So I ran a beer pong tournament at my house Friday night, and although I didn’t win (my brother and I ended up getting third place), it couldn’t have gone better, and ran very smoothly. Congratulations to Mark and Frank for their victory, and thanks to everybody who came and helped prepare for it, as well as those who lent me the use of their tables and spotlights.
I watched SummerSlam last night, so I missed The 4400 and The Dead Zone (however, my thoughts on those episodes will appear in next week’s column). As such, unfortunately there isn’t much for me to discuss regarding original television shows. Luckily, there was an article I wanted to mention last week, but felt that the column was filled with enough content as is.
CONTINUITY POLICE, VOLUME 3:
Fellow InsidePulse columnist Kevin Wong brought up the argument that the Miss Bliss era of Saved by the Bell is essentially a completely different series as the classic Saved by the Bell, and that’s a valid point (the former appeared on the Disney channel under the title “Good Morning, Miss Bliss”). Nevertheless, I still consider the example fair game, since (as I stated last week) both shows feature the same actors portraying the same roles, with the same basic back story. If the character Frasier mentioned on the television show of the same name that he had never been to Boston before that would be an obvious case of lack of continuity, since he spent several years living there during Cheers. So, in my eyes, last week’s example may not have been the best, but it is still fair game. Anyway, be sure to check out some of Kevin’s stuff, it’s always an enjoyable read.
This week, we take a look at Friends, and specifically, ask the question of when did Rachel and Chandler meet for the first time? In the first episode, Rachel hurries into Central Perk after running out of her wedding, and there she meets the gang (minus Monica and Ross) for the first time. It is made explicitly clear that Chandler, Joey, and Phoebe had never met her before. However, in a flashback episode after Janice asks the crew how they all met, we find out that Rachel ran into Chandler and Monica at the bar that would later become Central Perk. Not only were they simply introduced to each other, but Chandler also tried to flirt with her, and Rachel later had a fantasy about him. In this episode, it was made explicitly clear that they were meeting for the first time (a contradiction of what we learned in the pilot episode).
It doesn’t stop there, however. Later in the series, during one of the Thanksgiving episodes, we get several flashbacks of when Ross and Chandler were in college together. Here we learn that Rachel and Chandler had actually met numerous times, as both were guests at the Geller house for Thanksgiving. Further, we also learn that not only had Chandler and Rachel met before, but they actually made out with each other one time when Rachel and Monica visited Ross and Chandler at college. Talk about a continuous lack of continuity.
LOST:
Once again, it seems like ABC completely skipped over an episode. Last week focused on Michael and Walt, and ended with Claire returning after being held captive by Ethan. This week, Charlie is all messed up, and had apparently murdered Ethan.
That said this was one of my favorite episodes yet. I knew a bit about the episode before it aired, but only minimally so. I knew the basic back story: That Sawyer isn’t really his name, and that he took it after his father murdered his mother (after he found out she was cheating on him), and then killed himself, all in front of Sawyer (as a young boy). I also had a slight suspicion that the person Sawyer thought was the real Sawyer wasn’t actually him, but nevertheless it made a nice twist.
I especially enjoyed Sawyer and Kate playing “I never.” I liked how the game started off as playful and even flirtatious, but then transformed into something much darker and malicious. I also thought that having them both hesitate before drinking after Sawyer said he never killed a man was a nice touch. They both expressed a great deal of emotion in that moment, without even saying a word. Locke’s story about his sister dying and her mother finding solace in a golden retriever, and tying it into Sawyer’s story with the boar was interesting, and I liked how Sawyer decided not to kill it at the end, after looking it in the eyes. For a moment, I actually thought that he might even quietly say “I’m sorry,” but in the end it was implied anyway.
Perhaps the most surprising thing of all, however, was that Sawyer had met Jack’s dad while in Australia. I was legitimately shocked when the person at the bar turned out to be Jack’s father, and at the end of the episode when Sawyer had put two and two together while talking to Jack, I literally was yelling at the TV “don’t say ‘no reason’!” when Jack asked why Sawyer wanted to know about his dad, only for Sawyer to say “no reason.” Not only was it disappointing because it was a cool coincidence, but it was upsetting because Jack’s father said a lot of things that Sawyer knows Jack would have appreciated hearing. Further, Jack’s father really would have wanted Jack to know about it as well. I hope that by the end of everything, Sawyer lets Jack know. In a side note, it was really nice to see a softer, more compassionate side to Jack’s father.
THE SIMPSONS VS. FAMILY GUY:
First things first, I need to preface this by stating that I am one of the most loyal Simpson fans you will meet, to the extent that I religiously watched the show any time it was on syndication (even when FOX was showing it seven times a day). Now that I’ve gotten that out of the way, I need to say this: At this point in time, not only is the Simpsons terrible, but it’s one of the most atrocious, painful things to sit through. This past season, FOX would air two consecutive episodes in a row, and I maybe laughed once or twice within the hour, and it was usually a courtesy thing. I feel like the show has drifted so far away from being an animated comedy about a typical suburban family, and become such a gimmicked version of what it once was (remember when it was huge that the Simpsons were going to New York? Now they’re going to Japan or England and meeting the prime ministers of each).
Anyway, the August 2005 edition of Blender has a very interesting read on Family Guy, including an interview with creator Seth MacFarlane. The column also features an interview with the webmasters of a Simpsons website (nohomers.net) and Family Guy website (thedrunkenclam.com). Nine questions were asked to each, with both obviously siding with their respective show. Here were the questions asked, with my personal responses to each.
The Simpsons has been on for 16 years. Has it gotten better or worse with age?
That’s a tough question to answer, since, in my opinion, the first year or two wasn’t entirely funny either. The show definitely peaked in the third or fourth year, and remained funny for nearly a decade after that. The show was terrible this year, and hasn’t been very good in the past few years. So, yeah, it did get better with age, but as the Family Guy webmaster said, “all the good stories have been done. There’s been countless rehashing of jokes, the stories are pointless and the writing’s bad.”
Are Simpsons fans smarter than Family Guy fans?
I’d argue that most fans of the Simpsons probably became fans of Family Guy. Therefore, I’d argue that the audience is probably pretty close to being the same. However, that said, for several years the Simpsons was actually a surprisingly intelligent show, particularly the Stone Cutters episode (which immediately comes to mind).
Is Family Guy edgier than The Simpsons?
Yes.
What do you say to people who claim Family Guy rips off The Simpsons?
Honestly, I don’t think that’s a very fair claim. What exactly is so similar about it? Meg, Chris, and Stewie are absolutely nothing like Bart, Lisa, and Maggie (by any stretch of the imagination). Quagmire, Joe, and Cleveland aren’t anything like Lenny, Carl, and Barney. Horace and Moe don’t share any similarities. Sure, Peter is fat and stupid, but his stupidity is on a whole different plane as Homer’s, and hell, most patriarchal cartoon dads are fat (Fred Flintstone, for example). Lois and Marge aren’t particularly similar, aside from their affinity towards and lack of luck with gambling.
The Simpsons has Chief Wiggum, Apu, the Sea Captain…does Family Guy have as expansive a universe?
Right now? Probably not, although that isn’t an entirely fair comparison. Apu wasn’t nearly as central a character the first few years as he is now. The same goes for pretty much any other regular. Family Guy certainly has the potential, with all the neighbors, as well as Neil and his family. Not to mention the nudists, the horny old man, the greased up deaf guy (who I find annoying), and all the other random side characters.
Do you think it’s a failing of Family Guy that it doesn’t try to have a deeper emotional component?
Personally, I find that to be a big part of the humor. One of my favorite moments is at the end of one of the episodes, when Lois says to Peter “you must have learned something” and Peter simply says “Nope.”
What is the single worst thing about The Simpsons?
I’ve found it really annoying how, for the past several years, the first ten minutes of the episode have absolutely nothing to do with the rest of the story. It would be one thing if the first ten minutes were, ya’ know, funny, but instead it’s just a giant waste of time. What on earth does a badger have to do with the area code changing, anyway? I also hate how all celebrity guest voices all voice animated versions of themselves, instead of a different character completely. Meeting Krusty the Klown used to be exciting for Bart, now Homer is flying in a jet with Mel Gibson and John Travolta.
How about Family Guy?
It’s a bit early in the series to have a least favorite thing about it. But, if I had to choose, ummmm….lets go with the fact that, now, pretty much every character blatantly interacts with Stewie, instead of just Brian and non-regular characters.
Final question: Who gets laid more, a Simpsons fan or a Family Guy fan?
Probably a Simpsons fan. They’ve had 16 years to build up an audience. I’m just playing with averages here.
TV FUN FACT OF THE WEEK:
Since we discussed Saved by the Bell last week, how about we use it as our fun fact as well?
While not as popular or as well known as the original “Saved by the Bell” series, “Saved by the Bell: The New Class” actually had a longer series run and also produced more episodes.
And that’s it for this week. Simpsons fans, send your hate mail to the address provided below.
