Yup, it reminds me that “stupid, ignorant” (I prefer “uncomplicated” myself) Americans are just like “stupid, ignorant” folk everywhere - human.
That goes for Aussie “Ockers”, “Essex man” here in the UK and no doubt for whatever the Finnish equivalent is.
In fact, if the Martians invaded, I’d bet there’d be at least one saucer with a gun-rack
I like reading comments by jehovah68 for the same reasons articulated by Reverse.
Someone has already corrected my misapprehension on that.
Look, for the record, I do not hate the show, or think it’s stupid, or anything like that.
I simply do not find it funny, the sense of humour it utilises does not appeal to me. I also do not think it needed to be in animated form to work at its fundamental level. It could’ve easily have been live action, with few changes.
That’s all.
Fair enough.
Psst. kmg365, a moment of your time, please. You know where, right?
Perhaps those “few changes” are precisely why they made it a cartoon in the first place. My question to you is, why shouldn’t it be animated? How would the show work better if it were live action?
Hey.
jehovah68.
Cut it out.
Now.
It’s not that it’d work better. It’s just that I personally see animation as a tool to be utilised in a more dynamic way - there are things you can do with animation that you can’t do easily, or at all, with live action (Warner Brothers-type slapstick, Disney-type fantasy, Simpsons-type parody, Anime-type spectacle). It seems a shame to take a rather standard sitcom premise and put it in animation when it didn’t need to be, really.
It’s a bit of a waste of animator talent, having to draw something that I personally think looks kind of ordinary. And all the humour, the characterisation, the locations, could be easily done with live action, really. Sure it’d be a little bit different in places, but if it had never been animated in the first place, you wouldn’t’ve known that. And then if it subsequently got out that it was originally intended to be animated, you’d quite likely say “Hell, how could they get the amazing expressions that Lead Actor #1 does into a cartoon? It’d look so lame! Animation would never do it justice!” or something.
[Much unseemly snickering.] I’m sorry, I’m still taking off on the idea of the flying saucer with the gun rack. Thank you, Cap. Hey, d’you think this is gonna be like one of those things in “Contact” where the aliens land and go, “Take us to your Mega-Lo-Mart, we are out of hollowpoints”?
“See, where y’all just see green, scaly skin and deadly death-rays, I see a potential propane sale”
I guess this is where I’m having trouble following your logic, because I don’t see animation as a tool, I see it as an artform. And to say that a subject shouldn’t be tackled in one artform because it would be better or easier to do it in another artform seems bizarre to me. I still don’t see how “shame” enters into it. It’s not like animation is some sort of limited resource that is wasted on King of the Hill when it could be better spent on some other animated project. Quite the reverse, actually, because KotH is a succesful, adult-oriented cartoon, it will be easier in the future for adult-oriented cartoons to get greenlit.
The animators, including the guy who created the show, would seem to disagree. Actually, I suspect that animating KotH is significantly harder than animating Galaxy Space Robot Explosion, or some similar “spectacle” cartoon. Animating spaceships blowing up is not, I think, particularly difficult. Making a cartoon that relies totally and absolutely on creating compelling and sympathetic characters is a far more interesting trick.
And you know this how, exactly? I thought you didn’t watch the show.
No, I’m fairly certain that I would not.
Well, excuse me for expressing an opinion.
No, no. Excuse me for trying to debate your opinion. Silly of me to go and do something like that, here on this board dedicated to debate. Don’t know what I was thinking, won’t happen again.
From Melbourne, Australia and although I have only seen a few episodes I really enjoy KOTH.
I’m 28.
Just for the record - someone mentioned that people like KOTH for the same reasons people liked Seinfeld. Maybe I am an anomally but I can not stand Seinfeld, I find the show frustrating and annoying to watch.
New Jersey-born, transplanted Californian here.
I quite liked the first season, but have grown tired of the characters. Peggy in particular - I can’t STAND her ignorant-but-snooty-and cruel manner. She’s not funny, just infuriating to me!
Too often, though, I just turn it off out of boredom these days.
hrh
Relax, Miller and GuanoLad. Shake hands and I’ll buy us all a round of drinks. 
Animation gives the creator a great deal more lattitude in creating new locations, traveling scenes and unique camera angles. Traditional sit-coms are limited to established sets and standard shots from the three cameras. Obviously there are occasional exceptions to this rule depending on the show’s success and corresponding budget. Sit-coms really are not considered a director’s medium for this reason. Animators also use standard background pieces, but they have much more freedom of vision. If they use it to its utmost is up to your judgement.
Just my $.02.
For the record, I asked some animators what they think of King of the Hill.
Interesting cite, GuanoLad. Although I only say that since it supports my argument about as much as it supports yours.
I’m 24, born and raised and living in Ohio. I Love KOTH. I don’t know any Texans.