Sorry, you’re right. I meant more along the lines of deeper emotion. We’ve seen him whine and get angry and exhibit the more superficial emotions, but nothing ever as personal or vulnerable as the consistent loneliness that Leela had exuded when she thought she was the last cyclops.
Also, it is exactly because Bender is so emotionally unstable that his “crisis” lacked emotional punch. Leela’s character was largely defined by uncertainty of her identity. Bender’s character is defined by random outbursts. He was equally upset about this as he was about, for example, violence on TV. That’s not to say Bender hasn’t had his share of existential crises (Obsoletely Fabulous, A Pharoah to Remember), but because of his character’s predilections, these are more easily interepreted as being played for laughs than any real emotional growth.
Blaarrrggh! I wrote an undergrad paper about Futurama and it’s relations to suitor-eligibility in ancient Greek comedy. Can you tell?
Oh God, you guys are thinking about subtle plot points in a comedic cartoon that absolutely revels in its absurdity like a pig in shit.
whiny star trek nerd voice "oh no, but Bender has displayed fear in the past and this behavior in episodes X, Y, and Z is utterly inconsistent with the now-canon! I say [u][i]canon[/u][/i] universe information established in this episode.
If there was some way I could punch you and take your lunch money right now, I would.
Character-driven stories don’t work very well when they conflict with the characters.
Personally, I think this would have worked better if they’d revealed to the audience right away that Hermes was Inspector #5. It would have lent much-needed dramatic tension as we watched Hermes try to manage helping Bender without helping him too much, and it would have allowed building up our curiosity over the course of the episode as to why Hermes gave Bender a passing inspection. Instead, both revelations were dumped on us at the same time. Not good drama management.
Oh fun, this argument again.
“HERP DERP HERP DERP Lookit all these nerds complaining about character inconsistency and muddled writing in a cartoon. Don’t you losers know that cartoons don’t need to have good writing or plausible characterizations because they’re cartoons? Whatta buncha morons.”
This is pretty much the mating call of the braindead Internet Tough Guy™ who offers nothing to a conversation other than clueless derision. The only thing missing is some pathetic display of machismo dick-waving to further establish his self-perceived dominance ov…
If there was some way I could punch you and take your lunch money right now, I would.
Aand there it is.
INTERNET CONTINUITY FAIRY SAYS THAT FUTURAMA DOES NOT NEED CONTINUITY.
And the internet fairy will punch you, too. Pixie-punch, which hurts more.
H.
Yes. I’d actually like to re-watch the episode to see if Hermes has a reaction when Bender initially starts talking about Inspector #5. Ideally they should’ve laid a couple more clues like that to make the savvy viewer capable of figuring it out ahead of time.
You guys didn’t start getting suspicious when it was just Hermes and Bender together? No inkling? No suspicion?
It’s an episodic, non-linear, comedic cartoon that specifically makes fun of sci-fi-isms, cliches, and story-telling convention and nerds themselves.
You getting all angsty because there’s a baby Bender is ironic in that regard.
And watch who you’re calling loser. I rather enjoy cartoons, well-written ones at that. A small error (made for the sake of the story, at that) in an area that is not a focus for the show is something I can happily look past. It sucks for you that you can’t.
This is pretty much the mating call of the braindead Internet Tough Guy™ who offers nothing to a conversation other than clueless derision. The only thing missing is some pathetic display of machismo dick-waving to further establish his self-perceived dominance ov…
Aand there it is.
Not clueless derision. Just derision. You call it clueless because you can’t respond to the point that you’re upset that a comedic cartoon being inconsistent in backstory. You want to take your Star Trek lore or Star Wars history or whatever seriously? Alright. The setting and lore there are important or at least intriguing. Not my cup of tea, but I have my own flavor - A Song of Ice and Fire (where the backstory is of supreme importance). But to me - and remember, I’m nobody that important in your life so no need to get upset - it is absurd that some minor detail can pick away at your enjoyment of a very funny show so badly, when that show is clearly not focused on that aspect at all. Where Bender came from or any character development there is meaningless. Bender is Bender. He just proved that one episode ago with Amy.
Monogamy?
The big tip-off for me was when they were in the old house in Tijuana and they kept the retina-authorizing computer in view all the time.
That happened to have some of the best continuity in television, genre irrelevant. Hell, the pilot episode itself has Nibbler’s silhouette under the table, a reveal that we wouldn’t discover for years to come. There’s an attention to storyline detail in this show that’s unmatched in many other shows. So when said attention to detail appears to be cast to the wind, it’s understandable for people to raise an eyebrow.
You getting all angsty because there’s a baby Bender is ironic in that regard.
I couldn’t have cared less about baby Bender, but I can see people being “WTF” about it.
A small error (made for the sake of the story, at that) in an area that is not a focus for the show is something I can happily look past. It sucks for you that you can’t.
Nobody’s making a federal case out of it. It just struck us as odd and a conversation spun off from it.
Honestly, the only one making a big deal out of this whole thing is you by coming in here and HAW-HAWing at everyone and attempting to kick virtual sand in peoples’ faces in some misguided attempt to show off how cool you are.
Not clueless derision. Just derision. You call it clueless because you can’t respond to the point that you’re upset that a comedic cartoon being inconsistent in backstory.
Nope, it was pretty clueless. And I responded to the point fairly well: this is a show known for its attention to continuity and backstory. As such, when it eschews that for the sake of a gag, it stands out pretty clearly. No one’s “upset” about it (as far as I can tell), but it does stand out and did engender a discussion.
A discussion that was pretty civilized until you decided to tromp in here, waving your dick with one hand and thumping your chest with the other.
it is absurd that some minor detail can pick away at your enjoyment of a very funny show so badly
Again, I don’t think it ruined the episode for anyone, it just struck a few people as being off.
when that show is clearly not focused on [continuity] at all
Wow. You really do have no clue (about the show).
Where Bender came from or any character development there is meaningless.
Except that, you know, it’s not. His name, his nationality, his origin, these are all things that have been revealed in the past and maintained consistently throughout the series (this, by the way, is the continuity that you claim Futurama “is clearly not focused on”). It’s understandable to be confused when, suddenly, an episode comes along that maintains some of it and ignores the rest.
Mind you, I personally didn’t really care about the lack of continuity. This is their first new season in seven years; I’m willing to cut them a little slack. My only personal issue with the episode was the hamfisted attempt at schmaltz at the end. But all the same, I can see where other people are coming from. And I see that you really are clueless, at least in this specific situation.
I thought Baby Bender was retconned in in Teenage Mutant Leela’s Hurdles. At least, I like the explanation that Bender imagines himself springing from the factory fully formed, but there is a slight growth period. Keep in mind that Bender’s Robo (or “R”) NA works differently from DNA.
I’ll admit, I was disconcerted to see the “bureaucrat drills” suddenly replaced with boring retinal scanners. Seemed like a fairly pointless change, since either gizmo could have served the plot just as well.
You know what, I apologize. My mistake. I can see your point and I do apologize to everyone.
I still disagree about lore details being important to Futurama, but I am sorry for my post.
What?? There’s no apologizing on the internet!
It’s a trap. I don’t know how, but it’s a trap.
Seriously, though, that’s one of the bigger posts I’ve seen on the net to date. Kudos.
The one tonight was hilarious! Loved the stalagmite message, very clever.
“Oh crap. I guess we’ll have to bring her around again.”
The song was awesome.
Great episode overall, it hit just the right notes on Fry’s and Leela’s relationship.
The song was my favorite part!
They’re getting their mojo back. First few episodes were weak, but there’s been improvement the last few episodes. Granted, this episode had more than a little of “Time keeps on slippin’” in it, but I’m not going to complain as that was always a favorite of mine.
But it’s obvious they’re doing everything to keep Fry and Leela’s interactions apart because they’re not sure how to keep things moving forward with that big item resolved.