You're right, thank you SlamAdams. I'm wrong and I'm glad you corrected my view with your numerous correct points and charismatic writing.

Those meddling executives haven't been the norm for the majority of T.V. It started in the 80's, continued into the 90's and started to fall away in the 00's. There once was a time when NBC made great shows because they wanted to make great shows instead of money.

Who Shot Mr. Burns is the only two part episode; however there is a continuation of a mini-narrative of the future versions of the Simpson family; it starts with Future Drama, continued with Holidays of Future Passed, and the latest one is Days of Future Future.

If you know the show The Prisoner then you would know that it was a stylistic choice unlike this episode which couldn't think of a proper ending.

Their their, I won't do it again.

Did you get the critics power-book too?

Yes, this! Everyone was so disengaged from the events of the story. Why should we the audience care if they don't?

They just sat there all day watching that Hollywood Hogwash.

A statement like that doesn't forward to conversation. Would you care to elaborate?

I understand the usefulness of these terms, but do the benefits of cataloging them really out weigh the pigeonholing that will follow. T.V. is great because it is so hard to pin down; there is a wildness to what will work and what wont work, and I think we should try and preserve that.

After almost a day of reflection I've pretty much nailed down why this sucks, IMO. First: this could very well be any animated T.V. series. Futurama, American Dad, Family Guy, Spongebob, whatever. The motivations of the characters are so generic that it really could have been done with any show.

That's the problem with labels though. They work, for the most part. It's the genre's that fall through the crack that suffer. It for people who like the stuff that falls through the crack it does matter that the genre system is flawed.

We could turn it to Police Cops, or possibly Baby Admiral; What about Talk to the Hand and Don't Go Their?

Unfortunately it does matter. Despite how I try, I still use labels to find what I like. The problem is not going outside the labels, or having them restrict what you what be interested in.

"So one of those Egg Council creeps got to you too, huh?"
"Aw, you've got it all wrong Homer. It's not like that."
"You'd better run, egg!"

Yes, and we need to discuss this stuff so we know not to repeat that again. I don't want 10 years of shitty T.V. shows with budgets larger than most country's total yearly budget

Shows that are "mid-reputable" will probably take more risks as well, which I think should be praised far more than any prestige-drivel (newsroom *cough *cough}

That seems like a good thing to me. T.V. isn't trying to be what's popular like hollywood movies. Since it is okay to like a series that may not be as universally loved as GoT, but try doing that with a film; you'll either be called an idiot, or called out for taking a bribe.

The idea of "prestige T.V" is a very, very, VERY dangerous notion. I love T.V more than film because it doesn't have the problems of mainstream hollywood. The award shows, the celebrities, the money, the "talent," the culture obsessed about everything that isn't the actual product of all of those things. If we start…

This was… weird. This isn't the first time the show has had weird episodes, but this was the first time that it didn't feel like The Simpsons; The Simpsons has done high concept Sci-fi, even in non Halloween episodes, but this episode was all about premise (a typically non-simpsons premise) and didn't have any…