[The following article is the second submission from our faithful reader FatFat McWhoDat. If you are interested in submitting your own article, click here for more information about our weekly reader's editorial. Enjoy!]
Its probably been 10 years since "The Simpsons" had an all together epic season of quality programming. The show's recent work certainly brings chuckles to the viewer, but not the full-on-belly-laughs from slap stick comedy wonderfully melded into articulate social and political satire of its early shows. Of course, the writing team has had plenty of roll over since the glorious early days of the show, and through 20+ years the characters have simply encountered every imaginable situation, leaving fresh plot ideas few and far between. However, I'd like to propose an alternate hypothesis as to why "The Simpsons" of the last decade hasn't met the Herculean standard set by its earlier seasons. Matt Groening was working on another project. Not the much hyped, but somewhat poorly received Simpsons movie mind you, but rather a pet project he embarked upon with David X. Cohen called "Futurama."
"Futurama" captured everything Groening strived to create with the Simpsons, and moreover served as a proving ground for his new ideas. If "The Simpsons" represents Giotto of the early Italian renaissance, then Groening created his Michelangelo with "Futurama." The show uses Groening's own Simpson family as the precedent of its genre, as do "South Park" and "Family Guy," two other notable adult-oriented comedic animations. "The Simpsons" used the classic "Leave it to Beaver" sit-com formula of a standard family living in standard suburbia during the present day, thus creating a suitably comfortable platform from which to launch an entire new genre that has drastically changed television: satirical cartoons for adults. "The Simpsons'" new genre is perhaps epitomized by the fantastical experiences in which these animated characters are allowed to partake, since their cartoon--hence imaginary--universe doesn't need to make sense. Homer could never work in a leaky nuclear power plant in real life. Nor could Maggie stay so perfectly youthful. Moreover Bart's attempted jump over Springfield Canyon could never have been portrayed accurately by real life actors. By bringing the idea of adult entertainment to cartoons, Matt Groening had brought ironic, absurd humor to an unprecedented level on television with "The Simpsons." With "Futurama," he took it a step further.
Since "Futurama" is set 1000 years in the future, the narratives usually operate under the assumption that anything science fiction is possible, from time travel to nanotechnology; therefore allowing Groening's absurd sense of humor to reach an ever greater scope than the Simpsons' thence-archaic technological present. However, his truest stroke of perfection comes in Futurama's most lovable persona: Fry. By placing a pretty awkward, generally stupid character at the center of the series, Groening seized his audience's heart and imagination. Anyone can imagine the possibilities of being magically transported to 1000 years in the future. With the amount of technological innovation in the last 10 years, simply playing a video game in the year 3000 would probably be the experience of a lifetime for us old-timey 21st century folk.
My favorite part of Futurama however has to be the plethora of tangential characters. From Nixon's head to Hypnotoad, Groening systematically created a character for every stereotype. From ultra-rich foreigners (The Wongs) to the incessantly overdramatic soap drama star (Calculon, pictured), to my personal favorite Hedonism bot (based off of the Greek deity Bacchus and the hedonism movement in general), Futurama's extended cast finds every niche in today's society, and exploits each hilariously on screen to the delight of the viewer, much in the esteem of the Simpsons' great tradition.
So if you're looking for intellectual hilarity seamlessly blended with slapstick comedy, strap on your space boots and get yourself some new Futurama this summer.
No comments:
Post a Comment