Family Guy - what's the appeal?

[Mek]

Okay, I'm going to preface this by saying that I'm not a FG fan. I do enjoy two or three episodes, but otherwise I wonder why people even like this show.

Granted, compared to the last few seasons of 'The Simpsons' it's funny, but when I see it as a standalone show, I just don't get it.

Is it because it takes pot shots at easy targets that everyone loves to hate? (Granted, I enjoyed 'Holy Crap'... and I'm Catholic) Is it because it appeals to some 'low common denominator' for humor?

And don't get me started on Peter. He's the most irritating character on the show. Whereas the early Homer was stupid, he was actually funny at times. But Peter tries to hard to be the stupid*funny, and IMO he often ends up being obnoxious instead.

I do enjoy Stewie, but that's about it. He's the only thing I've consistently laughed at every time I happen to tune into the show. I mean, if you like FG, great. More power to ya'. But help me to understand here, please. D=

[TrogdorNyimbhat]

FG is good, I don't understand why people like South Park.

Well, I used to like it long ago, but... um, I don't now.


Anyway, FG has pretty unique humor. Although the concept is a Simpsons rip-off, new Simpsons suck, and I don't watch them anymore. FG is still funny.

What bothers me alot is that forum people idolize the worst episodes of Family Guy, when there are much better ones.

What I also don't like is the way they promote religion (Christianity) alot, but that figures since they're a Simpson's rip off and they do it all the time so...

[Fone Bone]

I think Family Guy has been hyped on the internet by it's fans so much that now that we actually see new episodes of it, they don't seem that great. Granted I thought the OLD episodes were WAAAAY overrated but I think the idea that a show like FG got cut off "in it's prime" while a show that's been coasting for a long time like The Simpsons keeps getting renewed probably built up the show to the point of overpraising. It's a show that when you realize that beyond being somewhat funny, isn't much of anything else.

[Kury Wagner]

The show is so screwed-up, I can't not love it. I'm not sure I can explain it, really. =/

I know several people that don't like the show, I just can't understand why. A few months ago FG was on when two of my sisters were over, one agreed with me that it's hilarious (her exact words were "It's so perverted, it's great!"), the other said it was idiotic and not funny.

[Cogliostro]

I mean, if you like FG, great. More power to ya'. But help me to understand here, please. D=

If you don't like or don't get a show then okay, move on. I don't think you are suddenly going to go ohhhhhhh now I get it, now I like the show after people try to tell you what they enjoy about a show and what they think makes it great. I believe most people, including myself like the show because it's zany, crazy, sick, random characters and humor. Simple as that.

[Jave]

Family Guy is not a Simpsons rip-off, unless you think Matt Groening invented cartoon families that go into sitcommy situations.

As for the show being only funny, duh, that's the point. It isn't supposed to have sophisticated plots or character development, because if you are looking for that, you watch Family Guy for all the wrong reasons. Shows like The Simpsons may have a good episode that isn't focused on humor, but if an episode of Family Guy doesn't make me laugh, throw it in the garbage, because it's a failure.

[Eddy]

Family Guy isn't a Simpsons rip-off. Just because it's a cartoon starring a family doesn't mean it's a Simpsons rip-off.

I like Family Guy for the same reasons everyone else likes it. It's funny. The show isn't about sophisticated plotlines or well-developed characters. It's a weird and obscure comedy cartoon.

[Scythemantis]

Is it because it takes pot shots at easy targets that everyone loves to hate? (Granted, I enjoyed 'Holy Crap'... and I'm Catholic) Is it because it appeals to some 'low common denominator' for humor?

I find the show hilarious and I don't even notice either of those aspects. I always thought the show's humor consisted almost entirely of surreal flashbacks and unexpected punchlines. You would think the "cliche busting" would get old to me, esspecially since I rarely find it funny on other shows, but FG's style has yet to bore me.

I have to say, though, that these types of threads are rather pointless. EVERYTHING has some sort of appeal, but nothing appeals to everyone. If you don't "get" something, you probably aren't going to no matter how it's re-explained to you.

[Spongebrain2.0]

People need to understand FG isn't a show that is normal. FG doesn't have sophisticated tearjerker moments. It isn't Futurama or The Simpsons. It's like Aqua Teen or another AS original. Part of its appeal is that it isn't down to earth & zany

[Fone Bone]

Family Guy is not a Simpsons rip-off, unless you think Matt Groening invented cartoon families that go into sitcommy situations.

As for the show being only funny, duh, that's the point. It isn't supposed to have sophisticated plots or character development, because if you are looking for that, you watch Family Guy for all the wrong reasons. Shows like The Simpsons may have a good episode that isn't focused on humor, but if an episode of Family Guy doesn't make me laugh, throw it in the garbage, because it's a failure.

I get this. But there are ALWAYS some internet nitwits out there who insist the show will be remembered 50 years from now and still be famous like Bugs Bunny. And that will NEVER happen as long as the show's ONLY goal is to get cheap laughs. Being funny can make you popular. But SUBSTANCE is the thing that makes a show LAST.

[Cogliostro]

It's a show that when you realize that beyond being somewhat funny, isn't much of anything else.

That's all Family Guy is suppose to be, is funny. If you want something more then crazy, zany, random and twisted humor.....watch something else.

[straw_hat]

I have no idea if this is true or not but I doubt Seth and his team set out to make a timeless cartoon for future generations or else we'd have a totally different show on our hands.

[Cogliostro]

Anyway, FG has pretty unique humor. Although the concept is a Simpsons rip-off.

What bothers me alot is that forum people idolize the worst episodes of Family Guy, when there are much better ones.

What I also don't like is the way they promote religion (Christianity) alot, but that figures since they're a Simpson's rip off and they do it all the time so...

1. As others have said, Family Guy is not a Simpsons rip-off. That would be like saying The Simpsons are a Jetsons rip-off, just because Jetsons came out before The Simpsons.

2. People can like which ever episodes they prefer, just because you think they suck doesn't mean everyone else does.

3. Ummm since when does either The Simpsons or Family Guy promote Christianity? They discuss it and usually poke fun at it but they don't go around promoting it.

[Cogliostro]

I get this. But there are ALWAYS some internet nitwits out there who insist the show will be remembered 50 years from now and still be famous like Bugs Bunny. And that will NEVER happen as long as the show's ONLY goal is to get cheap laughs. Being funny can make you popular. But SUBSTANCE is the thing that makes a show LAST.

I'm not saying you are right or wrong but Tom and Jerry is a show about a cat and mouse that constantly go around attacking each other, there isn't much substance to them yet they have lasted many years and is a well known show.

[Jave]

I get this. But there are ALWAYS some internet nitwits out there who insist the show will be remembered 50 years from now and still be famous like Bugs Bunny. And that will NEVER happen as long as the show's ONLY goal is to get cheap laughs. Being funny can make you popular. But SUBSTANCE is the thing that makes a show LAST.

Dude, I doubt anyone, and I emphazise ANYONE, nowadays pitches a cartoon with the intention of making it last 50 years, because chances of that happening are minimal. The majority of the cartoons from the 80s and earlier have been forgotten and not seen on TV for ages, with the exceptions of the great ones, such as Looney Tunes, Popeye, Disney, Flintstones, etc. Which is why Family Guy doesn't bother with substance, because they are entertaining TODAY'S audience. They don't want to be remembered forever, they want to entertain their audience now, not 50 years from today.

But define "substance". If you associate the lack of it with Family Guy, then how do you explain the Coyote/Roadrunner cartoons still being remembered 56 years after they aired? That series didn't have by any means more substance than Family Guy, in fact, its only goal was to make the audience laugh, JUST LIKE FAMILY GUY.

[Fone Bone]

Dude, I doubt anyone, and I emphazise ANYONE, nowadays pitches a cartoon with the intention of making it last 50 years, because chances of that happening are minimal. The majority of the cartoons from the 80s and earlier have been forgotten and not seen on TV for ages, with the exceptions of the great ones, such as Looney Tunes, Popeye, Disney, Flintstones, etc. Which is why Family Guy doesn't bother with substance, because they are entertaining TODAY'S audience. They don't want to be remembered forever, they want to entertain their audience now, not 50 years from today.

That's fine. But look at the thread of which cartoon characters will be remembered 50 years from now and understand that I was aggravated that Family Guy was mentioned so frequently.

But define "substance". If you associate the lack of it with Family Guy, then how do you explain the Coyote/Roadrunner cartoons still being remembered 56 years after they aired? That series didn't have by any means more substance than Family Guy, in fact, its only goal was to make the audience laugh, JUST LIKE FAMILY GUY.

Actually, I think the Road Runner cartoons are LOADED with substance. The futulity of the Coyote's quest to catch that miserable filty bird is so fruitless and in vain that I always think Chuck Jones is channeling Arthur Miller when he's directing them.

I'm not saying you are right or wrong but Tom and Jerry is a show about a cat and mouse that constantly go around attacking each other, there isn't much substance to them yet they have lasted many years and is a well known show.

Whoa! You got me! Nice!

Fone Bone=PWNED!

[PowerZord]

Those were diferente generations, On this Generation The only cartoons that will be remenbered are Pokémon and the Simpsons

[Jave]

That's fine. But look at the thread of which cartoon characters will be remembered 50 years from now and understand that I was aggravated that Family Guy was mentioned so frequently.

Why does this bother you so much? I don't believe EVERYONE will remember FG 50 years from today, but there's certainly people who will. Just like there's still people who remember "Coal Black and de Sebben Dwarfs"

Actually, I think the Road Runner cartoons are LOADED with substance. The futulity of the Coyote's quest to catch that miserable filty bird is so fruitless and in vain that I always think Chuck Jones is channeling Arthur Miller when he's directing them.

Didn't Chuck Jones said himself that the Roadrunner cartoons were just there to make the audience laugh and he never intended them to be by any means substantial? The Coyote has personality, sure, but so does every character on FG.

[Fone Bone]

Why does this bother you so much? I don't believe EVERYONE will remember FG 50 years from today, but there's certainly people who will. Just like there's still people who remember "Coal Black and de Sebben Dwarfs"

Probably because these are the same people who dismiss The Simpsons. There. I'm petty. But I'll admit it.

I love you Javeman!:anime:

Didn't Chuck Jones said himself that the Roadrunner cartoons were just there to make the audience laugh and he never intended them to be by any means substantial? The Coyote has personality, sure, but so does every character on FG.

I can totally believe that Chuck Jones was not going for anything substantial. But he was such a frelling genius that subtext was already built into his work whether he realized it or not. It may not have been his intention to make his cartoons substantial. But they were.

[Underdunkt]

Plus, the Looney Tunes cartoons had memorable and sometimes likeable characters, something Family Guy has never had (by the admission of most fans, it focuses exclusively on gags, to the point that the characters aren't even usually considered). People can say that the Family Guy characters have personality, but I have yet to see one female character for instance on either of McFarlane's shows that isn't totally shallow and stereotypical, and most of the male characters are the same way, unless they're just ripping off previous characters/personas that had personality (Homer Simpson/Jackie Gleason, Rex Harrison/Jimmy Corrigan).

Anyway, the charm is mainly in the bizzarro and random humor. It can be good passive entertainment in that sense. Its just something that throws out random gags and shocks you. It won't last through the years though, not by a long shot, because too many of the parodies (references to things from 70's and 80's "junk culture", for instance) are based on the nostalgia of the audience watching now, and simply won't make sense 50 years from now.