What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

"Seinfeld": Does it hold up 10 years later? (1 Viewer)

dugout

Footballguy
http://www.newsweek.com/id/135368

Nope: When 'Seinfeld' signed off, it was hailed as a classic—the original must-see TV. Looking back now, you can't help wondering, what were we thinking?

By Marc Peyser

Are you ready to feel old? It was 10 years ago this month that "Seinfeld" went off the air. The decade may have flown by in less time than it took Jerry to find his next girlfriend, but a decade seems like the right distance from which to evaluate how successful the show really was. When it left prime time in 1998, "Seinfeld" was widely considered to be a classic, and many fans call it the best sitcom ever. Was it either?

Or neither. As someone who doesn't dip into its bottomless rerun pool much, I was surprised when I sat down with the show again by how poorly "Seinfeld" holds up. What once seemed smart—they just did a storyline on John Cheever's diaries!—feels like shtik. The pacing—no show had ever packed in so many scenes, some of them lasting a few seconds—now seems formulaic and forced. You can almost hear the guys sitting in the writers' room throwing out ideas: Wouldn't it be funny if (a) Jerry dated a deaf girl? (b) Elaine was an embarrassingly bad dancer? © George got a job with the Yankees? (d) Kramer invented a bra for men? Chances are, you can immediately remember the episode I'm talking about, and it's probably making you smile. But I bet you can't remember much beyond that tagline, because the show was one big conceit: four characters—whiny wackos with hair, really—who managed to turn life's most ordinary situations into something outrageous, and with a laugh track.

Seinfeld and cocreator Larry David (lately of "Curb Your Enthusiasm") might not disagree much with that assessment. They always said that "Seinfeld" didn't aspire to be anything great— after all, this was a show about "nothing." They went out of their way to create a sitcom that treated happy endings and character development like kryptonite. "Seinfeld" was about finding humor in ordinary situations: relationships, jobs, parents, a bite at the local coffee shop. If you could dig up laughs in a chocolate babka, you really were the funniest show around. And if you could do it in an entire episode about masturbation—and, even tougher, without ever saying the word "masturbation"—you were the master of the comedy domain.

But, like a cheap sweater, or a cheap puffy shirt, the "Seinfeld" humor wears thin fast. It's hard to concoct four storylines an episode that are simultaneously ordinary and over the top. After all these years, the show's meticulous architecture creaks so loudly, it drowns out the comedy. Which leaves you with something very silly. I don't mean juvenile. The truly naughty episodes—such as the one about being the "master of my domain" (see above) or the one about breast implants—are still must-see TV, because they cover ticklish territory no one went near before, and they did it with a verbal panache that could easily have become crass. But in between, there were an awful lot of clothes jokes. And food jokes. And car jokes. And was that George Steinbrenner stuff ever funny to anyone who's not a Yankees fan? Maybe it's not the writing that's to blame at all. We all know that Jerry was no Olivier, but could he be a worse actor? I found myself wondering if "Seinfeld" would work better if Seinfeld weren't in it.

Perhaps none of this will bother you as you watch the one about George buying Jon Voight's car for the 153rd time. Part of the reason we loved "Seinfeld" was that these guys were our buddies. For eight years we hung out with them, along with those kids just down the street on "Friends." "Seinfeld" became the '90s version of bowling night: the place you kicked back once a week and shared life's little triumphs and humiliations with folks who knew just what you were going through. They made you feel like part of the gang, right down to the inside jokes. The problem is, we've changed, and the "Seinfeld" gang hasn't. There's a reason that the great sitcoms—"The Mary Tyler Moore Show," "M*A*S*H" and "Taxi," to name a few—still work. They're not just about being funny; they're about people who grow enough in a week, and over time, to keep them interesting. They have depth. Jerry and George have issues. That can be amusing, even occasionally hilarious. But after a while, it all has started to sound like a whole lotta yadda yadda yadda.

-------------------------------

Yep: One of the many reasons 'Seinfeld' remains a TV classic: have you ever really watched how Wayne Knight narrows his beady little eyes?

By David Noonan

Why is "Seinfeld," currently running on more than 200 stations across the country, still going strong 10 years after the last original episode aired? Why do I watch it nearly every weeknight at 7:30 and sometimes again at 11? Why are millions still watching and laughing along with me, including my 18-year-old son, who was born in April 1990, before the fragile, four-episode first season (the "glass table" season) had even begun? Why does "Seinfeld," like Elaine Benes, have such great legs? (Why does this article start with so many questions?) There are lots of reasons, actually. I could talk about the great writing, the intricate, interwoven storylines and how … yadda yadda yadda … it's really funny. I could discuss its bicipital nature, the underlying Jerry Seinfeld/Larry David yin/yang, good/evil, light/dark tension that gives the show its unique character. I could even explore the role that trivia plays in the enduring appeal of a sitcom with 180 episodes in the can. (During the first season, what kind of table did jerry have in his apartment?) I could do that, but I'm not going to. Instead, I'm going to examine some of the show's more subtle strengths, the often overlooked and underappreciated elements that are so critical to "Seinfeld's" ongoing success.

There is, for example, the casting. And when I say casting, I don't mean the four principals, who, in my view, rank right up there with the stars of "I Love Lucy," "the #### Van Dyke Show," "All in the Family" and "Cheers." (Yeah, I know, Jerry's not an actor, but the other three more than compensate for his limitations.) No, I'm talking about the rest of the ensemble. Let me say it plain—no sitcom in the history of television has featured a more talented or memorable bunch of second, third and fourth bananas than "Seinfeld." Period.

The truth is, even we loyal fans can get a little tired of the three yuppie leads and their hipster-doofus buddy nattering on about nothing. But when we do, there are plenty of other great characters to keep us watching, especially the deranged trio of Frank Costanza (Jerry Stiller), Estelle Costanza (Estelle Harris) and Newman (Wayne Knight). How deeply disturbed these folks are, how extraordinary the actors who bring their pathologies to life. With perfect timing, inspired line readings (just try to predict when Stiller is going to start screaming; count the many ways Harris can say "George") and physical craft (see Newman narrow his beady eyes like a silent-movie villain), they add a deep and essential layer of psychosis to the show.

Less prominent but no less worthy of attention are Jerry's father, Morty (Barney Martin); his mother, Helen (Liz Sheridan); his shoplifting Uncle Leo (Len Lesser); Elaine's boss J. Peterman (John O'Hurley), and Kramer's attorney, Jackie Chiles (Phil Morris). It's incredible to see how totally these actors commit to their nutty roles. Even bit parts on the show, like Philip Baker Hall's Lt. Bookman, the library cop, become master classes in lunacy.

Another reason the show has held up as long as it has, I think, is the variety and quality of the sets. And again, I'm not talking about the two main sets—Jerry's bland apartment or that boring coffee shop they hang out in. I mean all the other places we go when we watch, like George's parents' house in Queens, a perfect little domestic hell, with its stuffed couch, polished coffee table and hideous knickknacks. Or Newman's cluttered apartment, the postman's lair, where he cavorts with Kramer's mother and soaks his feet after a long day delivering mail. (Yuck.) Also, thanks to the fanatical attention to detail, you get that perfect combination of ridiculous plots and realistic sets. When Jerry and Elaine go to the bakery to buy a chocolate babka or the gang spends the weekend in the Hamptons (think "shrinkage"), it looks like they're buying a babka and hanging out in the Hamptons.

Although it's about four friends in New York in the '90s, "Seinfeld's" best jokes have almost nothing to do with all that, another reason it endures. The contamination of Jerry's car by a parking valet's lethal BO, Kramer's finding the old Merv Griffin set and turning his apartment into a talk show, the invention of the Mansiere. These are timeless absurdities. And here's another one: it's 2008 and we're still watching.

 
OMG has it been 10 years.

Amazing show. It is great that they still show episodes. It would be something if they came back and did another show or movie.

 
They had a lot stinkers. They went on a run for a while where they basically parodied real life events badly (OJ, Tanya Harding, etc.) But there are some good episodes.

I don't think it's as good as MASH or All In The Family, or The Office. I place it just above Three's Company.

 
They had a lot stinkers. They went on a run for a while where they basically parodied real life events badly (OJ, Tanya Harding, etc.) But there are some good episodes.

I don't think it's as good as MASH or All In The Family, or The Office. I place it just above Three's Company.
OK, now that's just stupid.I can't stand 2 minutes of Three's Company and its only that long so I can check out Crissy's rack. Seinfeld is in a whole other stratosphere. I can understand MASH or the Office based on personal preference, but All In The Family? Seriously? That's just whack.

 
I say absolutely. Why? Because I can still sit down and watch it every single day and not get bored with it. Now take Friends, which I watched more religiously when it was on the air, I can't watch it now. Just bores me to tears. Sure there are some funny shows if I catch that I will watch, but for the most part I never pay attention. But Seinfeld? I can watch it every day. And most of the comedy is still relevant.

 
best show ever, although The Office is creeping up my list.

Bottom line: The show was diferent and over the top. The "popular" sitcoms now(other than the office) are the very definition of formulaic. They're all about some fat loser with an attractive, mean wife and smart kids. The father puts his foot in his mouth, the kids roll their eyes, the wife stomps off, hilarity ensues...i guess.

 
the test for me is that i'm in one of ESPN's daily cap leagues which asks members to name their teams after Seinfeld references. at times, the league has had more than 200 members & not only are there 200+ teamworthy Seinfeld references (i know ive changed mine a half dozen times: orgy guy, kavorka, yam-yam, etc, without duplicating) but i still giggle just reading the standings. dunno another show (with the possible exception of monty python) that could meet that criteria and that makes it a cultural icon, at the very least. nufced

 
I watched all the episodes 10 years ago....yada yada yada, I watch the re-runs almost every weeknight. :goodposting:

 
Comparing Seinfeld to Three's Company :thumbdown:
Early simple Seinfeld (the Chinese Restaurant, Parking Garage, etc) were great. But then they started getting so convoluted and forced it was like a Three's Company episode.But if you liked all those episodes, then good for you. I'm certainly not going to tell you what you should or should not like.
 
Of course it does.

What's more shocking is watching season 1 re-runs and realizing they are almost 20 years old.

 
IMO, Seinfeld and Cheers stand head and shoulders above any other sitcom ever (though All in The Family was more bold and edgy, and as well-written as these two, just not as laugh-out-loud funny in my estimation.)

I still watch re-runs. The show's just f'n funny, why try to dissect it?

 
best show ever, although The Office is creeping up my list.Bottom line: The show was diferent and over the top. The "popular" sitcoms now(other than the office) are the very definition of formulaic. They're all about some fat loser with an attractive, mean wife and smart kids. The father puts his foot in his mouth, the kids roll their eyes, the wife stomps off, hilarity ensues...i guess.
That seems to be the model these days. I'll take Scrubs and My Name is Earl as shows that are against the grain....
 
I just saw an episode from the first season. Jerry's Dad is a different actor and the pacing was totally out of wack. Not really very funny.

It really got going in season 3 I think. They had that mojo for a while... a good 5 years. Not bad.

 
Best sitcom ever.

Bringing it back 10 years later would instantly draw record audiences in the midst of a market flooded with reality show bull ####.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
What I find particularly amusing about the "con" article in the OP is that to prove his point the writer continuously intersperses phrases and images from the show to make his point. Whether he did this on purpose or not, the fact that those phrases and images are vernacular enough to the extent that he can assume the readers get them with no explanation really takes the legs out from under his criticism. If there's that much from the show that people still reference ten years later, his criticisms amount to snide nit picks - the reality is for the most part the show really hit its mark and remains relevant today.

I'm thinking the writer's heart wasn't in it (architecture of a 1/2 sit com? really?) and he got stuck writing the con article.

 
I grew up watching M*A*S*H, and I can't stand to watch anything with BJ Honeycutt in it now.

I dunno why the TV writers wanted to turn Altman's Radar into a eunuch either.

 
IMO, Seinfeld and Cheers stand head and shoulders above any other sitcom ever (though All in The Family was more bold and edgy, and as well-written as these two, just not as laugh-out-loud funny in my estimation.)

I still watch re-runs. The show's just f'n funny, why try to dissect it?
:eek:
 
Fantasic show. I still pick this over pretty much any heavily syndicated show shown in the early evening before 'primetime'. Example. Everybody Loves Raymond comes on, and im pissed, as i can't stand it, Seinfeld comes on and im excited. At least there is something to do for a while :eek: Even though ive seen every episode like 20 times.

 
Can't take the Con guy seriously if he spells it "shtik"

Still put it way ahead of "The Office", which is funny in a whole different way. There are more jokes in Seinfeld, that's my kind of sitcom. Laugh-a-minute scripts. The Office is three or four big laughs per episode, and a lot of story and build up. Single-cam style scripts for a single-cam style show.

 
There's a difference between how well the show holds up 10 years later and how much the show both affected popular culture and has become part of the vernacular of a certain segment of American society.

But I believe that Seinfeld was never very popular in the black community or in rural America. And since this board is made up of hip urban/suburbanitesit's not surprizing that the FFA thinks it's the cat's pjs, but that doesn't make it universal.

 
Like all long running shows, they had some mediocre(even bad) episodes.

The mediocre ones don't age well. That is true with any type of art.

However, the great ones, The Marine Biologist, The Contest, The Outing, and others are still laugh out loud funny for me.

 
Still watch it almost daily. Never get tired of the reruns. Holds up well, and IMO, best sitcom ever.

 
Watched "The Baby Shower" last night and laughed out loud several times ("Red Shirt!" "I eat the whole apple. core. stem. everything"). Most episodes hold up very well

 
2nd best ever behind MASH

i'd rather every network show endless Seinfeld reruns during prime time than the absolute garbage that's on right now.

 
For some reason, the show just never did much for me. I could watch it, and there were some classic moments, but for the most part...meh. The characters were almost too shallow, I guess. :fishing:

 
There's a difference between how well the show holds up 10 years later and how much the show both affected popular culture and has become part of the vernacular of a certain segment of American society.

But I believe that Seinfeld was never very popular in the black community or in rural America. And since this board is made up of hip urban/suburbanitesit's not surprizing that the FFA thinks it's the cat's pjs, but that doesn't make it universal.
Wilbon has said more than once on PTI that "brothers don't watch Seinfeld."
 
IMO, Seinfeld and Cheers stand head and shoulders above any other sitcom ever (though All in The Family was more bold and edgy, and as well-written as these two, just not as laugh-out-loud funny in my estimation.)

I still watch re-runs. The show's just f'n funny, why try to dissect it?
Good call. You mentioned my three favorite comedies of all-time. I do think that All in the Family was laugh out loud funny, though. It also was capable of being funny as hell one minute and serious as hell the next, which is not an easy thing to pull off.
 
Great show, but I have to admit that I finally got burnt out on the reruns. I've had to take a break from watching it. Saw the episodes too many times. I've felt that way about M*A*S*H in the past too, but I've been watching it again lately.

 
There's a difference between how well the show holds up 10 years later and how much the show both affected popular culture and has become part of the vernacular of a certain segment of American society.But I believe that Seinfeld was never very popular in the black community or in rural America. And since this board is made up of hip urban/suburbanitesit's not surprizing that the FFA thinks it's the cat's pjs, but that doesn't make it universal.
The jerk store called...
 
I just saw an episode from the first season. Jerry's Dad is a different actor and the pacing was totally out of wack. Not really very funny.It really got going in season 3 I think.
:popcorn: The first couple of seasons bordered on awful. They had to hit their stride, that's all. In the early episodes, there was very little of that familiar "wacky music" which divided the scenes, and instead there was too much horn honking from the New York traffic. A little thing, but a minor adjustment like that made a big difference. Also, Jerry's apartment felt like a TV studio rather than an apartment in the early episodes. Does any of that make sense? :unsure:
 
IMO, Seinfeld and Cheers stand head and shoulders above any other sitcom ever (though All in The Family was more bold and edgy, and as well-written as these two, just not as laugh-out-loud funny in my estimation.)

I still watch re-runs. The show's just f'n funny, why try to dissect it?
Good call. You mentioned my three favorite comedies of all-time. I do think that All in the Family was laugh out loud funny, though. It also was capable of being funny as hell one minute and serious as hell the next, which is not an easy thing to pull off.
Oh, I never said AITF wasn't laugh out loud funny, just not AS laugh out loud funny as the other two. Probably for the exact reason you just posted. It was an amazing show, just a little different.
 
I just saw an episode from the first season. Jerry's Dad is a different actor and the pacing was totally out of wack. Not really very funny.It really got going in season 3 I think.
:hot: The first couple of seasons bordered on awful. They had to hit their stride, that's all. In the early episodes, there was very little of that familiar "wacky music" which divided the scenes, and instead there was too much horn honking from the New York traffic. A little thing, but a minor adjustment like that made a big difference. Also, Jerry's apartment felt like a TV studio rather than an apartment in the early episodes. Does any of that make sense? :unsure:
It does make sense. However, I'd say the first season was the only weak one. Season 3 was where it really took off, but season 2 set the groundwork... by episode 10 or so, they had some good ones. The Heart Attack, The Statue, The Apartment (I am Costanza, Lord of the Idiots) , The Chinese Restaurant... these were the foundation of the rest of the series. They were trying different things and seeing what worked and what didn't, IMO.
 
this is the only show that I can sit down and watch an episode that I've already seem 40 or 50 times and still be entertained/find it funny

 
I just saw an episode from the first season. Jerry's Dad is a different actor and the pacing was totally out of wack. Not really very funny.

It really got going in season 3 I think.
:goodposting: The first couple of seasons bordered on awful. They had to hit their stride, that's all. In the early episodes, there was very little of that familiar "wacky music" which divided the scenes, and instead there was too much horn honking from the New York traffic. A little thing, but a minor adjustment like that made a big difference. Also, Jerry's apartment felt like a TV studio rather than an apartment in the early episodes. Does any of that make sense? :unsure:
It does make sense. However, I'd say the first season was the only weak one. Season 3 was where it really took off, but season 2 set the groundwork... by episode 10 or so, they had some good ones. The Heart Attack, The Statue, The Apartment (I am Costanza, Lord of the Idiots) , The Chinese Restaurant... these were the foundation of the rest of the series. They were trying different things and seeing what worked and what didn't, IMO.
The show's improvement coincided with opening being a scene instead of Jerry's standup act.
 
For me, it holds up as well as anyo other show in history, although time will tell how it compares to Lucy. Mary Tyler Moore is there too. And plenty of All in the Family episodes qualify, although many are stale to me. But I can still watch (and in fact do) Seinfeld again and again and still crack up.

Shows like MASH and Cheers I find completely unwatchable now. But Seinfeld holds up exceptionally well.

 
I don't find it funny anymore...and I don't believe it will stand the test of time...

I still find Frasier funny, but of the shows in syndication, that is about it...

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top