Who and What are responsible for making the simpsons good/bad

[Toefur]

I see that it is generally common to lay blame upon Mike Scully for the fall of the Simpsons from greatness to lameness, but I am wondering how true this is (and just exactly -how- it is).

I'm not asking about Scully in particular, but the show overall. What is it in the show that makes it good and or bad? The Scully seasons 9-12 (12? I think?) are with Scully as executive producer, right?

What sort of role does the executive producer play in the series? I would have thought whether the show was a quality show with quality writing (Which the Simpsons definately had... and then lost, imho) would have depending heavily upon the actual writer.

What makes me wonder this is that I could have sworn I saw Scully listed as Writer for an (pre season 9) episode the other day. I suppose I could be mistaken, and I probably am. Was scully involved beforehand?

What about all the other producers always listed at the start? They go through large lists of producers, consultant producers, etc. What role do they play?

I noticed the name David Mirkin as executive producer on a lot of the good episodes and after a quick browse around the 'net a little bit it seems that general consensus -is- that Mirkin did a good job with the Simpsons.

So why exactly did Scully take over in season 9?

More the point of my post - Which positions at the Simpsons are those that effect the outcome of what the show will actually be? And what effect individually exactly do each of these positions (writer/producer/etc/) have on the show.

Following on after that, who are specific names of people that made the Simpsons a quality show; and names of those that made it not-so.

When the Simpsons started to get bad was it soley because of the appointment of Scully as executive producer, or were there also other movements in other departments that would have contributed?

A lot of questions, I know... but I'm interested in discussing this and hearing some more enlightened views on the matter.

[newhook_1]

I'm not exactly sure so someone else can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the Excutive Producer is the one who has the final say on all the scripts and decides what goes in and what stays out/gets taken out during the rewrites. The excutive producers change every now and then because they useually make a name for themselves working on the Simpons and are able to start there own projects (Like how Scully started the god awful show "The Pitts").

[The Governor]

The "who" (not the band) : The Executive Producers.
The "what" : Dope, beer, caffene, etc...

[Generic]

Obviously the Executive Producer in his role as "show runner" is responsible for the quality of the show. But I don't think it's his fault alone. After all, he didn't write every line of every episode and he didn't come up with every concept. You could fault him for approving subpar concepts and jokes, or maybe even encouraging them, but a large group of people are responsible for the show we see. They all contribute to the show's quality, so it's kind of unfair to place the blame on one individual.

Having said that, if you want to blame just one person, the Executive Producer is that individual.

[George Cauldron]

Originally posted by Toefur
I'm not asking about Scully in particular, but the show overall. What is it in the show that makes it good and or bad? The Scully seasons 9-12 (12? I think?) are with Scully as executive producer, right?

Yep, you're right.

What makes me wonder this is that I could have sworn I saw Scully listed as Writer for an (pre season 9) episode the other day. I suppose I could be mistaken, and I probably am. Was scully involved beforehand?

Again, correct. He'd written quite a few episodes before taking the role of executive producer, including Lisa's Rival, Lisa on Ice, Marge Be Not Proud, and Lisa's Date With Density, all agreed to have been very good to excellent episodes.

Following on after that, who are specific names of people that made the Simpsons a quality show; and names of those that made it not-so.

I think that everybody who has contributed to the show has been great and has made it what it is. They've all been great. However, some people are greater than others.

When the Simpsons started to get bad was it soley because of the appointment of Scully as executive producer, or were there also other movements in other departments that would have contributed?

I don't think the blame lies squarely with Mike Scully. It was the whole evolution of the show's style, humor and writing that contributed to a decline, if any.

[Sloppy Jimbo XOX]

Originally posted by Toefur
I'm not asking about Scully in particular, but the show overall. What is it in the show that makes it good and or bad? The Scully seasons 9-12 (12? I think?) are with Scully as executive producer, right?

Executive Producer list:

Seasons 1 and 2: James L. Brooks, Matt Groening and Sam Simon
Seasons 3 and 4: Al Jean and Mike Reiss
Seasons 5 and 6: David Mirkin
Seasons 7 and 8: Bill Oakley and Josh Weinstein
Seasons 9, 10, 11 and 12: Mike Scully
Seasons 13, 14 and 15: Al Jean

Originally posted by Toefur
What sort of role does the executive producer play in the series? I would have thought whether the show was a quality show with quality writing (Which the Simpsons definately had... and then lost, imho) would have depending heavily upon the actual writer.

What happens is this: a writer is either assigned or comes up with an idea for a script. If the Executive Producer approves this idea, the writer goes away for a week or two and comes back with a rough draft. The entire writing staff then get together and basically whip that rough draft into shape. All the while, the Executive Producer approves what goes in the final product. The credited writer contributes only about 20-40% of any final script.

Originally posted by Toefur
What makes me wonder this is that I could have sworn I saw Scully listed as Writer for an (pre season 9) episode the other day. I suppose I could be mistaken, and I probably am. Was scully involved beforehand?

He was hired as a writer by David Mirkin in season five. Mike Scully wrote the following episode before he became an Exec:

Lisa's Rival (Mirkin)
Lisa On Ice (Mirkin)
Two Dozen and One Greyhounds (Mirkin)
Team Homer (Mirkin/Oakley, Weinstein)
Marge Be Not Proud (Oakley, Weinstein)
Lisa's Date with Density (Oakley, Weinstein)

None of these episodes are terrible though, they're all rather good. This just proves how a bad writer can be compensated by a good Executive Producer.

Originally posted by Toefur
What about all the other producers always listed at the start? They go through large lists of producers, consultant producers, etc. What role do they play?

I've always assumed that the opening credits just list the writers in order of importance to the making of an episode. There are exceptions such as directors (David Silverman, Jim Reardon) though.

Originally posted by Toefur
I noticed the name David Mirkin as executive producer on a lot of the good episodes and after a quick browse around the 'net a little bit it seems that general consensus -is- that Mirkin did a good job with the Simpsons.

Yeah, Mirkin was basically a good version of Scully.

Originally posted by Toefur
So why exactly did Scully take over in season 9?

A lot of the hopeful candidates turned it down. Scully was about the only person game.

Originally posted by Toefur
More the point of my post - Which positions at the Simpsons are those that effect the outcome of what the show will actually be? And what effect individually exactly do each of these positions (writer/producer/etc/) have on the show.

Everybody with a title has at least some influence on the show. The Executive Producer however has the final say on everything (writing, music, acting, animation, you name it).

Originally posted by Toefur
Following on after that, who are specific names of people that made the Simpsons a quality show; and names of those that made it not-so.

Good: Al Jean and Mike Reiss, George Meyer, Sam Simon, Jon Vitti, James L. Brooks, John Swartzwelder, Bill Oakley and Josh Weinstein, Greg Daniels, Alf Clausen, Matt Greoning, David Silverman, Rich Moore, Brad Bird, etc

Bad: Mike Scully... Though, most people aren't too fond of Ian Maxtone-Graham either.

Originally posted by Toefur
When the Simpsons started to get bad was it soley because of the appointment of Scully as executive producer, or were there also other movements in other departments that would have contributed?

Around the time of season nine, Matt Groening virtually abondoned the show to focus on making Futurama. I'm sure that had at least something to do with the decline.

[Brentyn]

And now that Futurama is no more, Groening can focus his resources on OFF, which is clearly evident in the show's recent rise in quality (to partially detour, Bart v. Lisa v. 3rd Grade, which I saw last week, was really great).

[Jouni]

Originally posted by Toefur
What about all the other producers always listed at the start?

Producers are writers, basically.

There are also several "executive producers" listed, one (or two) of which is the actual show runner.

it seems that general consensus -is- that Mirkin did a good job with the Simpsons.

Well, mostly, although it was him who introduced the new Homer, of which Scully took to a whole new level later on.

More the point of my post - Which positions at the Simpsons are those that effect the outcome of what the show will actually be?

It's team work, but I guess the show runner (writing) and the director (animation) are the key persons. And MG/Brooks/Simon when they were around.

Following on after that, who are specific names of people that made the Simpsons a quality show;

In the very beginning Brooks, Simon, Groening, Silverman. Soon after Jean, Reiss, Meyer, Reardon, Kirkland, Archer, Moore... And writers like Vitti and Swartzwelder.