Dissertation Help Please

Topic: Narm!

Users: @gkscotty @Graham @SuzyQ Beb Chris Enhas fellranger Tony

irc.simpworks.com

[SparciaM]

I’m a currently a third year student at Staffordshire Uni (England) studying BA(hons) Film, TV and Radio Studies. For my 10,000word dissertation (final project) I am looking at the hit Fox Network show The Simpsons. I would appreciate for you to fill in this questionnaire as best as possible and all information will be kept confidential and for research purposes only.


Age and Sex please:

1) Why do you think "The Simpsons" is so popular and has lasted so long?

2) Do you think there is an end in sight for "The Simpsons"?

3) Do you think "The Simpsons" would work well as a live action sitcom?

4) How do you think "The Simpsons" tackles social, cultural and political issues?

4a) In regards to politically-incorrect issues how do you think these are shown / come across?

4b) Do you think that because "The Simpsons" is a cartoon, it takes more liberties with these and other issues more than say a show like "Friends" or "Sex And The City"?

5) Would you rate "The Simpsons" as just another cartoon or would say that it is something completely different? if so, why?

6) Do you think the violence in the show is justified?

6a) Do you think that cartoons in general take liberties when it comes to violence?

6b) Would a live action show that has as much violence as "The Simpsons" be received well? (Shown in the same time slot as "The Simpsons")

7) Do you think that "The Simpsons" is a good and idealistic portrayal of American Culture and Society?

7a) Can you or anyone in your family relate to "The Simpsons" and the characters involved?

If you have children would you allow your children to a watch a live action show similar to "The Simpsons" in regards to violence and content on their own without adult supervision and why?

Case Study: Who Shot Mr Burns (Parts One & Two)

This episode dealt with the attempted murder of Mr Burns. The whole town is accused of the murder and throughout the episode each character is questioned and then struke off the list. At the end we find out that the culprit was Baby Maggie Simpsons. Even though she was found guilty of the attempted murder of Mr Burns she was never arrested or punished for this crime.

9) Do you think that if it was a live action show that it would still have been seen as funny? or do you think that it would have been looked upon as morally wrong in todays society and why?

10) What do you think the reasons are that allow this episode and others like it to be made and seen, and enjoyed by millions around the world. And not to be complained about or looked upon as morally wrong?

Thankx again for the replies

[Stancho]

Oooooo shiny!

Ok here I go..

Age: 20
Sex: Male.

1) Probably because of the insights into people and social commentary on the show, it seems to be a running theme with successful TV shows. Well that and of course the characters, we don't call them OFF for nothing!

2) Only when F*x decides that they can't make enough advertising revenue off the show anymore and pulls the plug. Creatively it could go on for a long time. They aren't as out of ideas as many people seem to think.

3) No. They regularly do things that live action shows can't or wouldn't do due to constraints of reality (danger!) , money and stuff. I'd rather it stayed as animation.

4) All the time, although it's as inclined to make fun of them as to pass any message. But yeah it defiantly *DOES* do that to a greater or lesser degree depending on the season and episode.

4a) Depends on the season but I have very little time for PCness myself so I wouldn’t' really know. (Or care for that matter.)

4b) Er...no certainly not compared to some episodes of Friends I've been unfortunate enough to see. Actually OFF probably does in much more tastefully than most shows IMO.

5) It's not a Cartoon full stop it's an Animated Situation Comedy that's the not same as cartoon in the old Warner Brothers or Disney Sense. It does things that true cartoons wouldn't do in a million years.

6) Violence is *always* justified, we live in a violent world and competitive violence is the reason humans are here today and not some other type of humanoid species. I mean ok in a utopia there'd be *no* violence but we don't live in a utopia, anything but in fact.

6a) Yes if it's a cartoon but OFF isn't and as Matt said they always show the *CONESQUENCES* of violence and accidents. It's refereed to as "Rubber band reality" which means people get hurt but they can take more damage than in the real world. Much more in fact I've seen Homer take beating and injuries that could have killed an Orc Chieftain and come out fine in the end.

6b) Nah, it'd scare the pants off the moral majority and probably get banned after about 5 shows. No way it'd work.

7) No, it's a sarcastic and subversive take on American society and the things it does. You *do* know who Matt Groening is right?

7a) Maybe to some degree, I normally relate to Bart or to a greater degree Lisa. I guess it depends on the individual. I think my dad sort of relates to Homer in a "I'm glad I'm not him!" kind of way.

N/A. I don't have kids.

9) I dunno, I mean Maggie *did* shoot Mr Burns but frankly he asked for it and I'd actually support shooting someone as rich and frankly evil as that. After all people get what they deserve...

10) Well first off it's because it's not taken as seriously when it's on OFF because it's animated and animation isn't taken as seriously in the west as live action TV. Second Burns *deserved* to be shot for what he did so a lot of people would have no complains about it. I guess it depends if you follow the law or your conscience.

[Shirt-Guy Tone]

26, Male.

1.  It's lasted so long because it's cheap to produce and has a large fan base.  It's been popular for so long because the show, at its best, delivers unique characters and plots, and looks at society in a non-preachy way.

2.  Only when the people on the show say so, I doubt Fox will put an end to the series.

3.  Absolutely not.  It would probably be too controversial.

4.  Again, at its best, it does so by making a point well, quickly enough to move from issue to issue, but not so fast that the viewer misses it.

a.  Taking shots at PCness is more or less part of the show's mission.

b.  Don't watch either show, wouldn't know.

5.  It's been slipping, but it's definitely not "just another cartoon", as it's written on an adult level as well as for kids.

6.  Most of the time.  Lately, they've been adding gratuitous stuff, but even then, it's not as grisly as what you'd see on some live action TV.

a.  In general, yes, since it's possible to do more in this regard.

b.  No.  Live action violence is more graphic by its very nature.

7.  Good, but not idealistic.  It will expose and discuss what's wrong, but it generally puts forth an impression that America is a good and just society, and that her people are good.

a.  Absolutely.  That's the strongest part of the show, that everyone can identify with at least one character, even the minor ones.  (I've always identified with both Bart and Lisa, while Ma sees a lot of herself in Marge and Apu.)

8.  I don't have kids, but there are a few episodes I would not want them to watch unsupervised.  Most of them, however, are fine.

Burns:

9.  It could be effective, and possibly funny, but the comic effect just would not be the same due to the distinct nature of live action violence from the cartoon variety.

10.  Burns is a despicable character, and as the show pointed out, he has countless enemies.  So the motive is there, and it's easy to see how some of the characters could get pushed over the edge.  Since it *is* OFF, there was almost a certainty that it would have an unconventional ending, that it would not end with one of the main characters committing cold-blooded murder, standing trial, etc.  Anyone who thought otherwise hadn't been paying attention.

[D.B.]

Not sure how fair a test this is, with everyone able to read everyone else's response first. oh well.

20, Male

1 - It appeals across the spectrum - children can laugh at the zany cartooniness, whilst adults can appreciate the more subtle humor. Basically, something for everyone to relate to.

2 - Eventually, yes, but not in the forseeable future. The show is still far too profitable.

3 - You could not simply transplant the writing into a live setting, no. A lot of the visual humor would also be lost, and it would be shaped much more by the cast's personality. Just like Fraiser would not be Fraiser without Kelsey Grammar.

4 - It's not afraid to poke fun at hypocracy/ignorance, and often has quite a strong moral message without getting overly sentimental.

4a - To my mind, it doesn't have that much political incorrectness. A strange mixture of being very blazze about them and taking an indepth look.

4b - No. Though it often does it better.

5 - it's a sitcom delivered in cartoon form for a wide ranging audience. So yes, something different

6 - No more or less than most other shows. yes.

6a - yes

6b - no

7 - Idealistic yes, because there are very few genuinely nasty characters. Good in a moral sense because despite no-one's perfect (they all have some sort of flaw). Good in an accurate sense...less so (they're often too nice.)

7a - pretty much everyone in my family can, it's one of the best bits (I'd see eye to eye with Lisa mostly)

Don't have children. If I did I would have no problem with it, as you don't teach kids something is wrong by preventing them ever seeing it. If it gets to that stage you're already in pretty deep trouble

8 - on the grounds Maggie is well  below the age at which she can be held responsible for her actions and it was not intentional yes, it would have still been alright

9 - Partly coz it's a cartoon (Roadrunner being a constant advertisment for premeditated murder and all), partly coz it was handled well and between the humor we had more serious aspects, like Homer's arrest and Lisa saving him, etc...
It's no worse than lots of the 70's and 80's murder mysteries it was meant to parody


Enjoy typing all this up!

[Stancho]

on the grounds Maggie is well  below the age at which she can be held responsible for her actions and it was not intentional yes, it would have still been alright

Er...D.B. it *was* intentional IIRC Maggie *did* pull the trigger on the gun and I think she meant it all so at the end when Marge states that it wasn't intentional Maggie looks around with her eyes in a shifty way as the music changes. So really I get the impression she meant it. Then again like I said with the things Burns does I don't blame her. :-/

[Don Cobra]

Oooooo shiny! :D

Ditto. :)

Male, 17.

1) It seems to me The Simpsons are able to appeal to many different groups of people, and there are lots of points of view from which to analyse them, instead of being 100% straightforward and direct. They manage to be funny, disturbing, moving and deep all at the same time. One can find it a spectacular satyre of society, other can find it a great analysis of family relationships, and others can just find it a funny cartoon.

2) Possibly. The show has been going downhill these days, and in an optimistic thought, it could be a tactic to bring the show to an unexpected ending.

3) Definitly not. The innumerous different aspects and complexities of the show would get lost in a live sitcom format, and not to mention that knowing it would have to be much more direct and easy to understand, many characters and situations would get distorted.

4) The show's polictical and social issues are very subtle and indirect, and sometimes inexistent for some people. In a deeper analysis, the show can reveal many polictical complaints and such, that aren't obvious or clear at first sight.

4a) In many ways. Sometimes innofensive and subtle, other times blatant and disturbing. But most importantly, almost always the show manages to justify these situations and make them belivable, instead of being just throwaway fun.

4b) I don't think so. The cartoon format of the show allows them to create surreal scenes and that thing that the characters don't age and so on, but nothing more than that, I think.

5) No way it is just another cartoon. The show is not there just to take some lightweight laughs out of us, but to make us think and reason, and to touch us sometimes.

6) Not sure how to answer this. In a not too distant past, violence was never abused on the show, and the jokes were genuinely funny and well in place. But lately, they have been just gratuitous and needless.

6a) Well, yes. You can't deny Tom And Jerry, Woody Woodpecke, Road Runner, etc are violent and take liberties, and the characters never die. That's not the case with OFF, though.

6b) Probably not. Live action violence can't be veiled the way violence in OFF is.

7) I don't live in USA so I can't quite tell, but I believe they do the best job depicting society and polictics, without fear to show its flaws and absurdities, destroying the myth of a "perfect society" we have over here in the 3rd world.

7a) I can easily relate the reality I see in OFF with the reality of Brazil, where I live. Not only specific characters (would I be too pretentious if I said I identify myself with Lisa?), but the police officers, the bad school system, etc, are stuff I'm used to find around here.

8) Heh heh, fortunately I don't have kids, but I would have no problem letting them watch OFF. If I had to choose one program to let them watch, I would easily choose OFF instead of all that soap opera garbage.

9) Well, people would expect realism on live action shows, and they'd probably expect a punishment for Maggie. But since we're watching a show that deals with absurdities all the time, there's no much surprise with the resolution of the case.

10) The Simpsons intentionally cast an image around themselves as a lightweight, funny cartoon, and people can overlook these aspects of the show and face it as just another funny cartoon. Many people, however, understand the real image of the show, that is exactly to show these situations and poke fun at them, so complaining is no good trying.

[D.B.]

...So really I get the impression she meant it.

Fair enough. However I stand by my original statement.

[Marco]

Wow, a test that isn-t a Trivia

23, Male

1) Because when it started it was original and did something no other shows did (i-m talking about Italian TV here, because that's where i saw them for the first time). It was a cartoon ore for adults than for kids, a witty and "evil" huour that i didn-t see anywhere before. But i just liked the fact it was very unusual.
Then with time it matured, and became simply a classic. It lost some of its starting sarcasm about the average American family but became more mainstream. I couldn't tell why, i was already hooked at the time.

2) Yes, at least that's what i've heard. I think they will want to end it completely with a or more movies.

3) That could've been true for the first episodes, i guess, before the "cartoonish" essence of the show gained a prominent role in the plots and situations. But not fully. As a sitcom it would've not stimulated the public attention so much, after all we know the simpsons as yellow, ugly, bulgy-eyed people. It's the first thing that hits the eye and attention of the first occasional viewer.

4) It's satire, sometimes velated, sometimes utterly cried out loud. The first episodes where a good example of this and they imho had a good balance and a very strong sense of (im)morality. I think this is one of the other things that got lost in time as seasons went through. Now it's more of a "make fun of guest star - important personalities" satire, and not even too much clever.

4a) I wouldn't know really, being not an American. Sometimes they seem a little too forced to me, but that's it.

4b) Never watched Friends nor the other one. But I liked the Simpsons precisely because, even if it was a cartoon, it didn't take advantage of this particularity. Of course, the latter seasons are out of this line of thoughts. (Homer being gutted by a badger is definitely a step too far in the cartoonish dimension.)

5) Again, let's make a distinguo. Before the writers started to use the cartoonish side of the simpsons to throw the show in the "make people laugh with lowbrow humour" bucket, the Simpsons was the perfect balance between humour sitcoms, social commentary, family dramas and just cartoon humour. Yes, it was definitely something of its own kind.

6) 70% of the times, it's just another way to shock people and gain easy laughs/views. I know we don't live in a world full of flowers and rainbows, but sometimes violence is used in the show just for the fun of it. That could be avoidable.

6a)Some cartoons are done especially and only for that, so yes. Itchy and Scratchy is a cartoon in a cartoon that explains this, though its an humorous violence. The real violence (mental, phisical, subtle and *real*) it's something i don't see often in cartoons. Then again, i'm not very interested in the scene.

6b)I don't think so. The fact of being a cartoon "smoothes" the impact on people, of every age. If it were a sitcom people would probably be not so happy about it.

7) Couldn't know, thoguh  its pretty clear everything in the show is exagerated (charachters and situations) in realtion to reality, to give an edge to the commentary/satire/humour.

7a) Hm... no. Well, my mother maybe resembles Marge at times, but just because Marge was built around the stereotypical caring mom. As for myself, i can' really compare to anyone in particular. Maybe Homer for my laziness and love of just doing nothing
And i was like Lisa in my earlier school years. Got lost with time.

8)I don't, but if i had, yes, i'd let them.  Of course i'd be watching with them, not for supervision but more for curiosity, especially if earlier seasons are being shown.

9)I don't think it would've been judged as immoral. Maybe people would've expected some more realism in the ending.

10)Because the plot and the overall situation was handled with intelligence and so the act of Maggie wasn't "unsupported". It fit well in the plot and it "melted" good with the mood. The immorality of the act slipped away. Plus, Burns is the "evil" charachter. More so in that special episode, i think that prevents to be marked as unmoral.

[Wilde Grey Yonder]

20, female.

1. It is (or was, before the undeniable rot set in) an intelligent, well-plotted and above all hilarious show, aimed at a wide audience.

2. Sad to say, yes, and sadder to say, I would not cry over it. It has been running for so long, and there is a definite sense of a draught in later episodes. I'd give it a couple of seasons more, at most.

3. It might just work, but it would not be a patch on the show as it is. The style of the animation is one of the many things which made it so enjoyable.

4. I would like to agree with Marco on this one. The cultural issues and satire were much better covered in the old days, when the humour was highbrow and the writers seemed to watch other things than reality TV and "The Matrix". Bitterness aside, this used to a very perceptive show.

4a. A hard question to answer. After all, this is a comedy, and comedy is supposed to subvert the current mores. The political views presented usually seemed just slightly conservative to me, but that is my personal opinion.

4b. Don't watch those shows, and frankly they don't seem worth it.

5. The Simpsons is definitely not just another cartoon. It is made for the whole family, meaning that it is (or should be) mature enough to appeal to adults. This might not seem revolutionary now, but in 1990 that was groundbreaking.

6. The violence might seem gratuitous at times, especially lately, but humour is not a domesticated beast. Humour thrives on violence, sex, and whatever is taboo. In the former seasons, I had very little problems with the violence, it being a cartoon and all. In latter seasons, again, it has been taken too far and seems to be actively used to nauseate the audience.

6a. I am not an expert, but I would suppose so. Cartoons are not supposed to be realistic.

6b. Hard to answer, really. It might be allowed, but I doubt it would be as enjoyable.

7. Not being American, I wouldn't know, but *idealistic*... HA!

7a. Most certainly yes. Some of the characters are as well developed as any you could hope to see in a TV show.

8. I don't have children, but I watched The Simpsons and it never harmed me. Seriously, yes. There is plenty of stuff on the telly which is more tasteless and hasn't got the wit to balance it. If anything, the gratuitous sex in the later episodes would put me off, but you can't just protect children every second of their lives.

9. Well, maybe more realism would have been expected.

10. It *is* fiction. Surely people can distinguish between fiction and reality?

[CargoOfDarkness]

Age and Sex please: I am a 17,4 years old boy-oy-oy!


1) Why do you think "The Simpsons" is so popular and has lasted so long?

Because it started with a uncomercial idea to creat a real Family with all the real problems and a familieship. In my oppinion the Simpsons were getting popular after the three first seasons. The reached the top of the show and hold that level till season 9.



2) Do you think there is an end in sight for "The Simpsons"?

I hope so. After the 10. season the Simpsons were getting worser and worser. They ended up in stupid storys and dirty jokes. The wonderful characters became standart choosen joke-artists. The storys have no logic and sense. Needless or  unnecessary gueststars spoilt the hole show.



3) Do you think "The Simpsons" would work well as a live action sitcom?

Never. Maybe the emotions and the spoken fun can be tranzfer into a reality sitcom.



4) How do you think "The Simpsons" tackles social, cultural and political issues?

Yearh! Its very criticful. But not everyone can see the deeper messages of the show. And in the new episodes, the messages are lesser and deeper hidden.



4a) In regards to politically-incorrect issues how do you think these are shown / come across?

4b) Do you think that because "The Simpsons" is a cartoon, it takes more liberties with these and other issues more than say a show like "Friends" or "Sex And The City"?

I don't know these other sitcomes.....



5) Would you rate "The Simpsons" as just another cartoon or would say that it is something completely different? if so, why?

Its completely differnet. It have parodies of Cartoons (like Itchy and Scratchy). But Simpsons is a mixture of family, movie, animated-series and sitcom. You cannot put it into a till.



6) Do you think the violence in the show is justified?

Not really. I cannot handle with violence in The Simpsons.



6a) Do you think that cartoons in general take liberties when it comes to violence?

Maybe. It is indepedent of what kind of violence it is....



6b) Would a live action show that has as much violence as "The Simpsons" be received well? (Shown in the same time
slot as "The Simpsons")

I don´t know. Not really, because, how I said, I cannot handle with the violence in The Simpsons.


7) Do you think that "The Simpsons" is a good and idealistic portrayal of American Culture and Society?

Hehe, never!  



7a) Can you or anyone in your family relate to "The Simpsons" and the characters involved?

Noboy. Just me, sometimes I feel like Lisa Simpson....



If you have children would you allow your children to a watch a live action show similar to "The Simpsons" in regards to violence and content on their own without adult supervision and why?

No, I explained that a reallity show would never be the same...




Okay, I got this....

[Stancho]

Fair enough. However I stand by my original statement.

Whatever, we all know what happened anyway...

[Kwyjibo]

Male, 17.

1) Why do you think "The Simpsons" is so popular and has lasted so long?
In my opinion, the Simpsons gained much popularity in the 90s, due to a well-balanced combination of humour and satire.
Of course, nothing lasts forever, and as of season 11, the producer(s) chose to move to a different, larger, and seemingly growing audience, which in my experience consist mostly of the same people who can rant for hours about the subtleties of reality TV-shows (though they don't use the word "subtle").

2) Do you think there is an end in sight for "The Simpsons"?
Not as such. When the new audience loses interest, we'll see if Fox stop it or try to move on to another audience.

3) Do you think "The Simpsons" would work well as a live action sitcom?
It would be possible, but it'd be the most expensive sitcom ever produced, then. Plus, the animation adds a layer of "innocense", which allows the show to break certain limits, which it wouldn't have been allowed had it been a live action sitcom.

4) How do you think "The Simpsons" tackles social, cultural and political issues?
Until recently, pretty good, satire being a major force of the show.

4a) In regards to politically-incorrect issues how do you think these are shown / come across?
The show was never PC, and one of the things it "commented" on regularly, was political correctness.

4b) Do you think that because "The Simpsons" is a cartoon, it takes more liberties with these and other issues more than say a show like "Friends" or "Sex And The City"?
Though I find Friends very amusing, it's never appeared to be anything else than a comedy based on humorous incidents and peculiar characters.
And as for "Sex and the City"... Well, the very name have kept me from watching it. If someone recommended it to me, I might watch it, but so far, nobody has.

5) Would you rate "The Simpsons" as just another cartoon or would say that it is something completely different? if so, why?
The Simpsons is far from being "just a cartoon". The show does not "rely" on being a cartoon, it's points and characters are not dependent on the fact that it's a cartoon.
That makes it much different from other cartoons.

6) Do you think the violence in the show is justified?
Though I've occasionally found the violence to be unneccesary and as such unjustified, it's never appeared to be "too much". That is, until season 11.

6a) Do you think that cartoons in general take liberties when it comes to violence?
Of course they do. That is one of the powers of animation, extreme violence doesn't seem that extreme after all.

6b) Would a live action show that has as much violence as "The Simpsons" be received well? (Shown in the same time slot as "The Simpsons")
Sadly, yes, I think it would, though the audience would probably prefer "pure" violence shows like, Jackass.

7) Do you think that "The Simpsons" is a good and idealistic portrayal of American Culture and Society?
Idealistic? Far from it. But good? Yeah.
I think one of the messages of the show ... was... that USA, just like the Simpsons family (and just like every other country), had it's flaws and problems, but beneath those actually was "good".

7a) Can you or anyone in your family relate to "The Simpsons" and the characters involved?
I think it's quite easy to relate to the problems of the family members in the early seasons, though again, after season 11 it gets a bit harder. Being raped by a panda doesn't seem to be that common a problem for most people.

8) If you have children would you allow your children to a watch a live action show similar to "The Simpsons" in regards to violence and content on their own without adult supervision and why?
Well, IMO, kids under, say, 6-7 years can watch actual kids' shows. No reason to break their illusions so soon.
But I sure wouldn't let my kids watch the recent The Simpsons seasons if I could prevent it, no matter the age.

(Who Shot Mr. Burns)
9) Do you think that if it was a live action show that it would still have been seen as funny? or do you think that it would have been looked upon as morally wrong in todays society and why?
The point of the Simpsons was at the time of Who Shot Mr Burns still to comment on today's society with irony and sarcasm, and in doing so, it's probably been looked upon as morally wrong by certain people, on several occasions.

10) What do you think the reasons are that allow this episode and others like it to be made and seen, and enjoyed by millions around the world. And not to be complained about or looked upon as morally wrong?
Generally, people were (are) quite tired of political correctness and certain people's ideas of morals. The Simpsons helped breaking boundaries that people had wanted to be broken for a looong time.

[Robbie]

Don't mind if I do!

Age and Sex please:

18 years old, Male...

1) Why do you think "The Simpsons" is so popular and has lasted so long?

Satire, good writing in the early seasons, and a hell of a lot of merchandising. Not to mention it's one of the few prime-time animated sitcoms to adress current issues...

2) Do you think there is an end in sight for "The Simpsons"?

Hell yeah! Everything's gotta end sometime, just ask the Spice Girls....

3) Do you think "The Simpsons" would work well as a live action sitcom?

Not really. The look of the characters don't really fit. Not to mention it would be hard to emulate Bart and Lisa's hairstyles...

4) How do you think "The Simpsons" tackles social, cultural and political issues?

Well, it's all realistic, innit? Just because you won't find a Springfield and Shelbyville sitting next to each other in the US doesn't mean you could find an Apu-type at your local convieniece store or a Burnsie making you work your butt off.

4a) In regards to politically-incorrect issues how do you think these are shown / come across?

I never really got the hang of political correctness myself. All i know is what's right and wrong. So I think it should be handled at least pretty subtle. No chance of that with Large Marge, I hear...

4b) Do you think that because "The Simpsons" is a cartoon, it takes more liberties with these and other issues more than say a show like "Friends" or "Sex And The City"?

I dunno, I never watch Friends, or Sex In the city that much, but Friends' lesbian relationship was handled pretty subtly. I don't think I got the idea it was supposed to be taboo at all. But I was raised kinda liberally, so I don't think gay and lesbian couples should be singled out.

5) Would you rate "The Simpsons" as just another cartoon or would say that it is something completely different? if so, why?

Nah. Animated sitcom seems to fit it more. I think Lisa said it best.

6) Do you think the violence in the show is justified?

Well, a lot of it is, unless we're talking about the Looney Tunes slapstick Homer undergoes every freakin' latter season episode. I mean, Little Big Mom with the snow mounds and the eletric needle room...  :scream:

6a) Do you think that cartoons in general take liberties when it comes to violence?

Well, at least they don't show the real-life consequences of such violence. I mean, can you REALLY play human lungs like the bagpipes?

6b) Would a live action show that has as much violence as "The Simpsons" be received well? (Shown in the same time slot as "The Simpsons")

Well, probably not, but I think Ally McBeal has this sort of violence, and people liked it. People liked Jackass too, but that had warnings and was probably shown in a late night slot.

7) Do you think that "The Simpsons" is a good and idealistic portrayal of American Culture and Society?

Not really. It's like our world, but boosted to ridiculous lengths. The rich burn us like dead cattle, trying to change things won't be seen as for the better by everyone... No matter how many times you try it, moonlighting extra jobs suck like that vent Bart crawled into at the end of Little Girl in the Big Ten. (You hearing this, Homer Simpson?!)

7a) Can you or anyone in your family relate to "The Simpsons" and the characters involved?

Well, I could relate to Bart, probably... And Homer, and even Lisa a little bit, so yeah.

If you have children would you allow your children to a watch a live action show similar to "The Simpsons" in regards to violence and content on their own without adult supervision and why?

If they found it funny and knew that doing such violence yourself is wrong, I guess so. I would probably end up raisising a kid like Charlie does in Me, Myself and Irene.

Case Study: Who Shot Mr Burns (Parts One & Two)

This episode dealt with the attempted murder of Mr Burns. The whole town is accused of the murder and throughout the episode each character is questioned and then struke off the list. At the end we find out that the culprit was Baby Maggie Simpsons. Even though she was found guilty of the attempted murder of Mr Burns she was never arrested or punished for this crime.

9) Do you think that if it was a live action show that it would still have been seen as funny? or do you think that it would have been looked upon as morally wrong in todays society and why?

Probably, but that's just because I'm British. Honestly, it was a shock for me too, as the ending also implies she wanted to do it...  

10) What do you think the reasons are that allow this episode and others like it to be made and seen, and enjoyed by millions around the world. And not to be complained about or looked upon as morally wrong?

They probably just wanted to spoof Who Shot Jr. With the Simpsons popularity, it was a real slobber-knocker of a plot idea, though. The ending seemed a little bit stupid though, because I wouldn't think Maggie would have been able to fire that gun in the first place, unless it did go off accidentally.

Well, this is my reply. Hooby-hoo-be-doo, and all that...