MovieChat Forums > The Simpsons (1989) Discussion > Are the producers of this show mentally ...

Are the producers of this show mentally ill? Why not let the show end on a respectable note?

posted 5 years ago by [deleted]
28 replies | jump to latest

Let me put into perspective how long this show has been on the air, for the younger generation who don't understand why people of my generation constantly complain about it being on the air too long.

When The Simpsons short started airing on the Tracey Ullman Show, I was in my freshman year of high school. I was 14 years old. There were no such things as smartphones, the world wide web, digital downloads, internet streaming, even DVDs. There were no such things as digital cameras, Instagram, social media, GPS and WiFi. We were a decade away from the mp3 format.

I am now 46 years old. I am four years away from being an AARP member. I'm 30 percent gray. I never had kids but if I had at age, say, 20, I'd be old enough to have an adult child and a couple of preschool-age grandchildren.

Why in the name of all that is holy is this show still on the air? Keep in mind that I'm not against the concept of shows being this long on the air as long as it's in the form of "incarnations" or spin offs. For example. there have been a couple of Scooby Doo series since 1969, but they each tried something new, were tailor-made for a new generation of kids and ran for a few short seasons. Ditto, say, Spiderman. There have been several Spiderman cartoons since the 1960s, and that's fine because each new series was different in and of itself.

The Simpsons isn't that. It's not a spin off or an incarnation. It's not like, say, a cool new iteration where we get to see Bart and Lisa in college or anything like that. It's a series that's coasting on a premise that everyone agrees was long exhausted by season 9. Not only that, it's been on so long that key members of the show are beginning to die off.

Are the producers of this show mentally ill? I'm a writer/creative, and as much as I love my characters, I could never in a million years imagine spending over 20 years obsessively keeping them alive. All good things must come to an end, and to me, to keep characters long past their expiration date seems pathetic, like someone unable to let go or hanging onto this delusion that they'll achieve immortality if they keep the characters around as long as possible.

[–] LordBAElish (2015) 5 years ago

I have no idea what the ratings are, but they must be good enough to keep the show going. Money is always the answer in film and TV

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

I don't disagree with what you're saying (about ratings and money).

The thing is, though, is that most creators tend to care more about preserving their work and leaving on a high note than they do money. That's why many of them will end a series even when it's riding high. To me, there's something wrong with Matt Groening and company to keep The Simpsons on for this long, even for the money and ratings.

[–] hurricane (1908) 4 years ago

^ This.

Most people are of the opinion that it isn't as good as it was in the 1990s, but there must be enough people watching still to make the series profitable. Otherwise it wouldn't be on the air any more.

Sad though it is that it's been on longer as a show that used to be funny than as a funny show, they're not going to stop making a profitable show because somebody on the internet called them mentally ill.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

[deleted]

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

So, are you seriously telling me that if you wrote a good show idea that you weren't even fond of and you could be made rich beyond your dreams by selling it, that you wouldn't? Because that's effectively what MG did.

I've never cared about being rich beyond my dreams. All I care about is living comfortably past retirement and not having health issues. I know that sounds corny, but it's true.

You said that MG isn't fond of The Simpsons. But by the same token, that was the show that made him a household name. I used to read LIH when it ran in one of the local NYC indie papers (can't remember if it was The Village Voice or NY Press). As cute and subversive as LIH was, MG was no R. Crumb or Art Spiegelman, and he would've fallen into obscurity if it were not for The Simpsons. To me, dumping The Simpsons doesn't make sense because he's become so synonymous with the show that he's gaining new fans to LIH as a result. This is how I discovered him. I loved the show, looked him up at the library (yes, that long ago, LOL) and then saw that he had a strip in the paper. If, say, five years from now, The Simpsons became so bad that people flat out hated it, MG's name would be mud and no one would care enough to look him up and discover his other work.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

I also grew up with The Simpsons and I know what you mean. Given all the crap episodes, on average The Simpsons is now a bad show. All the lame episodes have dragged it down from being one of the best shows of all time.

It has to be about money. There's no other reason to keep bringing this borefest back again and again. It's become one of the cliched, stale, unfunny sitcoms that it used to satirise so well.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

The first digital camera was made in 1975.

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

They weren't common items 'til the early 2000s though. Canon and Nikon didn't release them til around then.

[–] PaladinNJ (20310) 5 years ago

If the network keeps paying, they'll keep playing.

[–] spurtle467 (1498) 5 years ago

This show could have cemented its legacy as one of the greatest TV shows of all time, had it ended some time before, let's say season 13. Now about two thirds of all the episodes are mediocre and it has gone so far past its best before date that nobody really attaches it to the label of greatest TV shows anymore. Like many of my generation who remembered it at its peak, I would be completely apathetic to the thought of the show calling it a day.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

My thoughts exactly. That's what I find so weird about this. The very reason why we still fondly watch I Love Lucy, Seinfeld, etc. is that they ended on a high note. Had The Simpsons ended around the 10th or 11th season, it would've been forever remembered as the classic TV show that revolutionized prime time. Now it's not that show anymore. It's just white noise at this point.

[–] Ken12602 (481) 5 years ago

Why do you care if it's still on? If it doesn't interest you, then just don't watch it.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

Because I used to love this show enough to want it to end on a high note, so that it would be remembered for the classic show that it was. Not so run into the ground that no one remembers or cares about it anymore.

[–] strntz (10818) 5 years ago

I agree with your assessment of the falloff of quality.

I was a Tracy Ullman fan and watched the shorts grow into the best comedy of any type on TV. I also watched it die a lingering and painful death.

But to be honest I don't really care about the Simpsons legacy. I have no dog in the fight, I'm not associated with the show, the network, nor have I written any shows for them.

What I would like is for original Simpsons fans who have the fortitude to sit through every current episode to rate anything past the 15th season (when I quit) and identify any (if any) shows that would fit the quality profile of the original 10-13 years.

[–] BillySlater (4097) 5 years ago

The thing that I find most painful, is if re-runs are airing, I have to check the info button each time to see what episode it is, I´d gladly watch anything before season 9 but sadly, the Simpsons now has about 20 years of crap as well.

[–] strntz (10818) 5 years ago

It's interesting how us fans put a different line of demarcation on the Simpsons timeline. For you, it's season 9.

I do the same as you; check the info button. If it's season 10 or less, it's gold to me. Most episodes to season 13 are wonderful, and there were many excellent ones up to season 15 or so. I can't recall any beyond that. Any episode 15 or beyond I just go to something more clever, funny, and satirical than later Simpsons: like watching QVC for instance...

But since I won't even commit to 30 minutes for later shows, I wish there was a rating. I mean, there *must* be at least a few good shows after 15.

[–] GreenGoblinsOck8 (7402) 5 years ago

I agree. Anytime I caught a rerun of it on TV in recent years it's always one of the episodes from the last 10 years.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

We're the same age. I recall when the show started down here. Hard rock was still popular although slowly in decline, I was slimmer. The show was also funny and kind of subversive at times. In later seasons I noticed that it no longer made fun of what would become known as SJW's but started to support that kind of thinking.

30 years is a long time, some say it lasted that long because unlike sitcoms with live actors the kids never grew up. I think maybe they could have had them age a little here and there. Maybe they have, I haven't watched a new ep for over 10 years now.

The ratings still seem respectable and unlike other countries where they will do a set number of seasons of a show America likes to run shows into the ground. So maybe that is the plan?