General Futurama Discussion - A New Thread

[Reply #160 on:]

Amazing. Happy Anniversary!

[Reply #161 on:]

Happy 20th to the greatest show of the past, present & future!

You can't prove it won't happen.

[Reply #162 on:]

There having a marathon on the Syfy channel, if anyone still has cable anymore.

[Reply #163 on:]

I can't believe it's been 20 years! Happy anniversary Futurama!

[Reply #164 on:]

So quick question. Season 5 is basically the four movies chopped up into 22 minute episodes, correct? I have the complete series box set. I don't need to buy the individual movie discs now?

[Reply #165 on:]

That's my recollection, but I don't have my discs handy.

* * Tachy looks online* *

Yep: The Infosphere - Season 5

[Reply #166 on:]

K cool. Thanks.

[Reply #167 on:]

I believe it is actually 16 episodes since each one was split into 4 parts.

[Reply #168 on:]

i love futurame is the best

[Reply #169 on:]

Finally.

I didn't really think someone quite like you would arrive to embrace and reveal the true contents of my secret heart in such an honest and succinct, ...poetic? 😕 face. Dare I?

I've waited.  Years.  I waited for years....and here you are. Yeeeeeaaaaarrsssrs.

[Reply #170 on:]

So I've been watching reruns on SyFy the past few nights--they conveniently air at around the time I'm settling in for bed and just want something mindless and comforting to fall asleep to. Last night I caught "Crimes of the Hot" and was reminded of why I love season four so much and consider it, truly, the best the series has to offer.

In short: this is the season that made me care about Bender. He's always been my least favorite (though, oddly, most quotable and most avatar-able) member of the core trio, just because he's so excessively misanthropic and amoral--but he's also such a cute li'l guy. If "Godfellas" establishes that Bender has a soul, the episodes of season four build on that premise with gusto.

"Crimes of the Hot," "Bend Her," and "Obsoletely Fabulous" all call on Bender to demonstrate some degree of conscience and self-sacrifice, or at least require him to grow in some demonstrable way. Most of the Bender-centric episodes of seasons past (excepting "Godfellas") are focused on Bender following a whim (becoming a wrestler, a mob enforcer, a folk singer, a chef) and having zany adventure as a result--he's basically the Homer Simpson of the show, always on the lookout for a new scheme.

But the aforementioned Bender episodes in season four are focused on Bender building genuine relationships with other living things (be it a lovable turtle, a robot with unholy acting talent, or a ragtag team of outdated robots) and embarking on a compelling course of action as a result. The previous love-interest-of-the-week episodes--"A Flight to Remember," "Bendless Love," "Love and Rocket"--have shades of this, but they're all of a type; "Crimes of the Hot," "Bend Her," and "Obsoletely Fabulous" give Bender a chance to shine in unique situations (a global crisis, a public romantic entanglement, an isolated island), and each time he responds in an interesting, dare I say human way.

I'm probably overstating my point here, but no matter: season four is awesome, Bender is great, and that's that.

[Reply #171 on:]

Well, I think that season four was the weakest of the four seasons, and Bender has always been my favorite character, so I guess we disagree.

[Reply #172 on:]

So it appears! I'm curious to know what your favorite season is, and what particularly about season four just doesn't do it for you (less in the spirt of healthy debate, more out of nosiness). I do think that seasons one and two have a different vibe than seasons three and four--which I've generally attributed to the greater emphasis on the Fry/Leela ship in the back half of the original run, but that's just a hunch--so I'm wondering if that's part of what's at play in our differing opinions.

[Reply #173 on:]

Looking at the episode list, I'd definitely have to say that the show peaked in the third season.

I don't think that there are any bad episodes in season four.  I don't think that there are any bad episodes in the original run at all, although there are episodes that are better than others.  However, it does seem to me that the writers were starting to run out of ideas by the fourth season.

[Reply #174 on:]

I don't think that there are any bad episodes in the original run at all,

The Cryonic Woman is a bad episode.

[Reply #175 on:]

Yeah?  Well, you know, that's just like uh, your opinion, man.

[Reply #176 on:]

It may be a bad episode, but it did grow on me a bit and I can still enjoy it <plays episode in head at that moment> yeah that episode is alright.  I think the rule with American sitcoms is that 3 seasons is typically the high point for congruent strong writing across the season.  I can't say for sure when the show jumped the shark though, maybe with super king.

[Reply #177 on:]

The Cryonic Woman could have been better. Michelle is a horrible character who was written to be hated.  But she's not really a funny character and that makes her scenes rather grating.

I would compare her to Bev who is another unpleasent character but isn't funny enough to be enjoyable.  Wanda Sykes tries to make her dialogue funny but they should have just let her ad lib because Bev isn't as sassy as the writers seem to think she is.  I love Wanda Sykes but I remember being disappointed by the character.

Like seriously Bev just insults everyone around her except Fry.  She is rude to Bender straight off the bat, and then calls Ruth and Esther trashy sluts when neither of them had said a word to her, Esther stands up for herself and her friend with a clapback that is much wittier then anything Bev says in the episode, which results in both her and Ruth (who never says a word to Bev) beyond sprayed with slurm.  Then Bev gets knocked up again by the policeman looking for her son... And she thinks she can call Ruth and Esther trashy?  Such jealous.

I think the problem with both Bev and Michelle is that they are just too awful people but they are not funny enough to be enjoyable characters.  Michelle's joke is that she is a horrible girlfriend who emotionally abuses Fry, cheats on him and dumps him the second she gets bored or finds someone else.  I suppose Michelle is much more grating because she focuses the entire extent of her shitty personality on the sweetest boy in the universe, while Bev at least spreads her inherent crumminess on everyone who is unfortunate to run into her, whether it's an alcoholic badboy, his yiddish fembot floozies or her own children.  And oddly enough Bev seems like she might have a softer side for all her whoring and child abusing, and it is notable that a lot of her nastier behaviour is often a result of Bender pissing her off, justifiably or not.

I also wonder if there is a nicer side to Bev that we do not see since she and Bender are at each others well... Whatever robotos have instead of throats.   It's not hard to imagine that she genuinely enjoys Fry's company and its also not hard to imagine that during his slurm addiction episode that he took the time to talk to her and listen to her problems and interests.  Fry is that Guy and he has the most empathy of anyone in the show, so I don't find it difficult that even a nasty old drinks dispensing shrew like Bev could eventually become genuinely fond of him.

Also I wonder if Ruth and Esther bumped into him en route to a blintz.  I'm sure Fry would have been very happy to lick slurm off some big ol' robo tiddies.

[Reply #178 on:]

I think another reason why a lot of people dislike that episode is because it probably hits too close to home for a lot of people.  Either you have dated someone like Michelle or someone you really care about has and Michelle's dialogue makes her a dead ringer for that horrible girl your best friend/brother/any guy you really care about has dated and proceeded to mess him and his life up over a long period of time.

My former best friend dated a girl with bpd b(though she seemed like she had NPD wimhich is much nastier) and she pretty much ruined our friendship forever because she didn't like how physically affectionate we were and since he was bisexual, for all her yack yacking about teh soshul jurstice she was convinced he would cheat on her with most about any man who blinked at her.  She also liked turning up to her job in miniskirts that barely covered her stomach (I saw her camel toe at least once) and then crying when she was asked to wear something more appropriate to her job.

Of course it wasn't all her fault but she was a huge factor in me losing my best friend forever and I will always hate her for that. .

[Reply #179 on:]

I miss Futurama. I'm missing it harder lately since I have viewed videos from Johnny 2 Cellos. It's amazing how with the right timing and argument, some stranger can reignite your passion.

I know PEEL is pretty much dead. Nary a post is made without at least a day between. This place had so much activity a decade ago; it's just the sign of the times though. I don't think most internet forums are doing too well now since the advent of Reddit and Twitter, though the newer platforms definitely have their downsides (as it relates to the subject, if something doesn't ignite conversation in a few hours then the topic is dead in the water).

I fell in love with Futurama in August 2005. I was just entering the middle school age. It was a crucial part of my formation as I wasn't a socially ept girl. I maintained my love for a decade to see the movies and the new run. I loved discussing the show with all you dead PEELers, poking every hole and criticizing every decision. When Futurama ended, I needed a break. I was too obsessed, you know? And it ended well enough at the time.

But now I'm not so satisfied anymore. I honestly can't say I liked the [current] series finale no matter what everyone online professes as one of the greatest finales ever. I need more. I want closure, dammit. And that finale only brought me the opposite of closure. It's made me restless. I've been thinking of the story more, the plotlines unanswered, the character arcs unexplored... It's so strong, I am making up my own answers.

I didn't even fathom, entertain, or even blink at the idea back in 2005 while I was swinging in my backyard dreaming of my shitty little head-fanfictions back in 2005, but now that I'm older (and some may say a little wiser) and have gotten a greater understanding of Futurama and the world in general, I want to write for Futurama. It has given me so much and I love it so much, that I just want to be part of it on my own way. What does this mean? Probably nothing. I'm pretty sure I'm talking to an empty auditorium, but I'm talking to a public audience of ghosts nonetheless. Maybe I'll start making my own videos like Johnny 2 Cellos. Maybe I can rally up a campaign to bring Futurama back sometime soon. Disenchantment probably isn't going to last forever and Disney+ will need the content as the streaming wars heat up. I keep dreaming of answers to the questions the series left behind and wish to share them with somebody. I wish I can share them with you all, but I'm too prideful and keep them to myself as I think they deserve to be canon (it's been a long way from 2005 when my head fanfictions had me as a Mary Sue). I wish I could discuss my ideas with the crew behind the series to get input. I know I can develop something incredible that would make people not regret Futurama's third resurrection, but I don't have anyone to bounce my ideas off of that can offer valuable criticism. I want to do something soon as I feel a change in the wind. Billy West is going to be 80 in ten years. The streaming game is heating up (HBO Max has raised the steaks! That's right, S-T-E-A-K-S, prime cuts and not yet laboratory created!) I don't know what the contracts are for everything, but I would imagine Viacom is going to lose their grip on Futurama and Disney+ is going to want something to headline their adult streaming service once Hulu collapses in on itself. We are on the precipice of a happening, and I can be the difference between happening and not happening.

[Reply #180 on:]

Maybe I can rally up a campaign to bring Futurama back sometime soon.

At this point, it would be like asking a friendly necromancer to raise your great-great-great grandmother. You'd get something that had the same bones, but the meat would be either long gone or unrecognisable, and it just wouldn't be cut out for the modern world.

Of course, that's assuming you were to bring the show back with the original run's guiding spirit intact. In the event that you got some kind of "updated" version, it would likely be something a little more akin to a more lacklustre version of the revived run after the movies.

Then again, you might also end up having trouble bringing it back with a full budget or writing team, in which case you're back to the re-animated grandmother but one who continually curses in an attempt to stay relevant to "the youth". Which would just be sad.

It'd be a season of things on the same level as AOTKA, and nobody wants that.

Let Futurama rest with dignity. It's died. It's at peace. Don't violate the sanctity of it's grave - the gratification you get from it will be worthless when the guilt sets in.

[Reply #181 on:]

I'm not sure if this is a worldwide thing or not, but the other day I saw that Futurama is on Disney+ now.
Since I'm too lazy to use my DVDs, this is good news.

[Reply #182 on:]

I'm not sure if this is a worldwide thing or not, but the other day I saw that Futurama is on Disney+ now.

It's worldwide except for the US. It has something to do with Star being added to the service, but I don't know the specifics or even the generals since I'm a burger. It's exciting, though that does raise the question of what is going to happen to Hulu. Disney is very careful of the image they want to project to the greater American public. While having The Simpsons is just too good to pass up on their headlining streaming service, they're pretty protective of anything explicitly adult making it onto their supposedly family-friendly outlet.

Maybe I can rally up a campaign to bring Futurama back sometime soon.

Of course, that's assuming you were to bring the show back with the original run's guiding spirit intact. In the event that you got some kind of "updated" version, it would likely be something a little more akin to a more lacklustre version of the revived run after the movies.

Then again, you might also end up having trouble bringing it back with a full budget or writing team, in which case you're back to the re-animated grandmother but one who continually curses in an attempt to stay relevant to "the youth". Which would just be sad.

It'd be a season of things on the same level as AOTKA, and nobody wants that.

Let Futurama rest with dignity. It's died. It's at peace. Don't violate the sanctity of it's grave - the gratification you get from it will be worthless when the guilt sets in.

Oh canuck tnuk, such doubt. I don't regret the movies or Comedy Central seasons. Were they a bar lower than the original run? Debatably yes. But I think they were worth it even with stinkers like AotKA.

I'm pleasantly surprised no one has responded derisively at my dream to write for Futurama. So thanks to all five people who read my heart spill out on the internet.

I'm still fairly young at 28. If I had some say on Futurama coming back, I would be adamant on no politics, especially social politics. There is just no winning no matter what you say and frankly folks don't want to be proselytized by a cartoon. I would want Futurama to focus primarily on the time aspect of the show. The time travel escapades are always the most beloved adventures to see and with a show entitled *Futurama* that's sort of what people expect.

Besides, I need closure, dammit! How exactly does the Professor prevent the time loop? At what point did the Professor conceive of the reset button? Is Fry still needed as savior of the universe? Is Leela the other? What is the other? Do Fry and Leela ever have children? What do they look like? How would Fry and Leela be as parents? Is Floyd Farnsworth okay? What happens when Kif and Amy and Leela's tadpoles sprout legs? I HAVE TO KNOOOOOOOW

[Reply #183 on:]

If I had some say on Futurama coming back, I would be adamant on no politics, especially social politics. There is just no winning no matter what you say and frankly folks don't want to be proselytized by a cartoon.

That would be a big mistake. Science fiction has always been a progressive lens through which to view examples of better or worse worlds.

Removing this facet of the genre would diminish the show significantly - there is a right way and a wrong way to use social commentary and allegory within science fiction though. Some of the episodes we've had have been really stellar examples of the wrong way. Heavy-handed and ham-fisted social commentary ages poorly as time moves on, and in general does not sit well with audiences.

It looks and feels forced, and is an obvious soapbox. Especially when it's the main focus of an episode rather than a set of background observations that are tied to the worldbuilding of the show.

On the other hand, there have been some very subtle examples of social commentary in Futurama that were extremely well done. In the original run, we see the robot underclass, we see the crippling poverty that still exists in the 31st Century somehow, and we see the excesses of the rich and decadent (all in the same episode, no less). We see how the rich tradition of rewarding incompetence with promotion still exists in the future, and the horrible consequences thereof (and we're still in that same episode).

Picking another, we see how there is another underclass - the mutants. We see their struggles, and we see that for all of their differences they are fundamentally the same as us and deserve the same shot at the opportunities that those on the surface have. But they are denied due to some ugly prejudices, and live as outcasts on the wastes of humanity. We see over the course of the original and revised run how their class struggle plays out, and the eventual beginnings of (possibly) better things for them.

We see a complex exploration over several episodes of the topic of religion - for robots, for humans, and even for god-like entities that exist in deep space or other dimensions.

There's even some exploration of the issues surrounding colonialism, exploitation, abuse of indigenous populations, and the ideas involved in restitution for that. Again, this can all be applied to one episode but some of the ideas are also explored in others.

Sure, these are all played for laughs rather than hammered home self-righteously. But that's the right way to do it. That's what works. That's how you get people to look through this lens for possibly the first time.

Futurama is littered with socially progressive commentaries on the time we live in, times gone by, and the future as well. You might not notice many of them, because they're so well done. But there is commentary on sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia, misogyny, environmentalism, pseudoscience, nepotism, political corruption, abuse of power, late-stage capitalism, xenophobia, nationalism, radicalization of vulnerable individuals, and the exploitation of underprivileged groups both by systemic and individual societal prejudices.

Most of it doesn't stick out in the original run, because it was done rather well. Most of it doesn't end up too well-done in the newer episodes. But some of it from both runs is pretty heavy-hitting stuff, and it's the sort of artistic commentary on the society that we live in that is necessary for the world to make progress and for people to begin to explore the ideas of confronting societal problems, their own privileges, and the unfairness that is baked into much of our current civilisational model.

By erasing any of that, you'd be wiping out a part of the intelligence and heart that characterized the best of Futurama. Critical social and political commentary being removed from artistic expression is one of the cornerstones of systematic censorship.

A Futurama with its soul burned and its teeth pulled in this way would absolutely be the worst possible incarnation of the franchise. In other words, your idea is bad and you should feel bad.

[Reply #184 on:]

In other words, your idea is bad and you should feel bad.

Yeesh. Of course I can't leave PEEL without being figuratively eviscerated by tnuc in a long-form reply.

Look, I'm not saying to rid of all sociopolitical commentary that is implied. It's just that today nobody can execute anything remotely related to the hot topics with grace. Futurama's recent run proved they don't have the light touch like they used to. The robosexuality episode didn't offer any new perspectives on the topic of gay marriage. It's pretty sad when Family Guy's episode years before offered a better argument that anything Futurama could muster.

It's not like the original run did that much better either. An episode like "Bend Her" is now touted as transphobic. "Neutopia" is considered a trainwreck with it's sexist gender commentary that really wasn't funny in the first place. Then there were episodes like "Decision 3012" that I'm not even sure what the point of all of it was. Okay, so Senator Travers wasn't born until 3012, it's a jab at Obama birthers, but it lacks relevancy otherwise as most criticism towards Obama were not directed at his country of origin.

I fear how Futurama would take on race relations today. The current rhetoric is either one side or die. The writing staff of Futurama is comprised mostly of straight aging white males so it would be pretty deaf for any of them to say they can comprehend the intricacies of racism. They're just out of their depth there. All of these hot-button issues are booby traps- you don't need to touch them to tell a good story. And if you do touch them, you're gonna get bit.

[Reply #185 on:]

If I had some say on Futurama coming back, I would be adamant on no politics, especially social politics.

Look, I'm not saying to rid of all sociopolitical commentary that is implied.

Okay. So you're not saying what you said. That makes perfect sense.

Of course I can't leave PEEL without being figuratively eviscerated by tnuc in a long-form reply.

Your idea was bad, and you should feel bad, and I needed to be sure that you knew that.

[Reply #186 on:]

Okay. So you're not saying what you said. That makes perfect sense.


Your idea was bad, and you should feel bad, and I needed to be sure that you knew that.

The meaning of the word "politics" is so loose really. It's not just subjective when topics can verve between timely and apolitical over time and culture.

(Haha, you got nothing to say.)

Really, most entertainment could benefit from trying to be too relevant. We don't want to be reminded of Kim Kardashian's ass, though I would be cool if Futurama made a reference to something like the hitchhiking robot that got attacked in Philadelphia. Context matters. In Futurama, it oughta be nerdy, not pop culture brain bubblegum.

[Reply #187 on:]

Context matters. In Futurama, it oughta be nerdy, not pop culture brain bubblegum.

Futurama is littered with socially progressive commentaries on the time we live in, times gone by, and the future as well. You might not notice many of them, because they're so well done. But there is commentary on sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia, misogyny, environmentalism, pseudoscience, nepotism, political corruption, abuse of power, late-stage capitalism, xenophobia, nationalism, radicalization of vulnerable individuals, and the exploitation of underprivileged groups both by systemic and individual societal prejudices.

If you view this as pop culture brain bubblegum, how the hell were you ever able to appreciate Futurama in the first place? These are the soul and core of the classic science fiction that inspired Futurama. It was laden with these themes, and not all of them were subtly done. I mean, if you want pulp sci-fi fantasy like John Carter or Star Wars to be the only flavour out there, then sure. You can discard all the "politics" and declare them too "subjective" to be part of your fiction. But you also lose the message, the heart, and the engagement that comes from people recognizing their own struggles in what the heroes and villains are facing within those works.

These themes I mentioned are all still relevant in their original context, too. Some (if not all) are even more relevant today. They're not "brain bubblegum". They're the fucking soul of the story. Not the spaceships. Not the robots. Those are the shiny wrapping paper. Science fiction is a lens. Through it, you view new concepts and take on ideas bigger than yourself. Through it you gain insight, understanding, and compassion. Or, you do if you're capable of these things.

If you're going to make an argument in bad faith, you should really make sure it's not one that can be demonstrated to be fallacious so easily. Calling social commentary in Futurama "brain bubblegum" and crying "It'S tOo PoLiTiCaL!" when the message is particularly obvious to you seems like an obvious deflection to prevent you from needing to confront whatever part of the problem you might recognise in yourself.

I've been guilty of this myself in the past. I find these days that if it feels "ToO pOlItIcAl", it usually means that I have some personal attribute I should work on in response. Ham-fisted writing just makes me roll my eyes and hope that the next episode is more subtly crafted. It's entertainment, after all.

Besides which, human art and expression for the last 4 or 5 thousand years has always been a form of social commentary, and very little of that is now irrelevant in the modern era. There are social commentaries woven into The Iliad that we are still able to hold as a lens to modern problems.

(Haha, you got nothing to say.)

On the contrary. There is plenty I would love to say. Some of it would be unwise in this place at this time. You are also worth shockingly little of my overall attention, so I'm keeping my comments brief. The fact that you referred to one of them as "longposting" was something I did consider taking issue with - in general that was a short to mid-length post for me.

If you want longpost replies, or to have a conversation which you feel has a little more depth and substance than this, I'd be more than happy to do so providing you're willing to provide monetary compensation for my time (and my rates went up recently, so be prepared to shell out for it).

This is a sincere offer, and if you come into the discord and leave me a PM I can discuss the details of remuneration and the appropriate platform for private discussion with you.

Otherwise, please feel free to believe that I have nothing to respond to you with when I'm not actually saying it. It won't be true, as the truth is merely that the newest version of tnuc is actually capable of demonstrating a smidgeon more restraint.

Further replies from me on this topic from this point have an increasing chance of being bouncing red text.

[Reply #188 on:]

I hate the idea that politics are off-limits in entertainment. Politics control literally everything and are a part of daily life. Banning politics is basically creative murder.

[Reply #189 on:]

If you view this as pop culture brain bubblegum, how the hell were you ever able to appreciate Futurama in the first place? These are the soul and core of the classic science fiction that inspired Futurama. It was laden with these themes, and not all of them were subtly done. I mean, if you want pulp sci-fi fantasy like John Carter or Star Wars to be the only flavour out there, then sure. You can discard all the "politics" and declare them too "subjective" to be part of your fiction. But you also lose the message, the heart, and the engagement that comes from people recognizing their own struggles in what the heroes and villains are facing within those works.

These themes I mentioned are all still relevant in their original context, too. Some (if not all) are even more relevant today. They're not "brain bubblegum". They're the fucking soul of the story. Not the spaceships. Not the robots. Those are the shiny wrapping paper. Science fiction is a lens. Through it, you view new concepts and take on ideas bigger than yourself. Through it you gain insight, understanding, and compassion. Or, you do if you're capable of these things.

If you're going to make an argument in bad faith, you should really make sure it's not one that can be demonstrated to be fallacious so easily. Calling social commentary in Futurama "brain bubblegum" and crying "It'S tOo PoLiTiCaL!" when the message is particularly obvious to you seems like an obvious deflection to prevent you from needing to confront whatever part of the problem you might recognise in yourself.

I've been guilty of this myself in the past. I find these days that if it feels "ToO pOlItIcAl", it usually means that I have some personal attribute I should work on in response. Ham-fisted writing just makes me roll my eyes and hope that the next episode is more subtly crafted. It's entertainment, after all.

Besides which, human art and expression for the last 4 or 5 thousand years has always been a form of social commentary, and very little of that is now irrelevant in the modern era. There are social commentaries woven into The Iliad that we are still able to hold as a lens to modern problems.

(Haha, you got nothing to say.)

On the contrary. There is plenty I would love to say. Some of it would be unwise in this place at this time. You are also worth shockingly little of my overall attention, so I'm keeping my comments brief. The fact that you referred to one of them as "longposting" was something I did consider taking issue with - in general that was a short to mid-length post for me.

If you want longpost replies, or to have a conversation which you feel has a little more depth and substance than this, I'd be more than happy to do so providing you're willing to provide monetary compensation for my time (and my rates went up recently, so be prepared to shell out for it).

This is a sincere offer, and if you come into the discord and leave me a PM I can discuss the details of remuneration and the appropriate platform for private discussion with you.

Otherwise, please feel free to believe that I have nothing to respond to you with when I'm not actually saying it. It won't be true, as the truth is merely that the newest version of tnuc is actually capable of demonstrating a smidgeon more restraint.

Further replies from me on this topic from this point have an increasing chance of being bouncing red text.

Why on earth did I poke the bear?

I wish I could have responded sooner. I've been busy with life and stuff and feel ashamed it took me ten days to reply.

There isn't much use trying to message me via PEEL anymore. I can't seem to open any messages. So any attempt to contact me that way would be in vain. But I still got a fire in my belly.

I don't see you defending the more political episodes. They are weaker episodes. You know it, I know it, everybody knows it. Social commentary on the grand scale of society is cool, but I don't want to have something as dumb as gamergate rehashed out for me.

I hate the idea that politics are off-limits in entertainment. Politics control literally everything and are a part of daily life. Banning politics is basically creative murder.

On the contrary, creativity will thrive in just about any environment you box it into. Creativity see captivity as a playground to bounce off the walls and climb on the ceiling. I don't think excluding one subject as limiting, rather so by eliminating what is superfluous can we get a more focused work. To me, saying no politics is like saying no violence- a work doesn't need violence or politics or sex or drugs or dialogue to be good.

It is so damn hard to write and post on a smartphone.

[Reply #190 on:]

You wrote all that on a phone? [Leia] "You're braver than I thought!"

[Reply #191 on:]

I don't see you defending the more political episodes. They are weaker episodes. You know it, I know it, everybody knows it. Social commentary on the grand scale of society is cool, but I don't want to have something as dumb as gamergate rehashed out for me.

You are continuing to miss the point. The entire series and the entire genre are a political and social commentary as much as they are anything else.

I'm not going to defend an episode that rehashes some social media kerfuffle which was relevant for a hot second and no longer. But neither will I pretend that to avoid this it is necessary to remove all political and social commentary from the table.

To me, saying no politics is like saying no violence- a work doesn't need violence or politics or sex or drugs or dialogue to be good.

A work of science fiction that does not reflect the social and political realities of its time whilst providing commentary as appropriate for the right side of history would literally be less meaningful and more "pop-culture bubblegum" than any of the Star Wars movies.

[Reply #192 on:]

[Reply #193 on:]

I would be cool if Futurama made a reference to something like the hitchhiking robot that got attacked in Philadelphia. Context matters. In Futurama, it oughta be nerdy, not pop culture brain bubblegum.

Yeah, because that forgettable moment is really as interesting as exploring themes like fascism (Star Wars) and other political topics we currently face through a sci-fi lens.

[Reply #194 on:]

To me, saying no politics is like saying no violence- a work doesn't need violence or politics or sex or drugs or dialogue to be good.

Of course it doesn't need those things to be good, but leaving them at the front door isn't doing anyone any favours either. Politics are an essential part of life. Futurama is about day-to-day life in a sci-fi setting, so not touching upon politics is just silly. And you have a point about the politics-focussed episodes being so-so, but I think that's more to do with it being weirdly America-focused.


On a completely unrelated note, I was just watching Futurama a few minutes ago, and I think we should discuss Amy's face in this frame.

[Reply #195 on:]

Amazing. Happy Anniversary!

Happy 22nd Anniversary to Futurama and second anniversary of this post/page!

[Reply #196 on:]

Let's not UrL... I don't like making the animators feel uncomfortable.  They do their best, and that's all I can ask for.

[Reply #197 on:]

Okay, okay! I give, I give! Politics ok.

I think there was a communication error that I should take full blame for; I was using the American colloquial definition of politics as being any controversial topic, especially those that define the divide between the two ruling parties. I really do enjoy the philosophical takes Futurama has to offer. Futurama could really explore something like information security and the questions surrounding it- what information companies obtain, what they do with it, how it can be exploited or flat-out abused, etc.

I'm a very fanatical individual. I guess I got a little crazy in my fantasies there for a spell.

Is that a constellation of Hermes shoving a package into Fry's chest?

On a completely unrelated note, I was just watching Futurama a few minutes ago, and I think we should discuss Amy's face in this frame.

I don't think it's too off-putting. Maybe it's one of the last remaining flashes of Amy's baby fat before she completely aged into adulthood.

Also this morbotron.com seems like a fantastic source for screengrabs! I had no idea it existed until I saw the url in the quoted text.

-----

I digress. I don't want to take any future conversation pertaining to Futurama to another thread, and I definitely don't want to make a new thread for topics that I want to discuss. I love PEEL, but Space Jam's website got an update sooner than PEEL has. So, here's something to chew on.

I have been rewatching "Space Pilot 3000" and noticed how much career chips and destiny were emphasized but sort of abandoned. Supposedly in Futurama every being is assigned the job they are most qualified for. Of course Bender would be a Bender because that's what bending units are built for. Fry would be a delivery boy when that's like his only work experience prior to coming to the future. But Leela was a "Fate Assignment Officer". Was it the job she was best suited for? Were there other people more qualified for the position? Sure, she was competent, but I don't think she was the best for it. She was trained in Arcturan kung fu and is somebody committed to upholding the law. Leela can be sympathetic, but for somebody who is supposed to consult recent defrostees into how to assimilate into the time period, she was rather detached and didn't want to get too involved in the process (it might be New Year's Eve, but something didn't rub me right about it). Wouldn't Leela be better suited as a peace officer, maybe even a spy as that kind of career is suited for individuals without loved ones?

(I'm tired and I'm kind of going on a roundabout way to get to my point...)

I was thinking about how tightly written the pilot was for the series, about how Nibbler was manipulating events from the very beginning. So if Nibbler froze Fry in the year 2000 to bring him to the future, could Nibbler have hacked the career assignment system to have Leela be one of the first people Fry meets in the future? We know Leela is "the other" and she is possibly supposed to breed with Fry-

I guess I should mention this clip:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=21Sz56QWV-8&t=2808s

David X. Cohen mentions Leela as "the other" in this livestream panel in relation to a future storyline about an "epic breeding program". So there's probably our answer, shippers- Leela's breeding stock.

I hope somebody is following my chain of thought 'cuz I'm not...

[Reply #198 on:]

Is that a constellation of Hermes shoving a package into Fry's chest?

Close. It's a scene from ST-TOS, The Alternative Factor. Lazarus battling anti-Lazarus for eternity.

[Reply #199 on:]

I've been watching the occasional rerun (original series only, of course) on the Sci-Fi channel over the last few months, and I have to say that they still hold up pretty well.