Leaves of Grass My Ass: Why Futurama is a Better TV Show than The Simpsons

This is a post I did on my now defunct old blog about a year ago, before Comedy Central announced the show’s revival.  Figured it would be a nice space fil…. I mean a nice read for those who hadn’t seen it before.

Whenever I am asked what my favorite television show is, I immediately reply ‘The Simpsons.’ I grew up with this show, it premiered when I was five years old and obviously is still going. I don’t remember when I first started watching it, I do know for some time I was not allowed to, but I would guess it was somewhere around the third season. I definitely remember seeing the softball episode when it came on, because I have a vivid memory of thinking that Ozzie Smith was actually dead (I was a stupid, stupid child).

However, of late, The Simpsons has severely faltered. There are fans who will tell you that the show dropped off over ten years ago. Frankly I think it stopped being the funniest show on television around the 15^th season. The reasons for this drop are many. One, the show is two minutes shorter than it used to be, so there are fewer non-sequitur jokes because they get sacrificed for those which are integral to the plot. Two, there is far too much focus on guest stars. I remember one DVD commentary in which as writer spoke about a guest appearance in an early season, and that how he was glad they didn’t do guest stars in the fashion of saying ‘Hi, I’m so and so’, they actually have them play characters. This past season there was an episode which consisted of Denis Leary losing his cell phone, what the fuck? Lastly, after 20 years it’s got to be impossible for a show to keep churning out good ideas. The last few Rolling Stones albums sucked, the new Indiana Jones movie was awful, sometimes people just need to know when to stop.

Still, I watch my DVDs of seasons 3-11 all the time, that is the prime of the show and there are very few bad episodes, and loads of excellent ones. However; because of the absurdly slow process of releasing the boxsets (fuck you writers strike, maybe you shouldn’t have done that internet content if you weren’t going to get paid for it?) I have been forced to watch other shows just to keep things fresh. This is where Futurama steps in. Over the last two years I have picked up all four seasons (substantially cheaper than Simpsons DVDs I might add) as well as the four feature length movies. I watched the show off and on when it was on the air, but as it changed times and had hiatuses, it was hard to keep up with. I did manage to catch most episodes in syndication on Cartoon Network, so I was not a stranger to the show. While there are only 70+ episodes and the four movies, I think it is fair to compare it to The Simpsons and their 400+ episodes and one feature film. And this is where I say that I believe Futurama is a better television show than The Simpsons.

I need to qualify that statement. I think the Simpsons in it’s prime is a funnier show that Futurama at it’s best, however I think that Futurama is more entertaining. But, The Simpsons the past five seasons is not as funny as Futurama ever was. So, let me explain.

• Futurama is more plot driven: The Simpsons resets at the end of each episode (exception being Who Shot Mr. Burns), and now they even joke about it in the show. Futurama carries over from episode to episode. When someone dies, they stay dead. Albeit the major characters don’t get killed off, there isn’t anything like Moleman getting blown up in five different episodes and still being around. The best example of how Futurama is different is the episode ‘The Why of Fry‘ from season four, which is possibly my favorite episode. In this episode the story from the pilot is tied back in, and all of Fry’s actives are explained to have been in an arc to reach that point of his life. There simply is not storytelling like this in The Simpsons. Sure there are flashback episodes and episodes set in the future (which suck), but in Futurama the series feels more tied together. If you sat down and watched a random episode in the fourth season of Futurama without ever seeing an episode, you would have no idea what the hell was going on. The Simpsons on the other hand, can be picked up at any point. In short, Futurama is more of an emotional investment than The Simpsons. I realize that the nature of animation is that there are several episodes being written and produced at once, but Futurama still manages to make the episodes piece together better than The Simpsons. And while the latter may be more joke heavy, I think the former is more enthralling.
• Futurama characters are better developed: Another aspect here is that The Simpsons have been set in a time freeze since the show’s start. The characters (with the exception of Homer aging three years) have all stayed the same age, and there really aren’t any references to the year being important. As strange as it sounds, a show set in the future has done a better job of adapting to time. While there was not much mention of it during the show’s initial run, the first feature film deals with time travel and is set in 2007, while the pilot was set in 2000,so we are to assume that seven years have passed over that time frame. And Fry has changed drastically, without giving too much away let’s just say there are several different versions of Fry in the movie and time passing plays a huge role with each. Again, for Futurama’s style of storytelling this works the best, but it wouldn’t work with The Simpsons, and I think this is one thing that makes the show better: with the passage of time there is more character development. When there are no consequences to a character’s actions, they can do anything they want and just go back to square one, and it is just more interesting to see how a character grows.
• Futurama poached the best Simpsons writers: Futurama is the brainchild of Matt Groening and David X. Cohen. Groening is obviously the creator of The Simpsons, and Cohen was a Simpsons writer from 1993 until 1998, which places him on the show during some of the greatest seasons. He would serve as head writer and executive producer for the entirety of Futurama’s run. They also brought with them Ken Keeler, who also was a writer for The Simpsons, to serve as the show’s co-executive producer. Keeler may be best known for writing the controversial Simpsons episode ‘The Principal and the Pauper.’ This episode happens to be one of my favorites, and for anyone who owns the DVDs, listen to the commentary on it where he just completely rails against fans who gave him shit. Point being, they took two of the main writers from the strongest period of The Simpsons, so it is not shocking that their talent translated to Futurama. Now with Groening, having listened to all the DVD commentaries for both series, I honestly think that he cares more about Futurama. He definitely seemed to have a more hands on approach to Futurama, when with The Simpsons it seemed that after the first two seasons he was not doing as much. He is one of the greatest comedic minds of all time, and for him to pour his heart and soul into Futurama shows. Now, speaking of those writers …
• Futurama was the smartest show on television, literally: The following were all writers for Futurama: Ken Keeler, Jeff Westbrook, Patric Verrone, J. Stewart Burns, Bill Odenkirk. What do these men have in common? They have all received doctorates. Aside from that, Cohen and Eric Kaplan both did graduate work at UC Berkley. Essentially, it was the best educated writing staff in television. This comes across in the material of the show: from advanced graph theory, to Dungeons and Dragons, and even to a general outstanding level of nerdiness. While most of them have written for The Simpsons as well, I think their ability translated better into Futurama, because ….
• Futurama is a nerdfest with no story limits: One of the things that was always brought up about The Simpsons was that the traditional bounds of sitcoms did not apply because it was animation, and there could be more suspension of disbelief. This led to more physical comedy, more outrageous plot lines, and frankly just better television. Then Futurama came around and completely one-upped it’s brethren. Both shows are loaded with wildly creative writing, but it is only natural that a show about the future, outer-space, the universe, and everything, is going to provide the better template for expression of that creativity, as opposed to a show about a suburban family. Shit, there are talking robots, aliens, mutants, suicide booths, and of course time travel. The closest The Simpsons can get to this is the Treehouse of Horror episode every year, and it is no surprise that it is traditionally the best rated episode of the year, so obviously when Futurama expands that wide berth of creative license to an entire series, the results are going to be excellent.
• Futurama didn’t have a chance to get stale: The treatment of Futurama by FOX is well documented and inexcusable, especially considering how long they let King of the Hill run for. What the fuck is that about, that show is more at home on ABC Family. Futurama only had four seasons, and only two real full length ones. Because there were so few episodes, it is harder to find a bad one, in my opinion. That just isn’t the case with The Simpsons, there have been so many episodes that it is bound to become hit and miss. In this sense, The Simpsons are Pink Floyd and Futurama is Nirvana. Pink Floyd is my favorite band, and their best music is the best music. They had a string of incredible albums, and their overall body of work is fantastic. But did we really need The Division Bell or Momentary Lapse of Reason? Probably not. Nirvana on the other hand only had three studio releases, and because of that the selection is so small and concentrated when they were at their best, it’s difficult for me to find a song I don’t like. There are maybe two songs off Bleach I don’t like, but In Utero and Nevermind are perfect. Nirvana isn’t my favorite band, but given any random song of theirs there is a much higher chance I will love it over a random song out of Pink Floyd’s catalog.
• Even with robots, Futurama drips with emotion: There are a few Simpsons episodes which are very high on emotion (Mother Simpson, Round Springfield, Alone Again Natura’diddly, etc), and for the most part those episodes manage to strike a balance between touching and funny. However, there is a fundamental roadblock which keeps The Simpsons from being more emotional: the relationships are already established. While there are several episodes where Homer and Marge are on the outs; almost the entire Futurama arc deals with Fry’s pursuit of Leela. Maybe it’s because I relate more with a romantically hapless moron with no prospects rather than a middle aged married man; but I think more emotion can be drawn from the tortured nature of Fry’s consistently futile approaches. Not to give a spoiler, but the latest, and sadly final, Futurama feature film ends with Fry and Leela kissing. I cannot remember completely, but I think it was the first non-cheek, non-worm/dream/parallel induced kiss between them; and it was the perfect way to end the show. I find myself genuinely caring about what happens to the characters in Futurama; while in The Simpsons I know things are going to go back to normal and I am just focusing on what jokes are coming next.

And that is what it comes down to: I care about the story in Futurama, in The Simpsons I just care about the jokes. Yet, they’re both comedy cartoons, so is the whole point just to be funny, and therefore The Simpsons would be the ‘better’ show? I don’t know, but I know I’ve definitely gotten misty-eyed watching Futurama, and I’ve started choking from laughing so hard at The Simpsons. What I’m sure about though is this: if I could trade the last five seasons of The Simpsons for five more seasons of Futurama, I make that trade in a heartbeat. I watch more Simpsons episodes overall, because they are great filler and background material when I just want something to distract me. But if I’m in the mood to actually watch something, I throw on Futurama.