst Episode Ever" and bemoans the loss of Conan O'Brien/John Schwartzwelder/(Insert name here) and proclaims that the show is a mere shadow of itself, acting as if they've made some sort of scientific breakthrough. The fact is, that when that huge tree came crashing through Kentucky Fried Panda and Homer screamed "NO!!! It was finger Ling-Ling good", that's some fine television, full of bizarre spark and genuine comedy. For shame Seth Stevenson, for you know not of which you speak.
--Zac Johnson
(To reply, click here.)
(2/12)