I’ve just found this article about Futurama on The Independent, a UK newspaper. It comments on the changes in Futurama reflecting the changes in society in general.

    • hoodatninja@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      41
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      So I understand what you are saying, but as somebody who has watched way too much Futurama then he would ever care to admit, I feel the need to make an important distinction about it that I think might help frame the objective of the article better.

      Futurama is generally not a pop-culture/current events show. Any references they make to pop-culture are generally dated (intentionally)/or semi-timeless. Some episodes are the exception, like Proposition Infinity and Eye-Phone (whatever the ep is called), but these are not the norm and definitely don’t happen with as much frequency as you’d see in shows like The Simpsons or South Park. It’s part of what makes Futurama so damn good. What I find the show reflects over time is values changing. The way they stop making being gay a joke over time. The way they stop using masculinity as a joke (unless there’s a particular intent with it/commentary), things like that. The relationships between characters evolve and morph and show how society has changed. The things that bother them, even.

      I’m on a plane about to take off so I need to stop there. But I think if you decouple the idea that Futurama is a current events/current pop culture show, which if you look at all of the episodes you will see is rarely the case, I think it will make the article seem less lazy and more thoughtful than it originally seemed. That being said I admit it emphasizes the current events episodes too much. But their observation about “The Gender Bender” for instance is more in line with what I’m saying.

        • thorbot@lemmy.world
          cake
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          South Park was not created to be “intentionally shitty” so that it can have “rapid turnaround”. That’s just patently false. It was like that because it was created by hand by Matt and Trey. And the aesthetic stuck. The fast turnaround was a result of the easy-to-make animation style.

      • some_guy@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        Before it was revived it was not a pop culture show at all.

        There’s nothing fascinating about it since the first revival.

        • hoodatninja@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          11 months ago

          Meh I thought they found their sea legs pretty well after a few swings and misses in the first revived season (7?) and I liked where it landed. Some strong episodes I really enjoyed. But I get it’s not for everyone!