> I will have to agree The War At Home was bad. About 30
> seconds into it I said to myself "HOW did this guy get his
> own show?" He was simply NOT funny. The whole concept seemed
> like a weak watered down version of Titus
OK, I'm in the minority and found it watchable, though not great. At least there's finally a show after The Simpsons I can watch (the others were King of the Hill and Futurama).
> The Simpsons was also poor. My objection is the fact they
> are repeating way too much. Now this would be OK if it
> weren't for the fact, now they have a great source
>
www.SNPP.com which lists episode guides. There is NO need to
> repeat any plot line. They could easily look up any plot
> line on that site to see if it was done before.
>
> Second of all there are STILL so many unexplored plot lines.
> I can think of quite a few and I'm not even a writer. For
> instance, they have NEVER done an episode about the cat, yet
> TWICE they've dealt with Santa's Little Helper having
> puppies.
In fairness, there was an episode where the cat played a central role by rescuing Homer from a fire. Of course, that was also about Santa's Little Helper, too, but that show and the one with the succession of dying cats were the most we'd seen of the little feline.
> This is ridiculous for the amount of money the writers are
> paid that they can't come up with realistic non-duplicative
> plot lines
>
> On the other hand what is even WORSE is the fact that as bad
> as last night Simpsons episode was, it is STILL far better
> than any other comedy currently running.
Last night was not spectacular, primarily because the set-up could have been used in much better ways than another Marge is mad at Homer plot. Marge as a porn producer maybe? They could have had some fun with it.
That said, I don't think that *overall* the show is as bad as some whiners make it out to be. Yes, we can do without the blatantly repeating plots, but there are still inspired moments of hunor, and it hands-down beats anything else on the air.
>
