What did they mean by this?

That there isn't enough Sneed.

JANNIES HELP ME
HELP ME NOW JANNIES!!

WHERE ARE YOU JANNIES, WHAT DO WE PAY YOU THAT LARGE SALARY FOR?

Wait a sec, how much do they do it for?

Attached: 1531235784137.gif (268x202, 1.25M)

that the simpsons needs more jews

I would like to understand the mentality of a writer or producer of the Simpsons, somebody high up who's heavily devoted to this show, (not Groening or Brooks, who just collect checks), and know what it feels like to work on this show. It's not like supporting the losing side in a war, which often is determines by uncontrollable forces, as if you're heavily responsible for the outcome of the show, you are personally responsible for how bad it is.

It it literally impossible to make a good Simpsons episode, or even tolerable ones? Has every conceivable idea that would result in a good episode, and that it's somehow not worse something to be proud of? What if some higher up just refused to tolerate this and said, "Okay, we're going to pay top dollar for good scripts, decent animation, and tell the voice actors that they better perform better, or they'll be replaced." Would that achieve nothing? Is quality television worth so little that it's better to take a check and drop all standards of quality? Does every single person who has any control over the show simply not know how bad it is?

These are the thoughts when I think about the Simpsons.

And Sneed.

what did they sneed by this?

>JANNIES SAVE ME, THEY'RE SNEEDPOSTING AGAIN

Attached: 1547763298370.png (1280x720, 1.04M)

"Hollywood can solve anything, except for the meaning behind the Sneed's Feed and Seed sign."

They're enslaved by (((them))) to keep cranking out 22 episodes every single year.

Fair enough, but have the numbers been crunched and it's more profitable to produce this utter garbage than anything decent? It is literally impossible to get good scripts? One would think with standards as high as they've become at Ivy League colleges, whoever graduates magna cum laude from Harvard or Yale's English program should be able to produce at least passable Simpsons episodes, (since it was largely mathematics majors from Harvard who made the Simpsons so great), but does television simply not pay enough for writers, so the talent isn't attracted? I think that would be an argument to make some sacrifices on the show for decent writing, which I think would increase the show's ratings to a point that the investment would be justified.

But I'm speaking in total ignorance, and it's a painful curiosity in me when I ponder why television is so terrible, even when it, to me, should be largely an issue of rejecting the scripts that seem acceptable for television these days so the good quality television of the 90s could be captured again.

No doubt, television standards have to decrease because of shrinking audiences, but it seems everything but the visuals have taken cuts in budget. Indeed, it seems the more important elements have been reduced in focus, like writing, then acting, and then more money has been dumped in visuals.

It's really quite possible that audiences are so incredibly stupid that immensely improving television standards is not financially viable. I'm usually very defensive for corporations looking at the bottom line, (as that's exactly what intelligent consumers do), but in this case, unless making better television would result in significantly lower profits, I think too much has been sacrificed, especially since almost nobody in entertainment television should feel proud of their work, as they are producing tripe appealing almost entirely to the lowest-common denominator.

That pic uncannily remember me the movie "The Endless".

It means there's too many damn jews in the industry

I never got this. How does more animation make something funnier? Simpsons has always been about the dialogue

>Simpsons has always been about the dialogue
That's not really accurate, and much of the humor, though not a large part, was visual, and plenty of the jokes were improved by the combination of visuals and dialogue.

If I were to suggest fixes with the Simpsons, it would be fist better dialogue, then better voice direction, (voice actors stopped caring for years, and I don't really blame them, as they tried much longer than the writers did), and then the visuals. The revival of Futurama, (beginning with the "movies") produced what might be the most visually impression animated sitcom yet, but they reduced the budget for the writing staff, and this resulted in a decidedly worse quality of the series compared to the pre-cancellation seasons.

Attached: file.png (372x348, 121K)

What did they mean by this

Attached: 1551902896430.webm (1280x720, 2.72M)

That joke with Homer's text was so surreal, it actually somewhat worked. I can at least say, "Okay, that was clever."

nice try but in my mind these are edits made by Yea Forumstards

Okay, well, I thought about it, and that really makes no sense, you stupid fuck.

you now remember Lisa goes Gaga

i stopped watching after krusty's daughter episode

you now remember Sneed goes Chuck

Here's the original

Attached: 1551905286317.webm (600x338, 1.96M)

the marge head turn always gets me
Like jesus christ they didn't even try, it's like 3 frames of animation

Doesn't it creep Homer out how there's a gif of him out there doing this? Did the Flanders have secret cameras set up?

The difference is remarkable

Attached: capture.png (1920x1080, 1.99M)