An MitM-Simpsons comparison

reese35

New member
I recently noticed, after seeing this week's Simpsons opener that there is at least one thing both shows have in common.

Both shows' cold openers are totally random. (And yet somehow, most MitM's cold openers get the shaft in syndie land, even when both the C.O. and a 4-second title sting total less than 33 seconds, the length of the opening credits)

Even as I'm writing this, I recall one more thing. Jane Kaczmarek both play hard-ass characters! In MitM, a hard-ass mom; in the Simpsons, a hard-ass judge.
 
Last edited:

tony_montana

Semper Fidelis
So, you DID decide to post this! :D
Anyways, like I said in our personal chat, the Simpsons and MITM have one thing that seperates them alot: MITM is hilarious, and Simpsons is not. Hope you didn't mind me saying that, Mike!
Oh, another similarity: Two very strange dads. :D
 
Malcolm in the Middle was based ooff of Simpsons so they are kind of alike. I personally like both, but recently Simpsons has been getting a tiny bit stale, but I still like it!
 

yardgames

Retired Administrator
I believe that among the many original ideas for MITM was to make it a live-action version of the Simpsons; but I think it was more important for Linwood to reflect his persona life history rather than that of an animated family his show originally aired before.
 

MalcolmFun

New member
I think that is a myth it was based on the Simpsons. Listen to the DVD commentary it was a unique project by Boomer and Fox almost wasnt even sold on it. It just easy to compare the whacky families since it aired right after it.

Despite its total craziness, Malcolm is an order of magnitute more realistic then the Simpsons. Even discounting the animation vs live action, just compare the plots and characters they are much more believable. So Malcolm has some perhaps troubled individuals in tough situations - okay but they are pretty much in the real world. Simpsons all of Springfrield is far fetched, I don't see it as any more realistic then Futurama (which by the way is funnier then the stale Simpsons anyway)
 

reese35

New member
Simpsons all of Springfrield is far fetched, I don't see it as any more realistic then Futurama (which by the way is funnier then the stale Simpsons anyway)

And yet, somehow, Futurama got canned too.

Hold on, here's one thing Futurama and MitM have in common - poor marketing! Episodes of Futurama and some of MitM (which eventually reaired) were preempted by - what else - football! By 2003, Futurama was airing erratically, and at the post-football time of Sundays at 7:00 (a more likely to be preempted time for a series) before leaving Fox. The following year, MitM would meet the same fate being at Sundays at 7:30, starting that downgrade of MitM viewership that would lead to the final season.

(Info gathered from Wikipedia :D)
 
That is so true, that is the only reason why it was Fox's lowest rated show, I've been asking around and a lot of wpople like it in my school, it's timeslots were the only thing that brought down its rating.

I personally prefer Simpsons over Futurama as I get a bit bored of Futurama sometimes, Futurama however is going to be brought back in 2008, so it hasn't really got canned. B ut it is obvious that Mitm is more popular.

Overall, Mitm is obviouslt thoguht of as unique because of it being live action and Simpsons being aniomated, and also because of storylines etc. However it is a know fact that Mitm was inspired by the Simpsons
 

yardgames

Retired Administrator
Futurama is going to be brought back in 2008? That is actually really rare; in fact, as far as I know it's only the second show ever to be officially canned by a network (not just hiatus) and then brought back. The first is Family Guy. Ironic how they're both on Fox, huh?
 
Top