Trackbacks

• No trackbacks exist for this post.

Comments

• 11/13/2011 1:15 AM Matt wrote:
  Yeah, I agree with Brad and Jerrid about Family Guy's stupid as hell 4-5 minute gags involving nothing but stupi d things going on for too long, but I feel that the end of Family Guy truly came around when we started getting all of the retarded,pretentious episodes focusing on Brian. They are boring and show the true ignorance of the show's current writers. BTW I think all of the shows funny writters when over to The Cleveland Show.
  Reply to this
• 11/13/2011 2:07 AM AKW wrote:
  Actually there are black Norwegians. A good portion were refugees from Africa.
  Reply to this
• 11/13/2011 3:11 AM Lyle Huckins wrote:
  Say what you will of "The Simpsons" but I still kind of enjoy it and it took it 18 or 19, 22 episode seasons to finally start to go stale as opposed to "Family Guys" within it's mere 9 13 episode seasons. I will say Family Guy is starting to get twisted in a Bad way. Did anyone catch that Really Creepy Episode a couple of weeks back about Quagmire's Sister being in an Abusive Relationship...I mean are we supposed to think Domestic Violence is funny?! Maybe I'm a prude but I don't want to laugh at Domestic Violence! Any thoughts?
  Reply to this
  1. 11/14/2011 1:26 PM Dorkus Malorkus wrote:
     The Simpsons jumped the shark in season 12, in the "Who" episode, which sucked, and contained nothing but recycled jokes. All the episodes after that sucked, and were unwatchable. The show has become like the TV equivalent of "Family Circus." And "Family Guy" has always sucked, people just didn't notice it when it came out because it was new and they didn't look at it with perspective.
     Reply to this
     1. 11/15/2011 7:24 PM Enus wrote:
        I actually think the Simpsons jumped the shark much earlier, at about the middle of season 6. The later episodes (seasons 6-11) were good, but did not have the brilliantly written scripts during the first five years, with some exceptions (ie. 138th Episode Spectacular). I think seasons 1-2 of FG are alright, but season 3 was pretty lame (when, if I'm not mistaken, they brought in writers from "The Tony Danza Show" and "Yes, Dear"). Really just should have stopped there.
        Reply to this
        1. 12/21/2011 7:33 PM supergeek2004 wrote:
           Uhh...guys? Need I remind you that the EXACT same people behind the Simpsons, ARE ALSO BEHIND FUTURAMA??????
           
           There. I just showed you that you're ALL morons talking about this "when the Simpson's jumped the shark" business. WHO CARES?! You can only take ONE FUCKING PREMISE AND SETTING into SO many plots and/or situations before it can start to feel "stale!"
           
           ,,,you know?
           
           I mean, Futurama, and its success, its CONTINUING success, (and I would also argue the somewhat still recent Simpson's movie) prove that the Simpson's _creators_ aren't getting stale...it's the IDEA, the SETTING, the show's very damn PREMISE that's possibly gotten stale, IF anything!
           
           And, come on, let's just appreciate the fact that most of you guys seem to be arguing for a shark-jumping point contained within a season whose number is in the DOUBLE DIGITS. That alone is kinda fucking impressive, don't you think?
           
           And I mean, this is like arguing that the creators of Family Guy went "stale" YEARS ago when the very EXISTENCE of Robot Chicken serves as an example proof of the contrary. I mean, seriously, people! Wow!
           Reply to this
• 11/13/2011 5:59 AM jaltesorensen wrote:
  Was this recorded on october or what? (judging from the south park episode reference and the robot-fight movie reference)???
  
  Personally i liked simpsons in the first 13 seasons. But then they started to repeat themselves in stupid ways and all the clever writting of the first seasons disapeared. But im sure there have been good episodes since the 13th season, but i just lost the interest.
  
  And the latest seasons of family guy have had some very funny jokes, i think, but also many more very unfunny long and stupid jokes. But i still watch family guy now and then.
  Reply to this
  1. 11/13/2011 12:35 PM karnman wrote:
     When it is posted here on the Cinema Snob's page, they are a few weeks behind. If you want listen to it as it comes out, go to http://www.jackaloperadio.com/
     
     I agree with you on the Simpsons. I think the Simpsons were pretty good a lot longer than most people claim (Season 8 was not the last good season!). Family Guy was decent before it was cancelled the first time. I watch it now and again and chuckle here and there, but the long "jokes" get so annoying and make the show unwatchable at times.
     Reply to this
• 11/13/2011 8:08 AM TonE wrote:
  I think the shakiness in your Caligula BluRay is due to your disc being defective. I have the imperial edition bluray as well and have watched it many times with no shaking at all
  Reply to this
• 11/13/2011 9:34 AM glenn wrote:
  Mainstream movies are just product at the moment. Some of them are entertaining, but there's too much money involved for them to take chance. Basically the studio's and producers have reasserted themselves, reducing directors and writers to a safe pair of hired hands and someone to give the actors something to say between the set pieces. This is why everything is getting remade and rebooted.
  Reply to this
• 11/13/2011 10:11 AM Stroker wrote:
  It was a minor point in the discussion but I feel like commenting on it. Your take on Family Guy and latter day Simpsons I can agree with, but in my opinion (and Adult Swim apparently), Stroker and Hoop suuucked. Just on a technical standpoint, from character design to voice work, it was across the board terrible. You know how bad it was? It was so bad that Cartoon Network didn't even bother renewing it when it was left on a cliffhanger. Which is actually pretty funny. Adult Swim renews pretty much everything. They were so confident in their show that they put a cliffhanger at the end of their first season. I'm sure they thought they had a slam dunk. I mean, even Assy McGee, which was equally terrible, had more than a season. And that was a show about an Ass Cop, not a cop who's an ass.
  
  Just because they reference some Burt Reynolds movies doesn't make it good or clever. Archer does that, but actually makes jokes like this but they at least tell us more about his character or the plot of the episode at the same time. But I digress.
  
  It's funny how reference heavy shows and movies work. Much of the entertainment that we derive from it, is a game of "Spot The Reference". For some, these are very easy and they're happy that they "got" it. We rail against the great unwashed for doing this, when people who are ostensibly more discerning do the same thing. So it seems, at least to me, that why you guys seemed to have given that show a pass was because of the reference to Stroker Ace or references like that.
  It pleases whatever knowledge base you have. Which is fine.
  
  There's nothing inherently wrong with reference jokes. What bugs me is when it's just objectively, incompetently done (Epic Movie, Family Guy et al.) . The Venture Brothers is a show based around the assumption that the fans will get the references. It pleases our collective geek brain when we realize that Kevin Conroy is voicing a superhero that is seducing his innocent young partner. Or that Johnny Quest became a drug addict. But, because VB takes it further than just spot the reference and makes it about the character or are integrated thoughtfully into the plot the jokes are just stronger and better constructed. It is objectively a stronger show.
  
  Which relates to your early discussion of what makes someone a Cinema Snob. It's not so much about what sort of movie you like or why you like them. This is harder to gauge. It's about whether the movie or show is effective.
  Reply to this
• 11/13/2011 12:30 PM glenn wrote:
  I think there's a huge difference between defending the films you like and knowing a lot about them or having a specific kind of taste than being a snob. The thing about genuine cinema snobs and art snobs generally is that they are often social snobs.
  It's like the Halloween v Friday 13 debate. Even before Halloween, John Carpenter had been adopted as a sort of semi-art house b-movie director because of the critical success of Assault on Precinct 13 in Europe. The BBC even profiled him during the making of Halloween. Cunningham on the other hand was known for as the producer of Last House on the Left and a few porn films which critics linked together because at the time revenge movies were seen as dangerous fascistic fantasies aimed at inflaming "the man in the street". So social snobbery was at play even before Friday the 13th was released. What I think is funny is that the respected Halloween is actually more specifically sexually violent with it's female characters than Friday the 13th. The lack of gore and elegance of the film making tends to mask the reality that Halloween has more than a little casual 70s sleaze to it's make up.
  Reply to this
• 11/13/2011 1:38 PM TonE wrote:
  I think this the whole anti-slasher kick those two were on was purely motivated by their desire for ratings. That time period was really big on finding things to nail up on crosses and I'm sure they assumed that all the right-wing Bush nuts would gather round and warm their bones beside a bright horror VHS burning. It was a way to get stressed out feminists to tune in as well as making them "wholesome guardians of taste."
  
  Siskel and Ebert were always gimicky as all hell. Their main audience was the middle to upper middle class who actually cared what someone else thought about a movie like my stepfather. He was so bad that he wouldn't see anything that didn't get two thumbs up. those kinds of people typically gravitated toward the socially acceptable and shied away from mindless gore fests.
  
  It must have scared them shitless to think that their intended crowd was breaking away. the tirade might also have been a desperate attempt to recapture their audience through the threat of "bad taste" and "offensive, exploitative cinema".
  
  Maybe, just maybe someone who made a horror movie really pissed them off. who knows? I'm fairly sure that it was for ratings though. Right wingers definitely eat that stuff up.
  Reply to this
• 11/13/2011 7:46 PM LucasChad wrote:
  I don't know what's up with the title, but I looked it up on Google Translate and the only thing I got out of it is that Inviso is Italian for "unpopular." Hmmm!
  Reply to this
• 11/14/2011 5:42 PM Amber B. wrote:
  Guys you are actually wrong about the earlier thing movie. The first Movie for the thing was made in 1951. It had two names: " The Thing from Another World " and " The Thing " but both are the same movie. Then John Carpenter came along in 1982 and remade the thing. Technically it takes place after the 1951 movie.
  Reply to this
  1. 11/15/2011 8:05 PM Doug wrote:
     I'm pretty sure Brad and company know of the 1951 Thing, given that they've mentioned it numerous times, and that, you know, they're not idiots.
     Reply to this
     1. 11/20/2011 5:40 PM Amber wrote:
        Beg your pardon lord of the comment world
        Reply to this
• 11/14/2011 8:12 PM Mr. Dogma wrote:
  I loved that the second I heard "There is one original show on Adult Swim", I could immediately go, "Oh hells yeah. Venture Brothers". Was quite pleased to hear my favorite show mentioned. I sing the praises of that show to anyone who will listen or says that nothing good has come out of Adult Swim.
  Reply to this
• 11/14/2011 8:17 PM Arne Maes wrote:
  I'm sorry guys, I love all of your stuff and agree with your take on movies 9/10 times but I'm sorry Family guy hasn't gotten bad, I agree, it's gotten a bit more hit or miss than it was in the earlier seasons, but their good episodes can still be hilarious if you're in the right mood.
  Ps: I agree with a previous poster that if you want the Family Guy humour of old you should check out The Cleveland Show.
  Reply to this
• 11/16/2011 3:41 PM Rebort wrote:
  I wouldn't call your favorite films "crap", Josh. I think the word "schlock" is maybe more accurate. And I certainly don't mean that as an insult - a lot of my favorite flicks are what I would call schlock.
  
  I equate those kind of movies with punk music - rough, loud, raw and even jarring, but full of energy and an "I don't give a fuck" attitude. Schlock movies offer a kind of entertainment you generally don't find with mainstream stuff.
  
  Anyway, great episode, you damn sexists!
  Reply to this
• 2/7/2012 12:57 PM outdoor furniture wrote:
  Thanks for taking the time to discuss this, I feel strongly about it and love learning more on this topic. If possible, as you gain expertise, would you mind updating your blog with more information? It is extremely helpful for me.
  Reply to this
• 3/31/2012 4:21 AM timberland boots outlet wrote:
  The post is pretty interesting. I really never thought I could have a good read by this time until I found out this site.I am grateful for the information given.
  Reply to this

Leave a comment