|
|
|
|
Shiny
Professor
|
|
Matt Groening mentioned on a commentary (AoI 2, I believe) that he thought of parallels between Futurama characters and The Wizard of Oz and Gilligan's Island. I figure, if you can make comparisons like that, comparing Futurama and Simpsons is just as legitimate.
Both shows share a creator, and many of the same writers, so some similarities are unavoidable - both tend to hit on the same themes and feature some of the same archetypes. However, the archetypal roles are spread around differently.
Take the classic "Homer/Bart = Bender/Fry" issue. Both ways of paralleling the characters have good arguments. Homer and Fry share the traits of dumbness, laziness and gluttony. However, Fry is young and a big fan of certain TV shows, more like Bart in some ways. Fry is also a dreamer, which is not really a major trait of either Homer or Bart. Bender shares Bart's mischievousness and con artist tendencies; but he also has Homer's laziness and gluttony (his gluttony usually outdoes Fry's, though his substances of choice are different). However, he outdoes Bart in deviousness due to the fact that he's evil (or at least wicked) and at least professes not to care about anyone but himself, which is like neither Homer nor Bart.
Leela has Marge's practicality and Lisa's brains and idealism; but she also has Bart's quality of thinking fast in a tough situation. I would argue that Fry's dorkiness and dreamer-ness are a bit like Lisa. Lisa's intellectualism is something only the Professor really shares. The Professor is old, like Grandpa, but unloved and unnoticed, like Zoidberg. Nibbler is part Santa's Little Helper and part Maggie.
I could go on all day. The fact that it is so hard to "match up" the characters one-to-one proves to me that both sets are complex and nicely rounded. In some situations, Fry serves the "Bart" function and in others he serves the "Homer" function, and occasionally the "Lisa" function. Fry is a combination of traits that add up to a fairly unique whole, the fanboy-slacker-loser-sacred fool-hero that is what makes him his loveable self.
Bender is a more familiar archetype, the Rogue with the Heart of Slightly Tarnished Silver, only more interesting because he's also a robot. Leela is the traditional science fiction "Action Babe," tough and practical, but also a fairly vulnerable recovering "wounded child," and she has a healthy streak of repressed "mischievous brat" that sometimes emerges, despite her well-honed better judgement.
In short, while they share traits with the Simpsons, they are not a retread; the similarities between them can lead to some interesting and enlightening comparisons, but it's actually harder to draw parallels between Futurama and Simpsons than Futurama and Wizard of Oz, or even Futurama and Gilligan's Island. That is because at heart Simpsons is a Family Sitcom, and Futurama is a comedic take on Action-oriented Science Fiction. Wizard of Oz and Gilligans Island are also adventure stories, and so it is natural they should draw water from the same well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TriggerHappyJim
Professor
|
|
If the characters in Futurama were anything as shallow as the simpsons (small "s" ) I would have stopped watching it, as I did the simpsons.
If anyone wants me, I'll be in my bomb shelter awaiting the inevitable onslaught.
|
|
|
|
|
|
TriggerHappyJim
Professor
|
|
Your welcome to it, I think there's room under that crate of tinned peaches.
Anyone else joining us in here?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nixorbo
UberMod
DOOP Secretary
|
|
Must resist urge to re-write out entire Grand Unified Roles Theory.
|
|
|
|
|
Shiny
Professor
|
|
You have a Grand Unified Roles Theory?! Stop resisting and spill it!
...or is that a name you've given to my previous rambling post above? (If so, then thank you!)
(If not, then out with your GUR! Nosy minds want to know!)
|
|
|
|
|
Nixorbo
UberMod
DOOP Secretary
|
|
Actually, it's a lot like yours.
Basically, characters from Futurama fulfill the same roles as characters from The Simpsons.
Fry fulfills more of the Homer-esque role - the loveable loser whose attempts to endear himself to the woman of his dreams provides wacky fun.
Bender is more of the Bart role (alliteration a coincidence? probably). Michevious scamp who gets away with everything.
Leela is a Marge/Lisa hybrid. She's the straight man to compliment Captain Wacky (in this case, Fry), the responsible voice of reason/nagger, and the crusader for causes.
The Professor. He takes Abe's Old Man Role, and combines it with Frink's nutty professorness. There is also a dash of Burns-esque richness and evillity, but that role largely falls to Mom.
Dr. Zoidberg does the Millhouse (outcast), Dr. Nick (quack), and Lionel Hutz (incompetent).
Kif? Smithers giving into his hate.
You could make the case that Zapp fulfills the Hutz role, but I'd still give it to Zoidy based on poorness. Personally, I feel he is a character that doesn't fit into a role. Same for Amy and Hermes.
|
|
|
|
|
Shiny
Professor
|
|
I can see the characters going that way, but I still say there's enough other "pairings" you can make that it's not the only way to see them.
You can compare and contrast, but equal signs just cannot be put between the casts. Any correspondence we can devise is just going to be one pattern among several possible others, because the shows are based on a different archetypal structure and therefore have different roles that need to be filled.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TriggerHappyJim
Professor
|
|
I agree. And who the hell is Cuthbert? Its Cubert.
I think Nixorbo nailed this thread.
|
|
|
|
|
Nixorbo
UberMod
DOOP Secretary
|
|
Originally posted by Shiny: I can see the characters going that way, but I still say there's enough other "pairings" you can make that it's not the only way to see them.
You can compare and contrast, but equal signs just cannot be put between the casts. Any correspondence we can devise is just going to be one pattern among several possible others, because the shows are based on a different archetypal structure and therefore have different roles that need to be filled. My basic argument was that characters do not repeat. Character roles do. I was going to say that in my last post, but then I forgot.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nixorbo
UberMod
DOOP Secretary
|
|
There are 2 things I draw from your post.
1) You recognize Family Guy for the cheap Simpsons knockoff it is. This is good. 2) You didn't bother to actually any of my or shiny's posts. This is bad.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shiny
Professor
|
|
Family Guy always feels like it was written by committee (a committee where at least half the members have no taste or wit, and who think pointless offensiveness is funny in and of itself). How different from Futurama or Simpsons, or even South Park (where the offensiveness is pointed, usually with deadly accuracy at the heart of some cultural sacred cow). It really matters to have someone or someones at the helm to keep things cohesive. The fact that Family Guy is so completely disjointed, uneven, and unoriginal (The only parts I like are those involving Brian and Stewie, the only two characters with any whiff of originality to them) and yet is still so freakin' popular fills me with despair. I'd say that most Americans are no more than talking monkeys with remote controls, but that would be a grave insult to Gunther. D'you suppose it would be possible to genetically engineer a virus that only kills people who think Family Guy is the best animated sitcom on TV?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NotHAPPY!
Crustacean
|
|
In my opinion, the charactors have SIMILARITIES as they're made by the same people. Thats all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|