You must log in or register to comment.
It’s not offensive, it’s just not that funny.
97% of Seinfeld’s entertainment value is the bass line.
But if you make an observation and draw it out for a long time, that automatically makes it funny, right?
BA DOUH BUH shikka shikka BAH-DA (et al)
Didn’t millennials watch it growing up? Someone’s not getting their generational terms right
Hell, I was even old enough when it was airing to think it was overrated then.
I didn’t necessarily mind it, but Jerry’s awful standup shoved in there on the other hand…
Generational labels tend to divide by arbitrary boundaries more than actually give you insightful information about something exclusive to the group.
Sounds like someone’s born on a cusp. Or right in the middle.
The years for Millennials go up to 94-96, Seinfeld finished in 98. I doubt many that young would have seen it. I was born in 86 and I barely watched Seinfeld re-runs.
The years for Millennials go up to 94-96
?? What do you think millennials were doing after 1996? Did they just phase out of existence?
I was born in 86 and I barely watched Seinfeld re-runs.
People had Seinfeld on in my college dorm during the mid-00s. It was one of the most syndicated shows of its era. If you remember 9/11, you remember Seinfeld.
I commented on someone who seemed to think that millennials wasn’t the correct generation because millennials must have grown up watching Seinfeld. Many did, but many didn’t. I know many people around my age that didn’t watch it so it’s fairly safe to assume that people who were 2-4 years old when the show ended might not have seen it, even re-runs. Remembering it and watching it enough to have an opinion on it are two different things.
It’s not like every millennial watched it growing up. It’s not inconceivable that there are millennials who are seeing it now for only the first time and find it offensive.
I mean, it was genuinely hard to avoid for a while there.
Gen Z, maybe.
My partner is a millennial and she had never seen Seinfeld until we first watched it together a few years ago. It’s not that inconceivable to imagine not everyone grew up watching the same things as you.
No, it’s definitely fine and possible. A thriving industry of Youtube reaction channels hinges on that plausibility. It’s just the concept of the OP’s headline implying it’s a generational thing when it definitely isn’t.
Ummmm, the whole point of the show was that the people were horrible.
The show ended with them jailed after they made fun of a guy who was getting mugged.
The gang on It’s Always Sunny is worse but they are obviously not people we’re supposed to empathise with. It’s quite a bit less obvious on Seinfeld.
Always Sunny was taking the idea of Seinfeld and dialing it up to 11.
I feel like the distinction is that on Sunny the gang is “punished” for their shitty behavior, and on Seinfeld they basically never were. (I don’t include the season finale because that was just a cop-out to give the show an ending.)
I feel like Seinfeld reveled in the naughty pleasure of schadenfreude
The show is still a very 90s show with 90s sensibilities. There is a lot of media from that time that hasn’t aged well.
That right there is some clickbait. I’m millennial and I was watching the show when it was on and loved it.
Yeah, not sure how old they think millennials are or when they thought Seinfeld aired
#HEY IT’S THE ASSMAN!
This whole “young people find everything offensive” narrative is ridiculous, and always has been. It’s very beneficial to those who want to shift the Overton window, though.
Are we talking about “Seinfeld”, the slightly overrated comedy TV series, or “Seinfeld”, the horrible human being?
Yes
I’m an Xer and I didn’t like Seinfeld, but that’s mostly because I don’t like embarrassment comedy. It’s the same reason I don’t like Will Ferrel and Ben Stiller, but to each their own. I don’t begrudge anyone else finding it funny, it’s just not my vibe.
It’s weird that “this group of people don’t like that show that you like” is supposed to create some sort of negative reaction. My enjoyment of a thing does not depend on a certain number of other people liking it.
I must be numb to “outrage is the best way to engage people” that everyone uses these days.
To be fair, Outrage Marketing does work, but it usually isn’t this obvious.
Like when Disney announced that the Snow White remake would have Seven Multicolored Normal Sized Human People? And later it turned out the final movie will indeed have dwarves?
That was just done to get bigots talking about the flick. Wouldn’t be surprised to learn Aerial being black in the newer Mermaid movie was the same thing. I mean it worked, people were too busy defending Disney from criticism for this move that they didn’t notice the movie is, like most Live Action Remakes of Non-Live Action media, shit.
Hey Disney, bring back your 2D Animation, have them do another Lion King, then dub it over with the audio for the Mufasa film. I guarantee I’ll actually consider watching the damn thing if you do that. (These Live Action remakes have got to be a Money Laundering scheme or something)
Hey Disney, bring back your 2D Animation
Disney used to churn out plenty of entertaining live action shows without issue.
The problem isn’t with the medium, it’s with the company. They’ve fired too many writers, put too much stock in CGI, and devolved too much of the editing process to the marketing department.
But the idea that the folks who brought you Tron, The Mighty Ducks, and Pirates of the Caribbean can’t make good live action cinema is crazy.
Before The Little Mermaid Disney made live-action remakes of Pinnochio and Peter Pan. Neither of them had a substantial outrage associated with them and I didn’t hear about either of them until they’d already released and flopped.
Imagine making a live action Pinocchio and not putting Guillermo del Toro in charge
If they(we) think Seinfeld is offensive, what do they think of IASIP?
Would you leave us the fuck alone, we’re old now!
I did a re-watch in the last couple years. Most of it was fine, even if it would not be a big hit these days. Jerry dates the Asian women? Yea that would get called out most likely. Elaine dates a guy she thinks is black? Pretty sure that still flies. Elaine is scarred she’s dating a murderer? Probs a special two part episode these days. Shocks me how ahead of the curve they were with the Elaine gets gaped episode.
Oh yeah, that’s a gape
I guess I’m going to have to rewatch now.
it’s the laugh track that’s offensive.
I feel like a lot of you assume I’m younger. I’m closer to 50 then I like to admit. I’m just not from the US, maybe that is part of why it didn’t click with me.
And I’m older than you and in the US-- I agree with you that Seinfeld was a waste of scotch tape also. There was nothing about it that ever resonated with me. And for the life of me, I can’t see how anyone else could be so fascinated by the premise of that TV show.
It’s not even worth the effort to be “offended” by it.
I watched the first episode and found it dull and boring. Is it representative for the whole show?
The past decade of tv has spoiled people with quality TV shows.
Back in the old days of tv, we didn’t have story arcs. First seasons of shows were still rough. Networks often gave shows a lot longer of a lifeline to prove themselves. For example: Parks and Rec didn’t hit their stride into mid-Season 2.
For 90s shows, I recommend finding a Top 10 episodes list and seeing if you enjoy it.
This, there’s a LOT of shows before streaming services where I just beg people to skip the first season.
Always Sunny is definitely one that suffers from a lot of Early Installment Weirdness, it’s clear they had no idea what the hell they wanted the show to be at the start… Also Danny DeVito improves anything he touches.
Funny story, Season 1 was so bad the network said they would cancel them unless they could get an A-List Actor to guest star in an episode for a ratings’ boost, which went so well that said guest star wound up being a permanent mainstay.
Some episodes are legendarily funny, but a lot are very forgettable. It’s more of a cultural bellwether.
Seinfeld was one of those shows that talked about certain issues that weren’t broached on network tv. I think the masturbation episode was the first time it was even alluded to on any mainstream tv.
But at the end of the day it’s a sitcom with laugh tracks, so it doesn’t age super well.
Elaine was part of the masturbation episode and lost, which further speaks to the progressiveness of the show because a woman was portrayed as having sexuality that was outside of acceptable limits at the time (for love only, preferably in marriage). They also presented being gay as acceptable, which was quite progressive at the time where people were calling each other “gay” and the f-word as a terrible insult.
Bla bla blaYou’d be correct, the first episode is indeed very dull and boring. I’d recommend to start from Season 4.
I’m working my way through now, in season 4. Later seasons get better, but there’s a lot more bad than good imo. I’m not sure I’ve seen an episode that’s consistently funny, just the occasional good joke.
It’s not a formula I find enjoyable, always sunny follows the same pattern.
Honestly, Seinfeld paved the way for a lot of quality cringe comedy.
It’s like watching the Matrix and being bored with the beats/effects, because it’s now the norm everywhere.
God, Matrix is such a trip, it’s a real showcase of how society actively learns.
When it came out, I was a kid who was considered intelligent by peers simply because I was capable of understanding the film whereas even a lot of grown-ups found it hard to grok.
Nowadays the idea of our entire world being fabricated is so basic and so often the butt of jokes that you can’t ever tell if someone’s kidding or not when they talk about Simulation Theory.
And this is one of many reasons why The Matrix Resurrected was doomed to fail.
Relevant Youtube Video - https://youtu.be/7WqVXT5ofDs
They said “not that there’s anything wrong with that” about gay people in the 90s. WAY better than most of the shit at the time.
