just checked out of curiosity, s6e3 is a clip show, and s9e11 is a musical clip show
post
It shows the trend but the colors make this look far more severe than the scores reflect
Yeah they should have had black as 5.x, grey as 6.x, white as 7.x, green as 8.x, and gold as 9.x
Or just use the Blizzard/rpg rarity colors for user defined groupings so that people can make their own thresholds for how to opine for whatever ratings.
For example, I typically think of each number as three categories: low-7s, mid 7s, and high 7s. A low 7 is watchable and decent, a mid 7 may be pretty good but not have a ton of truly moving content or messaging, and high 7s are like the last rating of ultimate popcorn - fantastic, but relatively intellectually empty. And as soon as you hit 8.0, to get there, it has to start having some levels of boundary-pushing of my expectations AND be very good.
So I would relate all of the 7s as like a Diablo green item rarity, maybe with high 7s being blues. High 8s maybe starts to get into yellows, and 9s are legendaries with mid and high 9s being reds or like Diablo ancients. Very low 7s and high 6s would definitely be whites, with mid and low 6s being greys. And anything under there... Probably also greys? Maybe have a gradient where the lower the rating, the more transparent it gets. 1.0 or 0.0 (whatever the lowest is) would have to still be visible, though.
And now I know SCmSTR's very arbitrary scale compared to Diablo rarerity scale colors. What a time to be alive.
Automatically coloring cells is one of the things Excel excels at. Green for the upper bound (either a static number or ~90th percentile), yellow for 50th percentile, red for lower bound (static number or 10th percentile etc.). Automatically gradients everything in between. Want it more green? Lower the upper bound. Want it more red? Raise the lower bound.
Eh, idk how it is with series, but <7 for films means not worth the time (excepting special circumstances), and 7 to 8 is okay to good.
Everyone:
Anti-vaxxers: "You're just getting vaccines to be trendy, not to protect your family and others!"
Every episode of modern Simpsons:
"[First name] [Last name]! [Pronoun]'s the best [occupation] in all of [country]."
- Lisa Simpson, directly to the audience.
"That's right, Lisa. I'm here to [ad for a song/book/movie/space-nazi]."
- [First name] [Last name].
2026 and they're still frothing at the mouth over masks and vaccinations.
These are the people who constantly whined about "NPCs" just following directions without thought, showing the same line of dialogue 6 years on lol
My father sill to this day says it was a "muslification attempt", "trying to force burkas in the whole population".
He has two health-related degrees.
Yeah I thought I was supposed to be dead from sudden onset Bill Gates microchip 5g disease by now because I'm vaccinated. But instead I'm still reading their dumb posts on the Internet.
I have those in my family.
Those who got vaccinated will be dying any day now. /s
Was there a major staff change for season 9? That's when it appears to have markedly declined.
Yeah, the show was never the same after Bill Oakley and Josh Weinstein left to make Mission Hill in the late 90s. Additionally, Futurama became a primary though to people like Groening so Simpsons suffered stagnation majorly.
I've literally never heard of mission hill. Sounds like they should have stayed on The Simpsons
Can't blame them for wanting to make their own thing, and they did a pretty good job (even if the TV stations kind of fucked them over by putting them on some bad timeslots.) Overall, I'm glad the show exists.
Art director for Mission Hill went on to work as a director for Disney (also one of the first women to work as a sole-director at Disney, coincidentally) and Bill Oakley / Josh Weinstein continued to work as writers, so I think it worked out for most parties involved in the production.
Mission Hill is good, but had a very short run. I didn't know it when it first aired, but watched it when it was part of Cartoon Network's "Adult Swim" block. It's about a naive dork teenager, Kevin, moving in with his lazy older brother Andy, in the city. The art style is unique, vividly colored and eye-catching. Two of the characters are an elderly gay couple, treated like normal people (which wasn't common at the time the show was made.) And of course, being written by Bill Oakley and Josh Weinstein, it's pretty funny.
I'd say it's worth a watch. It's only 13 episodes long, so it's easy to binge.
Coincidentally, that happened to be around when the last year of Gen X graduated high school, 1997-98-ish. The internet actually started to become more of “a thing” (edit: as well as computer ownership and literacy, generally), and cell phones started to become smaller and cheaper and more ubiquitous.
Cable television had also become much more widespread and popular. Edit: so did video game consoles.
It might be connected to a cultural shift.
It might be connected to a cultural shift.
If that's related, it's because the writers decided to address the cultural shift by making their jokes increasingly hokey and forced. The shift is there in the content.This isn't just a change in audience perception.
I was suggesting that it was not just a change in content, but of audience, too. The kids who grew up watching The Simpsons were now off to college, and our tastes had changed. We had better things to do than sit in front of the TV on Sunday nights to catch the latest episode.
Seasons 3-8 are generally considered "golden age" simpsons. Theres a lull for a few seasons where it gets very patchy, then it kinda enters a long silver age where episodes are fairly consistently good, with few poor ones and even fewer universally agreed upon greats.
Many fans completely ignore 9+. Others argue where sliver age begins.
The ratings only show the golden age and then slowly declining popularity, because popularity is only ever a loose proxy for quality.
Can't tell if they're mouthbreathing because they're dumb, or because of COVID.
Season 23 episode 22: Rating 3.9: Lisa Goes Gaga: Lisa helps Lady Gaga and learns the importance of being yourself.
Season 30 episode 18: Rating 4.6: Bart vs. Itchy and Scratchy: Krusty releases an all-female reboot of Itchy and Scratchy
We can guess at why those two got the lowest ratings of the entire series.
I could guess, but why don't you just go ahead and say it? I'm not sure what you're implying, it could be anything.
I'd say the Gaga was for pandering to fans of a celebrity to get them to watch. Making a Gaga centric episode at the height of Gaga's popularity is pandering. As compared to having a few lines by George Harrison or Paul McCartney which were at their height of popularity 20 years earlier. When contemporary celebrities were used like Smashing Pumpkins is was as a cameo, not the focus of the entire episode.
The all woman Itchy Scratchy episode would be panned because it's punching down on the feminist movie remakes.
it's punching down on the feminist movie remakes.
Is that feminist? Giving women a recycled story with a history and a ton of baggage instead of a universe thats really theirs? You're setting them up to never be their own thing, always compared to the original.
See, ladies? We made movies for you but no one liked them...obviously because of misogyny, not because they were obvious and soulless cash grabs.
It's corporate feminism.
That's the other thing. Take a beloved franchise, with expectations through the roof. Hire the laziest writers you can find, making sure none of them understand what people connected with in the source material. Market it as "look, the movie you loved, but with vaginas now!"
I'm convinced ghostbusters 2016 was created solely to give ammo to chuds.
I'm too familiar with internet anonymity to truly believe this but I wouldn't be surprised if the ghostbusters backlash was started by the studio.
There's no way they didn't know it was bad...but they already paid for it and would get shit for canning it. So they made it seem like the release was sabotaged by the patriarchy.
Corporations are ALL about dividing and conquering.
You don't hire the writers because they're lazy, you hire them because they're cheap and you want to minimise production costs because there are women in the film so you're not expecting to sell any tickets except to people who've fallen for the social media marketing campaign you ran that said anyone who doesn't watch the film is a misogynist. It's just classic race-to-the-bottom profit seeking.
They're not as good as the old ones by a lot, admittedly they're frequently pretty bad but I still kind of feel like the treehouse of horror episodes tend to have at least one passable story and are usually the highlight of the season.
I remember how horrifying the first Treehouse of Horror was with checks notes an Edgar Allen Poe rendition of The Raven.
S6e3 was a clip show, s9e11 was a musical clip show.
Years ago I marathoned seasons 1 through 13 while enduring benzo withdrawals. I can absolutely confirm that these ratings are accurate.
The Simpson stopped making stories about the family and started making episodes where every week was a new celebrity coming to Springfield. Then they did some odd reboot thing where now they’re just retelling stories with a modern look? It’s so weird. The show should have ended with the movie IMO
Are they audience ratings? If so the episode quality is probably even lower towards the end as some audiences will have dropped out so you're only including the data of folk who stuck with it.
As someone who grew up with the Simpsons and also pretty recently watched the first 29 seasons again, the first 9 seasons we definitely the best seasons. They're timeless. The show became too afraid to be offensive.
I'm so old I was an adult when I saw the very first shorts on Tracy Ullman.
I was shocked when they hit 20 years. Now, I'm just baffled. Why are people still watching? I can only guess, habit?
The last thing I watched was part of the first movie. Since I had, coincidently, just read Under the Dome (which King claims was not born from the movie), I didn't even finish the movie.
This is consistent with my idea (which I've long had) that there was yet another quality drop around the time they switched to HD. The episodes from the 2000s are mostly still perfectly watchable IMHO, the ones from the 2010s much less so and I don't think I've ever watched a Simpsons episode from the 2020s, so can't say anything about that.
top 75 comments