The old "Everything is worse now" discussion - General Futurama Discussion. SPOILER ALERT

[Reply #200 on:]

I wouldn't call Otis a troll in this situation. He hasn't name called you (as you have him with "troll" and "idiot"), hasn't told you the Futurama equivalent of "fuck off", and hasn't used nearly as many eyerolls as you.

Please try to keep this civil. Otherwise, we always have PM for flaming!
(Edit: damn you for getting here first, Aki!)


And I think people have a serious nostalgia goggles problem, but it's also possible that some never really were Futurama fans. It's all open to interpretation of the person rather than the group.

[Reply #201 on:]

In my opinion both have had some serious civility issues, but I would not call either a troll.  Both have contributed some perfectly cromulent arguments and requests, but both have also been pretty nasty. My point was, however, that if one considers the other a troll, then ignore him.

And I think people have a serious nostalgia goggles problem, but it's also possible that some never really were Futurama fans. It's all open to interpretation of the person rather than the group.

Indeedidly.

[Reply #202 on:]

let us call a spade a spade. both take the internet WAY too seriously. MY GOD, these posts.

[Reply #203 on:]

I forget who, but somebody keeps saying that CGEF ratings for episodes change over time. This is not true. There are small fluctuations over time, somewhere in the order of a few percentage points.

The general trend, however, tends to remain fairly constant. If an episode starts out rated at 80% after 10 reviews, it'll fluctuate between 75 and 85 over time... and that would be an extreme fluctuation.

Don't make me pull out my spreadsheets and prove it graphically - I do have archived CGEF scores for some episodes in Seasons 1-4, but the differences between ratings over time are negligable and it'd be a horrible waste of time to do it because I seem to remember whoever was stating this was being a complete dick as well. I can't be bothered to re-read the whole thread again and find out who. But I have a feeling it's the guy who's been posting immensely long and pontificating rants about how much he hates certain episodes and feels that The Cryonic Woman was better.

Which is just indefensible.

And I think people have a serious nostalgia goggles problem, but it's also possible that some never really were Futurama fans. It's all open to interpretation of the person rather than the group.

What's needed to test it without the goggles is a screening of seven random S1-4 episodes to 10 people who've never seen Futurama, plus 3 random S5-7 episodes. If more than half of the people who see the ten episodes can correctly identify the 5-7 episodes based purely on which they feel are not part of the "original" set, then the people who are complaining specifically about new episodes may have a point.

I wish I had a pool of volunteers for crazy experiments. I'd love to actually perform this one (partially because it involves watching lots of Futurama).

[Reply #204 on:]

I've contemplated using a sort of lottery system to determine which episode of Futurama I will watch at any given point. It would be totally unscientific and low-tech (I would literally just write the name of every episode on strips of paper, toss them into a hat, and then pull them out at random to compose my viewing list), but it has the potential to be a useful way of testing how susceptible I am to the dreaded nostalgia filter. 

[Reply #205 on:]

Another thing to consider with CGEF ratings, and all polling, is that the most adamant people go to the polls first. I've found this with reviews of professors and courses at my university: the people who rate the professors are the ones who are most adamant about them being horrible or fantastic, whereas the middle ground don't really bother. This is also found in exit polling for elections; you don't get a sound and reasonable number until you have some time. Compare how many more reviews episodes from Seasons 1-4 have than Season 6. I'd give it until the end of this year until last year's episodes have stopped fluctuating and a "true" rating is determined.

Right now, a lot of the reviews are gut reaction and through nostalgia goggles. You saw last year a lot of people changing their ratings and rankings of the new episodes as more were released, so give it time before we can truly judge which is "best".


And that sounds like an excellent idea for an experiment, TNUK. You'd have to show the episodes either all in 4:3 or all in widescreen. And Gorky, why not just use a random number generator from online, using choices from 1-85 (excludes new episodes, as I don't know if you have "acquired" them, and the movies, as I'm unsure you'd want to watch one act of a certain movie at "any given point")? That way you don't have to write down 85 episode titles on 85 strips of paper! Or 85 episode abbreviations and then having to do the guesswork to remember what the abbreviations TH, G, TS, and R mean.

[Reply #206 on:]

Despite my distrust for random number generators (blame "A Tale of Two Santas" for that one), I took your advice, Weiner. I included every episode, up to and including "Ghost in the Machines," and the results were, well, certainly random.

It occurs to me that it might be kind of cool and/or useful if any interested PEELers with loads of free time on their hands* chose to work their way through the series using a predetermined, randomly-generated list to dictate what episodes they watch, and when they watch them. This would not necessarily be as accurate as tnuk's test, but it would be neat if any interested PEELers (particularly those who, like me, can admit to suffering from some sort of nostalgia problem) participated and compared notes amongst themselves.

*That's redundant.

[Reply #207 on:]

I forget who, but somebody keeps saying that CGEF ratings for episodes change over time. This is not true. There are small fluctuations over time, somewhere in the order of a few percentage points.

In one sentence you claim that it is not true that CGEF ratings change over time. Then the next sentence you acknowledge that there are "small fluctuations" over time; i.e. changes.

Which is it, totalnerduk?

The general trend, however, tends to remain fairly constant. If an episode starts out rated at 80% after 10 reviews, it'll fluctuate between 75 and 85 over time... and that would be an extreme fluctuation.

Then you compounded your contradictory emphatic statement that CGEF ratings don't change by saying that rankings can vary by as much as 10 points.

Don't make me pull out my spreadsheets and prove it graphically - I do have archived CGEF scores for some episodes in Seasons 1-4, but the differences between ratings over time are negligable...

Be my guest: Pull out your precious spreadsheets and prove that the CGEF ratings do change over time, regardless of how "negligable" that you subjectively consider those changes to be.

[Reply #208 on:]

Despite my distrust for random number generators (blame "A Tale of Two Santas" for that one), I took your advice, Weiner. I included every episode, up to and including "Ghost in the Machines," and the results were, well, certainly random.

It occurs to me that it might be kind of cool and/or useful if any interested PEELers with loads of free time on their hands* chose to work their way through the series using a predetermined, randomly-generated list to dictate what episodes they watch, and when they watch them. This would not necessarily be as accurate as tnuk's test, but it would be neat if any interested PEELers (particularly those who, like me, can admit to suffering from some sort of nostalgia problem) participated and compared notes amongst themselves.

*That's redundant.

Thou hath inspired me. Gaze thine eyes into the depths of General Disscussion and thou shall see a glorious thread.

[Reply #209 on:]

I forget who, but somebody keeps saying that CGEF ratings for episodes change over time. This is not true. There are small fluctuations over time, somewhere in the order of a few percentage points.

In one sentence you claim that it is not true that CGEF ratings change over time. Then the next sentence you acknowledge that there are "small fluctuations" over time; i.e. changes.

Which is it, totalnerduk?

Perhaps I should've said "not strictly true. By adhering so rigidly to the literal definitions of individual words within my statement, you have failed to see the point of the whole. The episode ratings do not change significantly. There are small changes over time that do not affect the overall result in a significant capacity.

Hopefully this clarifies the meaning of my statement, for the hard-of-thinking.

Then you compounded your contradictory emphatic statement that CGEF ratings don't change by saying that rankings can vary by as much as 10 points.

I did note that a variation of 10 points would be an extreme example. Perhaps it's worth pointing out at this point that if an episode is rated at 80%, dips to 75%, and then rises to 85%, the average would be 80% overall. If it is rated for the majority of that time at between 79% and 81%, it is a fairly constant rating.

Note that I said "fairly constant", both times. Meaning that there is a small amount of variation. Next time I'll be more precise in the wording I use, so as not to confuse you. Perhaps "consistent" would have been a better choice of word?

Don't make me pull out my spreadsheets and prove it graphically - I do have archived CGEF scores for some episodes in Seasons 1-4, but the differences between ratings over time are negligable...

Be my guest: Pull out your precious spreadsheets and prove that the CGEF ratings do change over time, regardless of how "negligable" that you subjectively consider those changes to be.

I'm not going to prove anything for you. If I thought you had a genuine interest, then I'd produce something from the data, showing that any changes over time are very minor. However, I don't think you'd properly appreciate it. I have better uses for my time.

Perhaps you'd like to take this to PM if you want to continue, rather than cluttering up this thread and creating extra work for PEEL's hardworking staff.

Finally, I'd like to direct you to the last line of this post, which is incidentally taken from another thread in which you had decided to be a jackass.

[Reply #210 on:]

Does it annoy anyone else when people call others 'trolls' just because they have a contradictory opinion to theirs?

Trolling is a deliberate act of messing shit up. If someone is being a dick because they don't or they do like an episode of Futurama and someone else disagrees, that isn't trolling, that's being a dick. Trolling would be if someone came here and started posting about how shit everything was to aggravate everyone else...

[Reply #211 on:]

No way are, say, Amy and Zoidberg as interesting or worth developing as the main three.

Surely it's the less interesting characters that are worth developing as opposed to the three that are already very well developed?

I don't want to be tv writer Aki stop stirring shit for the hell of it. Loads of fans would agree that it's a big mistake having the whole crew feature in every episode.

Look, I've been quiet up until now, but there's also loads of fans who would disagree with that too. I for one quite like having all of the crew around for lots of episodes, I still feel that Fry, Leela and Bender get enough time to themselves and I feel that one of season 6's best qualities is how its been exploring a lot of characters and character pairings we haven't seen much of before. Bender and Hermes really worked well together in Lethal Inspection and I thoroughly enjoyed seeing Amy and Nibbler as the focus in That Darn Katz!. I felt like Lrrreconcilable Ndndifferences was a step too far, but Eric Rogers has a good point. If the writers feel that they've exhausted something, it's better for them to try new things than to go stale.

[Reply #212 on:]

Anyway I'm done with this show If it's staying this way. I mean I love futurama but not in this format.

How do you delete your account?

[leela] Oh lord... [/leela]

Hahaha!!


Anywho, I really miss the Fry, Leela, Bender-centric episodes and i think  that they still can make episodes like that. I mean, some episodes work with the whole crew being involved like Prisoner of Benda. ..but I actually didn't like Neutopia.

[Reply #213 on:]

(First post? What whaaaaat)

The strength of the Futurama ensemble has always been a huge selling point of the show for me, I was just remarking to a friend of mine today that there is no "main character" (I refer to the PE crew) that I find to be weak. They're all funny, and I truly believe that there's no PE staff member who can't carry an episode (Perhaps Scruffy? Prove me wrong, Futurama...). And you know? They all have.

So I don't really see it as Fry/Leela/Bender VS "The Rest", I see it as the PE Crew. The Amy/Bender combo in "Proposition Infinity" didn't float my boat, but that wasn't Amy's fault - I really liked her in "Kif Gets Knocked Up a Notch" and "That Darn Katz!". "That's Lobstertainment" is pretty weak, but "A Taste of Freedom" is a personal favorite.

Now, I know this is all personal taste and what not, but my three least favorite episodes (Attack of the Killer App, A Pharaoh to Remember and A Leela of their Own) all prominently feature Fry, Bender or Leela. It's not a slight against those characters, it's a slight against those episodes. And I think that's an important distinction - good characters can have bad episodes.

What I DO worry about is full episodes devoted to one joke characters. If we're in a world where Futurama is entering its fifteenth season or something crazy, I hope we're not seeing episodes starring Randy, the Gypsy Fortune Teller, the Whale Biologist and Professor Ben Beeler. Actually, I take it back, I do want that episode exactly. They can drive around in an old Chevy and solve mysteries.

[Reply #214 on:]

Well, when I'm fiding Ugly Americans more entertaining on a regular basis, something's going wrong.

I think it's awesome having that right after Futurama.

The problem is just that the television landscape in general
has changed so much in the seven years between Devil's Hands and
"Rebirth," and it's only natural that Futurama would be affected by
changes in the medium.

Ohmygosh...you are right...7 YEARS!!!! It really doesn't feel that long. Wow.

Also, I really hope not to read about trolls again, unless it involves the ones with the special encrusted heart shaped belly buttons and purple hair

[Reply #215 on:]

Also, I really hope not to read about trolls again, unless it involves the ones with the special encrusted heart shaped belly buttons and purple hair

Yeah, c'mon people, get back on topic:

[Reply #216 on:]

Many episodes with Fry, Leela, and Bender all together as the main crew wouldn't just be redundant now; they were already starting to get pretty redundant by the third season or so, which is about when they started to cease being as prominent. The first couple seasons have a lot of "all three go another ADVENTURE" type of episodes and, while they were fun, they also tended to feel very formulaic (oh look, they're running from something or someone about the kill them...again....). By season three, if nothing else, the characters were developed enough that the writers could decide to make an episode primarily about just Fry, or just Bender, or just Leela, or focus on either two of those or one of them and a secondary character, or even just get brave and focus almost entirely on a secondary character. There's nothing wrong with that. It's called evolution, and all TV shows must do it to survive and stay fresh.

I think Eric Rogers is being misinterpreted just a bit anyway, at least by some...he's not just saying that they need to make more episodes with the secondaries (although that is important), but also that trying to force more episodes to include all three original main characters on an equal basis would be a mistake and cause the show the show to get very stale. If nothing else, it's just more interesting if you can actually explore any one or two of the characters in depth, rather than relying on the season 1/2 formula (not from all episodes then, but many of them) of trying to give each of them more or less equal time and just putting them in another adventure of some kind. It's not just that the secondaries should be focused on, but also that there should be episodes where, say, Bender is the focus and Fry and Leela are in the background, or Fry and Bender should be focused on with little Leela, or Leela should be focused on while...well, you get the point.

My only complaint is that I don't really get why Amy, Hermes, Zoidberg, etc would go with them on all these trips all the time, or even why the Professor would so often. I don't really mind all those characters being in the episodes (I think that's a good choice, or at the very least not a bad one), but I just don't get what purpose, say, Hermes would have in joining a delivery or going along with some of these adventures. It's not his role in the company, so it doesn't always make much sense. But that's a very minor issue, anyway. I definitely think we're seeing more of the secondaries at least partially because of the promotion of a few former "guest stars" to regular salaried roles, but I don't think it was a bad move or anything.

[Reply #217 on:]

Hi I'm InfoMan! it's time for me to speak

To everyone complaining about no fry, leela and bender eps In the clip from 'All The Presidents Heads' Only fry, leela, bender and the professor were in the clip.

I'm quite disappointed so far this series. I think a lot of us viewers are forcing ourselves to believe that futurama is still as good as it's ever been and that theirs no decline in quality but honestly their is but that doesn't mean I'm going to stop watching it. I will watch it for as long as it's on the air but I really have got to stop comparing it to the old episodes. I mean it's not quite their but it's better than anything else on tv that said I'm sure we will get 2 or 3 gems this series.

P.S: How do you get a picture by your name?  

[Reply #218 on:]

The only real prominent problem I have with the secondary characters is that they're used on deliveries when that isn't their job at Planet Express. Fry, Leela and Bender are the delivery crew and I fail to see the need for secondary characters to tag along for no real reason. To include them in plots and subplots is absolutely fine, I just do not want them on deliveries 

[Reply #219 on:]

The only real prominent problem I have with the secondary characters is that they're used on deliveries when that isn't their job at Planet Express. Fry, Leela and Bender are the delivery crew and I fail to see the need for secondary characters to tag along for no real reason. To include them in plots and subplots is absolutely fine, I just do not want them on deliveries  

That's ironic, because in "The Mutants Are Revolting" the Professor declared that Planet Express was about to make its 100th delivery, and Hermes stated "That's almost ten per year."

The joke was obviously a reference to that being the 100th episode, and probably a meta-joke about how few episodes are actually about the crew delivering packages. Because I don't recall an episode in "season 6", with the exception of that one, that had the PlanEx crew deliver a package.

So your criticism that the rest of the PlanEx staff should not join Fry, Leela, and Bender on deliveries doesn't really apply to majority of the recent episodes (except "The Mutants Are Revolting" and "Benderama").

Personally, I wouldn't mind more episodes that focused on the three main characters, but I'm not opposed to the other characters coming along for the ride if it services the story.

[Reply #220 on:]

Because I don't recall an episode in "season 6", with the exception of that one, that had the PlanEx crew deliver a package.

So far there have been 4 deliveries in Season 6 which is about the average for the original seasons.

Handy link.

[Reply #221 on:]

Because I don't recall an episode in "season 6", with the exception of that one, that had the PlanEx crew deliver a package.

So far there have been 4 deliveries in Season 6 which is about the average for the original seasons.

Handy link.

Thanks for the link.

I admit that I forgot about the crew hauling e-waste to the "third world" of the Antares system in "Attack of the Killer App".

By "season 6" I originally meant last season. Then when I mentioned the delivery in "Benderama" I neglected to revise it.

And even that link acknowledges that the Professor delivering that note to himself doesn't really count as a delivery.

So there've been three deliveries so far in "season 6", out of 16 episodes. In comparison to season 1, episodes rarely involve the PlanEx crew delivering packages anymore -- hence the meta-joke in "The Mutants Are Revolting".

[Reply #222 on:]

It's more a joke about how few episodes there are relative to how long the show's been around (because of the cancellation), as well as just a funny jab at how little business PlanEx apparently gets. It has nothing to do with there being fewer deliveries in later seasons.

[Reply #223 on:]

As I've stated before, the 1/10 score is indicative that I consider this episode to be the worst episode of Futurama; meaning that it is the least funny and least enjoyable to watch, and I do not intend to watch this episode ever again -- except maybe with audio commentary to gain some insight as to WTF went wrong. I desperately want an explanation why the writer thought it was better to omit the songs, because the song-that-wasn't RUINED this episode for me!

Anyway... (IMO) chuckles only count to the funny factor of the episode if they are not accompanied or followed by: involuntary eye rolling, Kiff-groans, and/or head shaking.

So the chuckles count for nothing to you, absolutely nothing. I’m glad we’ve got to the bottom of that...

I've acknowledged that I didn't get this episode.

There's nothing I want more than to watch a new episode of Futurama and laugh so much that I cry and have to catch my breath so I can continue laughing. So the fact that I hated this episode so much, whereas others seemed to enjoy it, is indeed my loss.

Well, at least there’s always The Cryonic Woman...

Considering that CGEF's rankings of Futurama episodes change over time, I see no problem in revising the scores as necessary. If you feel it's necessary to chisel your scores into stone, be my guest.

That’s not what I’m getting at and anyone with half a brain would know it. Apparently you’re either very stupid, or you skipped past this part of my post:

Of course your opinions of episodes can change over time, I would never contest that

Do pay attention ...

A 0.1 addition to my original scores doesn't constitute a drastic change to my rating of a particular episode.

Again you completely missed the point. The point was it’s a flawed grading system to change another episodes score based on having nowhere to fit a new episode within the grading system. You’ve freely admitted you won’t ever be watching this episode again, so if you change it just to accommodate a new episode within your ridiculous grading system, no matter how small that change is, it only shows how flawed your grading system is. That is the point ...

Removing the decimal and scoring the episodes out of a hundred won't alter my opinions about the episodes, so it's pointless.

Of course it’s pointless, by rating out of 100 you would be removing the decimal point ...

I completely disagree that it was "lazy writing". I thought it was completely in character for the Professor to have forgotten why he fired Fry, then for Bender to screw Fry over by reminding him, and then for the Professor to react so harshly. The funniest part was that the PlanEx ship suddenly had a trap door for Fry to fall out of. The absurdity of that, combined with the shock, and the presumption that Fry was severely injured in the fall, are what made it funny.

You can libel that as "lazy writing" if you want, but the fact is that "The Cryonic Woman" did have a button -- meaning a final joke -- but you just didn't consider it to be funny. The crucial difference is that "Ghosts in the Machine" did not have a button. Instead, it simply had Fry accusingly ask Bender if he haunted him, then an excrutiating SILENCE with the expectation of a joke... which never came! I don't know if that was "lazy" writing per se, but IMO it was definitely BAD writing. And a befittingly awful ending to an abysmal episode.

Humour and lazy writing are different things...

Note the emphasis on "I don't need to justify any of my opinions to you..." because it's pointless when you've demonstrated that you'll never accept them. Which is evident by how you were so quick to try to dismiss everything that I've written on this subject just because I didn't bother to provide fodder for your ludicrous demands.

Opinions have more meaning with the relevant backup to justify them. Also I haven’t dismissed everything you’ve said either, so don’t lie...

The 5/10 was my initial impression of the episode after only seeing it once.

Any Futurama fan understands that Futurama episodes need to be watched multiple times to truly appreciate them -- for better or worse.

After a good night's rest and seeing this episode again in the light of day, I recognized how unfunny it was, and realized that I disliked this episode more than any other Futurama episode -- even "That's Lobstertainment". That's why I revised my score to 1/10, to rate it as the worst Futurama episode ever, IMO.

BTW This isn't the first time that I've revised my score on an episode. So what?

Initial impressions are notoriously unreliable. Anyone who bases their opinion on their initial impression and decrees it to be irrevocable, is an IDIOT.

My comment was based on the fact that you made such an extreme fluctuation in grades. If you want to change your grade then fine, but may I suggest that given how extremely far off base your original opinion of this episode was compared to your subsequent opinion, that for future episodes you neglect voting until after a re-watch because if you can’t trust your own initial impression, then it means very little to us. Rating one or two higher or lower wouldn’t be so questionable, but your extreme rating fluctuation most certainly is...

[Reply #224 on:]

So there've been three deliveries so far in "season 6", out of 16 episodes. In comparison to season 1, episodes rarely involve the PlanEx crew delivering packages anymore -- hence the meta-joke in "The Mutants Are Revolting".

Three deliveries in season 6 is about the same as four in season 4 (which has more aired episodes), two (!) in season 3 and two (!!!) in season 5. Having more deliveries in season one and two is the exception of the rule, not the rule itself.

I left my initial comment vague as to not cause this kind of argument, but I did indeed mean Cryonic and Buggalo.

Doesn't anyone think that the first act of "The Cryonic Woman" was good?

I loved the opening scene and really enjoyed the first act. I wish that more of the episode was about Fry and Bender running amok at the Cryogenics Lab, and Leela being a "delivery boy". Because it was when Polly Shore and Michelle were introduced that the episode went off the rails. And I disagree with group mindset that the ending was terrible.

I'd never claim it was a "good" episode overall, but the enjoyable first act is what elevates it from "worst-episode-ever" categorization IMO.

Whereas episodes like "That's Lobstertainment", "Where the Buggalo Roam", and many of the new episodes I didn't like at all, which is why I consider them to be the worst episodes of Futurama. If I were to rank all of the Futurama episodes, "The Cryonic Woman" would be in the bottom twenty, but not in the bottom two.

I see people say quite often that the first act of Cryonic is one of the best first acts ever. It's just that the rest of the episode doesn't hold up.

(First post? What whaaaaat)

Welcome to PEEL! Hope you'll have a nice stay.

[Reply #225 on:]

To not repeat myself telling you to take angry discussions someplace else:

[Reply #226 on:]

When I feel something needs addressing I will do so, and if that is in a long post, or a short post, so be it. I don't see the problem in a long well-thought out post, as long as some of it pertains to the topic. Not every post should have to be medium sized to please the spam haters and the long post haters. If I feel that something needs saying, then so it shall be said. My above post contained more subject matter relating to the topic than your most recent post. That isn’t a dig, I respect your opinions, but please respect mine too...
 

I appreciate PEEL for having such long posts. It's a much nicer read than just people yelling. The longer posts are much more often read through several times before posted.

Yes the posts haven't entirely been devoid of insulting remarks from both sides. In my defence I will react like that if there is a just cause. Aside from that I thought you didn't have a problem with long posts, Aki?...

In short, I liked Ghost In The Machines ...

[Reply #227 on:]

When I feel something needs addressing I will do so, and if that is in a long post, or a short post, so be it. I don't see the problem in a long well-thought out post, as long as some of it pertains to the topic. Not every post should have to be medium sized to please the spam haters and the long post haters. If I feel that something needs saying, then so it shall be said. My above post contained more subject matter relating to the topic than your most recent post. That isn’t a dig, I respect your opinions, but please respect mine too...
 

I appreciate PEEL for having such long posts. It's a much nicer read than just people yelling. The longer posts are much more often read through several times before posted.

Yes the posts haven't entirely been devoid of insulting remarks from both sides. In my defence I will react like that if there is a just cause. Aside from that I thought you didn't have a problem with long posts, Aki?...

In short, I liked Ghost In The Machines ...

I don't mind long, thought-out posts. That wasn't what I talked about. My point is when you are just being extremely uncivil, calling eachother names and going around in circles. It wasn't directed at your last post, but your conversation in general.

[Reply #228 on:]

Finally, I'd like to direct you to the last line of this post, which is incidentally taken from another thread in which you had decided to be a jackass.

OMG I totally forgot about that! Says it all really, damn...

[Reply #229 on:]

Everyone,

I stickied this thread and edited the title so hopefully posters will know to discuss the overall show here. I spent 3 hours going through the Futurama news threads trying to keep it ontopic.

Please take your general Futurama talk here for the time being. I'd rather not see those other threads cluttered again. Thank you.

~futurefreak

[Reply #230 on:]

Thanks Randi.

Something I would have liked to see: Zapp and Kif in Cornwood.

[Reply #231 on:]

Taken from the Cryonic Woman review thread:

Personally I enjoyed Fry's line of "...and this picture of me and my old girlfriend Michelle and that ski instructor she was just friends with." and then he's in the background waving One of my top fave Fry stupid moments.

Yeah, the "awkward implication" jokes are always funny, and something that Futurama does particularly well. But at the same time as it makes me chuckle, that line really does make me feel sorry for Fry. Yah, he's a total clueless idiot. But he deserves better treatment than he gets, almost all of the way through that episode. Not just from Michelle, but from everybody.

Tnuk reminds me of something that's been bugging me in some of the newer episodes (though, as he implies, this has been a bit of a problem throughout the series): Fry has become such a punching bag for the rest of the PE crew. This is most pronounced in "The Duh-Vinci Code" (no one visits him in the hospital? Funny, but so sad) and "Ghost in the Machines" (where people think it's hilarious that Fry's being "haunted," and it takes him almost being strangled by a phone cord to make them take him seriously). I know that Fry is supposed to be a lovable dummy, a bit of an easy target, but when the entire PE crew turns on him (our hero, damn it!) it seems a bit too mean-spirited.

That's what I loved about "Law and Oracle": it had Fry being the butt-monkey at the beginning of the episode, but throughout the episode (and by the end) everyone had come to realize how much his simple presence contributes to life at Planet Express. It was nice to see Fry get a modicum of the respect he deserves.

Also: It's not that I find the ragging-on-Fry jokes unfunny; it's just that occasionally they seem to unnecessarily cruel. At least Fry's moments of being a punching bag tend to be spread out between episodes where he gets to be the bad-ass hero, so it's not exactly a chronic problem. It just bugs me when it does come up, I guess.

[Reply #232 on:]

[...] and "Ghost in the Machines" (where people think it's hilarious that Fry's being "haunted," and it takes him almost being strangled by a phone cord to make them take him seriously).

This isn't the first time Fry has made some ridiculous-sounding claim... it did take them seeing the lost city of Atlanta themselves for them to take his claims of seeing a mermaid seriously in The Deep South.

I agree, though, that no one coming to see him in the hospital is a bit cruel and also out of precedent. At least they all came in Ghost in the Machines. And it was nice seeing him be competent - and missed - in Law and Oracle. The only times I can think of off the top of my head where they all turned against him were times like Future Stock, where he was being an ass anyways and completely deserved it.

[Reply #233 on:]

I guess it just bothers me when Fry is clearly in distress about something (which was the case in "Ghost in the Machines") and everyone still chooses to laugh at him instead of consider the possibility that he may be telling the truth. I know it's a running joke that Fry makes ridiculous claims that are generally true despite being initially mocked by the rest of the crew, but in "Ghost in the Machines" it just seemed more malicious than amusing.

That said, though, the PE crew tends to disbelieve everyone's ridiculous claims. When Leela says Fry is still alive in "The Sting," everyone reacts with disgusted disbelief. Bender's insistence on the theory of robot evolution in "A Clockwork Origin" is also met with mockery. Maybe I'm just being overly-sensitive here, because every character has been made into a punching bag when it suits the story, but I don't know. In the two cases I mentioned in my first post, it just rubbed me the wrong way.

[Reply #234 on:]

I really was annoyed by the hospital joke in "The Duh-Vinci Code", but I think you're overreacting overall. Fry has been the punching bag many times before, just look at the ending of "My Three Suns" for a more literal version of it.

[Reply #235 on:]

But the ending of "My Three Suns" is funny; Fry's choked, desperate-sounding "Now do you believe me?" in "Ghost in the Machines" just hit a nerve.

In other words: Yes, I'm overreacting.

[Reply #236 on:]

However, I don't believe they really showed Fry himself how much he meant to them when he was around in Law and Oracle. One of things Leela mentions (shallowly) when he returns mid-episode was a compliment about his uniform. And at the end of the episode, the Professor promotes him for, as Hermes described, him "to feel better about himself". Although the plot isn't built around people ragging on Fry, the sentiment is still there throughout.

Thanks Randi.

Something I would have liked to see: Zapp and Kif in Cornwood.

We do have a things you want to see happen thread, which oddly enough you've posted in before.

[Reply #237 on:]

Shit, Weiner, now I hate the episode! Thanks for nothing.

Seriously, though: At the end of "Law and Oracle," Farnsworth essentially admits that Fry is invaluable to Planet Express (though he has a hard time pinpointing what, exactly, Fry contributes), and the rest of the crew laments Fry's absence at various points throughout the episode (like Zoidberg saying that the meetings used to be funny). And that was enough for me.

[Reply #238 on:]

We do have a things you want to see happen thread, which oddly enough you've posted in before.

I have a bad memory!

Also, did anyone else notice that Fry's voice sounded a little deeper in Law and Oracle?

[Reply #239 on:]

Fry's voice has seemed different to me since the movies; he occasionally sounds a bit worn-out, more  like current Billy West than young Billy West (which, as he's said numerous times, is the inspiration for Fry's voice). It's not jarring, exactly, but it's kind of odd.

I actually thought Roberto's voice sounded off in "Law and Oracle," too, but I may be alone there.