Mouse On Venus
Liquid Emperor
|
|
Originally posted by DotheBartman:And I don't get all the anger over the Monroe gag. I thought it was hysterical. Does it really matter if they disrupt a very small piece of continuity by bringing him back anyway? Its not like they had Bleeding Gums Murphy crawl out of his grave. I wasn't angry about it. I just didn't think it was anywhere near as hillarious as you and Uns did. And did you really think it was a good episode? 'coz it was exactly the sort of jackassery prominent in this episode that put me off the series in the first place. Still, I will admit the story wasn't too bad.
|
|
|
|
|
User_names_suck
Professor
|
|
|
« Reply #121 on: 04-11-2004 19:17 »
« Last Edit on: 04-11-2004 19:17 »
|
|
well I didn't think the Monroe gag was hilarious I just thought it was quite amusing.
To pick you on a few points Homer oafishness is there so he can lose his job and to develop Marge's anger in writing the book the way she did yes he does a few wacky things that aren't funny but some of it is. (I know if I take this sign out the window they'll pay me to make a new one) and anyway it wasn't the centre stage of the story anyway. The emotinal aspect was there as a twist ending I cant see how else The plot would have resolved so it seems quite natrual to me.
To be honest I'm shocked and appalled how dare you have an opinion thats different to mine I just cant belive this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
leelaholic
Liquid Emperor
|
|
"The Ziff Who Came To Dinner" tonight was much better than before for some reason. F -> B- I agree with Kent. "What the...?" And the upcoming episodes sound good. Especially "The Way We Wasn't"
|
|
|
|
|
Gorky
DOOP Secretary
|
|
Originally posted by DotheBartman: To be clear, my comment about the "anger" over the Monroe gag was mostly in response to the general reception of that joke, including at the NHC. Some people like myself loved that gag, but many were angered by it. I did say that it was the worst part of the episode, but I didn't necessarily hate it. It's just that, compared to the rest of the episode, it was the weakest aspect. I'm really probably being overly critical, but I can be a stickler for continuity. Anyway, although I didn't like the fact that he came back, I thought that his explaination, "I was very sick" (or something like that) was funny. So basically what I'm saying is, the whole concept of bringing him back was pretty pointless, IMO, but the joke itself was funny.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gorky
DOOP Secretary
|
|
Definitely looking forward to May (particularly what appears to be the season finale, "The Way We Weren't" ), as both Leelaholic and Woodbot said.
Oh, and I agree Leelaholic, "The Ziff Who Came to Dinner" is definitely better upon a second viewing. The Enron satires are stronger and the jokes seem stronger. I mean, how can you not laugh at the "Daddy's on fire; Daddy's not on fire" joke? Or the Blair Witch Project parody up in the attic. Some great stuff. For me:
D -> B
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gorky
DOOP Secretary
|
|
I actually found "Co-Dependents Day" to be an okay episode, maybe a B. But I must agree that the Shakspeare play bit was pretty stupid.
|
|
|
|
|
sheep555
Liquid Emperor
|
|
Originally posted by Gorky: It also conflicts with the Dr. Marvin Monroe Memorial Wing in the hospital, seen in the 2-parter "Who Shot Mr. Burns?".
No it doesn't. You can have a memorial to someone who isn't dead. My school has a memorial to a pupil who went off to win the Nobel Prize, and yet he wasn't dead (at the time of the memorial construction). I thought the joke was hilarious, because of it's blatent disregard for continuity. The episode itself wasn't that great (certainly better than 12/13, it would be an around average episode for the past few years). But the Marvin Monroe joke was great, because it was so lame. The excuse "I've been sick" I found hilarious. At that moment I could just imagine thousands of people logging on to rage. But hey, I'm one guy.
|
|
|
|
|
User_names_suck
Professor
|
|
Exactly The writers are probably happy they could annoy people so much (I'm not looking at anyone here.) by that disregard for continuity.
I'm noticing with season 15 episodes are getting really mixed reviews and people are enjoy them a lotmore on 2nd viewing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nurdbot
DOOP Secretary
|
|
Eh, I don't care at this point of the show.
|
|
|
|
|
davierocks
Professor
|
|
Gettin offtopic for just a second as I could not find a thred that dealed solely with this subject. I am planning on buying one of the Simpsons box sets they have seasons 1-3 released over here and am wondering which season you people reccomend. I am leaning towards season 3 but would like to know your "expert" opinions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CyberKnight
Urban Legend
|
|
I concur; of the sets which are available right now - Season Three. It's one of my two absolute favourite seasons (the other being 4), and for me this was when the writing, animation, voice acting was all at it's best. The only real episode I'm not too keen on in the S3 box set is "When Flanders Failed" (I can't stand the ending, for one thing) - but then you've got episodes like "Stark Raving Dad", "Seperate Vocations" and "Burns Verkaufen Der Kraftwerk", plus the other 20 episodes to offset that. And "When Flanders Failed" isn't really that bad. And of course, my favourite opening sequence in the form of "Bart's Friend Falls in Love".
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gorky
DOOP Secretary
|
|
Well, davierocks, I think that it depends on what you're buying the DVD for; the episodes, commentaries, features, or a combination of the three. If you're buying for sheer quality of episodes, I would have to say season 3. It has some of the greetest greatest episodes of the series, in my opinion. There's "Stark Raving Dad", "When Flanders Failed", "Flaming Moes", "Lisa's Pony", "Lisa the Greek", "Homer at the Bat", "Seperate Vocations", and "Colonel Homer".
However, if you're buying them because you've seen all of the episodes and you just want to hear the commentaries, I would suggest season 2. Don't get me wrong, season 1 and 3's are great, but some commentaries are lacking in both sets (for example, season 3's have some very long pauses and aren't that fun to listen to). In my opinion, season 2's are the most consistently entertaining and informative.
Of course, if it were me, I'd buy season 1 first, simply because I would want to buy all of the sets in order. But, for your purposes, overall I would say that you should buy season 3.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
bender+fry
Professor
|
|
yeah. people might think it was some cheesy rip-off and not buy it if the new simpsons were nowhere to be seen.
|
|
|
|
|
Gorky
DOOP Secretary
|
|
Originally posted by DotheBartman: That's true. It might work best as a "bonus" for buyers willing to pay extra for one of the regular season sets. Not part of one of the sets themselves, but sold with them. That would definitely be the best way to go. If you were going to sell the sets with that bonus (for those willing to pay more), than the DVD would sell more copies (most likely) because I'm sure that many of the buyers who buy the box sets wouldn't mind paying extra for such a great bonus disk. And, if Fox actually did decide to release the shorts with the sets, they could eliminate the idea of a higher price by simply adding a few shorts to each disk (of course Fox wouldn't make as much per set, but they would probably ultimately make more money by selling more copies of the set becase of the low price). But even then the price of the set might go up, only because the Ullmans as a special feature is so valuable, and the price for the rights to use the shorts would add to the production cost of the box sets. Of course this is all just an optimism, because Fox may be reluctant to pay the price for the rights from Klasky-Csupo. Unless the movie, as DotheBartman said, grossed a lot of cash, then the price for the rights wouldn't be as big a factor and Fox would recoup their costs due to the interest in the show.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|