In retrospect, how well do you feel Futurama has aged?

I

Iamfootball

New member
I've been rewatching the series for the first time in years, and I'm noticing that while there are some really great episodes and funny episodes, there are also a lot of other episodes that I simply don't care for.

The weaker episodes I tend to notice are in the middle. Whatever was in the mid-section of Futurama had a lot of dulls, like the one where Bender joins a band with Beck.

Also, what is with the dated humor and devices? Why in the world would they be using VHS tapes in the year 3000? I understand back when the show was airing VHS tapes were still common compared to DVDs, but why see that in 3000? Or casette tapes? Or friggin floppy disks? What the hell?

On top of that, some of the humor isn't consistently funny. Some eps will be full of laughs, yet others have only a few good jokes in them but that's it.

I still enjoyed most of Futurama and I think its certainly a good show, but there's some parts of it that just haven't aged well IMO.
 
I agree with this. The show was already pretty creative, I can't imagine why little things like that were so difficult to tweak.

Futurama seems... average. Meaning, there hasn't been a significant amount of bombs to really suggest anything. Every show has a bad episode or more, it's when the show continues to have bad episodes is when it's concerning. But from what I saw with the recent Over the Wild Green Yonder movie, Futurama was picking itself up nicely, and by that I mean... well... it was better than Beast With a Million Backs. >.o
 
Didn't civilization get destroyed sometime between 1999 and 2999 and everyone had to rebuild? That might explain the presence of technology that would have been far outdated if technology had proceeded unabated for 1000 years.
 
Personally, I think Futurama holds up to repeat viewings far better than most shows of that era. The references to outdated technology aren't so much an "age" thing: they're purposefully retro-futuristic. The idea is to create an atmosphere similar to watching an old sci-fi movie or TV show that was set in "the near future," only now it has become the recent past. Like how if you go back and watch Transformers, the Earth was supposed to be covered with robots and high technology by 2005, but they still use cassette tapes.

Whether you agree with it or not, it's not a matter of the showing "aging" well or poorly because the creators didn't know that DVDs were the future. It was a conscious creative decision on the part of the creators.
 
I thought Cybercubed's issue with the dated technology was a completely different complaint? I believe the main goal of this thread is to discuss how Futurama has aged as a series in terms of overal quality and watchibility.

The way I look at it, Family Guy ages okay because it's random, joke-a-minute insanity. The older Simpsons episodes age well because many of them are perfect examples of absolute classic television. And both shows have that every day, middle class, blue collar appeal.

Futurama has always been cult and niche. It's story-heavy, its science fiction and it has a tendency to be nerdy as all get out. I don't think it has that widespread, mainstream appeal that shows like Simpsons, Family Guy and even South Park have. And I think the more the show's creators try to appease no one but the show's most dedicated fan base (which is what I think was one of the problems of the DVDs) the more the show might suffer. It isn't an everyman show that appeals to blue collar slobs who want a cheap laugh. It's better than that, but it's appeal is limited in the long run. There's a reason why everyone latched on to Bender, as he's the show's Peter, Homer and Cartman. But when written wrong, Bender can be such an immoral, despicable character that too much of him isn't a good thing.

I think that's why American Dad's Roger never came into his own the way characters like Homer, Peter and the earlier Cartman did. He's funny but there's nothing likable about him and the more he does horrible things the more distance I (personally) feel from the character. I think that's why American Dad hasn't caught on with the mainstream. Stan isn't Homer or Peter, who are both simple-minded, childish lugs. Stan is an angry, no-nonsense, CIA agent who doesn't seem to have any connection to any the characters around him. There's nothing playful or warm about him. Standoffish characters aren't appealing. And the fact that the main characters in the show are a standoffish guy in a suit and a nasty, vile, lush of an extraterrestrial I think doesn't attract audiences the way the characters on some of the other FOX shows do.
 
As much as the general public advances in their lifestyle, there are going to be many people who take a liking to the old fashion ways. Heck, even though Batman The Animated Series takes place in the 1990s, some of the technology used is something used see in an old crime themed movie.
 
You make a lot of good points in that post, but this one in particular I think bears examination. Futurama's story- and character-driven nature is a big part of why I think it ages particularly well. In your typical episode of, say, Family Guy, the big draw is the jokes, and most of the jokes function on surprise. Once you know what the jokes are, you're no longer surprised by them, and a given episode gets progressively less entertaining the more you watch it. There's nothing wrong with that, of course: it's a perfectly valid style of humor, and most comedies have the same effect.

Futurama, on the other hand, is primarily story- and character-driven. The jokes are there, but they're seldom the main appeal of any given episode. And good stories and good characters are something you can come back to again and again. The best episodes and seasons of the Simpsons are the same way, but the show went on so long that eventually you run out of new things to explore about the same old characters.
 
Plus many continuity elements have been planned long before incorporated in the series (Like Nibbler's significance), so seeing an old episode again will sometimes result in noticing little details which lead up to the plot.
 
True to a certain extent. But I think the reasons why reruns of Simpsons and Family Guy continue to be popular is because once you do become familiar with the jokes and gags it almost becomes a game to quote along with the show, to imitate the characters, to sing along with the songs (especially on Family Guy) to explain the pop culture references to those who don't get them. That's true to a certain extent with Futurama, but since - like you said - a lot of the humor is stroy and character driven, so it's harder to "joke mimic" the show. There's a reason why trivia games for Simpsons and Family Guy sell so well. People absorb those two shows and can become trivia machines for it. I think Futurama's more limited appeal (despite it's incredible hardcore and dedicated fanbase) doesn't lend itself to that sort of thing, at least not with the mainstream.

True, Futurama has great characters. I love Fry, Bender, Farnsworth and Zoidberg. But like I said, I don't think those characters have the widespread appeal as the characters in shows like Simpsons, Family Guy and South Park. The fans adore them, but I think Futurama's limited mainstream appeal means the show isn't going to hold up a long time from now the way The Simpsons undoutably will. I'm actually surprised the show keeps coming back, considering - like I said - the people in charge of the show really seem to be keeping it alive soley to please the hardcore fan base.



That's true, although (since I seem to be the one playing devil's advocate in this thread, despite the fact that I do love the show) having strong continuity isn't always a good thing, as the more stand-alone something is the more accessible it is. But to be honest, I've stopped buying the "we planned this all along" shtick a long time ago, as I think that was an issue with the DVDs. Not only did it become tiresome that they were constantly trying to always second guess the audience, it quickly became obvious to me that things were being made up as they went along for the sake a last minute "reveal". I don't believe they planned all the reveals from those DVDs years ago when they were working on the original seasons. I just don't.
 
Well, I guess it depends on what you mean by "hold up." As you say, the show was much more niche than The Simpsons to begin with: everyone's been part of a family, but not everyone is into sci-fi. I certainly don't think it's going to suddenly become less niche just because some time has passed. But I think it'll hold up at least as well with its smaller target audience as The Simpsons will with its larger one. I think the Simpsons will be (rightly) remembered by the mainstream as a groundbreaking show that changed a lot of the rules of what could succeed on television, while Futurama will (rightly) be remembered by its fans as the Simpsons' less groundbreaking, nerdier, more polished and more consistent (until the DTVs at least) descendant.
 
The thing about the Simpsons of course is that - aside from seasons 2 though 5 - it's been in the same time slot on the same night for 20 years, and probably will continue to be for some time to come. The Simpsons is going to be one of those rare shows with a fanbase that spans multiple generations. Futurama, meanwhile, seems to consist mostly of the same fan base which has stuck with it since the very beginning. My question is at which point is that particular group going to move on? I'm not saying I want it to but it's something to ponder. I know there are those out there who were disappointed with the DVDs and fear for how the show might turn out on comedy Central. The show's future certainly isn't set in stone. I fear the Family Guy mentality and influence is going to hurt Futurama the same way it did with the Simpsons.
 
Beautifully said. That perfectly states why I don't like American Dad very much, I mean, aside from it not being very funny.

Anyway, I think the pop culture references really date Futurama quickly. I remember on the first episode of Futurama when they introduced the heads in jars with the line "Hi, I'm Dick Clark's head" I thought it was a mildly amusing joke about how long Dick Clark has been hosting the New Year's bash. I didn't realize that they were going to make it into a recurring joke. I just find it ridiculous that 1000 years in the future anybody still cares about our celebrities. Most of the people who had heads in jars won't be remembered 20 years from now, let alone 1000. I mean, can't they write good jokes without resorting to lame pop culture references?
 
I actually think the series holds up really well. Yes it is niche, but I'd argue that its niche is an expanding one, sci-fi fandom. Thanks to DVD's and the internet Futurama can be be "rediscovered" by newer sci-fi fans, and every generation spawns more sci-fi fans.

The strongest episodes like "Jurassic Bark", "Luck of the Fryrish", "The Sting", "The Devils Hands are Idle Playthings" all work regardless of pop culture references. They deal with normal issues, just in a wacky environment.



The head in a jar joke isn't really that big a part of most episodes, sure there are a few that lean heavily on it ("Where No Fan Has Gone Before", or "Bendin In The Wind" or "I Dated a Robot") but in general it's used for throw away jokes and hardly the best humor. "The Farnsworth Parabox" or "Teenage Mutant Lela's Hurdles" or "Amazon Women in the Mood" have tons of great non-jar jokes.

I would agree with the resurrection concern, if the series does decide to do more pop culture references when it comes back, but there are plenty of other sci-fi ideas to spoof rather then churn out head-in-jar jokes just to get guest stars.

The DTV's weren't quite as great as the initial series, and I think that the creators are more aware of their strengths now and will play to those when the series comes back. (fingers crossed)
 
Hey, Michael Bay's movies make much more than Kevin Smith's movies, yet in both real life and online, I've encountered more fans of Kevin Smith than I have of Michael Bay. I personally think passionate, devoted, die-harcore fandom is more valuable than passive mainstream interest. I know die hard fans don't always bring in lots of dough, but hey, at least Kevin Smith and Futurama have managed to stay financially afloat over the years.
 
I think the only truly appealing main character in American Dad is Steve, because at least Steve - as well as Barry, Toshi and Snot - are just regular kids that the audience can relate to, whereas I find nothing in Stan or Roger to relate to. Homer and Peter are big, fat and stupid, but IMHO they're wish-fulfillment characters. I think at one time or another all of us would love to have some of the adventures these guys have without the fear of getting killed or ending up in jail. Roger is just a dark, seedy character whose egocentrism and inhumanity is so out of control that nothing is sacred for the him. He's a purely hurtful character who is very unappealing in large doses.

And say what you will about Homer's relationship with Marge or Peter's relationship with Lois. I feel nothing for Stan and Francine. Their entire dynamic seems to be based on the fact that Stan is just a stone-cold jerk who doesn't seem to understand a thing about his wife or his marraige. And Klaus is the perfect example of a "gimmick" character who should have been thought through a little more.

It confuses me how so many people (at least here) state that American Dad is better than Family Guy as if it's a proven fact. Their ratings are practically night and day, first off. One sits at the top of the Animation Domination pecking order and one just recently found a spot at the bottom. Peter's "limping to the barn" joke from "Three Kings" shows the MacFarlane crew's awareness of that fact. Talkbacks for new Family Guy episodes can go on for pages while American Dad seems to be lucky it gets much attention at all. FOX has barely merchandised it in the 4+ years it's been on the air. Some might say it points to popularity as opposed to overall quality because (for example) King of the Hill was a masterpiece that - despite the longevity - never really got the recognition it deserved , but I dunno...

Anyway, back to Futurama...
 
You must not watch a lot of American Dad.

They've developed Stan's character enough to show that while he can be a pompous jerk at times-he also has a sweet side and cares greatly for his wife and children (even Roger).
There's been several episodes devoted to Stan trying to show his family how much he cares about them, a majority of AD episodes will show Stan and Steve bonding over something in the end. It must show you've only watched the first season if you're so quick to declare Stan a character that isn't relatable or undeveloped.
 
Back
Top