How YOU would fix the show.

[TerrorK]

Okay, I'm trying to give a somewhat old idea here a fresh angle, so this is basically what the idea is: if you were, hypothetically, the Executive Producer of the show come next season, what would you change? Not only that, how would you prioritise these changes? Here are the options...


Characterisation - Homer
Characterisation - Marge
Characterisation - Bart
Characterisation - Lisa
Characterisation - Maggie
Characterisation - Family Overall (can overwrite any or all of the above if you want)
Characterisation - Other Specific (e.g. Characterisation - Burns)
Characterisation - Supporting Cast Overall
Writing - Plots & Storylines
Writing - Flow & Pacing
Writing - Joke to Story Ratio
Writing - Joke to Emotion/Drama Ratio
Jokes - Dating & Lastibility
Jokes - Timing & Length
Jokes - Subtlety
Jokes - Intelligence & Wit
Jokes - Wackiness
Voice Acting - Main Cast
Voice Acting - Supporting Cast
Voice Acting - Guest Cast
Animation - Style & Quality
Animation - Character Designs
Other - State your own (e.g. Talking Itchy & Scratchy)


Here's the idea, you take the options from the list of things to change, and assign up to five of them to each of the appropriate categories below. The order doesn't matter in each category, though if you want you can number them to reflect that:

Critical
Quite Important
Middling
Low Priority

Also, if you feel it is so, there's also a final category where you can put things called Not an Issue if you feel that is the case.

Okay, I think that's the basic idea. So here's mine for an example for those who are a little unsure...

Critical
* Writing - Flow & Pacing
* Jokes - Timing & Length
* Jokes - Subtlety
* Jokes - Intelligence & Wit
* Characterisation - Family Overall

Quite Important
* Characterisation - Mr. Burns
* Jokes - Dating & Lastibility
* Jokes - Wackiness
* Writing - Joke to Story Ratio
* Writing - Joke to Emotion/Drama Ratio

Middling
* Voice Acting - Main Cast
* Voice Acting - Guest Cast
* Animation - Character Designs
* Writing - Plots & Storylines
* Characterisation - Supporting Cast Overall

Low Priority
* Animation - Style & Quality
* Voice Acting - Supporting Cast
* Other - Talking Itchy & Scratchy

[Mira]

Critical
Writing - Plots & Storylines
Writing - Joke to Story Ratio
Jokes - Intelligence & Wit
Jokes - Subtlety
Characterisation - Bart

Quite Important
Voice Acting - Main Cast
Characterisation - Homer
Characterisation - Marge
Writing - Flow & Pacing
Writing - Joke to Emotion/Drama Ratio

Middling
Jokes- Wackiness
Jokes - Timing & Length
Voice Acting - Supporting Cast
Characterisation - Overuse of characters for jokes (Bullies, Cat Lady, Cletus, etc.)

Low Priority
Characterisation - Supporting Cast Overall

The very first one seems to really ruin or change an episode. There's way too much recycling and rehashing, especially in Season 17. Milhouse of Sand & Fog is a really good example.

[Reverend Lovejoy]

Can't think of much, but I'd definately give the Lovejoys more screen time.

[Dr Zaius]

End all the ridiculously overgoing, unfunny forced "jokes".

[H Thompson]

Can't think of much, but I'd definately give the Lovejoys more screen time.

Here's an idea, how about anytime you want to post a opinion on something you just post a full stop, we'll know what you mean and you'll save the effort of writing out the same fucking thing every time you make one of your useless posts. thanks.

[Zilla]

Can't think of much, but I'd definately give the Lovejoys more screen time.
Why? They're hardly good characters, are they?

[Jake]

Empathy.

Give me a reason to care about the situations the characters are in, then the bad jokes won't seem so bad. The old Simpsons was a show where you'd laugh with the characters, unlike the show of now where it's mostly laugh-AT.

[somewhat]

I don't think I am refined enough in my criticism to be as detailed and specific as your method, but I think that a little more wit and a lot less overstatement in general would go a long way.

[Itchy]

The changes I would make would be to make Homer stupidly funny and not just stupid as in recent episodes. Let THOH stories be written by diffrent writers instead of one guy making all three segments. And I miss the wraparound story around the tales that the early THOHs had so would bring back that as well. And of course I would give Itchy and Scratchy more appearnces, they seem to appear much more rarely nowadays.

[TheFlandersMan]

Empathy.

Give me a reason to care about the situations the characters are in, then the bad jokes won't seem so bad. The old Simpsons was a show where you'd laugh with the characters, unlike the show of now where it's mostly laugh-AT.

Good point.

[Reverend Lovejoy]

Here's an idea, how about anytime you want to post a opinion on something you just post a full stop, we'll know what you mean and you'll save the effort of writing out the same fucking thing every time you make one of your useless posts. thanks.

Here's an idea for you, how about you just put "Lovejoy" and a full stop after my posts and you'll save the effort of an unnecessary retaliation. :angry: They asked what I would do, I answered, so do the world a favour and leave me alone. :angry:

[H Thompson]

Ok I don't mean to be so hard on you, you're a nice person.

[Zilla]

Sorry but I don't think he is. I think he is a Lovejoy (an extremely mediocre family) obsessed freak who can't let anyone else have an opinion which doesn't concur with his.
Absolutely pathetic! :laugh:

[Nebuchanezzar]

Critical
* Characterisation - Homer
* Writing - Plots & Storylines
* Writing - Flow & Pacing
* Jokes - Intelligence & Wit
* Other - Less imitation of Family Guy type jokes

Quite Important

* Writing - Joke to Story Ratio
* Writing - Joke to Emotion/Drama Ratio
* Jokes - Subtlety
* Jokes - Timing & Length
* Characterisation - Supporting Cast Overall

Middling

* Characterisation - Marge
* Characterisation - Bart
* Jokes - Wackiness
* Jokes - Dating & Lastibility
* Characterisation - Family Overall (can overwrite any or all of the above if you want)

Low Priority

* Characterisation - Lisa (It's already basically perfect)
* Characterisation - Maggie

No effect - Ie: They're already good enough.

* Voice Acting - Main Cast
* Voice Acting - Supporting Cast
* Voice Acting - Guest Cast
* Animation - Style & Quality
* Animation - Character Designs
* Characterisation - Other Specific (None)

[Reverend Lovejoy]

Sorry but I don't think he is. I think he is a Lovejoy (an extremely mediocre family) obsessed freak who can't let anyone else have an opinion which doesn't concur with his.
Absolutely pathetic! :laugh:

Fuck you, I don't care what you think. I forgive you, Homer_Thompson, compared to this guy. I suppose you know what 'absolutely pathetic' means, since you are indeed more pathetic than me (I didn't think that was possible). Anyway, as I must have mentioned somewhere, I have Asperger's Syndrome. This 'Lovejoy obsessed freak' thing is the result over a disease over which I have no control. Do you think I like being like this? If you do, then you're more stupid than I took you for in the first place. I'm not pleading for sympathy here, I'm just telling people to get off my back. And if you want to know what mediocre is, just watch a season 11 ep. And for God's sake, leave me alone.

[Stratman]

End all the ridiculously overgoing, unfunny forced "jokes".

Let me END any doubts about your sexuality; you are not gay. Flaunting your love of women isn't necessary. But seriously...

First and foremost, the show is in need of stories that are about the Simpson’s, rather than stories featuring the Simpson’s. Also, being able to laugh, and empathise with the characters, as Jake brilliantly pointed out, is paramount and needs to be addressed.

Secondly, there have been times when I've gotten half way through an episode and thought to myself, ''what the hell is this episode about?'' Clear, focused storylines are a must.

I won't mention originality as the show has 268, I mean 368 episodes under its belt.

I may be in the minority here, but lately I've found the acting quite lacklustre. It just doesn't have the same 'punch.'

[Zilla]

Fuck you, I don't care what you think. I forgive you, Homer_Thompson, compared to this guy. I suppose you know what 'absolutely pathetic' means, since you are indeed more pathetic than me (I didn't think that was possible). Anyway, as I must have mentioned somewhere, I have Asperger's Syndrome. This 'Lovejoy obsessed freak' thing is the result over a disease over which I have no control. Do you think I like being like this? If you do, then you're more stupid than I took you for in the first place. I'm not pleading for sympathy here, I'm just telling people to get off my back. And if you want to know what mediocre is, just watch a season 11 ep. And for God's sake, leave me alone.

I know all about Asperger's Syndrome.
If you don't want people to be "on your back" (which let's face it, no-one is) then don't get all uptight whenever someone doesn't agree with your opinion.
And don't reply with the old "But I can't help it because of the AS" cliche. Yes, you may think angry thoughts about someone when they say they don't like the Lovejoys but the AS doesn't make you post it, does it?
As for your language - I recommend some water and lots of soap for that mouth of yours.

[TheFlandersMan]

lol. :LOL:

[Channel Surfer]

If you don't want people to be "on your back" (which let's face it, no-one is)

Five of your seventeen posts have been made to hassle her on her Lovejoy obsession. So at least for you it was a fair observation for her to make. It's not a big deal, and I have no desire to see habitual commenting on it and all of the resulting fallout afterwards.

[Mira]

Reverend Lovejoy is a girl? Well in that case she's not weird or odd at all.

[Al Jean's Butt]

Well, I can't really name my priorities, but besides the obvious ones of characterisation and more emphasis on plot, I would put want to work on the character model for Homer. It might be just me, but there's something about the new character model that I just find distracting. I think that his eyes are too small and his muzzle is too large. Or it could be that his muzzle and forehead are just a bit too large, but either way I feel like these three things are a bit out of proportion.

[TerrorK]

Well, I can't really name my priorities, but besides the obvious ones of characterisation and more emphasis on plot, I would put want to work on the character model for Homer. It might be just me, but there's something about the new character model that I just find distracting. I think that his eyes are too small and his muzzle is too large. Or it could be that his muzzle and forehead are just a bit too large, but either way I feel like these three things are a bit out of proportion.

I agree, actually. I think they've standardised the characters far too much, many to the point of looking rather boring and expressionless, with many of the features that made them unique toned down. And this goes for rather boring character designs of new characters or seldom seen ones returning.

I can understand them eliminating certain things, like the yellow borderless hair, but I think they've gone too far lately, IMO. Character designs are just too well rounded... the faces of Moe and Burns for instance are much rounder and less flattened and stretched than they once were it seems. I feel it also makes the characters look less Groening-like in appearance.

They're not as bad as the horribly bland, almost Muppet-like chop and change hair, noses, etc look that the Family Guy designs have, but they seem to be getting duller with time, even if the animation itself has improved lately. This was incredibly obvious when they brought back Bob the RV dealer again in Mobile Homer. They made his nose more standard, his eyes larger and rounder, his overbite less pronounced, and (worst of all) shrunk his ears right down. The redesigning totally lost the things that made Bob such an interesting and unique character.

[DotheBartman]

Fuck you, I don't care what you think. I forgive you, Homer_Thompson, compared to this guy. I suppose you know what 'absolutely pathetic' means, since you are indeed more pathetic than me (I didn't think that was possible). Anyway, as I must have mentioned somewhere, I have Asperger's Syndrome. This 'Lovejoy obsessed freak' thing is the result over a disease over which I have no control. Do you think I like being like this? If you do, then you're more stupid than I took you for in the first place. I'm not pleading for sympathy here, I'm just telling people to get off my back. And if you want to know what mediocre is, just watch a season 11 ep. And for God's sake, leave me alone.

I know Surfer doesn't want any more comments on this (and I apologize), but I hope I can add my two cents here...

The thing with AS is that, along with the obsessions, it makes it harder to function in social situations, and certainly, part of that can be talking too much about subjects of interest/obsession when it isn't appropriate. However, considering people here have made it fairly clear that they don't want to see a mention of the Lovejoys in every single one of your posts, and that it isn't appropriate for every topic, I'm not sure how much that applies here. I know AS can make things rough, but it isn't good to use it as an excuse. As Asperger person's dream is practically to have people actually spell out for them when something is or isn't appropriate, instead of having to rely on body language, etc., which they often can't read. In this case, instead of annoying people and using AS as an excuse, I'd suggest using the directness of people's posts and figuring out when it is and isn't appropriate. It'll save you a lot more grief than shouting "I have a disease!" every time someone raises issue with your obsession.

And believe me, I'm not trying to be a jerk about your AS....I was diagnosed with the same damn thing. I'm also not sure I would classify it as a disease exactly (personally, I honestly have a lot of objection to the idea of a "cure", and find many of those organizations like Cure Autism Now to be abominable. And believe me, I'm not alone). I just think it would be better if you aknowledged that you're different, but not use it as an "excuse"; instead, use it to better yourself, and as an explanation when neccesary. A lot of people with AS have been incredibly successful when they learned to use Asperger's and who they are to their advantage (and there are many positives). So try to find the positive in it, and grow from the negatives; there's no reason to turn yourself into a constant victim.

Um, that said....this formula would be difficult for me to use, partially because I don't see anything as "critical" at this point. There are major problems, at least in some episodes, but I don't see anything that's actually consistently awful or a major issue in nearly every show. It's more like everything is a problem at some point, and it just varies from show to show. Which is a lot like the classic years really, though obviously those years had much better overall quality.

[Reverend Lovejoy]

Actually, I try not to use AS as an excuse, I was just explaining that I couldn't help being a "Lovejoy-obsessed freak". Oh, and for the record, Zilla, I hardly ever swear much.

[Son of Bomber]

The show needs ending, not fixing. They have truly done everything. Maybe if it had started its life as a really zany show todays episodes wouldn't seem so crummy, but The Simpsons bravely went against having unfeasible plots, and did it well for the first eight years. The past six seasons have seriously damaged the show's rep in my eyes. A real shame.

[DotheBartman]

Actually, I try not to use AS as an excuse, I was just explaining that I couldn't help being a "Lovejoy-obsessed freak". Oh, and for the record, Zilla, I hardly ever swear much.

Fair enough, just thought I'd offer some advice. And I agree Zilla's comment was way over the line.

[TheFlandersMan]

I agree, actually. I think they've standardised the characters far too much, many to the point of looking rather boring and expressionless, with many of the features that made them unique toned down. And this goes for rather boring character designs of new characters or seldom seen ones returning.

Very True. They are so wooden to me now. Like videogame sprites that have just a few movements that vary now and then. It shouldn't be that way. In animation there's unlimited possibilities without being over the top.


The show needs ending, not fixing. They have truly done everything. Maybe if it had started its life as a really zany show todays episodes wouldn't seem so crummy, but The Simpsons bravely went against having unfeasible plots, and did it well for the first eight years. The past six seasons have seriously damaged the show's rep in my eyes. A real shame.

I agree, to a certain degree. Many, including myself are reluctant to admit it though. Though it does give me something to watch every week...

[TriforceBun]

Very True. They are so wooden to me now. Like videogame sprites that have just a few movements that vary now and then. It shouldn't be that way. In animation there's unlimited possibilities without being over the top.


Actually, I'd say it's more like 2-D sprites compared to 3-D renders. Sure, the sprites may be a bit more primitive, but I find them much more expressive than the gorgeously rendered 3-D models. Compare Super Mario World's Mario to Mario Party's. Or the FF3/6 cast to FF7's visual expressions. Sometimes, simple overexaggeration works best, especially in the animated world of the show. But that's a very small complaint from me, actually, as I really love most of the animation nowadays.

That's about all I love, as the show has recently gotten very stale. While I'm pleased overall with a lack of horrible episodes in S16, the episodes just aren't MEMORABLE anymore. They're starting to blend together. So what's most critical to the show at this point is a focused, tight plot. No more rehashing, no more disjointed first, second, third acts--just go in with a main theme, explore the theme, make us laugh, and tie it up nicely. You did it all the time in the classic years, and now it's extremely rare to catch a truly GREAT episode (the last one I really loved was TWWW't).

Only slightly below that complaint is the joke timing. The tastefulness and quality of the jokes generally stay above the water (very little cringe-worthy moments anymore, at least), but the timing often sinks even the best jokes nowadays. There are way too many looooong jokes! It's as if they want every gag to be another rake scene (...which wasn't really THAT funny in the first place)!

What's perhaps most frustrating is that these two major complaints can cancel each other out. Cutting down the jokes not only makes the gags funnier, but allows more time for fleshed out plots (and ideally, more great gags). I just can't see how some of this stuff gets pitched, produced, directed, animated, then fine-tuned over the period of nine months...and we end up with something like Bonfire of the Manatees. Clean it up, fellows!

To end on a positive note, characterization has gradually been getting much better, in general. While it usually doesn't explore the depth of the cast much, it very rarely has truly out-of-character moments now. The animation is often beautiful. There are still a few laughs per episode. And the show has strayed away from the wackiness of Scully and the tasteless sex jokes from early Jean. Even so, there're still major improvements to be had--it may not be a bad show now, but it often IS boring.

[TerrorK]

I personally think that many of the problems could be fixed by slowing down the pacing of the show. After watching some of the older episodes recently again on DVD, and recalling commentary comments about how slowly paced the show was back then compared to now, I think that the show today is way too fast.

It really is like the show suffers from ADD these days, going at an alarming pace, and sometimes shifting focus entirely along the way like wild mood swings, rather than just settling in and focussing on one thing properly. Putting the show on some metaphorical ritalin could really be a bonus to the stories and overall flow of it all. Cutting back on the subplots would be good too, as they seem more rampant than ever.

There's honestly too many faults to point out regarding all aspects of the show, because I feel everything is in some form of suffering state at the moment, but if they can just slow the show down a bit more, make the jokes that more wittier and intelligent like they once were, and just get some consistency, it'd do wonders, and much of the rest would fall into place.

Also, I notice that some episodes will get lambasted for being overly sitcommy. I agree to a certain extent, the show should never be sitcommy in the likes of Will & Grace, Friends and Joey, etc. But after watching the first three seasons, and comparing them to the Jean-era, I can't help but feel that the show should actually become a little more like the old style family sitcoms and less like the Saturday morning cartoon stylings of late. I don't mean it should be all schmaltzy and fuzzy or anything, but that it should get back to dealing with more realistic, down to earth situations that one can identify with, rather than off-the-wall cartoon happenances that hardly anybody would come across in reality. The situations are just far too outlandish lately, and the show needs to get back to basics, IMO.

[Veryjammy]

The problem is, I'm not convinced there are that many 'down to earth' scenarios left for the show to explore. After nearly 400 episodes the show has very little places left to go as far as home-based family storylines go. That's likely why plots have been getting very outlandish for some time. And to be honest I don't think it's a major issue; after all I doubt anyone can identify with going into space, or being hunted down by a demented killer, or having a runaway monorail in the town but it doesn't mean they're not great episodes.

And don't take this personally TerrorK but I think your original subdivisions of aspects the show needs to work on is naive. You separate out jokes into

Jokes - Dating & Lastibility
Jokes - Timing & Length
Jokes - Subtlety
Jokes - Intelligence & Wit
Jokes - Wackiness

And in reality it just isn't that simple. You can't just go in and say 'well let's make the jokes more subtle, less wacky, and more intelligent.' I doubt the current writers aren't aiming for that already to be honest. When people are pitching gags in the writers room, I doubt they're thinking about whether they're subtle enough or witty enough, they're just thinking about whether they are funny. And in all honesty, I doubt that many classic golden-era jokes would meet your criteria, they were just much better, funnier jokes in the first place rather than meeting golden rules on wit or intelligence. I will agree with you on the timing though, and that should be a very easy problem to sort out imo.

[TerrorK]

The problem is, I'm not convinced there are that many 'down to earth' scenarios left for the show to explore. After nearly 400 episodes the show has very little places left to go as far as home-based family storylines go. That's likely why plots have been getting very outlandish for some time. And to be honest I don't think it's a major issue; after all I doubt anyone can identify with going into space, or being hunted down by a demented killer, or having a runaway monorail in the town but it doesn't mean they're not great episodes.

Oh, I agree, at least to a certain degree. There were certainly a fair share of outlandish situations in the past. The difference was that there'd be more realistic ones between them, rather than being insane idea after insane idea. It's not that there's neccessarily anything wrong with them, it's just that to have them happen too often wears thin, and doesn't come across as being that realistic. That combined with the fact that the set ups were usually done better in the earlier days too, to make them seem more realistic.

And don't take this personally TerrorK but I think your original subdivisions of aspects the show needs to work on is naive. You separate out jokes into

Jokes - Dating & Lastibility
Jokes - Timing & Length
Jokes - Subtlety
Jokes - Intelligence & Wit
Jokes - Wackiness

And in reality it just isn't that simple. You can't just go in and say 'well let's make the jokes more subtle, less wacky, and more intelligent.' I doubt the current writers aren't aiming for that already to be honest. When people are pitching gags in the writers room, I doubt they're thinking about whether they're subtle enough or witty enough, they're just thinking about whether they are funny. And in all honesty, I doubt that many classic golden-era jokes would meet your criteria, they were just much better, funnier jokes in the first place rather than meeting golden rules on wit or intelligence. I will agree with you on the timing though, and that should be a very easy problem to sort out imo.

Firstly, one of the quotes I remember floating around in the olden days about the show several times from varying sources was something along the likes of "you can do a high-brow literary reference one moment, and then a butt crack joke the next."

That basically sums up my feelings about why the show really worked in the past: it was versatile and universal in it's humour. It could appeal to the smartest person in the world one moment, and then Joe Shmoe the next. Not onlt that, but it could do it in a matter that would make neither groan about the joke that didn't suit them because of the way it was handled.

I understand what you're saying, but the fact it, the jokes just aren't funny these days. And I feel that many of the reasons they aren't are because they suffer from the factors that I outlined above. Okay, a fair share of the jokes just would never be funny, and to be honest, I don't know what the writers were even thinking when they put them in (things like Homer using gummy worms to catch a gummy fish for example). But there are a fair share of recent jokes that would work if they were either timed better, their length was reduced, the reference they were making wasn't blatantly pointed out in some manner, they hadn't been so random, etc.

The thing is, while not all the jokes of the classic years were witty, or subtle, or down to earth, or whatever, those jokes did exist around the others. During the classic years, OFF had layers of jokes, and varied styles. Now the humour seems so one-dimensional, like instead of aiming at a wide range of audiences and being a show for anybody, they're just aiming at one or two. And if that's not the case, I can't see why being witty, intelligent, and clever came so easily to the staff of old, but can't be achieved by the staff today. There are definitely some writers there who should be capable of it, but they seem to be content with inconsistent mediocrity.

Sure, one can say that better timing, delivery, and length can fix many a joke, but there's a vast majority of gags these days that no amount of fixing will mend. They just aren't funny no matter how they're done.

[Stratman]

Oh, I agree, at least to a certain degree. There were certainly a fair share of outlandish situations in the past. The difference was that there'd be more realistic ones between them, rather than being insane idea after insane idea. It's not that there's neccessarily anything wrong with them, it's just that to have them happen too often wears thin, and doesn't come across as being that realistic. That combined with the fact that the set ups were usually done better in the earlier days too, to make them seem more realistic.

I think one of the reasons those early ''boundry pushing'' episodes worked so well was they often had a strong emotional anchor. Deep Space Homer is a perfect example. The notion of Homer becoming an astronaut is quite hard to fathom, but seeing the family worry about Homer really brought it back down to earth, so to speak.

[HellKat666]

Critical
*Writing - Plots and Storylines I know it's hard to be original after producing over 350 episodes, but at least create plots that are interesting and make us care about the family (which goes along with Jake's post about empathy).
*Writing - Flow and Pacing Many episodes these days are either too fast-paced, or feel disjointed with the pace changing seemingly at random.
*Jokes - Timing and Length There have been too many examples of jokes that go on too long recently.
*Jokes - Intelligence and Wit The show seems considerably dumbed down nowadays, though that could be the result of a lack of subtlety with the jokes.
*Jokes - Subtlety Nothing ruins a good joke worse than having it made so completely obvious that even a mentally-challenged two year-old gets it.

Quite Important
*Characterization - Homer He's better overall now than during the Scully era, but he still gets annoyingly whiny or too deliberately stupid at times.
*Characterization - Marge She's actually worse now than in the Scully years. Though she has her good moments (SWTE and MSP stick out in my mind), she is often either too crazy or used only as an antagonist (The Father, Son, and Holy Guest Star for example).
*Characterization - Bart He just doesn't seem like his old self. Like Marge, he has his moments but otherwise he either comes off as too much of a wimp or just a generic troublemaking kid.
*Writing - Joke to Story Ratio A lot of times it seems like the story was written around the jokes, rather than the other way around. I'd rather have an episode that doesn't have many jokes but has a great story instead of a weak story with many jokes (especially if the jokes aren't very good).
*Jokes - Dating and Lastibility Topical humor works great with South Park. The show is made quicker and the jokes are usually still relevant when the episode airs. However, The Simpsons should not try to imitate this. By the time a Simpsons episode airs, the jokes feel dated. Plus, random pop-culture influenced humor fits a show like Family Guy. It doesn't fit The Simpsons, who should be focused more on their stories and character humor.
*Jokes - Wackiness This is pretty self-explanatory.
*Voice Acting - Main Cast The cast just seems bored at times and give lifeless performances. This may have to do with the fact that they're sick of the uninspired script and don't like voicing characters who act OOC.

Middling
*Characterization - Lisa She's actually improved quite a bit. There aren't even too many OOC moments for her recently. If anything, sometimes she comes off as too generic. She's also not used a much as she should be.
*Characterization - Supporting Cast Overall Too many of them have been relegated to one-note characters or act oddly. I think Burns and Flanders are the biggest offenders here. Plus, like Mira said, some characters are just overused for what really amounts to one joke (Cat Lady: says something unintelligible and throws cats, Bullies: do something that you wouldn't expect from bullies, Cletus: says something dumb, etc.).
*Writing - Joke to Emotion/Drama Ratio This was probably my biggest problem with Marge's Son Poisoning. It could've been a great episode; instead, the emotional impact was brought down by so many failed jokes.
*Voice Acting - Guest Cast I'm tired of guest stars whose appearances just feels pointless. It's not even a matter of whether they play themselves or not. Just don't have someone as a guest star if you have nothing substantial for them.
*Animation - Character Designs Something seems off about them.

Low Priority
*Characterization - Maggie While I don't think she's being used to her full potential, there haven't been too many times recently where I didn't like how she was characterized.
*Voice Acting - Supporting Cast This is everyone outside of the main six, right? If so, none of them really bother me, probably because they're used so little. In some cases, they're barely used at all (for example, I hardly ever hear Martin/Sherri/Terri outside of about two episodes per season).
*Animation - Style and Quality I don't see anything wrong with it.

[professorfrink]

i like the idea of moving the center of the show away from the simpsons and calling it springfield stories or something of that nature....base the episodes on 22 short stories except you'll have 3 "10 minute cartoons" thats probably been done by other shows before ...but name an idea the simpsons havent stolen

[No, Connie, over here!]

Re-hire all the writers they had back in the semi-early to mid to semi-late 90s.

[Jamie]

Critical

Jokes - Timing & Length
I think timing is the biggest problem with The Simpsons now. I can't tell you how may times there's a joke that's funny but just drags on to the point of unfunniness. One of my favorite jokes in LETS is when Homer says "first thing tomorrow, I'm going to punch Lenny in the face!" and then it cuts to Lenny being punched in the face. Total time: 3 seconds at most. A keen editor in the editing booth could work wonders and maybe even make room for the one minute lost to commercials that Jean is always whining about.

Writing - Flow & Pacing
Sometimes the first act wanders around aimlessly while the last few minutes of the show is a scramble to end the story. And what the fuck was the deal with that Rob Reiner LA promotion detour that took like two minutes?

Writing - Plots & Storylines
Stop "ironically" reverting to standard sitcom cliches.

Other - State your own
Stop having the family go to conventions or museums every episode so the episode can be padded out with three minutes of lame observational jokes. It's a horrible writing crutch.

Characterisation - Homer
Why is Homer such a whiny asshole these days? He seems written more like a teenager than a naive child.

Characterisation - Lisa
Write her as an 8-year old girl, not a 20-ish college protestor.

Other - State your own
There doesn't need to be a "Chief Wiggum, Eddie, and Lou Witty Banter" scene every episode.

Characterisation - Bart
Bart seems to have lapsed into his "mature years". Make him funny again.

Other - State your own
There is no need for a "Homer and Marge make intentionally cheesy innuendo while getting intimate" scene in every episode.

Animation - Character Designs
Background characters and celebrities look too much like real people. Simpsonize them! It's bizarre to see some celebrity guy with small, realistic pupils is talking to Homer, whose grotesque eyeballs take up a third of his face.

Voice Acting - Supporting Cast
Stop using Tress Macneille so much. She can only do three character types: small child with annoying voice, old lady, and businesswoman.

Quite Important

Animation - Style & Quality
Acting, acting, acting. Make it look interesting. Be more liberal with camera angles. Feel free to go off model when a scene calls for it.

Characterisation - Other Specific
Man do I hate Cletus and Brandine

Characterisation - Other Specific
Don't use Lindsay Naegle ever again

Characterisation - Supporting Cast Overall
Whenever something happens, three characters quip on the action with dipsoable one-liners relating to their "gimmick".

Stop it.


Jokes - Subtlety
Be subtle when you make a meta-reference.

Jokes - Dating & Lastibility
Reality show parodies six years after the trend took off? Okay. At least try to be "with it", man. But don't overdo it because you'll seem like a middle-aged dad trying to connect with his children.

Jokes - Intelligence & Wit
Be more funny

Jokes - Wackiness
Delve into fantasy more often, like the "you can run, but you can't glide!" scene or Homer imagining himself as solid gold for no reason.

Middling

Characterisation - Krusty
He's not goofy anymore, and we rarely see him on his show or see Brad Bird-esque Krusty poses these days. He's just a jerk these days.

Voice Acting - Main Cast
Homer's voice is a smidgen too high-pitched. Skinner's voice isn't as deep and powerful as it once was. I'm stealing these complaints from TerrorK.

Jokes - Subtlety
When a character says something stupid, you don't need to have Lisa or whoever point out that it's stupid.

[do what donny dont does]

I would have one murder commited per episode. That would spice things up!
:hump: :hump:

[H Thompson]

pretty much agreed with jamie except Lisa isn't a 20 year old college student these days, she seems more like a 5 year old girl or who ocassionly says something about being a vegetarian or some other cause.
Sometimes she's even just the straight woman to set up other people's jokes, particulary in last years superbowl episode.

In fact in general I've never really understood the complaints about the simpsons kids not acting like kids. You ever tried having a conversation with an 8 year old girl?
Their idiots they have nothing intresting to say, a lot of them can barely even string a coherent sentence together. If Simpson children acted Exactly like real children they'd be very boring and annoying.

[Kiyosuki]

^Mmmmmm, I don't know about that. Children are inexperienced and can be tough to talk to but many of them arn't stupid. In fact, this generation's brought a large amount of kids thinking in more older ways at a younger age because of all the information. I think the reason why the kids are often far more well informed than the adults think in the show is because well....in real life they often are. I don't know about you, but I remember what it was like to be 10...and while being inexperienced...I wasn't incapable of absorbing what was going on around me. Nothing was worse than being treated by adults in a way that insulted my intelligence. I once read that a major issue in the modern times is that children know so much more about the world around them today...and often have a lot to talk about but are often scoffed at by Adults because of their age. Thats not really good guidance for today I don't think...but thats another subject alltogether. But I always felt the show sort of hinted at that often...especially with Lisa.


Wow, where do I start?

Well since I have a lot to say, I think I'll dedicate the first post to my first and foremost thought...characterization. I'll get to the other stuff later.

First....

Before I answer the specific questions...I've never agreed that the main problem with the Simpsons right now has been the lack of "down to earth" episodes. I think personally what made the Simpsons...and what to an extent still makes it so memorable...is how the characters react to whats going on. The storyline of the arcade game (you know, the oldschool four player), in all its wackiness could be the story of an episode...and I feel that if the characters are properly used and their reactions to things taken care of...it can be great stuff. We have to remember that while the Simpsons is a caricature of American life (and to an extent...family and people in general around the world. ) at its base...its become so much more from that. It was a caricature during season 1..and maybe season 2 but from that point on...every single character took on a motif and personality of their own that we find we care about. Thats in my opinion what makes the Simpsons so special, its incredible characterization of not just the family itself...but all of Springfield. Even to this date, no other animated series...or even show for that matter in the same vein...such as Family Guy, South Park, or even to an extent Futurama has had quite as much of a powerful and varied cast as this one has.

That being said, I think that is the show's greatest challenge right now. All the characters were once so incredibly human. Each character, even minor characters could be taken for face value...or you could look at them in a deeper light and see a complicated human being. They may or...may not be but the fact you can feel that is what counts. In all the film I've seen with a large cast...especially animation (and this encompasses all animation, even Japanese) I have to say few shows can boast the same powerful cast this show's brought us. Its all in the little subtleties...but I believe when you truly care even a little bit about the characters in a comedy...it makes the humor as well as drama mean so much more if its handled right.

I feel at the moment...rather than each character being written to act like themselves...I feel like they're being written as caricatures of themselves. Homer's mentality and tendancy towards wacky antics are traits of his, not the character itself. Ralph Wiggum wasn't just a bunch of random lines, he showed at various times that he was human...with his own things to deal with. Bart is a trouble maker...but his personality ranges so far beyond that. The point I'm trying to make is that each character's signature traits are being overused...they're overshadowing the characters. Jerkass Homer was born of this, Ralph feels depressingly empty, Bart doesn't have as much of that rebellious zing and sharpness that made his character so famous world wide. Its like rather than let the characters truly take flight in each plot...they're constantly written the same way. In the end...I think the show's biggest challenge is the characters don't feel as flexible as they once were. Its the difference between truly bringing a character to life...and simply writing a character, the little things. Different reactions, spontaneousness...never the same old thing over and over.

I also think pacing is a good thing to keep in mind. Thats not something you just "run out" of. The Simpsons has been known for its superb pacing and I think some of the latter seasons suffered from really awkward pace. That can do so much harm to the overall feeling.

Anyways, onto the other stuff

Critical

Characterization - Family: The whole thing. I think as the core characters it makes sense to prioritize it highest. Now....I think aside from what I said above...a major problem with the Simpsons themselves is they've been interacting with themselves far too much. Think about it...many of the best episodes were episodes where one or two of the members of the family interacting with the other characters. This continues even now, this season's Seemingly Never Ending Story didn't focus so much on the family's reaction to eachother...but stuff they did with Springfield's other residents. Hionestly...I think its so much funner watching these characters do stuff with the other people in depth rather than just constantly do stuff between eachother.

Granted...its necessary but a big complaint I constantly hear about is many plotlines between the Simpsons themselves feel overused. I think this is because past season 11...the family just interacted with itself far too much. You gotta mix things up a bit to get the best out of all these guys.

A few minor notes.

-Homer: Homer is really not hard to spruce up. All he needs to do is to keep his emotion in check a little bit more. He's so much more endearing when he handles things like ...a normal man. The things that we love Homer for just come with that... I think Homer started going astray when his famous character traits were used too often. He lost that human touch. Just cut it back a bit and I guarnatee he'd be better. Also, his reactions to things should go in similar vein.

-Marge: Marge has been through a lot, honestly though out of all the Simpsons she doesn't need much. I think the she'd do well to cut down on the nagging. The problem with Marge is that she's very straightforward...I've been liking the direction she's been taking lately...the writers seem to want to use her in more interesting ways. I think thats good but they've got to remember what made Marge who she is...her integrity.

-Bart: Ahhh...Bart. What happened to the Bartman? For me...Bart's really tough to think about. He hasn't...changed all that much. All thats really happened is I think he takes a back-seat far too much. More central use of Bart is always welcomed. But another thing is I think he lost that...edge that made him so memorable. And I'm not just talking about his roughness...or his trouble making ways...but how every action he did seemed so grandiose. His deeper side always caught your attention. I think maybe thats it...he sorta dulled his charisma a bit. I kind of like the more humble things we've seen of Bart lately but I think he really just needs to have more of an effect on plots. He's treated too passively. Oh also...I really miss "Bart and the other kids" episodes...like Lemon of Troy, Bart of Darkness, Milhouse doesn't live here anymore, Saturdays of Thunder, This little Wiggy etc. Good old fashioned adventures with the kids...we see so little of that at the moment. They made some of the funnest episodes. Just a spotlight on their lives or two every now and then.

-Lisa: Lisa's by far the show's most stable character....which is her charm. But I think they really did go overboard with the child-genius thing. What made Lisa my favorite character for so long was her defiance against the world...but at the same time the fact she was a little girl. She was so strong but so vulnerable at the same time. REally the character's just gotta lighten up a bit thats all. More "Lisa is a kid" stuff like the Graveyard episode. When she does go on her little crusades...she shouldn't be so stuck up over it. Thats not Lisa. She does it because she genuinly cares, not just...for the sake of it. Like Mr.Burns said, "Don't you ever turn off?". Writers should take that advice and just let Lisa be a little girl at her core again. Come on...where's the "I eat Fruitloops for breakfast!" scenes? :D

-Maggie: Mmmm...well not much to say really. I'd love to see her interact with Moe again, that little relationship is very promising to me. It'd be a shame to waste such a potentially endearing surrogate-father friendship like that.

Once...just once I'd like to see a future episode before the series ends from Maggie's perspective. If you think about it...she doesn't have to even speak and could still be the center of the plot.

Characterization - Other characters: As stated above...I don't think the Simpsons would of come nearly as far without its incredibly strong supporting cast. A lot of you are tired of the one-line background character antics...and although its kind of inevitable since you can't do much with a character thats on screen only a bit. But one thing that isn't inevitable is the fact we could get to know these guys a bit better. I mean...come on its Season 17 and we JUST got a Groundskeeper Willie episode? Its sad because I think this show's potentially deepest characters are all from the supporting cast. I mean...I wouldn't mind a little spotlight on the Lovejoy family myself...or a lot of other families. I've been dying to see Wiggum's family get a bit of exposure. Not just Ralph alone...or Clancy alone...and well..Sarah's never been used. But anyways..them interacting with eachother more in depth. Stuff like that with everyone.

Krabappel could make for a great focus for an episode. I mean...all episodes related to her have been about her and another man...mostly Skinner. I wanna see more about Krabappel HERSELF. I can't be the only one that found her little sub-story in Seemingly Never ending story real interesting. I personally wanted to see more. Or like...how it was mentioned that Wiggum was gravely wounded in the bank-shootout in Kiss Kiss recently. I would of much rather seen a story about that rather than Homer going to India. I mean...come on thats a great story gone to waste...like if it could potentially affect him or his family in some way. And it doesn't have to just be themselves...as mentioned above...one or two members of the Simpsons could interact with them more often. That makes for some of the best moments. I think the show would be far stronger if the supporting cast came out from the background more often. It'd give the drama between the Simpsons family itself some time to rest and be more poignant, and it would exploit some of the great stuff these other characters could bring.

Some minor stuff.

-Flanders: I'd love to see Flanders' darker side take more of a spotlight again. It rounds him so much to see that he's not quite the perfect man Homer originally envisioned...especially with Maude's death. Although we do have to move away from that a bit..
-The Wiggums: I've said all I can about Ralph in the thread about him on General Desc. All I'll say here is Ralph needs his human depth brought back bad. He has so much potential as a character that its a shame for it to never be realized. Clancy needs exclusive spotlight at least once...and Sarah needs to desperatly be used at least once herself.
-The school: I miss the interactions between the kids. They happen so rarely now.
-Otto: What happened to this guy? He's been almost completely forgotten.
-Moe: Moe is such a great character. He's been given a lot of spotlight but I wouldn't mind his contrasting endearing qualities like his surrogate relationship to Maggie to be given spotlight at least one more time.
-Krabappel: Seemingly Never Ending opened up a real pandora's box by throwing hints of Krabappel's younger years.
-Lisa's friends: Come on...she's gotta at least still have a relationship with Janey.
-Milhouse: The kid needs a few positive moments...even a few. I loved the Italian episode, it was a great reminder of how funny Milhouse can be if used. XD
-Nelson: Nelson is really fun when he's used with the other kids. I don't know if he needs an episode dedicated to him...but I'd like to see him do a few more things with Bart and the others.
-Martin: Yes. XD I know some people find him annoying, but I think if he's used right Martin can make some things really fun. I may be completely alone on this but I wouldn't mind if the writers used him at least once to a greater degree. I mean...come on, he's a smart kid. He's gotta have some complexes about the way he's treated at school.
-Rod and Todd: Bart Has Two Mommies FINALLY brought the idea of Rod and Tod getting away from this black hole they've been stuck in as characters, and opened up new possibilities by having them potentially develop distinct personalities. I'd love to see more of this.
-Mrs. Skinner: Seymour's gotta get some airtime away from this woman, badly.

I think in the end...its silly to say the Simpsons has run out of idea's because really it hasn't. There's so much unused material in the show its not even funny. More than enough stuff to take the show to its last days with grace and style. I think its just a matter of using such a memorable cast in a proper...balanced manner. Too much of any character is bad, too little is just as bad.

[Rest your giant head]

I know this will sound extremly stupid... But I think the reason of the bad quality episodes in recent years are the new writters. I don't know what's wrong with them,they're just not that funny. Bring back the old writters. Think about this:

Writters in seasons 5,6,7,8:
John Swartzwelder,Bill Oakley,John Weinstein,Greg Daniels,Brent Forrester,Ken Keeler,Jon Vitti... Great old writters.

Writters in seasons 16,17:
Patric M. Verrone,Daniel Chun,Joel H. Cohen,Don Payne,John Frink,Michael Price... All new guys!

[Kefka]

CANCEL IT!

LOLOLOLOL

[Nameless]

Ken Keeler

Ken Keeler was a terrible writer for OFF.

And I think David Stern and Frank Mula show that bringing back old writers doesn't automatically mean the show will get better.

[Rest your giant head]

I think that Ken Keeler was an excellent writter,his sence of humor is good. "Principal and the pauper" isn't that great,though.

[H Thompson]

Mmmmmm, I don't know about that. Children are inexperienced and can be tough to talk to but many of them arn't stupid. In fact, this generation's brought a large amount of kids thinking in more older ways at a younger age because of all the information. I think the reason why the kids are often far more well informed than the adults think in the show is because well....in real life they often are. I don't know about you, but I remember what it was like to be 10...and while being inexperienced...I wasn't incapable of absorbing what was going on around me. Nothing was worse than being treated by adults in a way that insulted my intelligence. I once read that a major issue in the modern times is that children know so much more about the world around them today...and often have a lot to talk about but are often scoffed at by Adults because of their age. Thats not really good guidance for today I don't think...but thats another subject alltogether. But I always felt the show sort of hinted at that often...especially with Lisa.

Well I was sort of half joking, but I think the fact remains that real children just run around screaming playing with toys and are not really able to engage in a proper adult conversation like Lisa is (and Bart to some extent). But many people here complain about Lisa not acting like a child, but I think if she did only act like a child then it wouldn't leave them much scope for stories and it also would mean Lisa wouldn't be very relateable.
I'm particulary thinking of "See Homer Run" (I'm presuming you've seen it) where she gets so upset by Homer not liking her gift. Now her unicorn card/book wasn't funny or intresting in the context of the show, even if it was fairly accurate and observational of what an 8 year old would think was good and it's not got much to do with Lisa's character except that um... unicorns are a little like pony's which she likes. I also thought it was kind of dumb of her to think Homer would like it, since she should know him well enough to know he's a materialistic guy and he'd want a proper a present he could use, even if he did understand the hand made card book was an expression of love, besides he did try to be polite and pretend to like the gift.

But I do also think like you that a lot of the humor has gone out of Lisa's character. (you have made an excellent post by the way and I agree with a lot of your points) I particulary like how she tricks Bart in Bart vs Australia - Sarcastically commenting that in Rand McNally people put hats on their feet and hamburgers eat people, Now that's good because in a sense she's just a little girl putting one over her older brother, but she's doing it in quite a clever way and she takes satisfaction in doing this without him needing to know he's being stupid. Now that's beyond most 8 year old girls intelligence. These days their sibling rivalry amounts to finding "Hilarious" different ways for Bart and Lisa to get into physical fights and exchanging childish insults like
"You're a nerd"
"You're gay"
etc
Now that may be more observational and be more true to real life, but it isn't funnier. Which is why I feel quite strongly that people are wrong to complain about Lisa not acting like a typical 8 year old girl.

Sorry if this isn't a very well presented argument, I'm a litte drunk at the moment and my thoughts on this are pretty scattered.

[Wonderlicious]

As Al Jean and co sometimes lurk here, I'd like to say that if you're reading, I generally admire your work greatly, and that these complaints are naturally constructive criticisms The Simpsons even better.

OTHER - (yet kind of links into all of the Joke issues TerrorK listed, and it affects a number of the Writing ones) Literally arodying Existing Films/TV series: These aren't Family Guy jabs. One thing that does annoy me is the number of direct parodies of films/TV series, such as Lisa watching The O.C. in Milhouse of Sand and Fog. In a way, it seems to ruin the atmosphere of The Simpsons, as part of the charm early on was that the media and commercial world was generally fictional. Now, I understand that the golden years had similar things, yet (as much as I don't mean to look back as though I have rose tinted glasses) they weren't as loud.

Jokes - Intelligence & Wit: The humour isn't anywhere low brow trash, but some more obscure or highbrow references would please many (I guess.)

Writing - Joke to Emotion/Drama Ratio: I think most will agree that it's on the up generally, but it could go up even more. Always try to include at least one scene where there's some feeling of drama/emotion each episode.

Voice Acting - Guest Cast: I'm okay if actors play new characters, but if you have a non actor guest, don't go with the awquard "OMG! It's [Larry David]!" approach. Use them in a way which makes them feel intergrated into the scene (look at Krusty Gets Kancelled, Homer at the Bat or Homerpalooza as examples).

Characterisation - Supporting Cast Overall: Similar to the above issue, don't throw characters randomly in a scene for the sake of it. And Moe's suicide attempts are becoming grating.

Animation - Character Designs: I sometimes don't think that the charicatures don't look like the people they are representing. This has always been a slight issue, and I know that it's inevitable as some people may not be easy to adapt into someone who can stand by Lisa and Maggie.

Oh, and Kiyosuki; I'm glad that I'm not the only one who thought Lisa was too much a child genius at times. :laugh:

[bluemoose]

Writing - Flow & Pacing - the way the first act nearly always is something totally random, and sometimes the "real story" doesn't start until the middle of the second act.

Characterisation - Bart - he doesn't act the way he used to. I don't know what it is specifically, but he's not the great character that he once was.

Jokes - Wackiness - I don't mind the main story being wacky, because, as stated before, there have been great episodes with wacky premises (Deep Space Homer, Marge vs. the Monorail, etc.), but the fact that, as TerrorK said, that nearly every joke is wacky (Like in Goo Goo Gai Pan, with Mr. Burns and his lungs. And Goo Goo Gai Pan didn't even have a wacky premise, it was just filled with wacky, unfunny jokes like that). In the old episodes, the whole episode wasn't wacky, even with a wacky premise. Like Deep Space Homer. It was relateable to watch the family worry about Homer.

Animation - Character Designs - everything is too bright, and it's really distracting. Also, as someone said, Homer's design seems a bit off balance.

Empathy - as Jake said, you have to laugh with the characters, not at them, which a lot of the new episodes have you doing.

Jokes - Intelligence & Wit - there seem to be a lot of "stupid" jokes lately. This didn't matter in the old episodes, because you also had the intelligent jokes, which balanced it out.

Jokes - subtelty - Many of the jokes nowadays are too "in your face"

Characterisation - Homer - the whole "jerkass" thing.

Sorry I didn't categorize.

[Veryjammy]

I feel at the moment...rather than each character being written to act like themselves...I feel like they're being written as caricatures of themselves. Homer's mentality and tendancy towards wacky antics are traits of his, not the character itself. Ralph Wiggum wasn't just a bunch of random lines, he showed at various times that he was human...with his own things to deal with. Bart is a trouble maker...but his personality ranges so far beyond that. The point I'm trying to make is that each character's signature traits are being overused...they're overshadowing the characters. Jerkass Homer was born of this, Ralph feels depressingly empty, Bart doesn't have as much of that rebellious zing and sharpness that made his character so famous world wide. Its like rather than let the characters truly take flight in each plot...they're constantly written the same way. In the end...I think the show's biggest challenge is the characters don't feel as flexible as they once were. Its the difference between truly bringing a character to life...and simply writing a character, the little things. Different reactions, spontaneousness...never the same old thing over and over.



I agree with most everything you say, but this is, I feel, the critical point. However it is also the hardest to avoid. I can't remember where it appeared or what it was about, but I remember reading a piece where someone theorised that all television shows eventually become like this. In a show's formative years, they experiment, they try new things, they develop characters in different ways. Essentially they see what works and what doesn't.

Once they see what works, there is forever the temptation to keep re-using that. If the audience gets a kick out of seeing Homer act stupid then eventually that trait gets pushed further and further forward until that IS his character and not just a part of it. When people started quoting Ralph, the writers realised his illogical lines were popular, and eventually they dominated him. Experiments with characters gradually die out and the same crowd-pleasing antics and established character traits get recycled, with characters becoming caricatures.

I don't think OFF became quite this extreme, although you can certainly see it in other shows. Take Friends for example. I'm not its biggest fan but it's an easy way to pass half an hour. Watch an early episode and the characters were more rounded, in that limited sitcommy kind of way. By the time the show ended Joey was stupid, Monica was obsessive, Phoebe was kooky, Chandler was a one-liner machine, Ross was a geek etc...they had all been reduced to one-note characters. Look at OFF today and this is evident in many characters.

The show avoided this trap for a long while, with Oakley and Weinstein for example trying to experiment. But it's been there for a while now, many characters being a cipher rather than a rounded individual. The show still tries to push the boat out every now and then but not nearly often enough, and it makes the show feel tired.

[Kiyosuki]

Well I was sort of half joking, but I think the fact remains that real children just run around screaming playing with toys and are not really able to engage in a proper adult conversation like Lisa is (and Bart to some extent). But many people here complain about Lisa not acting like a child, but I think if she did only act like a child then it wouldn't leave them much scope for stories and it also would mean Lisa wouldn't be very relateable.
I'm particulary thinking of "See Homer Run" (I'm presuming you've seen it) where she gets so upset by Homer not liking her gift. Now her unicorn card/book wasn't funny or intresting in the context of the show, even if it was fairly accurate and observational of what an 8 year old would think was good and it's not got much to do with Lisa's character except that um... unicorns are a little like pony's which she likes. I also thought it was kind of dumb of her to think Homer would like it, since she should know him well enough to know he's a materialistic guy and he'd want a proper a present he could use, even if he did understand the hand made card book was an expression of love, besides he did try to be polite and pretend to like the gift.

But I do also think like you that a lot of the humor has gone out of Lisa's character. (you have made an excellent post by the way and I agree with a lot of your points) I particulary like how she tricks Bart in Bart vs Australia - Sarcastically commenting that in Rand McNally people put hats on their feet and hamburgers eat people, Now that's good because in a sense she's just a little girl putting one over her older brother, but she's doing it in quite a clever way and she takes satisfaction in doing this without him needing to know he's being stupid. Now that's beyond most 8 year old girls intelligence. These days their sibling rivalry amounts to finding "Hilarious" different ways for Bart and Lisa to get into physical fights and exchanging childish insults like
"You're a nerd"
"You're gay"
etc
Now that may be more observational and be more true to real life, but it isn't funnier. Which is why I feel quite strongly that people are wrong to complain about Lisa not acting like a typical 8 year old girl.

Sorry if this isn't a very well presented argument, I'm a litte drunk at the moment and my thoughts on this are pretty scattered.

I never realized how separate the world of adults is from the world of children today until a few years ago. I think while a majority of children act whimsical and the like, if one takes the time to sometimes sit down and speak with one...in a level way I think many kids are surprisingly able to talk back in similar fashion. Of course its not quite the same as talking to another adult or a kid talking to another kid...but what I'm trying to say is that I think a major problem with today is how lightly we take children. They may be young...with their toys and so on but they're as varied and potentially complicated as we are...they just haven't been alive for as long. Some kids are simple, some kids are insanely smart...and some kids seem simple but arn't.

This is sort of off topic...but sometimes I wish a lot of people would take the time to get to know the individual personalities and traits of specific children...especially parents to their own kids. Children can feel so alone in the world because so few of the adult people who know better about the world are willing to speak to them a little more seriously about things. (or in a way not looking down on them...not physically of course.)

Children are very varied in personality, as much as us...I know there's some kids who may surprise you out there. While maybe its a bit much to expect someone of Lisa level understanding of the world but I know there's some that could closely rival that with opinions and personal knowledge...especially in an age right now where information is so readilly available to even the youngest human beings....whom could potentially grasp onto it easier than adults because they haven't fully developed and/or set in some way yet.

I think while the kids in the Simpsons are a bit exaggerated, I truly believe the notion that many of them are more understanding about things than adults think. I always felt Groening was trying to get that across at times.

Now...back to the show itself. The reason why I think so many of us want Lisa's more child-like qualities to come back is because it created such an endearing conflict within the character that made her feel so much more real. She wasn't just the cliche-ed child-genius....she was a gifted kid but she was still essentially a kid. I like the moments like the one in See Homer Run where she shows that more vulnerable young-side to herself because really...thats more realisitc than Lisa being able to take apart absolutely everything with the cynisism of a 40 year old. Her brain may be big and powerful...but her heart's still that of an 8-year old little girl who wants a pony, and just wants acceptance. Its a contradiction yes...but thats what made her so memorable I think. She was an up and coming intellectual...a human being who cared about things becaue she had the intelligence too. At times in the recent seasons I felt it moved away from this and she became a bit too much of a mindless activist....protesting things just for the sake of it. It doesn't really fit Lisa imo.

I agree with most everything you say, but this is, I feel, the critical point. However it is also the hardest to avoid. I can't remember where it appeared or what it was about, but I remember reading a piece where someone theorised that all television shows eventually become like this. In a show's formative years, they experiment, they try new things, they develop characters in different ways. Essentially they see what works and what doesn't.

Once they see what works, there is forever the temptation to keep re-using that. If the audience gets a kick out of seeing Homer act stupid then eventually that trait gets pushed further and further forward until that IS his character and not just a part of it. When people started quoting Ralph, the writers realised his illogical lines were popular, and eventually they dominated him. Experiments with characters gradually die out and the same crowd-pleasing antics and established character traits get recycled, with characters becoming caricatures.

Yeah you know what I'm getting at. I'm all for experimentation with characters. That can't happen though...if they never change and escape from their one-line sentence personality. The cast of this show I always felt could be taken in so many different directions, thats why I want that random human element written in. I think its the perfect time for it, even this late in the game.

Maybe I'm treading on hot water here...but maybe dare I say...the show's "timeless" quality is whats been biting it in the rear end all these years. Rather than be timeless, its been trying to be timeless...to the point where not many new things happen.

Man....I'd better be careful or I'm going to start getting a rep on this board for ungodly long posts. :nerd:

[H Thompson]

Oh yes I'm not denying the importance of Lisa's childlike qualities or the problems with lisa being too cynical and protesting things for the sake of it. But there's plenty of episodes in recent years where Lisa has been acting like a regular child, but simply doing that doesn't make for good characterisation.
I think the problem is the writers seem to seperate these characteristics, it's as almost as if she she's schizophrenic and she changes from being either a typical 8 year old girl or a mature adult activist.

Also on the subject of characters being one line gag machines, that's often a reason for some recent failed emotional episodes, If the characters are just gag machines then there's no humanity to them, they just spout generic emotional lines with generic emotional music behind it. So there's no reality to them so you don't belive in what's going on.

[TerrorK]

Exactly. It's like the characters these days are all performing in front of a big audience on stage or something. None of it feels real or natural any more, compared to the golden years when the dialogue and acting was far more natural. There used to be a lot of nice little one-liners that were delivered so normally that the joke behind them could pass you by if you weren't paying 100% attention. Nowadays it's as if every single line and action is the characters basically saying, "Look! It's a joke! Laugh the joke I'm performing for you!"

[Kiyosuki]

Oh yes I'm not denying the importance of Lisa's childlike qualities or the problems with lisa being too cynical and protesting things for the sake of it. But there's plenty of episodes in recent years where Lisa has been acting like a regular child, but simply doing that doesn't make for good characterisation.
I think the problem is the writers seem to seperate these characteristics, it's as almost as if she she's schizophrenic and she changes from being either a typical 8 year old girl or a mature adult activist.

Also on the subject of characters being one line gag machines, that's often a reason for some recent failed emotional episodes, If the characters are just gag machines then there's no humanity to them, they just spout generic emotional lines with generic emotional music behind it. So there's no reality to them so you don't belive in what's going on.

Maybe with some characters yes. It depends really. Like...I couldn't imagine a dramatic episode about Otto...and I could maybe see an episode about Frink that has a dramatic backdrop...but in the end he's too amusing a chracter to make it serious. Same with Barney (sadly for him, lol), and maybe Milhouse (although that boy's got the angst for drama no doubt about it.)

Some characters though, like Moe, Wiggum, Krabappel, Nelson, Ralph, and perhaps Smithers have that kind of edge that makes it so they could easilly take a serious episode. In the end...no Simpsons episode should be too dramatic...like fanfic-dramatic. Then it wouldn't be Simpsons. The contrast between the shows darker moments and hilarious moments is what made the show what it is. If some of these characters get some spotlight it doesn't necessarilly have to be serious...it can be very funny and entertaining just seeing them be themselves sometimes..as long as its done right though.

I think some of the dramatic episodes featuring secondary characters didn't fare so well because they tended to usually drift back to something having to do with the Simpsons eventually, which is a big no no I think. For that sort of thing to work, the plot has to revolve around the character. I Love Lisa for example...drifted back to Lisa's little problem with how she felt about telling Ralph off like that but in the end...the whole episode centered around Ralph in some way from beggining to end. Thats how I think episodes like that can be successful...when you really get into the character's ordeal. Milhouse of Sand and Fog did this terrible thing where it was all about Milhouse's family...then it magically became about Homer and Marge by the end. Some of the episodes are stuffed with too much material, you can only do so much with 20-30 minutes about so you gotta balance things I think for characterization to work.

Maybe with some characters yes. It depends really. Like...I couldn't imagine a dramatic episode about Otto...and I could maybe see an episode about Frink that has a dramatic backdrop...but in the end he's too amusing a chracter to make it serious. Same with Barney (sadly for him, lol), and maybe Milhouse (although that boy's got the angst for drama no doubt about it.)

Some characters though, like Moe, Wiggum, Krabappel, Nelson, Ralph, and perhaps Smithers have that kind of edge that makes it so they could easilly take a serious episode. In the end...no Simpsons episode should be too dramatic...like fanfic-dramatic. Then it wouldn't be Simpsons. The contrast between the shows darker moments and hilarious moments is what made the show what it is. If some of these characters get some spotlight it doesn't necessarilly have to be serious...it can be very funny and entertaining just seeing them be themselves sometimes..as long as its done right though.

I think some of the dramatic episodes featuring secondary characters didn't fare so well because they tended to usually drift back to something having to do with the Simpsons eventually, which is a big no no I think. For that sort of thing to work, the plot has to revolve around the character. I Love Lisa for example...drifted back to Lisa's little problem with how she felt about telling Ralph off like that but in the end...the whole episode centered around Ralph in some way from beggining to end. Thats how I think episodes like that can be successful...when you really get into the character's ordeal. Milhouse of Sand and Fog did this terrible thing where it was all about Milhouse's family...then it magically became about Homer and Marge by the end. Some of the episodes are stuffed with too much material, you can only do so much with 20-30 minutes about so you gotta balance things I think for characterization to work.



I can't argue that many of the characters do feel like they're not themselves anymore though, as we've been discussing. Really it all comes down to subtlety in the end perhaps. Its such an important but easilly lost trait in good writing.

Edit: How'd I quote myself...uh nevermind.

[shoeless_hunter]

Fire every current writer. Easy as that.

They seem to be so out of joke ideas they resort to "you're gay" jokes (in tonights episode which just finished in each segment they had one).

[TheFlandersMan]

Yep. I've noticed a "gay" joke in nearly every episode it seems.

[Imperciph]

Thanks to Homer_Thompson and Kiyusuki for providing a fascinating discussion about the current status of the characters of the show. Veryjammy also provided a great theory as well.

One thing I do like add is recently sometimes the story doesn't flow as naturally as it should flow. I mean, sometimes when I watch the show I see they are trying to make an emotional episode or they are trying to write edgy satire.

For example, Million Dollar Abie tried to have an emotional story for Grampa. Which was fine because I was feeling some sympathy for him the actual emotional story between Grampa and Lisa came out of nowhere. What was wrong with that emotional story ? It felt forced and generic becaue it was so underdeveloped. Overly sappy soap-operaish lines like "I've always believed in you, grampa" never work in the context of the show, especially when that angle between those two characters just came up two minutes ago.

And this brings me to another problem i have with the show. Lately, instead of developing the plot on-screen, the characters acknowledge the development on-screen. Even good to great Mommie Beerest suffered from this problem. Marge constantly refers how well she and Moe have been bonding, but we rarely actually even see them bonding at the workplace. She just says they have bonded. Covering improtant plot points in such manner considerably lessens the emotional impact of the show.

And as for satire, the best route for OFF has always been to deliver the commentary in an ambiguous manner, in the background of the story. Delivering the commentary in a South Park-ish "I've learned something today" like Bart did in the end of The Father, The Son and The Holy Guest Star manner won't work for this show, as this show never presented itself in a blunt manner like South Park. Then again, all satirical topics are actually rarely being explored in-depth for that to be a major problem. Issues like gay marriage, "Passion" controversy, assisted suicide, outsourcing, recall election weren't even the main conflict of their respective episodes, instead buried among "emotional" conflicts that rarely explored new sides of the relationships or wacky character antics.

[Red Hot Homer Simpson]

Can't think of much, but I'd definately give the Lovejoys more screen time.

Lovejoy Hey? I dont understand how you like him. The only funny thing he has done is play the organ wrong yet he keeps saying "wait i can do this"

No Offence, I was just giving my opinion

[Reverend Lovejoy]

I don't understand people like you. If that's the only thing you can think of, then you need to watch more episodes.

[Red Hot Homer Simpson]

Actually I've seen Every Simpsons Episode. Oh also....Why Do You Hate My Trains?!?! Thats another.Oh and...I DONT HERE SCRUBBING. Do your dirty sinful buisness. See you in hell...From Heavan.

When other non main characters have much better and funnier lines. Like Ralph and Super Intendant Chalmers And Jeff Albertson (Comic Book guy)

[Kiyosuki]

Everyone's got their preferences...

The cool thing about the characters in the show is that they all seem simple at first, but almost every character has just enough implied depth to leave a lot to the imagination.

[Reverend Lovejoy]

Actually I've seen Every Simpsons Episode. Oh also....Why Do You Hate My Trains?!?! Thats another.Oh and...I DONT HERE SCRUBBING. Do your dirty sinful buisness. See you in hell...From Heavan.

When other non main characters have much better and funnier lines. Like Ralph and Super Intendant Chalmers And Jeff Albertson (Comic Book guy)

Oh, mature. (Yeah, I know that's rich, coming from me). And the day anyone thinks that comic book guy is better than Lovejoy will be a sad pathetic day for all concerned. So please, get over it. How old are you, anyway?

[Imperciph]

Please stop derailing this thread and refrain from silly fights about your favorite characters. I am sure no one here wants NHC to turn into thesimpsons.com forums.

[Reverend Lovejoy]

Sorry. I don't want to get into any more fights, thank you. Although Hansen Pete didn't help much.

[thesimplerules]

Critical
Writing - (removal of dum) Plots & Storylines
Writing - Joke to Story Ratio
Jokes - Intelligence & Wit
Writing - Joke to Emotion/Drama Ratio
Jokes - Subtlety

Quite Important
Voice Acting - Main Cast
Characterisation - Homer
Characterisation - Bart
Characterisation - Marge
Writing - Flow & Pacing

Middling
Jokes- Wackiness
Jokes - Timing & Length
Voice Acting - Supporting Cast
Characterisation - Overuse of characters for jokes (Bullies, Cat Lady, Cletus, etc.)

Low Priority
Characterisation - Supporting Cast Overall