Crazy Noises: The Fight Before Christmas

The Simpsons Spin-Off Showcase2

“I’m Lisa, peppy, blonde and stunning, sophomore prom queen five years running!” – “Lisa”

In our ongoing mission to bring you only the shallowest and laziest analysis of Zombie Simpsons, we’re keeping up our Crazy Noises series for Season 22.  Since a podcast is so 2004, and video would require a flag, a fern and some folding chairs from the garage, we’ve elected to use the technology that brought the word “emoticon” to the masses: the chatroom.  Star Trek image macros are strictly forbidden, unless you have a really good reason why Captain Picard is better than Captain Kirk.  This text has been edited for clarity and spelling (especially on  “electrocution”).

One upon a time, back in the before time, in the long long ago, there was an episode called “The Simpsons Spin-Off Showcase”. Instead of telling one long story, it opened on Troy McClure and imagined three short stories of what the Simpsons characters would be like in different television contexts. There was a raunchy sitcom, a cheesy cop show, and a ye olde tyme variety show. In a nod to how ridiculous all of this was, and the fact that the staff thought the show would be done in a year or two,* they concluded with a bunch of truly horrifying ideas for future episodes.

The premise of the variety show segment was that the Simpsons were an Osmond like family of entertainers. Their show was filled with send ups of the religious friendly treacle of the original, and given that the “real” Lisa would find it vapid to the point of offensiveness, she was unceremoniously replaced with the evilly Hollywood line, “Unfortunately, one family member didn’t want that chance and refused to participate.” If you want to make fun of the penchant of the entertainment industry, even the “family friendly” parts, for throwing attractive young women in front of the camera for no reason other than their looks – without doing the same thing yourself – that was a good way to do it.

*They were right about that, but not in the way they thought.

Mad Jon: So, you guys want to get down to it?

Charlie Sweatpants: I’ve got my Katy Perry records blasting, I am ready to go.

Mad Jon: You are a trooper.

Dave: Let’s do this.

Charlie Sweatpants: Okay, I think my feelings on this are clear already, but for the sake of completeness, this or the Kesha opening, which is worse?

Mad Jon: I am not sure anything that can be conceived of by man could be worse than the Kesha opening.

Dave: I’m more down on Kesha, but it’s not like this was a dance around the maypole.

So that’s Kesha 2, Katy 1

Charlie Sweatpants: Wow, I’m surprised by that.

The Kesha opening was at least brief, this just kept going and going.

Mad Jon: Perhaps I missed the opening.

Charlie Sweatpants: Sorry, I just realized I was unclear.

Mad Jon: what happened in what you call the opening?

Dave: I think Charlie was comparing the Kesha opening to the Katy Perry bit.

Charlie Sweatpants:   Yes.

I meant to ask, the Katy Perry segment or the Kesha opening, which is worse?

Mad Jon: Oh…. Well, that makes a mountain more sense. Now you are asking me if I would rather die by drowning or electrocution. One is faster than the other, but either way the coroner is going to find shit in my pants.

  Still, in all seriousness, I hate the Kesha opening more.

Charlie Sweatpants: So the score is still 2-1? Well then, I’m still surprised.

  Say what you will about the tenants of giving your opening up to a warmed over pop song, but at least it wasn’t part of the episode.

Mad Jon: The Kesha opening was a flat out commercial. The Katy Perry bit was a cry for ratings. "Quick! Someone put some boobs on so we can top 5.1!"

Charlie Sweatpants: The writers actually worked on the Katy Perry segment.

Mad Jon: Although having read what I just typed, I guess they were both just cries or ratings.

Dave: I don’t know how the opening can’t be construed as part of the episode.

Charlie Sweatpants: Agreed, Jon.

  But still.

Dave: Regardless, they suck for different reasons

Doesn’t change the fact that they both suck

Mad Jon: Does not indeed.

Charlie Sweatpants: Well, they’re both transparent attempts to stay relevant by gettin’ with that music the kids seem to like these days. Either way Zombie Simpsons is the divorced dad with the earring and leather jacket.

Okay, let’s get off the puppet part.

Mad Jon: Ok then

Charlie Sweatpants: I think I had a small embolism when Lisa’s segment switched to an Inglourious Basterds part for no reason.

Mad Jon: That wasn’t even out of left field, that was out of a field in some dimension that cannot be described within the theory of general relativity.

Dave: And in classic ZS form, it just petered out.

Mad Jon: It really did, didn’t it?

Charlie Sweatpants: Exactly, it was there, then it wasn’t.

Mad Jon: But it was like two different stories, one that didn’t lead to the other, and then it was ok to have a Christmas tree again.

Charlie Sweatpants: Does the Tarantino part even count as a story?

Mad Jon: I think they snuck in a fifth act, Its only a matter of time before there is another set of commercials.

Charlie Sweatpants: Let’s say you hadn’t seen Basterds, would you have any idea what the hell was going on there?

Mad Jon: Not for a second.

Dave: No, you wouldn’t. They didn’t even attempt to make it humorous.

Mad Jon: I would probably make sure my future kids never saw Dumbo.

Charlie Sweatpants: Right, it was just segments from the end that had no back story at all.

  The thing with the elephant was particularly strange.

Mad Jon: And didn’t really follow the part it was parodying anyway.

Perhaps the elephant was the guy who kept hitting on Shosanna.

  And then get’s killed by and kills her.

Charlie Sweatpants: I think he was, but how would anyone know that?

Mad Jon: Well, nobody who saw it, and probably only half the people who did would understand that I guess.

  Funny story, I first saw that movie on a flight to Germany.

Charlie Sweatpants: I saw "Treehouse of Horror V" long before I saw "The Shining", I saw "Radio Bart" long before I saw "Ace in the Hole", and there are lots of old things they allude to that I haven’t seen and I can still follow them and get the jokes.

Mad Jon: Good point.

I actually haven’t seen "Ace in the Hole". And now that I know an excellent episode of Simpsons parodied it, I don’t need to.

Charlie Sweatpants: It’s not a bad flick, though you’ve got to be in the mood for an old movie. But that doesn’t change the basic criticism here, which is that once again they think a pop culture reference is the same as using an existing story to tell their own and crack jokes along the way.

Mad Jon: Fair enough.

  It was a shit act.

Charlie Sweatpants: So, so many times, Zombie Simpsons just puts up something that is indistinguishable from the original save the yellow skin and overbites, and think they’re being clever.

Which isn’t a bad description of the Martha Stewart segment.

Mad Jon: Indeed it isn’t.

I had stopped taking notes by then.

Charlie Sweatpants: Ohh, she can make anything into a home decoration.




  Oh, that’s all you’re going to do?

Mad Jon: Also there was chloroform.

Charlie Sweatpants: Though to what purpose remains unclear.

Dave: Can we make Martha more smug and condescending? Yep. Again! Yep.

Mad Jon: Yeah, I was just thinking to myself that I the details of the bottle and rag part escape me. Perhaps that is because there were no details.

Charlie Sweatpants: It was supposed to be a dream, but taking that seriously would mean we have to take the whole wraparound story seriously, which would be more than they did.

Also, Leonardo DiCaprio told me I need to have details in my dreams.

Mad Jon: He is a smart and handsome man, you should probably listen to him.

Charlie Sweatpants: Well, I guess we’ve got one left. Bart as corporate climbing elf, anyone?

Mad Jon: You know, I think you mentioned this in posts earlier, but I wasn’t as down on this act as I am about pretty much everything Zombie Simpsons.

There were problems, oh yes. But I actually laughed when Bart killed the snowmen patrol and we got that brief glimpse at the picture of the children in his wallet. Just ever so brief, no need to elaborate. Jokes can tell themselves, you don’t have to explain everything to me.

Dave: Of the segments in this trainwreck, the first was the most tolerable.

Mad Jon: Most tolerable is excellent phrasing.

The small allusion to Bart climbing the corporate ladder alluded to the type of realistic depression this show used to do well.

Charlie Sweatpants: Agreed. It had so many things it didn’t need to, and it ruined several of its most promising jokes, but it actually had jokes that can be described as "promising".

Mad Jon: I think I just used multiple variants of allude in the same sentence.

Charlie Sweatpants: The whole idea that Bart would be an excellent corporate climber because he makes things worse for his fellows is entertaining.

Mad Jon: Agreed.

Charlie Sweatpants: I will say that I’m still kinda mad at the reindeer stew joke.

We could see the antlers in the pot, and Krusty spooned out a red nose, that was enough! There didn’t need to be an explanation!

Mad Jon: That was pretty creepy and excessive. Also, why did Krusty/Santa need to be rich?

Dave: Going too far is what ZS does best, often with unappealing results.

Charlie Sweatpants: I dunno, I liked that things were really okay for Santa, that he was secretly deceiving Bart worked in concert with the horrible things Bart saw and did on the lower levels.

Mad Jon: Hmm, I guess I can see that.

I was clouded by my rash decision that it was done so they could have hip hop music and dancing Santa girls for 20 seconds.

Dave: That wouldn’t be entirely incorrect.

Charlie Sweatpants: Fair point, but by the time wasting standards of Zombie Simpsons it was mild.

Mad Jon: That is a fair statement.

Charlie Sweatpants: Any final points?

Mad Jon: I guess what really aggravates me about this episode is that I never really felt like the story began. They didn’t even try to setup the various dreams, and only when I REALLY think about it can I connect the whole story.

Marge = mad, Homer = lazy, Bart starts dream.

  That’s what happened.

Charlie Sweatpants: Like, if they were going to give it a whole story, they should’ve actually put some thought into it. Otherwise they’d have been better off not doing the wraparound segments at all?

Mad Jon: Exactly. Why even start it off? Why not just have credits roll into Bart’s room, maybe the 25th circled on a Krusty calendar above his bed, straight to the dreams. It wouldn’t have helped the various acts, but it would have kept me from feeling like I already have early onset Alzheimer’s.

  It’s a holiday episode, you can do this. It’s allowed.

But that’s all I have. You?

Charlie Sweatpants: Nope. I’m pretty done with this episode. The only thing I’ll say is that I hope the puppet thing becomes one of those black eyes for the show. It won’t help it get cancelled, but if we’re lucky it’ll become famous enough that I can bring it up in non-Simpsons fan conversations and people will know what I’m talking about.

Mad Jon: Sounds like a painfully interesting experiment.

Charlie Sweatpants: But I’m a selfish twit, so that’s just me.

Mad Jon: I wouldn’t have you any other way.

4 Responses to “Crazy Noises: The Fight Before Christmas”

  1. 1 Anonymous
    9 December 2010 at 4:03 pm

    you all fucking suck, that episode eas fuckiogh funny compared ti what the fuck yout rheee retards just said.

Comments are currently closed.


deadhomersociety (at) gmail

Run a Simpsons site or Twitter account? Let us know!

The Mob Has Spoken

Anonymous on Homeronymus Bosch
Ah Hee Hee Hee on Homeronymus Bosch
Anonymous on Homeronymus Bosch
Ezra Estephan on Homeronymus Bosch
Anonymous on Homeronymus Bosch
Anonymous on Homeronymus Bosch
Anonymous on Homeronymus Bosch
Anonymous on Homeronymus Bosch
Anonymous on Homeronymus Bosch
Anonymous on Homeronymus Bosch

Subscribe to Our Newsletter


Useful Legal Tidbit

Even though it’s obvious to anyone with a functional frontal lobe and a shred of morality, we feel the need to include this disclaimer. This website (which openly advocates for the cancellation of a beloved television series) is in no way, shape or form affiliated with the FOX Network, the News Corporation, subsidiaries thereof, or any of Rupert Murdoch’s wives or children. “The Simpsons” is (unfortunately) the intellectual property of FOX. We and our crack team of one (1) lawyer believe that everything on this site falls under the definition of Fair Use and is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. No revenue is generated from this endeavor; we’re here because we love “The Simpsons”. And besides, you can’t like, own a potato, man, it’s one of Mother Earth’s creatures.