Thats crazy talk...DOOOH!

@DRDMovieMusings said:

Flogging this dead horse is a travesty. It was culturally significant, one of the great shows of all time...and it's long past its expiry date.

Can they not find the respect, the dignity, to stop this ongoing charade? And leave us with the memories of a phenomenon that changed things - although, not altogether for the better, as it foisted upon us a barrage of adult cartoons racing each other to the bottom of the barrel of crassness, shock, and toilet humor that bears little resemblance to the insightful satire and social commentary that The Simpsons originally brought to the table.

You, of course, may disagree, but you've got to give me bonus points for correctly using both "it's" and "its" in one sentence.

That's like asking studios to stop churning out inane blockbuster sequels. As long as there is an audience, The Simpsons will continue. It's a stable job for all involved, why give it up even if the quality has deteriorated? Also, it probably doesn't interfere with other projects that the cast wants to do.

@Harry Skywalker said:

During the Golden Era of the Simpsons - Season 1 to Season 8 and half of Season 9 - this was the best show ever.

Then it turned to garbage. Yet still way better than that abomination called Family Guy.

Right? I also started a similar thread on American Dad.

@Harry Skywalker said:

@DRDMovieMusings said:

@Harry Skywalker said:

During the Golden Era of the Simpsons - Season 1 to Season 8 and half of Season 9 - this was the best show ever.

Then it turned to garbage. Yet still way better than that abomination called Family Guy.

Right? I also started a similar thread on American Dad.

American Dad is so goddamn better than Family Guy.

I'll have to take your word for it. But, let me ask, how much does it take to be better than Family Guy?

It should have ended like 15 years ago. The brilliance of the classic episodes from season 1-9 is on the lower end of the show's existence at this point. There's been more years of it being trash than quality. SMH.

I hate to say it as I've watched The Simpsons for years, but it's time to stop beating a dead horse and end the show. I like them to bring it full circle and have the family visit the Christmas play.

They could end it with Lisa becoming president.

It's really kind of sad to think that it has been bad (objectively speaking) longer than it was good (roughly 1991-1999) for most fans.

@A-Dubya said:

It's really kind of sad to think that it has been bad (objectively speaking) longer than it was good (roughly 1991-1999) for most fans.

I'm sayin'. For the love of all that's sacred, it's high time - past time - they shut this thing down. Great shows knew when to call it a wrap. Dragging it out is tarnishing the show's legacy.

If they stop make episodes now the show will still have merchandising and licensing making money for decades, repeats will be on forever without the cost of producing episodes, so for a long while it would probably be more cost effective. It's been on so long that it's actually lived past it's own 30 year cycle of nostalgia.

There's no reason for season to still be made other than dragging along the longest running animated show title out further and further so Arthur doesn't catch up.

@manfromatlantis said:

They could end it with Lisa becoming president.

I don't think they can. And, it has nothing to do with Lisa. I'm of the opinion that they could not actually move The Simpsons age-wise at all. Because of Bart.

Visions of Bart's future were fine, because we always returned to his childhood when the future was all about possibility. If they actually took him to adulthood, Bart would have become one of two things: successful, or a bum.

• If successful, it wouldn't play well as suggesting that kids can be slackers and all will end up okay, it smacks of frat boy-to-Supreme Court ickyness.

• If a bum, it'd just be sad. There's no more possibility, no more hope. Just a sad life.

@DRDMovieMusings said:

@manfromatlantis said:

They could end it with Lisa becoming president.

I don't think they can. And, it has nothing to do with Lisa. I'm of the opinion that they could not actually move The Simpsons age-wise at all. Because of Bart.

Visions of Bart's future were fine, because we always returned to his childhood when the future was all about possibility. If they actually took him to adulthood, Bart would have become one of two things: successful, or a bum.

• If successful, it wouldn't play well as suggesting that kids can be slackers and all will end up okay, it smacks of frat boy-to-Supreme Court ickyness.

• If a bum, it'd just be sad. There's no more possibility, no more hope. Just a sad life.

They could move it up showing bart leaned not to be aslacker.

@manfromatlantis said:

@DRDMovieMusings said:

@manfromatlantis said:

They could end it with Lisa becoming president.

I don't think they can. And, it has nothing to do with Lisa. I'm of the opinion that they could not actually move The Simpsons age-wise at all. Because of Bart.

Visions of Bart's future were fine, because we always returned to his childhood when the future was all about possibility. If they actually took him to adulthood, Bart would have become one of two things: successful, or a bum.

• If successful, it wouldn't play well as suggesting that kids can be slackers and all will end up okay, it smacks of frat boy-to-Supreme Court ickyness.

• If a bum, it'd just be sad. There's no more possibility, no more hope. Just a sad life.

They could move it up showing bart leaned not to be aslacker.

Well, you might be right. But, clearly, having opted to not move the show at all, and having foisted this crap on us for so long, it's abundantly evident that they ran the show far past their level of creative integrity. They may not have been able to move it up after all, because what they've been giving us is the best they can offer which, in the words of Bart, "both sucks and blows."

I stopped being a regular viewer during is twenty somethingth season, but I catch a rerun once in awhile and see an episode I missed.

It's lost its brilliance to be sure, but it is still good for a chuckle or two.

@MirrorMask said:

@DRDMovieMusings said:

Flogging this dead horse is a travesty. It was culturally significant, one of the great shows of all time...and it's long past its expiry date.

Can they not find the respect, the dignity, to stop this ongoing charade? And leave us with the memories of a phenomenon that changed things - although, not altogether for the better, as it foisted upon us a barrage of adult cartoons racing each other to the bottom of the barrel of crassness, shock, and toilet humor that bears little resemblance to the insightful satire and social commentary that The Simpsons originally brought to the table.

You, of course, may disagree, but you've got to give me bonus points for correctly using both "it's" and "its" in one sentence.

That's like asking studios to stop churning out inane blockbuster sequels. As long as there is an audience, The Simpsons will continue. It's a stable job for all involved, why give it up even if the quality has deteriorated? Also, it probably doesn't interfere with other projects that the cast wants to do.

Yeah, at least "homer" appeared on some SG-1 episodes back in the day