MOM...IS...NOT...MR...BURNS!!!

[on:]

Okay, perusing some of these boards, something has come to my attention. Some people really don't like Mom. Hey, that's cool. But...

Mom is a ripoff of Mr Burns? What the hell?

Superficially, they kind of served the same purpose in their respective shows, that of the evil and elderly head of a corporate empire, but seriously, the simularites end there.

Mr Burns is a loveless and withered old man with a fading grasp of reality (sometimes). In some ways, he is more comparable to Farnsworth than Mom (both are amoral, diabolical crakpots). He's not quite senile (usually), but does live as though it were still the 1930's. He is hated by all (bar Smithers, of course) and is physically fragile and weak. He is sometimes reasonalby 'real,' that is, kind of like YOUR boss (later episodes have messed with my character definitions, alas).

Mom is the worlds most powerful industrialist, whose public image of a kindly grandmother belies her actual persona of scheming super-villain. She is on top of the heap, and plans to stay there. She has a keen business mind, a mean vengeful streak and is anything but senile. Though old, she is quite active and violent, showing little sign of weakness physically, often slaping her sons around. She is also responsible for some hysterically funny (in my opinion) obscenities. She is a bit more 'out-there' than Mr Burns, with no real-life parallels (plenty of ficticious ones though).

I love both characters (in my own subtle way), and defy anyone to come up with a reasonable rebuttal...

...and thus I open hell's gate. Maybe.

[Reply #1 on:]

im inclined to agree.

[Reply #2 on:]

You spelled "slapping" wrong, therefore, your entire argument is flawed! FLAWED!!!  Take that, SlackJawedMoron! Seriously, though, very well put, and good point.

[Reply #3 on:]

Mom is not Mr. Burns.  Stunning revelation.

Next week, we discover that Leela is not Marge.

[Reply #4 on:]

 

Originally posted by PCC Fred:
Next week, we discover that Leela is not Marge.

What?! When did this happen? You're kidding, right!?

I agree though. I hate it when people say that Futurama is a spinoff of the Simpsons, and when they say characters are the same.

[Reply #5 on:]

Hmm... I don't know why, but I shall copy and paste some responses from "Jump the Shark" relating the two shows:

These aren't my opinions at all, so don't hurt me!

- At least on The Simpsons, Maggie and Marge are somewhat of a moral anchor. On Futurama, *everybody* is a bastard.
(Maggie is a moral value?)
- they tried to be like the simpsons
- This show sucks! It sucks hard. Of all the simpsons ripoffs this is the worst. Why? It's not funny! The art is so dull with what they can work with and the premise gets old so quickly. It sucks, sucks sucks. If anyone from fox had a brain in their hand they would take the money from this peice of crap and toss it over to Family Guy-the funniest show on tv, dare I saw it, better then the simpsons? Count the laughs. Peter and his wife, at a will reading, "No whammy, no whammy. STOP!" Great, just great.
(RAR! The art is beautiful! And Family Guy sucks! Also laughable, FOX giving Futurama money?)
- Futurama is the Mat Groening gone wrong. The characters suck. The storylines suck big time- remember the one about the morphing prince who tricked alien women into reproducing the species with him? The jokes aren't funny. Even the voices are not attractive- Peg Bundy as the star?
- This show has sucked from Day 1. Fox is obviously really hard up for programming (being unable to broadcast "Malcolm in the Middle" more than twice a week) and therefore, brings us tons of "Simpsons" knock offs. Boring and sometimes gross.
- This show was terrible from the start

Grrr... I wish I knew who these people were, then I could do things involving bombs!
At least most people voted "Never Jumped."

[Reply #6 on:]

...and this is why I never look at Jump the Shark anymore.  People there aren't interested in discussing when good shows went bad.  They're just there to knock the shows they personally didn't like.

That's why saying the show jumped "from Day One" is such a popular option for many shows.

[Reply #7 on:]

Mr. Burns and Mom actually served very different purposes on the show too, IMO.  While Burns was the evil industrialist, even more importantly he was the cruel boss that Homer felt miserable working for, sort of one of the emotional anchors of Homer in a sense in the first three or four seasons.  Afterwards Burns became sort of an overexxagerated senile sort of character and eventually even more of a slapstick character, an even further departure from Mom.

None of the PE crew actually deals with Mom as a boss (in fact Mom is in fairly few episodes and is a minor character, while Burns was more important and more prominent in the series), so there isn't actually much similarity between their roles on the show.

[Reply #8 on:]

Funny you should mention that.  One of the original ideas for Futurama was that the Planet Express crew WOULD work for Mom...

[Reply #9 on:]

 

Originally posted by PCC Fred:
Funny you should mention that.  One of the original ideas for Futurama was that the Planet Express crew WOULD work for Mom...

Yes, but as I understand it, the idea was that Mom would be the despotic ruler of earth, so in that case everyone would have worked for Mom.  That's not quite the same role as Mr. Burns.  If they had gone this route, the crew probably wouldn't have directly interacted with Mom very much at all.  Their immediate supervisor would have been Igner.

*Waits for Fred to claim that this means that Igner is Smithers.*

[Reply #10 on:]

I hate it when the topic bar gets stretched...
Relevance : Mathmatically insignificant

As for your argument, i'm not reading all that to find out something i already know. 

[Reply #11 on:]

Hey Fred. Nuts too you.   

Seriously, though, I was just taking a look at the most hated characters thread, and the 'Mom is Mr Burns in drag' came up a bit (though not as much as Cubert  ) . That made me angry. Ranting and raving angry!


Also... <slapps Ranadok>. And nuts to you too!
 

[Reply #12 on:]

 

Originally posted by David A:
*Waits for Fred to claim that this means that Igner is Smithers.*

Actually Igner is a Futurama ripoff of Apu.  But that's another story...

[Reply #13 on:]

No, you're thinking of Ipjee.

[Reply #14 on:]

Damn, I knew I should've chosen someone other than Apu for Igner to be a ripoff of.  Now the joke's been ruined.

Although David A thought I was serious, so I guess it's not a total loss.

 

[Reply #15 on:]

Sorry, Fred.  It would be easier to tell when you were joking if the things that you post when you're being serious weren't so ridiculous.

Incidentally, Matt Groening once said that the original concept for Igner was that he would be sort of an "evil Homer Simpson".  Interpret that as you will.

[Reply #16 on:]

 

Originally posted by David A:
Sorry, Fred.  It would be easier to tell when you were joking if the things that you post when you're being serious weren't so ridiculous.

On the contrary, the stuff I post when I'm being serious usually makes perfect sense.  It's just that total seriousness and sarcasm look very similar in a text only post.

[Reply #17 on:]

i have always found it annoying that people think futurama is the simpsons- people who call bender the 'homer' character- very small minded people

[Reply #18 on:]

I think every TV show should have one ep to show people to convince them to watch it. If they don't like it, they're not interested in your show, and their opinion matters not.

(For clarification, I don't mean to say "If you don't like Futurama, you don't count." I mean if somebody finishes watching, for example, LOTF and says it was too Simpson-y, there's no hope for them.)

[Reply #19 on:]

 

Originally posted by El Zilcho:
I think every TV show should have one ep to show people to convince them to watch it. If they don't like it, they're not interested in your show, and their opinion matters not.

That's what a pilot episode OUGHT to accomplish.  A good description I heard recently of what a pilot episode ought to be is "an episode that introduces your main characters and places them in a typical sitaution".  That way viewers know what they'll be watching every week, and they can decide whether they like it or not.

[Reply #20 on:]

Mom is a ripoff of Mr Burns? What the hell?

meh, who cares, almost every character is a rip-off of the simpsons, listen to the comentary for most of season1. leela is like marge, the smart one who acts more like a parent to fry/bender than a friend.

bender- homer( drinking beer)
fry - homer ( stupidity)
farns worth is like grandpa - you dont want him around but without him hte show would be nothing. you have that plus tons of simpsons references in the show.
blinky the fish-space pilot 3000
bart simpson dolls-a big piece of garbage
homer/bart simpson dolls-mars university. thats just to name a few of the obvious

[Reply #21 on:]

 

Originally posted by Shadowstar:
Hmm... I don't know why, but I shall copy and paste some responses from "Jump the Shark" relating the two shows:

These aren't my opinions at all, so don't hurt me!

- At least on The Simpsons, Maggie and Marge are somewhat of a moral anchor. On Futurama, *everybody* is a bastard.
(Maggie is a moral value?)
- they tried to be like the simpsons
- This show sucks! It sucks hard. Of all the simpsons ripoffs this is the worst. Why? It's not funny! The art is so dull with what they can work with and the premise gets old so quickly. It sucks, sucks sucks. If anyone from fox had a brain in their hand they would take the money from this peice of crap and toss it over to Family Guy-the funniest show on tv, dare I saw it, better then the simpsons? Count the laughs. Peter and his wife, at a will reading, "No whammy, no whammy. STOP!" Great, just great.
(RAR! The art is beautiful! And Family Guy sucks! Also laughable, FOX giving Futurama money?)
- Futurama is the Mat Groening gone wrong. The characters suck. The storylines suck big time- remember the one about the morphing prince who tricked alien women into reproducing the species with him? The jokes aren't funny. Even the voices are not attractive- Peg Bundy as the star?
- This show has sucked from Day 1. Fox is obviously really hard up for programming (being unable to broadcast "Malcolm in the Middle" more than twice a week) and therefore, brings us tons of "Simpsons" knock offs. Boring and sometimes gross.
- This show was terrible from the start

Grrr... I wish I knew who these people were, then I could do things involving bombs!
At least most people voted "Never Jumped."

they have obviously not seen roswell that ends well. and family guy season 2 wasnt all that good what with the flashbacks every 2 seconds.

[Reply #22 on:]

@theZoid88

1)Use the "" button next time.  Stop double posting.

2)"meh, who cares, almost every character is a rip-off of the simpsons" - Wow, it's nice to see a TRUE fan of the show.

And for crying out loud, how are the appearence of Blinky in the pilot and the Bart Simspon doll in "A Big Piece of Garabge" RIPPING-OFF the Simpsons?

[Reply #23 on:]

 

Originally posted by PCC Fred:
@theZoid88

1)Use the "" button next time.  Stop double posting.

2)"meh, who cares, almost every character is a rip-off of the simpsons" - Wow, it's nice to see a TRUE fan of the show.

And for crying out loud, how are the appearence of Blinky in the pilot and the Bart Simspon doll in "A Big Piece of Garabge" RIPPING-OFF the Simpsons?

its not ripping off the simpsons its just taking stuff from the simpsons and putting it in the show, second yeah most of them are ripoffs doesnt make the show any worse.  o yeah if id have edited the post would have made no sense. fyi.

[Reply #24 on:]

 

Originally posted by theZoid88:
 its not ripping off the simpsons

Okay, but then...

 

its just taking stuff from the simpsons and putting it in the show

Sounds like the very definition of "rip-off" to me.

 

second yeah most of them are ripoffs

So which one is it? They're rip-offs or they're not. You can't have it both ways.

Anyway, just because two characters share a few common traits, doesn't make them the same. Take Leela, she share the "responsibility/mother"-trait with Marge, the "smart"-trait with Lisa, but she also, unlike Lisa and Marge, like to drink beer, is adventurous, not afraid to use brute force, etc. And comparing Futurama with the Simpsons is (no offense) plain stupid, they're not the same show, nor will they ever be. It's like reading those idiots on Amazon.com, iMDB.com or JTS who say Futurama sucks "because it's not the Simpsons".

[Reply #25 on:]

 

Originally posted by theZoid88:
 its not ripping off the simpsons its just taking stuff from the simpsons and putting it in the show, second yeah most of them are ripoffs doesnt make the show any worse.  o yeah if id have edited the post would have made no sense. fyi.

Those aren't rip-offs, those are cameos/easter eggs put there for the enjoyment of fans of The Simpsons and Futurama.

Also, Futurama characters have been in The Simpsons. I've seen Bender (and his name) a couple times, and Fry was in a couch gag.

[Reply #26 on:]

 

Originally posted by theZoid88:
almost every character is a rip-off of the simpsons

So you named Leela, Bender, Fry, and Farnsy as "almost every character?" What about Hermes? And Zoidberg? And Amy? And Zapp? And Kif? And Nixon? Where are their Simpsons counterparts?

Also, Fry, unlike Homer, isn't defined by his stupidity. He's a great guy who's kinda stupid. Leela isn't defined by her carefulness, she's been known to be adventurous (as Teral mentioned). Bender isn't the "guy who drinks," he's the robot. Get it straight.

oh yeah and I dont' lik e Home Movies, cuz its 2 much like dr. Kats its such a ripof. [/sarcasm]

[Reply #27 on:]

Well, I'd say Nixon's Simpsons counterpart is himself.  He HAS been used as a character on both shows, after all.

There are obviously going to be some similarities between The Simpsons and Futurama, as they're both animated and use a lot of the same stereotypes/archetypes.  For instance, you can say Zoidberg is similar to Dr. Nick because they're both incompetent doctors.  But their characters aren't really very much alike, and there are numerous other incompetent professionals on both shows: Zapp, Chief Wiggum, the hyperchicken lawyer, Lionel Hutz, Homer (he's a nuclear safety inspector, after all), etc.  These characters have all been used for similar sorts of jokes, but they all have their own distinct personalities, too.

Besides, is it technically possible for Matt Groening to "rip off" himself?

[Reply #28 on:]

It could be.  Someone once said Star Trek: The Next Generation was ripping off the original Star Trek...

[Reply #29 on:]

quit you guys are making me think! ( i tend to drift in and out of what i sometimes say) well i guess some one could legally rip themselves off. though i dont think matt would.   

[Reply #30 on:]

John Fogerty was sued for plagiarizing himself, because some of his solo work sounded too much like some of the songs he wrote while with CCR.

[Reply #31 on:]

 

Originally posted by theZoid88:
quit you guys are making me think!

I don't think that's possible.  I also think you're unclear about what actually constitutes a ripoff.

[Reply #32 on:]

i know a ripoff , the new mike judge movie where a guy falls asleep and wakes up 1,000 years later.

[Reply #33 on:]

 

Originally posted by theZoid88:
i know a ripoff , the new mike judge movie where a guy falls asleep and wakes up 1,000 years later.

Yeah, that sounds like a total rip-off of Woody Allen's Sleeper.

[Reply #34 on:]

 

Originally posted by theZoid88:
i know a ripoff , the new mike judge movie where a guy falls asleep and wakes up 1,000 years later.

Okay, now can you see the difference between Mike Judge outright plagarising Futurama and Matt Groening including references to one of his shows in the other one?

[Reply #35 on:]

I am one of the people who hates Mom for that reason...

Yes, I know they're not EXACTLY the same. There are some major differences, but in my mind they are much too similar for me to like her.

[Reply #36 on:]

I think Mom is a great secondary character. As it's been stated before, alot of Futurama characters are a bit like characters from The Simpsons. I think that all tyrant leaders of multi-billion dollar companies are hilarious.

[Reply #37 on:]

The Futurama and Simpsons characters are only similar if viewed in the most superficial manner. Bender is a rip off of Homer because they both drink huh? What about the fact that Bender is intelligent (or at least cunning) while Homer is stupid, Bender is utterly amoral while Homer is often almost childlike in his innocence, Bender is a ruthless criminal who lives a frat-like lifestyle while Homer is a blue collar Joe who&#8217;s married with kids. Leela is a rip off of Marge because they&#8217;re both responsible? What about the fact that Leela is dominating and violent while Marge is a doormat, Leela seeks adventure while Marge seeks stability, Leela is headstrong while Marge is calm and measured.

Frankly, if you can&#8217;t see the difference between the shows I don&#8217;t think you can have understood much of either.

[Reply #38 on:]

 

Originally posted by Gambit:
i have always found it annoying that people think futurama is the simpsons- people who call bender the 'homer' character- very small minded people

Actually, Matt Groening used this very comparison before Futurama started.

[Reply #39 on:]

 

Originally posted by Rhodan:
 Actually, Matt Groening used this very comparison before Futurama started.

This might have been to simply try and entice Simpsons fans over to Futurama. People who like Homer would then watch the pilot, see the tenuous link between Homer and Bender, but also be captivated by the show's humour, characters and situations.