time to put the simpsons to bed
Debate Rounds (4)
Its has transformed from its original format that made it one of the greatest ever shows to a show that appears to try to hard to be like family guy. Nearly all the most famous Simpsons episodes are from the 1990s and I struggle to think of any great episodes from 2000 onwards. Great storylines have made way for half assed episodes filled with poor and overdone gags.
The show is unrecognisable for former hard core Simpsons fans. One suspects the only reason they still make the show is because it still brings in plenty of viewers and makes plenty of money. But to true Simpsons fans its now broken beyond repair. Its like watching a sick dog get sicker when it needs to be put to sleep.
http://youtu.be... (notice how all the episodes in this video are from the 1990s)
That would suggest that it still gets high numbers of viewers, thus still a successful show. Any show whether real or animated has to change some to keep getting new ideas and keep the script fresh. I have noticed some changes in The Simpson's" but I still enjoy it. The characters personalities have not significantly changed.
That is expect for possibly Ned Flanders. I have no idea how they had him marry Ms Krabappel, they were totally incompatible. The dynamic just did not work. I am not sure when they made Lisa a vegan, but that storyline is rather pointless, unless it is some attempt to push the one co-creators PETA membership agenda. I have not watched every episode and do not claim to be a Simpsons expert. I do however remember watching the first episode when it first came on and still enjoy the new episodes today. The fact that it still has a high viewer rate should be proof that plenty of people still enjoy it and that it should remain on.
Crazy storylines such as Ned Flanders marrying Ms Krabappel suggests that the Simpsons writers are really scraping the barrel for ideas. Storylines have become far fetched and ridiculous ideas such as the Simpsons/ Family guy crossover episode(plus I believe there's also going to be a Simpsons/ Futurama crossover) shows that they are desperate to hold on to what viewers they have left and attract new ones because they know there old fans are not coming back.
The writers of the Simpsons have for some years now been ripped to shreds by critics for the on going decline of the shows quality. The Simpsons is Matt Groening's baby. He will always defend The show and I can fully understand why he wouldn't want to end it but Id say its time to stop the rot and end the show with dignity.
The age of the voice actors is another reason the show cant keep going forever. The decline of the show is partly down to the fact that some of the voice actors of secondary characters such as Marcia Wallace( Ms Krabappel) and Phil Hartman( Troy McClure/ Lionel Hutz) are sadly no longer with us. Should something happen to one of the main voices actors the show would then surely have to end.
The Simpsons has been going now for 25 years. So far 559 Episodes have been broadcast. If the shows production stopped there is no reason whatsoever why old episodes cant be repeated for many years or even decades to come. Its not like there was only a few episodes made which if shown over and over again would get repetitive very quickly. Even if an episode was shown every weekday in order starting with episode one it would be close to two years before episode one was shown again. I think this would be the best solution all round.
With the age of the show, the aging voices and half of writers leaving, mostly to Futurama of course it will change some. However like I said the only critics to matter are the Nielsons. The quality of the show is not a provable fact one way or the other. So let the viewers decide whether or not it is good enough to stay or to get cancelled.
There are two very notable things about The Simpsons nobody can deny. It has never tried to push some horrible spin off like Family Guy did with Cleveland Show. Also, all animated shows that are not cartoons has it to thank for their existence. Its success opened up the possibility for all of them like The Family Guy and King of The Hill.
Con mentions the aging voices but doesn't respond to my point that if something was to happen to one the main actors. Dan Castellaneta voices not only Homer but also Abraham Simpson, Barney Gumble, Krusty the clown, Groundskeeper Willie and more. Should something happen to Dan it'll be hard to find somebody who can do all those voices. But more importantly it would be right to end the show at that point as a mark of respect.
I know death threats against Homer is not original, but each one is still an original storyline. Since it is not a drama each episode does not build on another and should be considered independently. Also in each episode they reason for wanting each character dead is for totally different reasons and different methods are used thus not really repeating the same storyline.
In the comments section you said. "I don't mind crossovers in Disney or kids show but primetime adult shows even when their cartoon should have some kind of realness to them."
If you are looking for realness, no animated show is for you. Is the crossover is the only realness is issue you see? Think about any of the Halloween episodes, any episodes concerning nuclear power like the three eyed fish and glowing Mr. Burns, or just any time Homer chokes Bart.
Or the conflict in the ages of Abe Simpson, Homer and Marge. It suggests that both Abe and Homer were young fathers. Homer just out of High School and Abe just out of War after the draft. In early episodes it suggested that Homer and Marge were in High School in the 60's, then later in the 70's. I believe Bart is in the 4rd Grade and 10 years old. Which places Homer and Marge at around 29-30. Though their appearance, actions and everything else has always suggested they are much older. Going by that time frame and consider the show start date they would have Homer and Marge born no earlier than 1960. So Teenagers in the 70's and but not the 60's and Bart Born in 1979. That would also suggest Abraham Simpson is not nearly as old as he appears or old enough to have been in WW2 as many episodes portray him. For him to have been in WW2 and had Homer in 1960 he would have been well into his late 30's before Homer was born. Again all of this is based on it being 1989 when the showed first aired.
However it is animated and realness is not a big priority for any animated show. Nor is being the same as it was in the beginning. You say it should be like it was in the 1990's but also say it should be original, those tow criteria is hard to master at one time. Also I think Family Guy is a rip off of the Simpsons not the other way around. Also while we are at it I think American Dad is just Joe Swanson with good legs and a better job.
Of course Family guy and American Dad or rip offs of the Simpsons. If it wasn't for the Simpsons there would be no South Park either. But that doesn't automatically make the Simpsons a better show. South Park like the Simpsons has changed of the years but unlike the Simpsons it still feels like the same show. It still feels unique and it is still as good as it has ever been( in my opinion at least).
Although the Simpsons came along first I feel that these days its definitely them trying to be like Family Guy and not the other way round. The Simpsons has lost its way. It lost its heart and sole some years ago and its now too late now to get it back.
South Park is pretty much the same as always, only at times more crude than before. I don't watch it due to a baby in the house and I prefer to not expose her to that language.
I personally think The Family Guy has changed more than The Simpsons. It has been a while since I watched that as well, but I know they somehow killed off Brian. Stewie has also changed dramatically, he went from evil genius trying to kill Lois to some crazed super fan adoring anything about Hollywood. They might as well have killed him off as well since they all but ruined his character. It some funny lines but it is not that original as many episodes are so much alike that I think they just rewrote them as a new episode. I can understand Cleveland leaving as he never really added much to the show, mostly just a sidekick for Quagmire.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by o0jeannie0o 2 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||6|
Reasons for voting decision: pro did not refute the idea with "changing as the demographic changes" argument that was implied by con. he simply stuck with the "its not the same as it used to be so it should stop" argument. From a business standpoint it would be ludicrous to start playing episodes from the beginning of the series instead of continuing with the show as its a cash cow, that isn't in its prime, but still making money. Win to con Wiki and youtube as sources (reliable) spelling isn't my forte and I usually don't vote unless its bad. but you, pro, said sole in your final statement instead of soul. ouch. (grammar to con)
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.