Old chap, I’ve watched everything Ricky Gervais has ever produced, from way back when he was on the 11 O’Clock Show and I couldn’t stand him. Silly hyperbole aside, I do concede that a) this scenario did happen on the Ross Kemp episode of Extras, and b) Extras is definitely not his best work.
That said, since you also dislike Larry David - whom I also think is a genius - this must be merely a matter of taste and not worth pursuing, since there’s no objective measure.
Great ep. Not the best of all time, but damn funny.
And ftg switch to decafe slick. If all you want to do is decry the show, and those who think its funny, do it, and leave. No need to come back just to complain some more.
Good point, I fully agree. However, I am somewhat curious – if ftg hates Ricky Gervais, Larry David, Seinfeld (by entension); surely despises Fawlty Towers (predictable situations), Blackadder (predictable), even the Marx Brothers – what, pray tell, does he consider the height of comedy? Or maybe he just steers clear of that whole sticky quagmire…Oooh chimpanzee that!
Bart: Help me cameraman! I let you smoke a cigarette in my room!
Cameraman: That was a joint. And I have a name, it’s Doug.
Right: I was curious to see what ftg thinks is funny as well.
Also, he didn’t just come to complain some more–note he was responding to comments in the thread. He was continuing the conversation.
Ftg, I’ve never seen Curb Your Enthusiasm, but your description does not suffice to show that it is not funny. I am pretty sure it’s not so much supposed to be funny that Larry is misunderstood and messes up when trying to clarify it. It’s funny how Larry is misunderstood and messes up when trying to clarify it. In other words, what’s funny is not the broad description of the event, but rather, the experience of watching it unfold. Bad actors with bad timing, given a bad script by a bad writer, could screw up a situation like the one you describe and make it unfunny. Talented actors with good timing, given a good script by a good writer, can make a situation like the one you describe extremely funny.
“Predictibility” doesn’t automatically make something un-funny. Especially if what’s predictible is merely a very broad description of what’s going to happen.
I can predict the ending of every Aristocrats joke. That doesn’t make them unfunny.
Of course, its really good when someone comes up with something really funny which no one would ever have seen coming. It’s just not required that this be done in order for something to be funny.
As I said, I’m curious to know what you think is funny.
-FrL-
So those who thought the episode sucked are only allowed one post per thread, while those who didn’t are not limited to one? That’s an interesting interpretation of how message boards work.
Indeed. There’s a classic sketch in The Fast Show where a perpetually unfortunate character explains that there’s a hole further down the road, and knowing his luck he’ll probably fall into it. The rest of the sketch is just him walking slowly down the street - before the inevitable happens. Though written down it doesn’t sound funny at all, it’s one of the most hilarious things I’ve seen. It’s down to the quality of the actor, the script, and immaculate comic timing.
Yup. Seems easy enough eh?
Never quite understood what the motivation is with the people who just come in to these threads and just compain about the poor quality of whatever the subject is. It’s not just the Simpsons, but seemed to come up all the time in the Matrix threads. Someone starts a thread asking a plot-related question and invariably someone comes in to say that the whole thing is preposterous and the second two movies were terrible (or don’t even exist). Similarly with Star Wars – always somehow boils down to Lucas’s bowel movements or Jar Jar Binks. Don’t get me started on the Family Guy threads.
A little different in this case since we are actually discussing reactions to the particular episode. You’re fully entitled to your opinion, so you come in here and say the episode was crap, the show’s been crap for the last 6 years, and Ricky Gervais is crap.
OK. Opinion noted. Anything else? What more can you say?
Keep in mind, I’m someone who was particularly underwhelmed by the episode, considering my newfound regard for Gervais.
I felt just the opposite. I’ve quite liked this season, and this was my least favorite episode in quite some time. I didn’t know the husband was being voiced by Ricky Gervais until I saw the end credits, but I’ve never seen any of his shows, so I doubt it would make it any more funny for me if I had known that.
Some of the jokes, like his genie one, seemed like a long, pointless, unfunny waste of time.
Very definitely agree.
Pepper Mill and I tried to watch the Office one night, and couldn’t do it. We are definitely not their target audience.
If you adhere to this philosophy your time here may not be the happiest. If you (or if Jayrot) want a Simpsons 3/26 Appreciation thread, in which only glowing comments about the episode are allowed, then you’re free to start one. Otherwise, you’re just going to have to suffer along with this one and find a way to deal with the idea that the same person might actually make two (or even more) negative posts.
Chalk me up as another one who hated this episode. I’ve enjoyed every other episode I’ve seen but this one left me slack-jawed and wondering, “Huh?”
The live opening was great though.
Not because I have anything to say but just for the sake of providing one additional data point, I’ll come in and say I found this episode to be… about average. Neither particularly good nor particularly bad. If I hadn’t known ahead of time that there was a “special guest writer” I wouldn’t have suspected that there was anything special about it. I enjoyed it, and laughed at a few things, and nothing really made me wince, but it was hardly Comedy Gold. And for the record I’m aware of who Gervaise is but have never seen The Office or anything else he’s been involved in before. (Except for reading the page in Entertainment Weekly where he picked his five favorite Simpsons episodes.)
Wasn’t that sort of the whole point? Meta-joke?
Why did he hit us with it, multiple times? Is the idea that if you keep repeating an unfunny meta-joke it becomes funny? Never works for me.
That, and that his character thinks this is the way to win marge over.
I thought this was a great episode, very funny. Except at the end it fell flat a bit.
I haven’t seen 10 minutes of the British version of “The Office”. I could not figure out whose voice that was. My best guess was Mick Jagger, but the voice didn’t sound old enough, and when he sang I was sure it wasn’t Mick. Then at the ending credits I saw Ricky Gervais and thought to myself “Ok, never heard of him…”
Ohh, bugger.
Whattaya gonna do? Snakes on a plane, man. Snakes on a plane.
I had no idea who was doing the voice of the other husband–for some reason I thought it was Eddie Izzard–and I’ve never seen The Office, so I believe I came to the episode with no preconceived notions. That said, I found the episode to be consistently funny, a notch above many of the episodes of recent years. Given that I also liked the “stories with stories” episode from a couple of weeks back, I’m almost ready to say that the show is on a hot streak. I don’t know what the haters were seeing, but I’m encouraged. And I might even look into checking out a few episodes of The Office.
And that beginning sequence was awesome.