The debate to end all debates -- FG vs. Simpsons

T

The Man to be Named Later

New member
Family Guy, been around 9 years, with two cancellations, bought being brought back both times. An incredible show, cutting edge, and incredible popularity.

The Simpsons. What more is there to say? Been around 21 years, an American staple, phenomenal popularity, and the list goes on.

Which do you prefer?

I personally have to go with the Simpsons, especially '87-'97 Simpsons. It's always had stronger plots and better character development, Family Guy is just big on cutaway scenes and mimicking everyday conversation. Don't get me wrong, I'm a huge fan of the show, but it just isn't the Simpsons.

You guys?
 
The Flintstones.

Both Simpsons and Family Guy are too rude and crude for my tastes. Some episodes of The Simpsons were okay, but I hate, revile, detest and infinitely despise Family Guy.
 
Personally,I've always liked The Simpsons more....While both series have equally lousy continuity (due in part to the fact the characters don't age),The Simpsons tends to have better jokes (at least in earlier seasons...I haven't seen much of the last two seasons,though I did love the movie)...and also doesn't resort to random cutaways (at least as far as I've seen)...
Plus,while many of the characters can be jerks(particularly Homer),you also come to care alot about them...The same really can't be said of Family Guy...while it's funny,I've just never felt any connection with the characters...
 
Family Guy is festering, fly-strewn sewage. No matter how poor The Simpsons gets (since about 1998, pretty poor, the movie aside), it will always be better.
 
The Simpsons is way better. It's the longest running animated show in America and it has yet to stoop to the mega offensive levels that Family Guy has. The Family Guy episodes that aired on [as] were great but as soon as they came back it was like Seth wanted it to be a South Park clone or something. You can call me sensitive or whatever but I don't like crude humor when it's taken to far in each and every episode.

Btw, Family Guy rips off of other shows and old/modern comic strips.
 
The Simpsons (or at least the episodes from the first 7 or 8 seasons) beats Family Guy by a country mile, a show I always felt was just a lame Simpsons/South Park knockoff (and feeling like it was written by someone with a very short attention span/an obsessed knowledge of 70s and 80s TV shows).

If spinoffs, etc. count, the Simpsons probably isn't the longest-running animated show in the US (the various Flintstones and Scooby Doo spinoffs probably have the Simpsons beat), and definitely not if theatrical cartoons count (Looney Tunes, with its approx. 1100 shorts).
 
If were comparing the shows at their respective primes, then the Simpsons is obviously the superior show. The writing on The Simpsons from roughly seasons 3-8 wasn't always as sharp as the best Family Guy material from seasons 2-3, it certainly was stronger and more "wholesome".

Family Guy's decline wasn't nearly as tragic as The Simpsons, however.

P.S. Brainatra, I think most of the Scooby and Flinstones spinoffs had, like, 13-something episodes apiece, while The Simpsons has well clocked over 400 episodes by now. Methinks its the longest running even if Spinoffs do count (well, non-anime anyway)
 
I beg to differ.

The Simpsons is one of the greatest shows of all time. While there are some shows I can put on it's level (or surpassing if I'm feeling generous), one of those shows is not Family Guy.

Family Guy had a single great season, one good season, and a bunch of mediocrity.

It wouldn't even make my top 30.
 
I've never liked the characters in The Simpsons and Family Guy doesn't pay attention to it's plot most of the time.

I vote for American Dad.
 
This is not "the ultimate debate"...it's a beaten-up old fossil of an argument that's been dragged through the mud since Family Guy's very first episode, and was senseless since it was first brought up.

The two shows have nothing in common besides being animated sitcoms about American suburban families. How many of those have we had? Take away the "animated" criteria and you can just as easily debate between The Simpsons and Married with Children or Family Guy and 3rd Rock from the Sun. It's ridiculous, it's an apples and oranges argument if there ever was one.

The Simpsons in its best seasons is a story and character-driven comedy, sometimes with real warmth and even a little drama.

Family Guy is more or less just animated stand-up comedy with a tacked on plot. Its quality depends on how much you like pop-culture references and non sequitors. I can watch it and laugh quite a bit at the latter brand of humor, I think it has some of the best-timed "nonsense" I've ever seen on the air. The cultural humor I could relatively do without, I'm completely unfamiliar with virtually all celebrities, but jokes about them are interchangeable anyway and fail to make me laugh.



You're kidding, right? The lowest, most crass humor the Simpsons has ever had to offer is still something the whole family can watch under any common-sense standard.



I can't stand when people think this way. If you even THINK about the fan-base of a show when you're watching it, then you don't know how to watch a show. All that should have any impact on your opinion is your own personal reaction to the writing.
 
"The Simpsons" understands something that "Family Guy" doesn't - that is, the humor of an animated sitcom hinges on the characters and how they interact with one another. Admittedly, "The Simpsons" has faulted here and there in this department, but most of the time (especially in the glory days of Seasons 1 through 8) they've maintained consistent personalities for the Simpson family and have let the stories and humor come forth from those personalities.

"Family Guy" has sacrificed its characterization for quick and dirty laughs, and the Griffins have become less likable as a result. If the writers can't create real and consistent personalities for their characters, then we as the audience are less inclined to care about them. When Homer Simpson gets fired, I worry for him. When Peter Griffin gets fired, I just shrug my shoulders and go "eh".

The sad thing is, I want to like "Family Guy", but it won't let me. I want to laugh at it, but it's not doing anything funny. I want to watch the plots develop, but they just stumble all over themselves. I want to care about the characters, but they're all just total jerks now. And I know the show is capable of better things, but the writers just choose to take the easy way out. "Family Guy" and myself share a definite love-hate relationship - I love what it could be, but I hate what it is.
 
"Rude" applies to The Simpsons while "crude" applies to Family Guy. Bart is an unforgivable little [*expletive*], yet the stories continually reward his behavior. It's not like he's a "what not to do" example. Bart comes off as very, very cool. I remember when I was in Kindergarten (and even as far up as 3rd Grade), Bart Simpson was the standard of coolness -- a regular childhood James Dean.

And no child ought to admire Brat Simpson. I'm glad I never did. Another show I hated as a kid was Family Dog. Does anyone remember that one? Paul Dini's sick mind let loose on a little cartoon dog. It was disgusting.

Also, the difference between Peter and Homer is that Homer genuinely loves his family, and I don't get that same feeling from Peter. Peter's constant misogynistic Meg-bashing has never been funny and is one of the reasons I never wanted to watch Family Guy.
 
Like Scythemantis said above, this is an 'apples and oranges' debate which is as tired as an old rocking chair hound dog.

The Simpsons and Family Guy have nothing in common other than both being animated Fox sitcoms about families, and it's not like they're the only 2 family sitcoms, animated or not, on the planet. The Simpsons wasn't the first animated family on TV, or even the second, so I really don't get why once Family Guy came out everybody feels compelled to compare it to The Simpsons.

Both shows have their strengths, both shows have their weaknesses. I wish the fanbases of these respective shows would learn to cease and desist with these pointless comparisons and debates over which is better and learn to appreciate the merits of both series.
 
The characters on Simpsons and Family Guy not againg never bothered me personally, and quite frankly, I don't understand why that's such an issue for some people. Do you honestly believe that Family Guy and The Simpsons would be better shows if the characters got older every season? Stewie would lose any appeal that he has left if he were no longer a baby; he'd just become a gay stereotype. Bart Simpson at age 10 is a lovable rascal, but he were to suddenly become a teenager or an adult who was no less obnoxious, he would quickly become insufferable. It would be different, certainly, but different doesn't automatically mean better, or even as good.

Why is seeing animated characters get older so important? Sure, Ben 10 aged their main characters when it became Ben 10: Alien Force, but Ben 10: AF also sucked all the charm and likability out of the characters and the show in the process. I personally think that Ben 10 was better before it became a dark teenage angst fest. If you're going to blast The Simpsons and Family Guy for not aging their characters, then you'd have to do the same thing for King of the Hill, Ed, Edd 'N' Eddy, Fosters', Charlie Brown, Dennis the Menace and the many other cartoons in which the characters stayed the same age throughout their respective runs. Lots of animated shows don't age their characters, therefore, it's silly to single out Family Guy and The Simpsons for not doing so.
 
Back
Top