I keep wanting to (re-)watch the 1991-1994 episodes, because I've always heard that most anything that came after the show got uncanceled (1996-2004) demonstrates a creatively dying show that was only still on because Nick needed to keep their pre-SpongeBob cash cow alive
SpongeBob's voice started to sound "wrong" (this started with the first movie, though), the mood of Bikini Bottom abruptly shifted to a place where everyone was hostile towards him and literally the only people who were nice to him were Patrick, Krabs, and Sandy...
relatedly, which seasons of spongebob were good, if any?
Odra's remark works well here too. Quality dropped after the third season and the movie, after which the original creator, Stevie Hillenburg, jumped ship and Nickelodeon gradually ran it into the ground.
The point where I stopped watching entirely was around the beginning of season 6, with the whole toenail thing? You remember the toenail thing, right guys? Remember how messed up that was?
There was a protracted scene where Squidward drops a couch on his tentacle and Spongebob inadvertendly tears off Squidward's inexplicable toenail while trying to get the couch off. It was as gory as you can get with a Spongebob episode
It wasn't even funny though, that's the thing. The timing's not quite on point and the music is worryingly nonchalant about what's happening
It was just horribly graphic and gross, to the point that they even showed the gristle and nerves still attached to the toenail, and it didn't fit with the tone of the rest of the episode at all.
You are the end result of a “would you push the button” prompt where the prompt was “you have unlimited godlike powers but you appear to all and sundry to be an impetuous child” – Zero, 2022
It was always weird to me when SpongeBob's writers ignored that the show is set underwater instead of playing with the underwater setting
The very first sentence displays the author's unwillingness to compromise the timelessness of his oeuvre. The story's setting and rough time period are only referred to as "once". Where is the ugly barnacle? When does the barnacle kill everyone?Those questions are irrelevant - this is a story detailling the unneeded struggle of the unlucky in a society obsessed by an arbitrary beauty ideal. Attaching a specific time and place would simply dilute the message and weaken the reader's empathy toward the barnacle's plight.
"there was an ugly barnacle."
Thusly is our protagonist introduced.Who is the ugly barnacle? What is the ugly barnacle beyond this shallow description? How is he ugly? All questions lesser minds would ask, completely missing the point of the tale.Say what you want about Patrick Star, but he doesn't fuck around. Whereas so-called "talented" authors often bore the lectorat with unneeded descriptive, Patrick sticks with the basics. The main character is a barnacle. He is ugly. For the purpose of the story, that is all you need to know. Anything beyond this point is space-wasting fluff.The so-called "Beige" description also has the quality of bypassing the reader's suspension of disbelief. A more detailed description, no matter how abject, would cause one smartass to spout "That doesn't look that ugly!" or "You're exaggerating dude". Simply labelling the barnacle as "ugly" causes the reader to apply his own standard of homeliness, skipping unneeded subjective concerns.
Unexpectedly, tragedy strikes!The climax of the tale is a superb case of subverting the reader expectation. Usually, this kind of story will features the main character going on an adventure to "fix" his appearance and conform to the society ideal, or finally accepting his physique and reconfort himself in the saccharine ideal that appearance alone doesn't matter.Not here. Not only did the barnacle did nothing to resolve his predicament, but said inaction causes his surrounding macrocosm to die. The tale satirize both society's obsession with physical appearance (as the presumably shallow, straight-thinking citizens are conditioned to be killed by violation of beauty standards) and the inaction of the homely, as the main character's unjustified lack of initiative causes negative and oh-so-very real consequences to himself and his surrounding.
"The End"
Patrick Star walks triumphant and doesn't look back. There was a barnacle. It was ugly. Everyone died. Blam.
Even as a kid I was always confused as to who Rugrats was supposed to be aimed at
The Ugly Barnacle is an exemplary tale.
"Once"
The very first sentence displays the author's unwillingness to compromise the timelessness of his oeuvre. The story's setting and rough time period are only referred to as "once". Where is the ugly barnacle? When does the barnacle kill everyone?Those questions are irrelevant - this is a story detailling the unneeded struggle of the unlucky in a society obsessed by an arbitrary beauty ideal. Attaching a specific time and place would simply dilute the message and weaken the reader's empathy toward the barnacle's plight.
"there was an ugly barnacle."
Thusly is our protagonist introduced.Who is the ugly barnacle? What is the ugly barnacle beyond this shallow description? How is he ugly? All questions lesser minds would ask, completely missing the point of the tale.Say what you want about Patrick Star, but he doesn't fuck around. Whereas so-called "talented" authors often bore the lectorat with unneeded descriptive, Patrick sticks with the basics. The main character is a barnacle. He is ugly. For the purpose of the story, that is all you need to know. Anything beyond this point is space-wasting fluff.The so-called "Beige" description also has the quality of bypassing the reader's suspension of disbelief. A more detailed description, no matter how abject, would cause one smartass to spout "That doesn't look that ugly!" or "You're exaggerating dude". Simply labelling the barnacle as "ugly" causes the reader to apply his own standard of homeliness, skipping unneeded subjective concerns.
Unexpectedly, tragedy strikes!The climax of the tale is a superb case of subverting the reader expectation. Usually, this kind of story will features the main character going on an adventure to "fix" his appearance and conform to the society ideal, or finally accepting his physique and reconfort himself in the saccharine ideal that appearance alone doesn't matter.Not here. Not only did the barnacle did nothing to resolve his predicament, but said inaction causes his surrounding macrocosm to die. The tale satirize both society's obsession with physical appearance (as the presumably shallow, straight-thinking citizens are conditioned to be killed by violation of beauty standards) and the inaction of the homely, as the main character's unjustified lack of initiative causes negative and oh-so-very real consequences to himself and his surrounding.
"The End"
Patrick Star walks triumphant and doesn't look back. There was a barnacle. It was ugly. Everyone died. Blam.
Comments
pretty good, actually, or at least, it seemed that way to me when i was a kid
I mean, unless you believe Eugene Krabs is history's greatest monster.
Assassin poems, Poems that shoot
guns. Poems that wrestle cops into alleys
and take their weapons leaving them dead
Assassin poems, Poems that shoot
guns. Poems that wrestle cops into alleys
and take their weapons leaving them dead
Assassin poems, Poems that shoot
guns. Poems that wrestle cops into alleys
and take their weapons leaving them dead
Assassin poems, Poems that shoot
guns. Poems that wrestle cops into alleys
and take their weapons leaving them dead
Assassin poems, Poems that shoot
guns. Poems that wrestle cops into alleys
and take their weapons leaving them dead
it was much less horrifying than i expected . . . happy tree friends is generally too much for me and i kind of have to steel myself to watch it
this was less disturbing to me than ren and stimpy, at least
like when they had fires underwater, or the way everyone just stands around on the seabed
kind of extreme anthropomorphism
The Ugly Barnacle is an exemplary tale.
(The other Jane)
The Ugly Barnacle is an exemplary tale.