The Whole "Continuity" Thing Again

D

DR1980

New member
There must be something wrong with me. I just can't stop think about it. I can't get it out of mind. I guess fantasy and imagination is just ruined for me. Realism and Believilality has taken over.

The Simpsons... Again.

http://www.simpsonsfolder.com/library/continuity.html

http://www.simpsoncrazy.com/articles/continuity

We all know The Simpsons' continuity is not a virture(that's an understatment). but the series still has nods to previous episode and small arcs, which the writers of those arcticle found to be a troublsome bane.

They believe the show would be better it it didn' have not just continuity, but no character development, backstories, nor nod to anything. AT ALL. The series was, from what I read, originally meant to be a satire of typical sitcoms(makes sense).

Me? I really stopped caring, yet still wonder if this what really made The Simpsons good. Maybe Seth Macfarlnae's works suffer the same problem? Maybe all animated comedy? I mean, reading those arctles made me think that the Simpsons was basically a modern version of the classic cartooons from the 30's to the 50's. I bet there are still people that believe the continuity ruined comic books.



Really, have those methods actually worked?
 
Continuity is a limitation. That doesn't make it inherently bad. Dinosaur Comics can only ever use the same six frames. Is that a bad thing?


I agree, Simpsons was better when it had less continuity. I don't agree with the implication that continuity makes shows "less creative" or should be "kept to the soap operas".


After all, if continuity is the enemy, why stop at the "less significant details"? Bugs Bunny didn't need significant details. Bugs Bunny could live wherever the hell he wanted, have whatever back-story he wanted, interact with whoever the hell he wanted, etc. He had no limitations whatsoever. And thus he could easily last forever without getting old.


But, no. Continuity is not a problem in and of itself. Futurama, for example, has surprisingly strong continuity and makes awesome use of it. Limitations are only a problem if a writer can't handle them.
 
As long as the continuity / continuing storylines of The Simpsons doesn't get so complex that it alienates non-fans, i see no problem with it.
 
And the Character Development? They said that the best characters are the more stereotyped and less development and detailed. "The Principal and The Pauper" epsiode ruined the Skinner character for the person who wrote the article.
 
I wonder if the writer of that article realizes that The Principal and the Pauper was written specifically to mock people who complain about character developments that they don't like?

The episode is MUCH funnier once you understand that.
 
Continuity is what it is - it really all comes down to the writing. Bugs Bunny is awesome not because there's no continuity in the Loony Toons (for the most part), but because he's well characterized. Gintama has mad continuity but it doesn't take away from the mayhem. In fact, it adds to it because much of the humor is character driven. *shrugs*
 
Back
Top