Rate and Review: The Principal and the Pauper

[The Governor]

I dunno...this is one episode that seems like the writers were saying: "We're going to produce a crappy episode and if you think it's crappy you fell for it."

[Nauru-1]

The thing is, I think if you can accept the plot for what it is, the rest of the things that go into an episode are at minimum reasonably well done. In this respect, I can't see how it's even close to as lackluster as some of the stuff later on in the very same season 9. The humour continues in the wittier O&W vein, the characters despite all that's going on are quite likeable, and you can at least appreciate their motivations even if you believe the transitions seemed forced.

[cloneasaurus]

There were things wrong with this episode. Skinner being a street punk was unbelievable, and clichéd, and the ending seemed very rushed, we barely got to see any of the "real" Arman Tamzarian.

But this episode is, stylistically, by no means the worst episode ever, nor F worthy. In fact humour wise, this was pretty much perfect considering the story, which had a lot to cram in in a short time. I found myself laughing a lot through the episode; not hysterically, but enough to complement the plot.

I'll admit I found the revelation this episode centred around to be unnecessary, and I didn't enjoy learning Principal Skinner was an imposter. But all it does, as stated before in this thread, is reveal Principal Skinner isn't what we thought he was. He's still the same person he was, he was still in Vietnam. He just has a different name, and as said, an unbelievable past. It may upset minor minor continuity referenced in past episodes, but nothing major. I find it pretty easy in this regard to just isolate the episode from others and treat it like it's non-canon.

I'll admit as an experiment it didn't quite work, but for me, the biggest problem with this episode that there was too much for 22 minutes. Humour-wise, it was perfect in relation to the plot and we got to see a unique insight into Skinner's life and relationship with his mother, and everyone was in character. I'll reiterate that I really didn't like the premise, but they pulled it off pretty well and really, it didn't "ruin" Skinner or continuity.

7.5/10

B

[Financial Panther]

I don't think that this is the greatest episode, but I don't think it's awful. I didn't really care for the Seymour Skinner character, but it's adequate overall.

[Ben Chan]

The thing is, I think if you can accept the plot for what it is, the rest of the things that go into an episode are at minimum reasonably well done. In this respect, I can't see how it's even close to as lackluster as some of the stuff later on in the very same season 9. The humour continues in the wittier O&W vein, the characters despite all that's going on are quite likeable, and you can at least appreciate their motivations even if you believe the transitions seemed forced.

ok. if you can accept the shithouse character writing, and lackthereof, of season 12...

seriously what type of argument is that. i can't accept the forced plot twists (of the sort i'd expect from scully) or the shithouse dialogue because these are the MAJOR problems with the episode.

There were things wrong with this episode. Skinner being a street punk was unbelievable, and clichéd, and the ending seemed very rushed, we barely got to see any of the "real" Arman Tamzarian. Plus, whilst this was probably the joke, the blatant "cop-out" ending wasn't very funny and added to the "rushed" feel of much of the episode. There was a lot in this episode, and I don't think they conveyed it the best they could have in 22 minutes.

like i said before, the ending is the most inspired part, in most part for the reasons i outlined in the 'status quo' thread in the general discussion forum. whereas the rest of the episode meanders around pointless and upsetting twists and turns, sheltered by godawful dialogue, the ending at least has SOMETHING to say. whereas the rest of the episode is bold and the beautiful, the ending is the closest thing to the simpsons.

and you didn't get to see anymore of the "real" arman because they showed about all they could show you. what else was there to show? the change in skinner was so laboured that in about 3 scenes you got about all you were going to get of the real arman.

[Nauru-1]

ok. if you can accept the shithouse character writing, and lackthereof, of season 12...

seriously what type of argument is that. i can't accept the forced plot twists (of the sort i'd expect from scully) or the shithouse dialogue because these are the MAJOR problems with the episode

Sorry, but an unnecessary and awkward premise is nowhere near as important to me as the characters and humour. I have a lot of patience with a story if I like who is involved and the comedy is well-done. Season 12 in its weaker episodes had absolutely none of these elements going for them, including story.

[Ben Chan]

yeah sure season 12 is terrible for those reasons, but how can you discount the writing and story of this episode? a quality story, respect for characters, substantial originality (etc) are all integral parts of the simpsons and they're absolutely vacant here.

in addition, i counted the number of "ha ha" jokes on one hand when i watched this episode in prep for my review. there were six of them, which is far below the o&w average. consider too that all of their other episodes (ALL of them) have far more going for them when it comes to writing, plot, continuity (if you value that) etc.

the episode is watchable. but that's just the thing: every episode prior to this one is of superior quality with a few possible exceptions in season 1. it's watchable, but that's not a good thing in this context.

edit: i mean, the plot could pass as fanfic written by a 14 year old. the story is flimsy, the turns predictable and the humour sparse. i may or may not have stolen that from an old essay dork in an old thread i was reading a few days ago, but it's a great point.

[Nauru-1]

We're just going to have to disagree on many of those points then, especially as where this episode in the grand scheme of things is contentious at best. Beyond a few isolated moments I don't find the writing to be all that problematic given the premise that the episode has to work with. I don't really see the issues you see with the humour, but that's a relatively subjective aspect of an episode I guess. While I'd take a great many O&W episodes ahead of it and the classic era in general for that matter, it wouldn't be last on my list either. I don't see how you could fail this episode without not also doing the same to the vast majority of seasons 10+ and even half of season 9, but that's just me.

[Ben Chan]

Beyond a few isolated moments I don't find the writing to be all that problematic given the premise that the episode has to work with

i agree. the premise is poor, and so the writing is poor. was that your point?

and the moments were never isolated. they were key moments and plot beats ffs, not throwaway tangents. see the quote i listed above...

I don't see how you could fail this episode without not also doing the same to the vast majority of seasons 10+ and even half of season 9, but that's just me.

you presume that this isn't the case? you presume that i'm a hypocrite?

[The Governor]

I don't see how you could fail this episode without not also doing the same to the vast majority of seasons 10+ and even half of season 9, but that's just me.

What B.C. is saying this isn't a Simpsons-esque episode that's trying and failing to be funny, this is a Simpsons episode that tries to emulate a bad melodrama and fails miserably.

IMO, the only good thing that came from this episode was the name "Armin Tamzarian" appearing inside a cab in the 1998 movie Godzilla.

[Ben Chan]

i'm not even convinced that the episode consciously tries to emulate or parody melodrama even. there was no indication of this in the commentaries (from memory, though i could be wrong) and there's nothing in the episode that's 'extreme' enough, i suppose, to indicate parody. it looks to me to be a very simple case of shitty writing working towards a satisfactory ending (tying him up and sending him away).

so basically, this was a simpsons episode that tries to make a point, and does so, but in the most grating, irritating and absurd method, and the problems with this method aren't intentional. it fails miserably at being a simpsons episode in some of the most basic ways.

[Nauru-1]

i agree. the premise is poor, and so the writing is poor. was that your point?

and the moments were never isolated. they were key moments and plot beats ffs, not throwaway tangents. see the quote i listed above...

Your examples were valid, although personally I suspended my disbelief as I felt the premise demanded such laboured transitions. It's not that I don't think that isn't a problem and shouldn't reflect on the episode, but you take any episode that and bits like that wouldn't be enough for me to consider an immediate failure. When you get into the rest of the episode, for every "This man in the real Seymour Skinner" I felt there was an interesting development such as the flashback into Seymour first meeting Agnes or at least a humourous scene like the huge group going to see "Armin" in the car.

you presume that this isn't the case? you presume that i'm a hypocrite?

It's certainly possible. If that's the case then I at least see the consistency in your expectations.

[Ben Chan]

Your examples were valid, although personally I suspended my disbelief as I felt the premise demanded such laboured transitions. It's not that I don't think that isn't a problem and shouldn't reflect on the episode, but you take any episode that and bits like that wouldn't be enough for me to consider an immediate failure. When you get into the rest of the episode, for every "This man in the real Seymour Skinner" I felt there was an interesting development such as the flashback into Seymour first meeting Agnes or at least a humourous scene like the huge group going to see "Armin" in the car.

there's nothing wrong with episodes that demand you to suspend your disbelief. case in point: bart the daredevil. i said as much in my review and we agree on this point.

the thing is that quality writing exists almost entirely independant of the suspension of disbelief. writing a cheesy bold and the beautiful ripoff - or whatever the premise is - can be done successfully: see the simpsons spinoff showcase - an A-/B+ episode - for evidence of that. the principal and the pauper isn't the simpsons spinoff showcase though. there's no obvious hint to the audience that any of the problems i've raised were supposed to be taken in the same vain as the spinoff showcase. ie: there's no case being made for the audience to suspend their disbelief. there is no obvious indication that the writing was a parody (i assume you think this is the premise) of the very thing that i'm criticising it for. the MAJOR plot beats and twists (in the most literal sense of the word, in fact) of the episode are entirely sincere:

THAT man is the REAL seymour skinner.
i can't. instead i'm leaving town forever.

there's nothing there that indicates that the dialogue is poking fun at anything. the lines are read seriously and the context of these lines shows no indication that they're supposed to be taken as parody (hell, they even function as the sole events which advance the plot). i'll give you an example where there's an indication of parody within the episode, at the end:

judge snyder: and noone will mention it again....under penalty of TORTURE! *cue dramatic music*

it's hyperbole, it follows the town sending skinner out on a train, it's obviously not meant to be taken seriously. contrast that to the parts of the episode which i'm criticisiing, where there is no forgiving context and no hyperbole, other than the awful, unintentional hyperbole actual lines themselves. there's parody of bad, and then there's bad. this episode gives no indication of parody or anything forgiving; it seems to me that it's just a bad episode.

---

and how is that scene with agnes/armin at all interesting? it's one of the most laboured scenes in the whole episode. one of the things the simpsons did well was having reasons for the characters acting the way they do, and applying those reasons consistently. the only reason why mrs. skinner was able to 'trick' herself into believing that armin was her son, was FOR SOME REASON. and 'for some reason' is another word for no reason. mrs. skinner acts the way she did then for no reason other than to advance the plot, which is the very meaning of the word contrived. and since there's nothing in the episode that indicates otherwise (other than o&w's insistence in the commentaries), then the critical reaction to the episode can't extend beyond that.

it's contrived. it's sappy. it's unthoughtful. it's shit.

[Nauru-1]

I would agree that the story isn't made an obvious parody like the Simpsons Spinoff Showcase, but when I watch it I don't feel like the plot points are all that sincere either. I get the sense they were experimenting with something and they weren't all that successful at getting it across. Regardless, I buy into it enough because I like the style of the surrounding content; it's the O&W style with a polarizing story. You put Scully-like characterizations and modern-Jean humour and I'm hating it as much as the next person.

Regarding the Agnes/Armin scene, I wouldn't say they have Agnes believe Armin to be Seymour for no reason. I think the scene itself makes it pretty clear it's easier for her to be in denial and believe this man on her doorstep is her son than to face the bad news. Whether you thought they did that successfully or not is up for debate.

[Bleedin' Gums Murphy]

5/5- Great episode though I still wish it didnt exist.

That is exactly how I would describe it. Good but so UNNECCESARY! It's the equal of That 90s show(my personal worst all time worst episode of The Simpsons) except it's good in itself.

[Handsome B. Wonderful]

2.5/5

Cheap laugh episode that I consider non-canon.

[Homer Defined]

I wasn't really offended about this episode changing Principal Skinner's character, partly because Principal Skinner is one of least favorite characters anyway. I liked that O&W were willing to take a radical chance to convey the fact that many people don't like change and don't like when things aren't the way they seem or want them to be. It's kinda like "Homer's Enemy" and "Two Bad Neighbors" where you have a normal character come into the Simpson universe and throws that dose of reality in your face. Overall I give it a 4/5.