Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
What was the lowest point of the Simpson
Homer Votes
Harlem Shake
Keisha Tik Tok intro
Homer Live
Lisa Goes Gaga
Other (please specify)
View Results
 
  • Post
  • Reply
IBroughttheFunk
Sep 28, 2012
On a whim, I decided to see when the Tik Tok opening (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WlRV6yxZUSQ) actually happened, as I kind of consider it a peak moment of new & bad Simpsons.

2010. It was the opening for a 2010 episode. My brain is still occasionally broken by the fact that this show has so, so many seasons of material that I absolutely do not care to seek out and watch whatsoever.


I tend to watch the clips posted here from newer episodes with the sound off (at least initially) so the main thing that always strikes me is that there can be technically so much happening in a scene, but it all just manages to look so sterile and lifeless. That observation of course isn't new to this thread, but dang, the Simpsons found a way to animate a drag show and make it just so dull.

IBroughttheFunk fucked around with this message at 14:45 on Feb 16, 2022

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Applewhite
Aug 16, 2014

by vyelkin
Nap Ghost
If Disney owns Hulu how can Animaniacs be on there?

Failed Imagineer
Sep 22, 2018
drat, wish I hadn't watched that.

The Simpsons has become an empty vessel, into which the biggest idiots can pour in the worst cultural slop and serve it up as mom's homemade soup

Empty Sandwich
Apr 22, 2008

goatse mugs

Applewhite posted:

If Disney owns Hulu how can Animaniacs be on there?

a wizard did it

SweetMercifulCrap!
Jan 28, 2012
Lipstick Apathy

Alan_Shore posted:

Lol are you serious

Okay, but how come when the Simpsons voice actors do this, they're lazy and greedy, but when John DiMaggio does it he's cool and sticking it to the man?

Ghost Leviathan
Mar 2, 2017

Exploration is ill-advised.

SweetMercifulCrap! posted:

Okay, but how come when the Simpsons voice actors do this, they're lazy and greedy, but when John DiMaggio does it he's cool and sticking it to the man?

simpsons voice actors need to do this way more, like demand their own country each

PostNouveau
Sep 3, 2011

VY till I die
Grimey Drawer

SweetMercifulCrap! posted:

Okay, but how come when the Simpsons voice actors do this, they're lazy and greedy, but when John DiMaggio does it he's cool and sticking it to the man?

The Simpsons voice actors are very smart for sticking together all these years and they've all turned their bit parts on lovely sketch show into tens of millions of dollars and lives of leisure at the expense of Fox and Disney.

bitterandtwisted
Sep 4, 2006




SweetMercifulCrap! posted:

Okay, but how come when the Simpsons voice actors do this, they're lazy and greedy, but when John DiMaggio does it he's cool and sticking it to the man?

who was criticizing Simpsons VAs for squeezing fox/disney?

No Dignity
Oct 15, 2007

SweetMercifulCrap! posted:

Okay, but how come when the Simpsons voice actors do this, they're lazy and greedy, but when John DiMaggio does it he's cool and sticking it to the man?

It's a zero sum dispute between the actors and Disney, one of the most powerful and evil companies in the world. Imagine taking corporate's side in this

Cemetry Gator
Apr 3, 2007

Do you find something comical about my appearance when I'm driving my automobile?

IBroughttheFunk posted:

On a whim, I decided to see when the Tik Tok opening (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WlRV6yxZUSQ) actually happened, as I kind of consider it a peak moment of new & bad Simpsons.

2010. It was the opening for a 2010 episode. My brain is still occasionally broken by the fact that this show has so, so many seasons of material that I absolutely do not care to seek out and watch whatsoever.

I tend to watch the clips posted here from newer episodes with the sound off (at least initially) so the main thing that always strikes me is that there can be technically so much happening in a scene, but it all just manages to look so sterile and lifeless. That observation of course isn't new to this thread, but dang, the Simpsons found a way to animate a drag show and make it just so dull.

There's a few things that stand out to me.

First, the cinematography is pretty basic. There's no showmanship or anything going on. They basically just "point" the camera and shoot. They shoot it like a 3-camera sitcom, which is fine when you're a three camera sitcom but when you're the Simpsons in a drag show, you get loving cinematic. You do close ups and slow reveals. You go loving Bubsy Berkeley on this poo poo.

The next problem is that the editing is atrocious, to the point where you lose all sense of space. So you're watching this, and you're seeing the characters teleport around.

Finally, the characters are all staying on model. There's no stretching, there's no breaking, it just feels stiff.

Mr Interweb
Aug 25, 2004
Probation
Can't post for 49 minutes!

IBroughttheFunk posted:

On a whim, I decided to see when the Tik Tok opening (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WlRV6yxZUSQ) actually happened, as I kind of consider it a peak moment of new & bad Simpsons.

2010. It was the opening for a 2010 episode. My brain is still occasionally broken by the fact that this show has so, so many seasons of material that I absolutely do not care to seek out and watch whatsoever.


okay two things:

1. :barf:
2. tik tok was around all the way in 2010?? i thought it was created in like...2019?

brugroffil
Nov 30, 2015


SweetMercifulCrap! posted:

Okay, but how come when the Simpsons voice actors do this, they're lazy and greedy, but when John DiMaggio does it he's cool and sticking it to the man?

They're lazy because they literally phone it in on a show that should have died two decades ago, but good on them for standing strong as a group.

SweetMercifulCrap!
Jan 28, 2012
Lipstick Apathy
I dunno guys, maybe both sides are kind of lovely. Hollywood does tend to stiff voice actors in compensation when compared to normal actors, but still, 1 - it is not the same amount of work regardless of how much they argue that it is (they literally can and do phone in their lines), and 2 - everyone working behind the scenes is working for pocket change in comparison for way more hours put in. VA's on his or the Simpsons VA's tier are already compensated far beyond that of a typical VA.

Every time the Simpsons VA's outside of Harry Shearer have pulled this, this were not met with the same compassion. I also feel like your tune might be a little different if bringing back Futurama again wasn't such a dumb idea to begin with.

PostNouveau
Sep 3, 2011

VY till I die
Grimey Drawer

Mr Interweb posted:

2. tik tok was around all the way in 2010??

Nah. Lipsyncing videos were a popular trend for a minute back then. The Office did one too. I'm sure a bunch of other shows as well.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfokPqeSNcw

Capital Letdown
Oct 5, 2006
i still cant fix red text avs someone tell me the bbcode for that im an admin and dont know this lmao
Tik Tok the song by Ke$ha and Tik Tok the app are two different things in this case.

No Dignity
Oct 15, 2007

SweetMercifulCrap! posted:

I dunno guys, maybe both sides are kind of lovely. Hollywood does tend to stiff voice actors in compensation when compared to normal actors, but still, 1 - it is not the same amount of work regardless of how much they argue that it is (they literally can and do phone in their lines), and 2 - everyone working behind the scenes is working for pocket change in comparison for way more hours put in. VA's on his or the Simpsons VA's tier are already compensated far beyond that of a typical VA.

Every time the Simpsons VA's outside of Harry Shearer have pulled this, this were not met with the same compassion. I also feel like your tune might be a little different if bringing back Futurama again wasn't such a dumb idea to begin with.

You're an idiot

SweetMercifulCrap!
Jan 28, 2012
Lipstick Apathy

No Dignity posted:

You're an idiot

Give me a counter-argument better than "You guys Disney is like, sooo evil"

(insert someone emptyquoting me and then your response)

Alan_Shore
Dec 2, 2004

SweetMercifulCrap! posted:

I dunno guys, maybe both sides are kind of lovely. Hollywood does tend to stiff voice actors in compensation when compared to normal actors, but still, 1 - it is not the same amount of work regardless of how much they argue that it is (they literally can and do phone in their lines), and 2 - everyone working behind the scenes is working for pocket change in comparison for way more hours put in. VA's on his or the Simpsons VA's tier are already compensated far beyond that of a typical VA.

Every time the Simpsons VA's outside of Harry Shearer have pulled this, this were not met with the same compassion. I also feel like your tune might be a little different if bringing back Futurama again wasn't such a dumb idea to begin with.

First of all, yes it absolutely is the same amount of work. Just because some VAs phone it in doesn't mean anything (you're seriously telling Bruce Willis isn't phoning it in these days?).

Second, actors always get paid more than writers. It's not fair, but I don't know why you're singling out VAs for it.

I don't know where you read people being angry at the Simpsons' actors for getting more money after making Fox billions of Dollars but it wasn't in this thread!

No Dignity
Oct 15, 2007

SweetMercifulCrap! posted:

Give me a counter-argument better than "You guys Disney is like, sooo evil"

(insert someone emptyquoting me and then your response)

Okay

You are extremely stupid, trolling or likely both

Mantis42
Jul 26, 2010

PostNouveau posted:

Nah. Lipsyncing videos were a popular trend for a minute back then. The Office did one too. I'm sure a bunch of other shows as well.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfokPqeSNcw

The Office never got as bad as the Simpsons or anything, everything up through the penultimate season is probably more good than bad, but it definitely started to be less intentional cringe humor and more unintentional cringe. There's several moments that are just trying to recreate viral Facebook moments from 2010, such as the lipsyncing thing, the dancing at the wedding, planking, etc. Aren't these supposed to be middle aged people at a job they hate? It's that sitcom-y thing where the audience grows to love the characters so the writers start to write the characters as best friends in-universe, even though that doesn't make sense.

IBroughttheFunk
Sep 28, 2012

Cemetry Gator posted:

There's a few things that stand out to me.

First, the cinematography is pretty basic. There's no showmanship or anything going on. They basically just "point" the camera and shoot. They shoot it like a 3-camera sitcom, which is fine when you're a three camera sitcom but when you're the Simpsons in a drag show, you get loving cinematic. You do close ups and slow reveals. You go loving Bubsy Berkeley on this poo poo.

The next problem is that the editing is atrocious, to the point where you lose all sense of space. So you're watching this, and you're seeing the characters teleport around.

Finally, the characters are all staying on model. There's no stretching, there's no breaking, it just feels stiff.

Thanks! You did an excellent job of actually putting into words all the reasons as to why that scene just felt so completely bland to me. Particularly just how restrictively, almost prohibitively on-model everyone tends to be in the non-classic seasons, especially when compared to moments like when Homer has his heart attack in Mr. Burns' office: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n8K0p7Brq7E.

IBroughttheFunk fucked around with this message at 20:35 on Feb 16, 2022

PostNouveau
Sep 3, 2011

VY till I die
Grimey Drawer

Mantis42 posted:

The Office never got as bad as the Simpsons or anything, everything up through the penultimate season is probably more good than bad, but it definitely started to be less intentional cringe humor and more unintentional cringe. There's several moments that are just trying to recreate viral Facebook moments from 2010, such as the lipsyncing thing, the dancing at the wedding, planking, etc. Aren't these supposed to be middle aged people at a job they hate? It's that sitcom-y thing where the audience grows to love the characters so the writers start to write the characters as best friends in-universe, even though that doesn't make sense.

It got pretty bad after Steve Carrell left. They shouldn't have tried to keep going without him. Although I liked the finale.

SweetMercifulCrap!
Jan 28, 2012
Lipstick Apathy

Alan_Shore posted:

First of all, yes it absolutely is the same amount of work. Just because some VAs phone it in doesn't mean anything (you're seriously telling Bruce Willis isn't phoning it in these days?).

Second, actors always get paid more than writers. It's not fair, but I don't know why you're singling out VAs for it.

I don't know where you read people being angry at the Simpsons' actors for getting more money after making Fox billions of Dollars but it wasn't in this thread!

Bruce Willis "phoning it in" still has to show up and put in long hours on the set vs. a few Skype calls a week for a few weeks.

No, it wasn't in this thread.

Data Graham
Dec 28, 2009

📈📊🍪😋



IBroughttheFunk posted:

Thanks! You did an excellent job of actually putting into words all the reasons as to why the scene just felt so completely dead to me - particularly just how restrictively, almost prohibitively on-model everyone tends to be in the non-classic seasons. Compare that to moments like when Homer has his heart attack in Mr. Burns' office: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n8K0p7Brq7E

Weirdly I thought this scene was completely "un-Simpsons" when it first aired. Way too off-the-wall cartoony, the dialogue flow is like a vaudeville bit instead of "realistic", etc.

"Oh I thought that said BRAIN hemorrhages" also struck me as off. Like come on , give me some grounding in plausibility to bite on

FreudianSlippers
Apr 12, 2010

Shooting and Fucking
are the same thing!

Mantis42 posted:

It's that sitcom-y thing where the audience grows to love the characters so the writers start to write the characters as best friends in-universe, even though that doesn't make sense.

Yeah

I'm not a huge fan of the UK office but that show understood that David Brent was a horrible person. The American had that for like one season before pivoting to make their Brent/Scott more of a awkward but loveable doofus. Like they were worried that having an unlike character front and center would confuse the audience.

PostNouveau
Sep 3, 2011

VY till I die
Grimey Drawer

FreudianSlippers posted:

Yeah

I'm not a huge fan of the UK office but that show understood that David Brent was a horrible person. The American had that for like one season before pivoting to make their Brent/Scott more of a awkward but loveable doofus. Like they were worried that having an unlike character front and center would confuse the audience.

It's true, although probably the worst thing Michael Scott did was in the later seasons

Rascar Capac
Aug 31, 2016

Surprisingly nice, for an evil Inca mummy.

FreudianSlippers posted:

Yeah

I'm not a huge fan of the UK office but that show understood that David Brent was a horrible person. The American had that for like one season before pivoting to make their Brent/Scott more of a awkward but loveable doofus. Like they were worried that having an unlike character front and center would confuse the audience.

Interestingly, this sentimentality then looped back to infect Ricky Gervais, who made the feature film David Brent: Life on the Road (2016) to say to us that actually, isn't David Brent a lovable hero?

pretty soft girl
Oct 1, 2004

my dead grandfather fights better than you

SweetMercifulCrap! posted:

Bruce Willis "phoning it in" still has to show up and put in long hours on the set vs. a few Skype calls a week for a few weeks.

No, it wasn't in this thread.

There's no way Bruce is spending more than 2 days on set or even bothering to memorize his lines for some of the trash he's been headlining lately

Das Boo
Jun 9, 2011

There was a GHOST here.
It's gone now.
I'm a BG designer. Storyboard artists are paid more than me and I cannot possibly care because whatever the board artist is paid is not impacting my salary at the studio. The art director is paid more than the board artist and I cannot possibly care because it doesn't impact my salary. The producer is paid more than the art director and it doesn't impact my salary. The only time I care is when a studio head gets switched because it's common practice to treat everything that has the previous head's name on it like a dog marking its territory. Pissing off the head for whatever reason is the only time you "run out of budget" at these giant studios. They generate unfathomable revenue. A six figure salary puts you comfortably in middle class in LA. And it's not the guys earning six or seven figures that made it that way. You and your measly VA salary aren't taking bread out of anyone's mouth no matter how prominent a VA you are.

But even past that? Why is DiMaggio obligated to do it at all? You don't have to take every gig thrown at you. You don't have to return to every gig you've contributed to. He was approached with an offer, he named a price that would compel him to accept the gig, they're in negotiation. It's up to Disney now to decide if they consider his contribution's worth the cost and if not, they pass, the show gets made with a replacement. This is all perfectly fine.

Mantis42
Jul 26, 2010

FreudianSlippers posted:

Yeah

I'm not a huge fan of the UK office but that show understood that David Brent was a horrible person. The American had that for like one season before pivoting to make their Brent/Scott more of a awkward but loveable doofus. Like they were worried that having an unlike character front and center would confuse the audience.

I don't really mind that too much. Michael Scott being a needy loser who just wants the rest of the office to be his best friends is not a bad character. It's later on when they actually do all become best friends that represents more of what I mean.

sweet geek swag
Mar 29, 2006

Adjust lasers to FUN!





Mantis42 posted:

I don't really mind that too much. Michael Scott being a needy loser who just wants the rest of the office to be his best friends is not a bad character. It's later on when they actually do all become best friends that represents more of what I mean.

There's definitely a moment where they go from feeling sorry for Michael (which is fine) to actually liking Michael, and it really doesn't work.

bobjr
Oct 16, 2012

Roose is loose.
🐓🐓🐓✊🪧

For as decent to bad the last few seasons were for the Office they did nail the finale in a way most long running shows don’t.

Granted on the recap podcast they revealed they liked Roy’s actor in season 3 so much they considered having Roy and Pam getting back together, which considering the fans at the time would have been a great reaction

The Wicked ZOGA
Jan 27, 2022

Just feed Bender's lines into one of those AIs. They're pretty good these days. and he's a robot anyway

SweetMercifulCrap!
Jan 28, 2012
Lipstick Apathy

Das Boo posted:

But even past that? Why is DiMaggio obligated to do it at all? You don't have to take every gig thrown at you. You don't have to return to every gig you've contributed to. He was approached with an offer, he named a price that would compel him to accept the gig, they're in negotiation. It's up to Disney now to decide if they consider his contribution's worth the cost and if not, they pass, the show gets made with a replacement. This is all perfectly fine.

No, I totally get this. He's in no way obligated to do it, I just feel that the spectacle of "we deserve better treatment and compensation" is unnecessary when in reality it boils down to "I don't really want to do this, and think it's a bad idea, but I guess I'll play my hand."

SweetMercifulCrap!
Jan 28, 2012
Lipstick Apathy

FreudianSlippers posted:

Yeah

I'm not a huge fan of the UK office but that show understood that David Brent was a horrible person. The American had that for like one season before pivoting to make their Brent/Scott more of a awkward but loveable doofus. Like they were worried that having an unlike character front and center would confuse the audience.

But I actually think this does work for some shows that go on for a long time, like the US Office. It wouldn't make sense for them not to start being friends with each other with the amount of dramatic conflict/resolutions they go through.

YeahTubaMike
Mar 24, 2005

*hic* Gotta finish thish . . .
Doctor Rope

Das Boo posted:

Why is DiMaggio obligated to do it at all? You don't have to take every gig thrown at you. You don't have to return to every gig you've contributed to. He was approached with an offer, he named a price that would compel him to accept the gig, they're in negotiation. It's up to Disney now to decide if they consider his contribution's worth the cost and if not, they pass, the show gets made with a replacement. This is all perfectly fine.

This, this, this this this. This this this this thiiiiiisssss.

Mantis42 posted:

The Office never got as bad as the Simpsons or anything, everything up through the penultimate season is probably more good than bad, but it definitely started to be less intentional cringe humor and more unintentional cringe.

I was flipping through the channels and an episode of The Office caught my eye in which Dwight shoots Stanley with a tranquilizer dart and he & an intern drag his body out of the office for...some reason, I kept flipping after that. As someone who pretty much gave up on The Office after/during Robert California, I was absolutely stunned by what the show had become (unless that episode ended up being a dream or something) & practically cringed myself inside out.

bobjr posted:

For as decent to bad the last few seasons were for the Office they did nail the finale in a way most long running shows don’t.

Granted on the recap podcast they revealed they liked Roy’s actor in season 3 so much they considered having Roy and Pam getting back together, which considering the fans at the time would have been a great reaction

gently caress Jim and gently caress "Jam", but having Pam stay with Roy -- an emotionally vacant, temperamental dullard -- would have probably been a disaster. Pam/Toby 5ever :v:

PostNouveau
Sep 3, 2011

VY till I die
Grimey Drawer

The Wicked ZOGA posted:

Just feed Bender's lines into one of those AIs. They're pretty good these days. and he's a robot anyway

They did this for CGI Luke in that Boba Fett show and it sounded super flat and lovely

Calaveron
Aug 7, 2006
:negative:

Das Boo posted:


But even past that? Why is DiMaggio obligated to do it at all? You don't have to take every gig thrown at you. You don't have to return to every gig you've contributed to. He was approached with an offer, he named a price that would compel him to accept the gig, they're in negotiation. It's up to Disney now to decide if they consider his contribution's worth the cost and if not, they pass, the show gets made with a replacement. This is all perfectly fine.

Also voice acting is a serious skill that requires serious time and effort and dedication. You can argue that DiMaggio's roles are kinda samey and you can instantly pin point him whenever he makes an appearance but Jake sounds way different than Wakka and Bender and Heidegger and so on and so forth. If the guy can leverage his talent to get a better deal from literally the biggest corporation on Earth, more power to him because gently caress you pay me.

Mantis42
Jul 26, 2010

Make Kevin Murphy the new voice of Bender and have Fry keep saying how much he hates it.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Hedgehog Pie
May 19, 2012

Total fuckin' silence.
There are definitely some times in the US Office where it feels that we're supposed to accept Michael for who he is, despite him occasionally being rather callous and sleazy in addition to being incompetent. I think the show in general probably has more going for it than the UK version, but even though Michael's antics were pretty fun all the way through, I'm not sure if they ever juggled his character all that well.

(As an aside, I think the show reached its lowest point when Will Ferrell, James Spader and Catherine Tate started showing up. There were still some entertaining arcs but those characters were just poorly handled and actively detracted from the show. The last season was a slight step up for me, even if it was dominated by insipid Jim/Pam drama.)

To get back on topic, I think Homer in the classic episodes was usually a good example of this sort of character juggling. He was a loud-mouthed slovenly idiot but he was rarely malicious, even doing things like helping Flanders save his business when he realised he'd been a total jackass. Later Homer was worse than Michael Scott because even his stunts weren't funny anymore. It'd be like if every episode of The Office was the one where Michael forces everyone to set him up on a date and he's cruel to all of them. Just unpleasant!

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply