The last sixteen weeks of ‘seinclass’ changed my perspective of TV viewing. I came to realize that there is more to the half hour spent in front of the ‘idiot box’ than just mindless time pass.
The topics of the blogs prompted me to think, analyze and critique the episodes to try and understand the mindset and thoughts of the writers. Said to be a sitcom about ‘nothing’ with no apparent morals to be learnt it is also thought to be in line with the philosophy of the time- ‘that life is pointless’.
In the process I personally learnt to evaluate and assess objectively and put down my thoughts as concisely as possible. I personally found it hard to keep my writings short and still be able to convey my message or idea. For instance in the third blog, George Constanza was a character of many diverse traits with every one being important and to pick just one and effectively describe it without diluting the others was tough. Then comparing him to a character from another sitcom required me to use my analytical skills yet again. All in all the ‘sein saga’ was a positive learning experience for me.
I am huge fan of SEINFELD and was overjoyed at the outset of this course to study my favorite sitcom. However, little did I know that this landmark sitcom was much deeper than I originally thought. I have seen every episode, most of them more than once. I appreciated the clever humor and witty characters but it wasn’t until this class did I learn that there were several undertones in all of the jokes. For example, I would have never noted the connection between pizza and abortion in “The Couch” (November 27, 2002). Although SEINFELD doesn’t necessarily take a stand on any particular issues over the course of it’s airing, it grazed over nearly every political or social issue known to man. This blog has proved to be a help not only to my understanding of SEINFELD but also to my writing abilities. I have more confidence when I write and now tend to aim straight for the point instead of beating around the bush. It also helps that I was writing about a subject that I enjoy. There may have been sometimes in the class when I wanted to scream out “serenity now” but I learned a lot about writing and analyzing television shows.
The farewell episode of Seinfeld was, by some, considered to be a flop, however, it still encompassed the essence of Seinfeld that captured viewers to begin with. The less than optimistic “Finale” (May 14, 1998) episode of Seinfeld took an unprecedented take on recapping the sitcom. The finale reminisced about all the awful things the “New York Four” did to their unsuspecting victims, however they were brought as witnesses in the case against the four who were bring charged with violating the Good Samaritan law. Although viewers were expecting a more uplifting end to the iconic sitcom, such as a rekindled relationship between Jerry (Jerry Seinfeld) and Elaine (Julia Louis-Dreyfus), it did not deliver as expected. A part from the failed expectations Seinfeld still allowed viewers to visit the colorful characters seen throughout the series for one last time. Seeing these characters first on the stand in the court room then flashing back to their scenes let viewers look back on the hilarity of Seinfeld and help to remember why so many people feel in love with this comical series. Now sentenced to a year “removed from society”, (“Finale”) the foursome still kept their Seinfeld spirit and kept on moving forward with their odd way of looking at reality. Kramer even stated, “Could be fun. Don’t have to worry about your meals…” (“Finale”), exemplifying their skewed outlook. Yet unique and unfortunately criticized, the finale episode of the beloved Seinfeld brought up all the wonderful and terrible emotions felt through the turbulent sitcom, it allowed viewers to say their last goodbye to the series about “nothing”.
SEINFELD left the general American audience rather upset after the airing of “The Finale” (May 14, 1998). I personally enjoyed the last episode. I like how in “The Finale” several secondary characters reappeared to prosecute the mischievous foursome. None of their personalities changed, especially the “Soup Nazi.” As an avid fan of SEINFELD, I appreciated and understood the humorous undertones that reminded me of former episodes. The last conversation that George Costanza (Jason Alexander) and Jerry Seinfeld (Jerry Seinfeld) had was the first conversation they had in Monk’s café. However, the main problem with “The Finale” is that it didn’t meet the audience’s expectations. Many viewers claim that this was a terrible way to end the sitcom because the ending was so unfortunate for the four loveable characters. Everyone thought that Elaine Benes (Julia Louis-Dreyfus) and Jerry would finally get together but to everyone’s dismay, that didn’t happen. No one is ever happy about the ending of anything, naturally. Sadly, “The Finale” was the last dance for this iconic show that set a precedent for nearly all sitcoms.
"The finale” left viewers with mixed feelings. Some thought it ended in true seinstyle while others thought it was a big let down after all the hype created around it. The final episode was self reflexive and had several intertextual references - very seinstyle-but there in lay the problem. The episode with innumerable characters from the past made it difficult for first time viewers to relate to the true meaning of the jokes and innuendos that were better appreciated by regular viewers. While the entire series hinged on the motto “no hugging no learning” with no morals to be learnt, ‘the finale’ did just the opposite. That the four friends finally end up in prison for being selfish, self absorbed and doing absolutely nothing to help others is suggestive of the age-old adage ‘the more evil you do the more you will suffer’. Even the final scene with Jerry doing his act for the inmates wasn’t taken to well by the audience.
The episode did have factors that were appreciated by many. All through the episode there continues to be comical twists for instance during what appears to be the final moments of their lives when the plane seems to be going down, Elaine tries to tell Jerry how she has always loved him but promptly changes her words when the pilot manages to control the aircraft and she realizes she is not going to die. Seinfeld finally ended letting the fat man(Newman) have “the last laugh”.
In the final episode of SEINFELD, “The Finale”, the group of four friends were thrown into unfamiliar territory and punished for their usual childish antics. Loyal followers of the show had to suffer through the realization that the past several years of watching the group of four had been a waste of their time on four unlikeable people in the bigger context of society. Inside Jerry’s apartment and Monk’s coffee shop they were safe to do as they pleased without anyone judging them too harshly. The childlike world that they had constructed was brought crashing down as many characters from their past were paraded in front of them in a courtroom. They showed no remorse for their actions and even smiled when it adversely affected others lives. The writers could have stopped showing witnesses for the prosecution after four or five people, but instead we were made to see that our modern heroes ruined many lives to gain passing satisfaction for their own narcissistic natures. By only showing a few lives ruined every few episodes, we were able to negate the fearsome foursome's actions, but the bombardment of over thirty witnesses from past episodes overwhelms us.
While some might argue that this self-referential nature made this episode great, I submit that it awoke the audience to painful realizations about the true nature of the show. George’s mom even thought that the show sounded “stupid”. A final blow to regular SEINFELD viewers was the triumph of Newman over Jerry.
From day one, Seinfeld has intrigued its' audiences with the 'no hugging, no learning' concept; a show about nothing and no morality included. The success of this daring idea proved to be phenomenal so why is the final episode so controversial? Many feel it was a let-down and there was no closure with the characters and their futures. Why didn't Elaine and Jerry get together? What life will George lead? Will Kramer ever settle down? It seems that despite audiences nine seasons of love for the disfunctional four, they were frustrated with the permanent stagnance of Seinfelds' characters. Personally, I enjoyed the hilarity of "The Finale"(May 14, 1998). It displayed more 'seinfeldisms' than any other episode; wrapping them all up into two episodes of constant self references. Of course, only loyal Seinfeld viewers would be able to appreciate the genious of these final episodes because they were built around self referential material but, that fact alone almost 'hugs' the audience with memories of all the 'good times' they've had together. Some may criticize that the ending had no substance and no big finish, 'This is how it ends?' ("The Finale" May 14, 1998). However, interpretations lead to the idea that immorality and lack of ethics will be brought to justice. I will agree, the episode is not a flashy, dramatic finish to the sitcom as every other sitcom has automatically created, it is simply an enhanced situation of daily minutae, the very foundation of Seinfeld.
Seinfeld, one of the greatest shows in Television, encountered greater success with its culmination then most shows in pop culture history. “The Finale” ended with a bang having over 76 million viewers tune in to examine the 23rd and 24th episode of the last Season. However was it the ending that we were hoping for? It sure wasn’t for me.
It was one of the greatest letdowns ever because after all of the no learning and no hugging, you would think they would show us a different side. Throughout the series, the creators have been very mind-blowing with the different shenanigans that they pull. Why would they end it all in the little ole town of
All of the reason stated above as to why “The Finale” was a let down, are the same reasons why the episode was such a success. No one would have ever thought the dynamic foursome would end it in the rural town of
In his essay on parents and children in Seinfeld, Matthew Bonds writes, "No family, no homeplace to speak of, no workplace: Seinfeld has dispensed with the sitcom's paradigmatic setting and social dynamic, replacing them with a sitcom about grown-up children" (109). If Seinfeld "revamped the [sitcom] model," as Bond asserts, certainly other post-Seinfeld shows have attempted the same, right?
A lot of older sitcoms use established shots with multiple cameras to give the audience a more traditional feel for the surrounding environment. In NBC’s The Office, the workplace setting is reintroduced to viewers in a new way. By using only one camera and a documentary style of filming similar to that of the recent movie Cloverfield (2007), but without as much shaking of the camera, The Office generates humor and suspense not only through dialogue, but through awkwardly editing certain clips, zooming, cutaway scenes of characters talking one on one with the camera, and breaking the fourth wall by addressing the person holding the camera.
This new look and feel for a sitcom situated mainly in the workplace breaks the previous mold for workplace sitcoms by allowing venturing outside the workplace to occur in order to follow certain characters on errands, most often, Michael Scott (Steve Carell) and Dwight Schrute (Rainn Wilson). In the episode “Office Olympics”, Dwight accompanies Michael in his quest to purchase a condo. It also allows for some shots of various characters homes and public restaurants. In the episode “The Dundies”, the staff adjourn to a Chili’s restaurant to have their yearly award show sponsored by Michael. In the most recent episode “Dinner Party”, we barely see any of the workplace, but a lot more of Michael’s condo.
Among the several post-Seinfeld sitcoms that have revamped their model, changing their characters, setting, structure or feel Still Standing is one that made a few major changes. Like many sitcoms of the time it’s based on a family, the relationships within the family and with others, everyday life and set in the home place. It is different in its conceptualization of ‘family’.
The parents are portrayed as ignorant and self absorbed. Bill Miller, the father, is lazy and not very smart. Judy Miller, the mother, though being a dental assistant isn’t that much smarter showing that they are unlike the conventional responsible and selfless role model parents depicted in most post Seinfeld sitcoms. In the episode “Still Eighteen” their son Brian is busy applying to colleges after taking a conscious decision on the college of his preference. Judy is not even aware of his major and misreads ‘physics’ for ‘psychics’. Bill on the other hand claims the credit (though misplaced) for Brian’s aspiring to be the first Miller to go to college. Later in the episode when Judy confronts Brian about quitting his job and spending time in a strip club, Bill instead of showing concern about the whereabouts of his son is more annoyed that Brian didn’t bring him back his favorite chicken wings! The father is shown as being self-centered and unlike the normal father figure depicted in sitcoms of that time. A classic example of a post-Seinfeld sitcom with a not so classic portrayal of “family”.
