Killing off Susan UNACCEPTABLE
Ted Kowal
Last night's show (MAY 16) was good. George was hilarious as he casually
lit up a cigarette to intentionally annoy Susan. And the pre-nup
confrontation scene was a classic not-fully-thought-out scheme hatched
by Kramer.
But killing off Susan to free George from marriage was unacceptable.
Killing off an established, likeable character in a comedy is just not
done. This is not Melrose. If the actress playing Susan wanted off the
show (who would want to leave a frequently No. 1 rated show?) or if the
producers wanted her off, there are so many other alternatives to
writing her off the show gradually or immediately.
For instance, why not have George catch her in a compromising lesbian
situation? After a brief heart-to-heart, they go their separate ways.
This would further George's reputation as a guy who turns women to
lesbianism. It also would provide grist for future material if Susan
were to make occasional appearances as the ex-fiancee-turned-lesbian.
Finally, it would solve the scripting problem of George separating away
from Jerry via marriage in Westchester.
The writers blew it by killing off Susan, even if the death was vaguely
comic by the goofy face she made before croaking.
And, okay, I admit it, I found Susan attractive...
Ted
Jeff Preloznik
Seinfeld is great because they continue to do things that nobody would
every dare to do. Susan was a babe but....life goes on.
Anil Prasad
>But killing off Susan to free George from marriage was unacceptable.
>Killing off an established, likeable character in a comedy is just not
>done. This is not Melrose. If the actress playing Susan wanted off the
>show (who would want to leave a frequently No. 1 rated show?) or if the
>producers wanted her off, there are so many other alternatives to
>writing her off the show gradually or immediately.
>The writers blew it by killing off Susan, even if the death was vaguely
I can't believe I'm jumping into this, but I have to agree.
The ending of the episode was PROFOUNDLY tacky, in poor taste, and
more importantly -- an example of awful, lazy writing. If this is
the sort of crap we can expect from the show next year, then yes,
perhaps it's about time the show disappears...
BTW, I'm not offended by the show -- just very disappointed that the
writing is getting as bad as it is.
Anil
Steve Simmons
> But killing off Susan to free George from marriage was unacceptable.
> Killing off an established, likeable character in a comedy is just not
> done
I think that is the idea....
Comedy is based on risks.... Seinfeld takes chances (are you a master
of your domain).
This one probably was a bad risk; however, everyone knew something
would go wrong before the wedding.... Obviously, no one predicted the
death of Susan.
Thank you.
Steve Simmons
Andrea Moro
On 17 May 1996 12:17:38 GMT, Ted Kowal (tko...@gte.com) wrote:
>...
>But killing off Susan to free George from marriage was unacceptable.
>Killing off an established, likeable character in a comedy is just not
Right. I'm not sure I will be able to watch Seifeld the same way I did
before.
Andrea
Peter Ryan
>
>But killing off Susan to free George from marriage was unacceptable.
This "plot" (?) was Seinfeld at it's absolute nadir - could not
believe such a stupid ending.....
~P
GKline
In article <4nhqp3$7...@ceylon.gte.com>, tko...@gte.com says...
>Last night's show (MAY 16) was good. George was hilarious as he casually
>lit up a cigarette to intentionally annoy Susan. And the pre-nup
>confrontation scene was a classic not-fully-thought-out scheme hatched
>by Kramer.
The thing which bothered about me with the pre-nup, is how Susan reacted. I
didn't get the feeling she was making fun of George, she was patronizing and
flippant about it. I don't feel this in line with someone who is "in love" and
on the verge of marriage. What the hell is her motive in marrying George then?
Oh well, moot point. She's dead, now.
>But killing off Susan to free George from marriage was unacceptable.
>Killing off an established, likeable character in a comedy is just not
>done. This is not Melrose. If the actress playing Susan wanted off the
>show (who would want to leave a frequently No. 1 rated show?) or if the
>producers wanted her off, there are so many other alternatives to
>writing her off the show gradually or immediately.
I agree. No one dies from licking envelopes. Besides, she was somewhat of a
bright person--but who the hell licks 200 envelopes? You use a small sponge
and a saucer of water! Out of character, IMHO.
>For instance, why not have George catch her in a compromising lesbian
>situation? After a brief heart-to-heart, they go their separate ways.
>This would further George's reputation as a guy who turns women to
>lesbianism. It also would provide grist for future material if Susan
>were to make occasional appearances as the ex-fiancee-turned-lesbian.
>Finally, it would solve the scripting problem of George separating away
>from Jerry via marriage in Westchester.
This would have been funny! Why couldn't the writers see such a great
opportunity??
>And, okay, I admit it, I found Susan attractive...
Really? With that whiny voice and morbid doll collection? <g>
-Gary K.
Christian Meglio
In <4nhqp3$7...@ceylon.gte.com> Ted Kowal <tko...@gte.com> writes:
<SNIP>
>For instance, why not have George catch her in a compromising lesbian
>situation? After a brief heart-to-heart, they go their separate ways.
>This would further George's reputation as a guy who turns women to
>lesbianism.
I like that idea - besides, she did turn to lesbianism before (after
she and George had broke-up - that is why he bacame attracted to her
again - remember>)
Even better - Jerry's new girlfriend could have been used better. i.e.
Jerry realizes that HE also made a mistake in proposing to JS. Both he
and George wonder how they will EVER get out if this situation. They
(Jerry and George) return to George and Susans apartment, only to find
both fiancees in bed with each other - and they girls decide to dump
the guys - problem solved.
Just another thought
Mark London
In a previous article, sim...@bnr.ca (Steve Simmons) wrote:
->> But killing off Susan to free George from marriage was unacceptable.
->> Killing off an established, likeable character in a comedy is just not
->> done
->Comedy is based on risks.... Seinfeld takes chances (are you a master
->of your domain).
->This one probably was a bad risk; however, everyone knew something
->would go wrong before the wedding.... Obviously, no one predicted the
->death of Susan
You people are all hyprocrites. You watch a show where basically selfish and
egotistical people ridicule each other and other people, and where sometimes
people arephysically injured for comedy sake, but when something serious
occurs, you cry foul. Surprise! These people aren't real! Oh yeah, it's all
right that characters in other shows die when they leave the show, but those
other shows are "serious" shows or the characters died for a good cause.
Yeah, right. Well, this person's death was actually more real life. People
who don't deserve to die often die for no good reason. That is real life
folks. This was black comedy at it's worst, or best, which ever way you want
to look at it. And it's not the first time. Does anyone remember on Northern
Exposure when Maggie's boyfriend gets killed by a fallen satellite? Did
anyone complain when people made jokes and laughed at his funeral? Take a
look at yourselves. You people care more about a fictional character dying
than the atrocities that occur daily in real life.
Mark London
M...@PFC.MIT.EDU
Adam #15
Whoa! Are we going a little too far here? "unacceptable"?!? Hey! if you don't like
what happens in the show, I've got the perfect remedey: don't watch the show! And
try to remember, it's only fiction! No one really got hurt (I *hope* I don't
have to explain this to any of you out there). And for all you who said "it
wasn't funny", I thought it was hillarious! Haven't you ever heard of black comedy?
If you want to appreciate morbid, FICTIONAL, humour, go out and rent the movie
_Heathers_ or even _Pulp Fiction_ then re-watch that episode and knock yourself out
laughing...
- Adam
Eldon Greenberg
In <4ni0cu$j...@crchh327.rich.bnr.ca> sim...@bnr.ca (Steve Simmons)
writes:
>
>> But killing off Susan to free George from marriage was unacceptable.
>> Killing off an established, likeable character in a comedy is just
not
>> done
>
>
>I think that is the idea....
>
>Comedy is based on risks.... Seinfeld takes chances (are you a master
>of your domain).
>
>This one probably was a bad risk; however, everyone knew something
>would go wrong before the wedding.... Obviously, no one predicted the
>death of Susan.
>
>Thank you.
>
> Steve Simmons
>
I have seen evey Seinfeld, and every one was completely hilarious,
all but the latest one (May 16), Seinfeld way overstepped its bounds.
Sure it has done it before, but in a light hearted way, but having
Susan die was completely offensive. All the other ways of losing Susan
were fine.(ie when she became a lesbian) but now to kill her, and
supposed to make it a joke.
Dave Sheen
I think the only funny part to come out of Susan's death, was when
George phones Marisa Tomei for a date, like the day after Susan dies.
________________________________________________
Dave Sheen <dsh...@direct.ca>
[http://mypage.direct.ca/d/dsheen]
________________________________________
"They who have put out the peoples eyes
reproach them of their blindnesse"
-- John Milton, 1642
_____________________________________________________
Bart L. Grossman
I think they wanted to toss off all excess baggage for the final year.
Bart L. Grossman
Maybe that is why we don't have commercially feasible fusion yet. They
are all pondering the complexities of Seinfeld.
Mitchell Virchick P225
In article <4nhqp3$7...@ceylon.gte.com>, Ted Kowal <tko...@gte.com> writes:
|> But killing off Susan to free George from marriage was unacceptable.
|> Killing off an established, likeable character in a comedy is just not
|> done. This is not Melrose.
Whaddaya mean, not Melrose? They all hang around the same places, and they're all pretty shallow. The only difference is that they aren't quite so malevolent, and Seinfeld is intentionally funny, and it isn't Aaron Spelling fascist bullshit. So they killed off a character with a freak death. It's TV, not real life. Try to keep them separate.
|> For instance, why not have George catch her in a compromising lesbian
|> situation? After a brief heart-to-heart, they go their separate ways.
|> This would further George's reputation as a guy who turns women to
|> lesbianism.
I'm glad you're not the writer. You don't exactly know the characters, do you? George has a reputation for turning women into lesbians? I'm afraid you're confusing a throwaway line with a character trait.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mitchell Virchick "Now is the time for all
mvi...@bnr.ca good men to come to the
Nortel-35 Davis aid of their party."
Kirk Knutson
The thing that irks me is George didn't even
try for "the pick".
Michelle Darrah
> You people are all hyprocrites. You watch a show where basically selfish and
> egotistical people ridicule each other and other people, and where sometimes
> people arephysically injured for comedy sake, but when something serious
> occurs, you cry foul. Surprise! These people aren't real! Oh yeah, it's all
> right that characters in other shows die when they leave the show, but those
> other shows are "serious" shows or the characters died for a good cause.
> Yeah, right. Well, this person's death was actually more real life. People
> who don't deserve to die often die for no good reason. That is real life
> folks. This was black comedy at it's worst, or best, which ever way you want
> to look at it. And it's not the first time. Does anyone remember on Northern
> Exposure when Maggie's boyfriend gets killed by a fallen satellite? Did
> anyone complain when people made jokes and laughed at his funeral? Take a
> look at yourselves. You people care more about a fictional character dying
> than the atrocities that occur daily in real life.
>
> Mark London
> M...@PFC.MIT.EDU
Hey, I have an idea! Instead of having a nice little discussion about the
show, let's call each other names!
Please. You don't know any of us or what we care about. We didn't like
the show, we're entitled to say so.
Michelle
KOERBER DUNCAN DANIEL
In article <4nhqp3$7...@ceylon.gte.com>, Ted Kowal <tko...@gte.com> wrote:
>For instance, why not have George catch her in a compromising lesbian
>situation? After a brief heart-to-heart, they go their separate ways.
>This would further George's reputation as a guy who turns women to
>were to make occasional appearances as the ex-fiancee-turned-lesbian.
>Finally, it would solve the scripting problem of George separating away
>from Jerry via marriage in Westchester.
Yeah, do that and everybody would say the writers couldn't think of
anything better to write about and were just recycling old ideas.
The whole turning-women-to-lesbianism story was good the first time
around but I think we had enough of it.
>The writers blew it by killing off Susan, even if the death was vaguely
>comic by the goofy face she made before croaking.
I really didn't think Susan contributed much to the show. George's
reactions to Susan were what made their relationship interesting.
It could have been any actress playing that part.. Give credit to
Alexander for that..
--
/|Duncan Koerber "...pigs, too frequent at our tables, ... are
||Erindale College no way comparable in taste or magnificence to a
\|University of Toronto well-grown fat, yearling child..." - Swift
Mark E. Bye
I agree... Watching the end of last night's show left me with a "funny"
feeling... and I don't mean "humorous". I had read some of the "teasers"
here in this group that predicted killing off Susan with the toxic glue,
but NEVER did I think the writers would do something THAT dumb!
Chris and Angela Miner
On 17 May 1996 14:35:26 GMT, elm...@ssc.sas.upenn.edu (Andrea Moro)
wrote:
>>...
>>But killing off Susan to free George from marriage was unacceptable.
>>Killing off an established, likeable character in a comedy is just not
>>done. This is not Melrose.
>
>Right. I'm not sure I will be able to watch Seifeld the same way I did
>before.
>
>
>Andrea
I totally agree. I mean, this is death here. I woman dies and George
was totally flip about the whole thing. It really put a bad taste in
my mouth (no pun intended). I think killing her sucked and I think
they way they handled it was totally insensitive. NBC, Seinfeld,
Jerry, you guys really SUCK for last nights show. I'm sickened.
Chris Miner
(teetering on being an ex-fan)
Brad Lips
cmi...@cougarnet.byu.edu (Chris and Angela Miner) wrote:
>
>On 17 May 1996 14:35:26 GMT, elm...@ssc.sas.upenn.edu (Andrea Moro)
>wrote:
>>>Killing off an established, likeable character in a comedy is just not
>>>done. This is not Melrose.
>>
>>Right. I'm not sure I will be able to watch Seifeld the same way I did
>>before.
>>Andrea
>
>I totally agree. I mean, this is death here. I woman dies and George
>was totally flip about the whole thing. It really put a bad taste in
>my mouth (no pun intended). I think killing her sucked and I think
>they way they handled it was totally insensitive. NBC, Seinfeld,
>Jerry, you guys really SUCK for last nights show. I'm sickened.
>Chris Miner
>(teetering on being an ex-fan)
My gawd I don't believe this... This show is NOT a documentary. It is
not a public service announcement! (Can you even imagine if, at the end
of the show, the actress playing Susan came out and said, "Each year, 10,
000 brides-to-be die from toxic glue poisoning. Protect yourself and
have all of your invitations tested at the lab before you seal them...
The more you know..." Putrid.) The show is a FREAKIN COMEDY, it's a
JOKE, it's absolutely ludicrous that anyone with a sense of humor would
get offended by this...
My favorite person in the world died and for months afterwards, I didn't
find death jokes funny -- but I didn't take them personally, and I didn't
fully lose my sense of humor. *Sheesh*
Jennifer!
________________
So shines a good deed in a weary world
N8TWING
I dont object to black comedy (LOVED Heathers and Pulp Fiction). But this
extreme black comedy (in the season finale) is not the tone of your usual
Seinfeld. I think they went too far. Worse, it wasnt funny enough to
forgive so easily. All this season built up to this ep... and many feel
disappointed... (including me)
JCS21212
I totally agree. I'm done with Seinfeld for good. Let them all rot in
Hades and be eaten by maggots. No television moment even remotely
compares with this. I hope I'm in a position one day to hurt the Seinfeld
staff as much as this shocked and devastated me.
"Don't you worry Mr. Simpson, I've argued in front of every judge in this
state. Often as a lawyer."
Lionel Hutz
GKline
In article <4nisb5$6...@news.acns.nwu.edu>, knu...@ossenu.astro.nwu.edu says...
>The thing that irks me is George didn't even try for "the pick".
Nah. Wouldn't have phased her. He tried smoking, that didn't do it. He tried
a pre-nup, she pointed out how it would be in her favor and laughed at him. He
could've said "Susan, the last time I got married, I became impotent." And her
reply would've been "Well, you haven't been such a great lover anyway! I'll
live with it..." He could've inflicted a flesh wound, she would've shrugged it
off. Pretty ridiculous, eh?
Humor is at it's best when the context is very relatable. If people act phony
because of bad writing or direction, it loses something. There has to be SOME
degree of plausibility or at least an explanation of something to keep the
humor fresh and alive. I don't think we were shown WHY Susan wanted to marry
George. But from what we've been shown of her character in the past, it
doesn't make sense for her to have stayed with George, unless there was some
extenuating circumstance that was kept from us. Of course, now we'll never
know...
-Gary K.
GKline
In article <319D34...@coredp.com>, ad...@coredp.com says...
>Whoa! Are we going a little too far here? "unacceptable"?!? Hey! if you don't like
>what happens in the show, I've got the perfect remedey: don't watch the show! And
>try to remember, it's only fiction! No one really got hurt (I *hope* I don't
>have to explain this to any of you out there). And for all you who said "it
>wasn't funny", I thought it was hillarious! Haven't you ever heard of black comedy?
>If you want to appreciate morbid, FICTIONAL, humour, go out and rent the movie
>_Heathers_ or even _Pulp Fiction_ then re-watch that episode and knock yourself out
>laughing...
Every show has it's boundaries. It gets slowly established over time, with each
succeeding episode. I think most everyone here had gotten a "sense" of what
Seinfeld is all about. This killing off of Susan and the way George reacted,
was not in concert with the show. It's one thing to do something unexpected,
it's another do something that goes against the grain to the point where the
humor is lost. Judging by the majority of postings against Susan being killed,
I think what I've said speaks for most of us.
-Gary K.
Ned Canepa
Ad> Subject: Susan's death unacceptable?!?
Ad>
Ad> Whoa! Are we going a little too far here? "unacceptable"?!? Hey! if
Ad> you don't l ike
Ad> what happens in the show, I've got the perfect remedey: don't watch
Ad> the show! A nd
Ad> try to remember, it's only fiction! No one really got hurt (I *hope* I
I am one who does not like killing of Susan.
Yes I KNOW it's fiction, I liked the character
being in the show, nothing more ,nothing less.
... "I don't know how you guys walk around with those things!" ..Elaine
___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.12
Mr David L. Campbell
What gets me are the more-sophisticated-than-thou crowd who infer that
people who don't find death amusing are somehow weaker than they are.
Generally, I have a lot more respect for sensitive people than I do for
people who boast that they can't be offended by anything.
What it all boils down to is this...those of us who didn't like the
episode felt CHEATED. Everyone has felt that way! Whether it was a play, a
book, a movie or a TV show, everyone has felt cheated by an ending that
was either poorly conceived or gratuitiously manipulative (hello, David
Lynch!). Are there really people who will accept any sort of lame ending?
I personally salute those who have posted messages to say, "This plot was
not Seinfeld-worthy!"
Right now, I can think of a few movies that were excellent until the
expected climax fizzled--"Bringing Up Baby", "No Way Out" (did Kevin
Costner come up with that stupid ending himself?) "Terminator 2" (nothing
else had killed the other terminator--why did that last way do the trick?)
And of course, on TV, that ridiculous "St. Elsewhere" bit about the
autistic child.
EJM
In article <4nle9q$i...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, jcs2...@aol.com (JCS21212)
wrote:
-------
This has GOT to be a put on.
JDennis702
It was completely heinous, morally unacceptable, and probably the nadir of
television sitcoms. Just compare it with other TV deaths, or even other
deaths on Seinfeld. I wouldn't say that I'm devastated, however.
JCS21212
<This has GOT to be a put on.>
Its not.
Clara Russo
In article <319d35ff....@news.byu.edu>, cmi...@cougarnet.byu.edu
(Chris and Angela Miner) wrote:
> On 17 May 1996 14:35:26 GMT, elm...@ssc.sas.upenn.edu (Andrea Moro)
> wrote:
> >>But killing off Susan to free George from marriage was unacceptable.
> >>Killing off an established, likeable character in a comedy is just not
> >>done. This is not Melrose.
> >
> >Right. I'm not sure I will be able to watch Seifeld the same way I did
> >before.
> >
> >Andrea
> I totally agree. I mean, this is death here. I woman dies and George
> was totally flip about the whole thing. It really put a bad taste in
> my mouth (no pun intended). I think killing her sucked and I think
> they way they handled it was totally insensitive. NBC, Seinfeld,
> Jerry, you guys really SUCK for last nights show. I'm sickened.
> Chris Miner
> (teetering on being an ex-fan)
Hey, folks, lighten up. This wasn't REAL! It's just a sitcom. I thought
it was great.
Clara
John Wooten
>In article <319d35ff....@news.byu.edu>, cmi...@cougarnet.byu.edu
>> (teetering on being an ex-fan)
Let me help you out and give you a push.
One would think that Seinfeld fans would possess a sense of humor...the
attitude of some of you folks lately leaves me speechless. What, did you
think this was "Sisters" or something?
John
"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is putting up with all the idiots in the world."--Calvin
JCS21212
<One would think that Seinfeld fans would possess a sense of humor...the
attitude of some of you folks lately leaves me speechless. What, did you
think this was "Sisters" or something?>
Actually the attitude of the set of folks you belong to makes me sick and
leaves me disgusted. Seinfeld has a built a reputation by being a funny,
clever, show about nothing where little changes and you can watch it and
get away from serious issues. The season finale's ending violated each
one of those rules. It wasn't funny. It was stupid. It was about a
serious issue and it shocked in a negative way. I still can't believe
that it happened. And in response to your last point, I thought I was
watching Seinfeld, but apparently I was wrong.
John Wooten
In article <4no9up$e...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, jcs2...@aol.com (JCS21212) wrote:
><One would think that Seinfeld fans would possess a sense of humor...the
>attitude of some of you folks lately leaves me speechless. What, did you
>think this was "Sisters" or something?>
>
>Actually the attitude of the set of folks you belong to makes me sick and
>leaves me disgusted. Seinfeld has a built a reputation by being a funny,
That's your opinion. BTW, nice ta meet ya Mr. Critic Man
>clever, show about nothing where little changes and you can watch it and
>get away from serious issues. The season finale's ending violated each
Actually, the only people making anything serious out of anything that
happened on the finale are some of the people on this group. You think
getting George out of the wedding by having the fiance lick cheap envelopes
that he picked out is serious?
>one of those rules. It wasn't funny. It was stupid. It was about a
>serious issue and it shocked in a negative way. I still can't believe
These are all *your* opinions. Other people feel differently, and as I
believe, that's still allowed.
>that it happened. And in response to your last point, I thought I was
>watching Seinfeld, but apparently I was wrong.
Maybe you shouldn't watch it if you dislike it so much. A comedy can't be a
comedy if it expects *everyone* to laugh at *every* joke. So you didn't
find it funny? I did. Ain't life grand?
If you piss and moan about how bad the show is, why watch it? if you like the
way it was....syndication!
Of course, then you wouldn't get to bless us with your lovely attitude.
Love,
john
SMM
GKline (gkl...@symantec.com) wrote:
: In article <319D34...@coredp.com>, ad...@coredp.com says...
:
: >Whoa! Are we going a little too far here? "unacceptable"?!? Hey! if you don't like
: >what happens in the show, I've got the perfect remedey: don't watch the show! And
: >try to remember, it's only fiction! No one really got hurt (I *hope* I don't
: >have to explain this to any of you out there). And for all you who said "it
: >wasn't funny", I thought it was hillarious! Haven't you ever heard of black comedy?
: >If you want to appreciate morbid, FICTIONAL, humour, go out and rent the movie
: >_Heathers_ or even _Pulp Fiction_ then re-watch that episode and knock yourself out
: >laughing...
I am actually a big fan of black comedy when it is done right (as in pulp
fiction, Fargo, etc..); I think that it takes extreme skill and
creativity to
pull it off, however. If Susan's death was supposed to be an instance of
black comedy, I dont think that the writers pulled it off very well...I
didnt think that Susan's death was funny at all; it didnt even seem like
a stale joke, to me it was just plain morbid; and a really dumb way to
end a season, much less a show. Susan's death just seemd inconsistent
with the way things normally "flow" on the show; I guess I mean it just
wasnt "Seinfeld-like" did anyone else get this impression?; anyways, I
thought
that this whole season in general was weaker than the previous ones; I
only hope that next season will be good...
I guess we'll just have to wait and see...
SMM (a HUGE fan of Seinfeld!)
Mr David L. Campbell
woot...@osu.edu (John Wooten) wrote:
>
>One would think that Seinfeld fans would possess a sense of humor...the
>attitude of some of you folks lately leaves me speechless. What, did you
>think this was "Sisters" or something?
>>
>>
>
Why don't you snobs GET IT? It isn't that upset viewers like myself don't
have a sense of humor. We just all felt CHEATED by the way things turned
out. (I explained this in detail in an earlier post.) I'm sure fans of
dark humor like yourself would have felt cheated if George actually grew
hair, married Susan and spun-off into a "Mad About You" type show...RIGHT?
You'd be hopping mad, flaming folks left and right who'd be thrilled to
see little Georgie happy at last. That isn't the George you know...you
wanted Independent George, not Happily Domestic George...RIGHT?
HELLO? Am I getting through to you? Or does the Dark Sense Of Humor
package require the removal of the empathy component before installation?
In addition...you obviously haven't seen the plots for "Sisters." The last
episode is the kind of manipulative crapola "Sisters" did on a regular
basis.
This is not to say Sela Ward isn't a stone-cold fox.
Drew
> I totally agree. I'm done with Seinfeld for good. Let them all rot in
> Hades and be eaten by maggots. No television moment even remotely
> compares with this. I hope I'm in a position one day to hurt the Seinfeld
> staff as much as this shocked and devastated me.
You need to get out more.
Anyone who is so devestated by a silly sitcom obviously needs some help.
Get over it.
- Drew
JCS21212
<You need to get out more.
Anyone who is so devestated by a silly sitcom obviously needs some help.
Get over it.>
Thanks, I'll keep that in mind next time I'm reading posts you've made to
a newgroup dedicated to a "silly sitcom."
"Kill all the Prussians and we'll have peace."
A Saxon-German Soldier, 1914
Chuck Gitles
In the immortal words of William Shatner:
"Get a life, willya? I mean, for crying our loud, it's just a TV show!"
Read this and live by it JCS and the rest of you. TV shows are meant to
entertain. If they don't, DON'T WATCH THEM!!!!!
Sheesh!
Chuck Gitles
----------------------------------------------------
Another day, another yen.
Daniel Sissman
Mr David L. Campbell (king...@hooked.net) wrote:
: Right now, I can think of a few movies that were excellent until the
: Costner come up with that stupid ending himself?) "Terminator 2" (nothing
: else had killed the other terminator--why did that last way do the trick?)
: And of course, on TV, that ridiculous "St. Elsewhere" bit about the
: autistic child.
Unfair. The ending of "St. Elsewhere" was a tongue-in-cheek spoof of the
story twist on "Dallas" where an entire season turned out to be a dream.
On "Dallas", they did it with a traight face. Now *THAT'S* ridiculous.
Tracy Young
Kirk Knutson <knu...@ossenu.astro.nwu.edu> wrote:
>The thing that irks me is George didn't even
>try for "the pick".
He DID do the pick with her! From the show that it was introduced,
he did it and she dumped him. They later got back together. She
already knew his "bad habit".
Tracy
Tracy Young
cmi...@cougarnet.byu.edu (Chris and Angela Miner) wrote:
>Jerry, you guys really SUCK for last nights show. I'm sickened.
>Chris Miner
>(teetering on being an ex-fan)
Then you should not be a fan. This is what the show is all about.
This is what the show was before it became popular and was listed in
the top ten shows (about when you probably started watching it).
This is classic "Seinfeld Chronicles"
Besides, the loop that will thrown in next season's opener will quiet
most critics. In the meantime, you are all doing exactly what they
wanted you to do... talk about the show.
Tracy
David Rogers
> Why don't you snobs GET IT? It isn't that upset viewers like myself don't
> have a sense of humor. We just all felt CHEATED by the way things turned
> out. (I explained this in detail in an earlier post.) I'm sure fans of
> dark humor like yourself would have felt cheated if George actually grew
> hair, married Susan and spun-off into a "Mad About You" type show...RIGHT?
> You'd be hopping mad, flaming folks left and right who'd be thrilled to
> see little Georgie happy at last. That isn't the George you know...you
> wanted Independent George, not Happily Domestic George...RIGHT?
>
> HELLO? Am I getting through to you? Or does the Dark Sense Of Humor
> package require the removal of the empathy component before installation?
Who is it that you feel empathy for? George for his "loss"? Or Susan
because she is dead? In my opinion, she is better off dead than being
married to a loser like Costansa. George happens to be my favorite
character on the show, but I wouldn't wish him on my ex-wife as a spouse.
I feel empathy for the actress that played Susan because she is out of a
good job.
The reason us fans of dark humor like Seinfeld so much is because the
humor in Seinfeld is often DARK! Don't you GET IT? Unless of course you
regard kidnapping pets, junior mints lost in surgical openings, pausing to
buy candy and popcorn on the way to the hospital, cork screw pasta up the
kazoo, unhygeinic chefs, fights with boys in plastic bubbles,
masturbation, offensive body odors, urinating in parking garages, out of
control wheel chairs, and countless other examples of irreverent, dark
humor as light hearted fare.
Seinfeld is a show about nothing, and as we all know, nothing can be very dark.
cordially,
David Rogers
--
As breathing is my life, I dare not dare to stop.-John Lennon
Doctor Fang
Ted Kowal <tko...@gte.com> wrote:
> But killing off Susan to free George from marriage was unacceptable.
> Killing off an established, likeable character in a comedy is just not
> done.
I, for one, never considered Susan to be an established, likeable
character. Her "character" (or lack thereof) served the purpose of giving
George a relationship and providing fodder for the humorous situations
which resulted, and not much else. To me, she wasn't much more than a
prop.
> And, okay, I admit it, I found Susan attractive...
A HA! I think this is the key to your predicament, as her "character" was
never really developed on the show. It wasn't her character that you
found likable...
------> oh...@cris.com (Doctor Fang) <------
"I think it was...their trousers."
JCS21212
<Read this and live by it JCS and the rest of you. TV shows are meant to
<entertain. If they don't, DON'T WATCH THEM!!!!!
TV shows, like television advertising, are meant to manipulate emotions.
They are not meant to entertain and never were. Entertainers are nothing
more than opiates designed to addict as many people as possible. TV and
society have become intermeshed and lines between television and reality
have become blurred (take talk shows and newsmagazines for example).
Don't tell me not to take it seriously and call it mere entertainment,
because to say that implies:
1. You couldn't possibly debate an issue intelligently
2. You don't know what you're talking about
3. You don't care about the effect television, like any medium, has on
anyone
Jonathan C. Enslin
.
>>>...
>>>But killing off Susan to free George from marriage was unacceptable.
>>>Killing off an established, likeable character in a comedy is just not
>>
>>Right. I'm not sure I will be able to watch Seifeld the same way I did
>>before.
>>
>>
>>Andrea
>
>I totally agree. I mean, this is death here. I woman dies and George
>was totally flip about the whole thing. It really put a bad taste in
>my mouth (no pun intended). I think killing her sucked and I think
>they way they handled it was totally insensitive. NBC, Seinfeld,
>Chris Miner
>(teetering on being an ex-fan)
Come on people, get a clue!
Seinfeld has always been irreverent, why should that change? I didn't find
that episode to be particularly funny, but the topic didn't bother me.
Can you imagine the story lines that are now possible for next season?
Jon
MARK HARRIS
If you remember correctly, this isn't the only person who has died in a
season finale. A couple of years ago, that tv producer who had the
major obsessive crush on Elaine, and was producing Jerry's pilot, was
killed when he joined Greenpeace to impress her. He goes out in a
whaling boat and then it sinks, or he falls in, or something like that.
At the time, I thought I was the only one who thought that was mildly
tasteless....almost a cop-out to get rid of a character in a rather
morbid and uninspired way. I remember spending the summer being mildly
(I am using this word because I know it's just a tv show - one that I
enjoy and will continue to enjoy, so I am not obsessing) disappointed
and wondering how the next season would be. Anyway, I think killing
Susan was a cop-out too. Most of us agree that Susan had to go, but I
think they could have done it with alot more humour --- as in she got
very sick and broke off with him, that she hallucinates what her life
would be like with him, that he falls in love with her when she is ill
but she wants to dump him, etc. So many possibilities to be wasted on
killing her off. They didn't even give us a good death scene or
anything to redeem it. Also, the whole Marisa Tomeir telephone call
at the end really took it over the top. I could have stood the death if
it hadn't been for that bit of tastelessness. Any other ideas how
they could have broken them up OR made the death funnier (in the Soup
Nazi or Rye bread tradition?)
Dana R. Bulpett
JCS21212 (jcs2...@aol.com) wrote:
: I totally agree. I'm done with Seinfeld for good. Let them all rot in
: Hades and be eaten by maggots. No television moment even remotely
: compares with this. I hope I'm in a position one day to hurt the Seinfeld
: staff as much as this shocked and devastated me.
: "Don't you worry Mr. Simpson, I've argued in front of every judge in this
: state. Often as a lawyer."
: Lionel Hutz
--
She was boring and they can't let any of them get married.
--o o Dana R. Bulpett
_-\<,_ <|\ dbul...@ccs.neu.edu
___\o_ (_)/ (_) /> "My pace or yours?"
~~~~~~
If you want your city on the internet, free (like I do!), visit
http://www.useful.com/quick/intro.htm & see if your hometown is
available...only about 1200 in the USA are not!
Monty D. Martin
deve...@amber.indstate.edu (Jonathan C. Enslin) wrote:
>Come on people, get a clue!
You forgot to say, "It's only a TV show. It's not real."
>Seinfeld has always been irreverent, why should that change? I didn't find
>that episode to be particularly funny, but the topic didn't bother me.
There's no question that Seinfeld has always been irreverent and
usually funny, but many people feel it DID change. They feel it went
past its own not so clearly defined limits. I'm not asking you to
agree with them but to acknowledge the fact that their opinions are
just as valid as yours. If you think the show was well within its
established limits, that's your opinion. If someone else says that
they went way past those limits, that's their opinion.
>Can you imagine the story lines that are now possible for next season?
Personally, I think there are far fewer than there would be if George
had gotten married.
Monty
--------------------------------------
"A cigar may be just a cigar, but Lanie, now she's a smoke." -- W.T. 'Doc' Pfefferle, PhD.
JCS21212
<A HA! I think this is the key to your predicament, as her "character"
was
never really developed on the show. It wasn't her character that you
found likable.>
I found her an incredibly likable character and every aspect of her
personality contributed to this likability (I'm sure thats spelled wrong).
I also found her attractive but that does not mean she wasn't likable as
well. The loss of her character was a death blow to the show and was a
toally UNACCEPTABLE turn of events.
call...@gnn.com
MARK HARRIS wrote:
>If you remember correctly, this isn't the only person who has died in a
>season finale. A couple of years ago, that tv producer who had the
>major obsessive crush on Elaine, and was producing Jerry's pilot, was
>killed when he joined Greenpeace to impress her. He goes out in a
>whaling boat and then it sinks, or he falls in, or something like that.
{snip}
>think they could have done it with alot more humour --- as in she got
>very sick and broke off with him, that she hallucinates what her life
>would be like with him, that he falls in love with her when she is ill
>but she wants to dump him, etc. So many possibilities to be wasted on
>killing her off. They didn't even give us a good death scene or
>anything to redeem it. Also, the whole Marisa Tomeir telephone call
>at the end really took it over the top. I could have stood the death if
>it hadn't been for that bit of tastelessness. Any other ideas how
>they could have broken them up OR made the death funnier (in the Soup
>Nazi or Rye bread tradition?)
Before I get to any response, let me say that it is refreshing to find
someone who can actually spur some intelligent discussion on this topic.
Most of the posts have been
Poster A: "I'm devestated"
Poster B: "Take it easy, it's only TV."
Poster A" "That's a cop out, with no valid reasoning, next time back up what
you say, like I do. By the way, you're an idiot."
Back to the episode...
I was also disapointed with the ending, it didn't seem funny, interesting or
even like it was supposed to happen like that. I rewatched the last half of
the show again to see if there was something I was missing. I couldn't find
it.
One of the spoilers circulating before the airing was that George Steinbrener
was going to appear. He even was interviewed by the news media, and there
were reports that his scenes got cut, because he blabbed too much about the
finale. I was wondering if these last scenes showing the death were shot
after it was decided that the finale had to be changed, and this was the best
they came up with.
Mitchell Virchick P225
I guarantee that 95% of the folks who think that killing off Susan was unacceptable have never been married. Either that, or they just have a very quaint view of the world.
Watch the movie "How to Murder Your Wife" with Jack Lemmon, a swingin' sixties comedy in which he convinces a jury (and the attorney he fires) that it's perfectly within the normal bounds of human behavior to press the button on the "glippita-gloppita" machine which makes your spouse disappear.
And, for all you absolutists, this doesn't mean I don't love my wife.
Mitch
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mitchell Virchick
mvi...@nortel.ca
Nortel-35 Davis
p...@gagarin.cs.buffalo.edu
In article <devensli.19...@amber.indstate.edu>,
Jonathan C. Enslin <deve...@amber.indstate.edu> wrote:
:>I totally agree. I mean, this is death here. I woman dies and George
:>was totally flip about the whole thing. It really put a bad taste in
:>my mouth (no pun intended). I think killing her sucked and I think
:>they way they handled it was totally insensitive. NBC, Seinfeld,
:>Jerry, you guys really SUCK for last nights show. I'm sickened.
:>Chris Miner
:>(teetering on being an ex-fan)
:Come on people, get a clue!
:
:Seinfeld has always been irreverent, why should that change? I didn't find
I think that's the main problem: it just wasn't funny; it could have been,
but the script was horrible. This reduces the episode to irreverence for its
own sake, which is at best boring, and at worst, offensive to some. I think
this was the first episode where I was actually checking my watch...
Paul Budrean
I disagree with you about that episode. I found it very funny.
George had earlier mentioned that it would be nice if Susan was on a
plane that crashed. The matter-of-fact way that he said such a cruel
thing is what was so funny. Then the way Susan's death had little
effect on him added to the humorousness. If you're a Seinfeld fan, you
know that their reality is different than ours, and callousness is just
a way of life. All in all, I found it to be one of the best episodes of
the season, though it's hard to judge them. They tend to fade from my
memory and I only remember specific incidents in them.
Michael davieS
>TV shows, like television advertising, are meant to manipulate emotions.
>They are not meant to entertain and never were. Entertainers are nothing
>more than opiates designed to addict as many people as possible.
What? TV shows are not meant to entertain and never were? What's that
mean? Also, why do you have ten posts in this group about Susan's death?
Why don't you post about something else?
Michael davies
mis...@epix.net
BETH K. TOBEY
In article <4ntdju$p...@shrike.depaul.edu>, cgi...@shrike.depaul.edu (Chuck Gitles) writes...
>In the immortal words of William Shatner:
>"Get a life, willya? I mean, for crying our loud, it's just a TV show!"
>
>entertain. If they don't, DON'T WATCH THEM!!!!!
>
>Chuck Gitles
I agree with Chuck!
Seinfeld has always made fun of so-called "serious" topics--what about
the episode where Elaine was dating an older man and he has a stroke?
Both the scene where she and Jerry were trying to feed him cookies to
revive him and the scene at the end when he was paralized and Elaine
had to help him in could have been offensive--if you forget that it's
a TV show!
On the other hand, I do agree with people who think that killing off
Susan was not a very clever way to get George out of the marriage--
I think we've come to expect more from the writers than that.
Just throwing my hat into the ring,
Beth
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Beth K. Tobey State University of New York
Senior Counselor College at Geneseo
NOT AVAILABLE VIA E-MAIL FOR THE MONTH OF JUNE!!
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Justin Tribble
We all know the season finale was somewhat dissapointing, but killing
Susan was a great idea! In the Sienfeld tradition it was so off the wall.
Although I was very dissapointed in the way they handled the ending. The
whole thing just went flat, there was no big laugh at the end!
Justin Tribble <Quest01.sedonanet.com>
JCS21212
<What? TV shows are not meant to entertain and never were? What's that
<mean? Also, why do you have ten posts in this group about Susan's death?
<Why don't you post about something else?
Television shows are designed to make people watch them over and over and
over so that advertisers can sell products. Entertainment is not their
primary purpose. If they entertain at the same time as selling products,
all the better, but their primary purpose is to serve as opiates to the
masses. The only thing about Seinfeld that matters to me is Susan and
since her death is her most current "action" thats what I post about. I'm
not concerned with who's Jewish, Uncle Leo, or episode lists.
"Things wil never so bad that we cannot defeat the Italians."
Emperor Franz Josef, 1859
replac...@delphi.com
Jonathan C. Enslin <deve...@amber.indstate.edu> writes:
>Come on people, get a clue!
>
>Seinfeld has always been irreverent, why should that change? I didn't find
>that episode to be particularly funny, but the topic didn't bother me.
>
>
I've been reading the idiotic posts from the love-it-or-leave-it crew - the
folks who believe criticizing the show violates rules of fandom. These
people say "It's just a show - get over it!", unaware that this forum is for
viewers who take the show seriously and want to analzye it in a manner that
may not be possible in the everyday world. I wasn't going to counterattack,
but this guy used the egregious phrase "get a clue!" so I couldn't remain
silent.......the ending blew, it wasn't funny, it violated the integrity of
the characters, and the only people that liked it are probably viewers who
joined the "Seinfeld" bandwagon for all the wrong reasons. They used to
watch "Home Improvement", then when "Seinfeld" switched to Thursdays, they
fell in love with the inane contrivances of its later years. Anybody who
yells "Shut up - it's just a show" deserves the response "Shut up - it's just
a newsgroup."
Greg alexander
replac...@delphi.com wrote:
My, aren't we bitter? It's very insulting for you to wide-spread
criticize anyone who liked the final episode. I thought it was a
great ending to a great season. "violated the integrity of the
characters"???? What show have you been watching?? Everyone had a
reaction to Susan's death that was very appropriate to their
character: George's pretending to be upset, Jerry and Elaine with
their usual "that's a shame" attitude, and Kramer seeming to care, but
not getting her name right. Plus, we get the added bonus of seeing
Jerry get what's been coming to him the entire season as he ridiculed
George...he wound up in the exact same position. And the classic
ending line, "we had a pact!" tied it all up. To me, the episode was
perfect. If you didn't like it, that's certainly your right. But
don't insult those of us who enjoyed it...
-Greg
"Jimmy crack corn, and I don't care!"
call...@gnn.com
In article <4ospmm$2...@ns.wsnet.com> Greg alexander wrote:
>If you didn't like it, that's certainly your right. But
>don't insult those of us who enjoyed it...
You know what ruined it for me? It was the fact that I read the SPOILERS
that were printed here. I've vowed not to peek into the future any longer.
I have not had time to rewatch the episode, but plan to, and hope to enjoy it
more than the first time.
>"Jimmy crack corn, and I don't care!"
I thought it was 'cracked corn'
Chaos Harlequin
jcs2...@aol.com (JCS21212) wrote:
>Television shows are designed to make people watch them over and over and
>over so that advertisers can sell products. Entertainment is not their
>primary purpose. If they entertain at the same time as selling products,
>all the better, but their primary purpose is to serve as opiates to the
>masses. The only thing about Seinfeld that matters to me is Susan and
>since her death is her most current "action" thats what I post about. I'm
>not concerned with who's Jewish, Uncle Leo, or episode lists.
TV shows may be made to get advertised in, but the only way that
people are going to watch them enough to see all those advertisements
is for them to be *entertaining* in some way or another. Melrose is
not an especially well-written or well-acted show, but people like
watching it, thus it is still on the air. Don't go off on one of those
"Everyone in capitalism is motivated by money, therefore everything
they produce has no point other than to make them money" things,
please.
/----------------------------Joshua Hall-Bachner----------------------------\
| part...@servtech.com http://www.servtech.com/public/particle/ |
| "I spend too much time raiding windmills. We go side by side, laugh until |
\-------it's right." Toad The Wet Sprocket, "Windmills"---------------------/
Advantec Global Services
I was completely upset that they tackled such an issue as death.
After seasons of trivial problems, how could they turn the
pointless"ness" of the show completely around???
pang...@teleport.com (Pangolin) wrote:
>EJM (ejm...@popd.ix.netcom.com) wrote:
>> In article <4nle9q$i...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, jcs2...@aol.com (JCS21212)
>> wrote:
>>
>> > I totally agree. I'm done with Seinfeld for good. Let them all rot in
>> > Hades and be eaten by maggots. No television moment even remotely
>> > compares with this. I hope I'm in a position one day to hurt the Seinfeld
>> > staff as much as this shocked and devastated me.
>> This has GOT to be a put on.
>lol! If only it was, EJM, if only it was.
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>PGP-Key: finger -l pang...@teleport.com
lann...@gmail.com
> The writers blew it by killing off Susan, even if the death was vaguely
> comic by the goofy face she made before croaking.
Well here we are 18 years later. I understand time heals all ...but I'm STILL annoyed they killed her off. My enjoyment of the rerun viewings would be an 8 out of 10 had they not done this...instead of the 6 of 10 the killing demoted me to.
Guess I'll give it another 20 or so years and see if I get over it. Wait...I'll be killed off by then. :)
