Why are the first few episodes of cartoons usually the worst?

November 4, 2004 2:17 PM

Why are the first few episodes of cartoons usually the worst? Ignoring the pilot which might have had a different production team, there seems to be some magic rule that the first three episodes of any new cartoon series are going to be pretty lackluster. I’ve been watching some Futurama reruns and have noticed that there are less jokes per minute, the voices and timing are really off, and the animation in some parts is sub-par. I’ve noticed this in other series too. Is there some kind of review the production team goes through after episode three? Perhaps they don’t get to see the first couple of episodes until they are working on the fifth? Does the voice talent just ‘gel’ after a few episodes?
posted by skallas to media & arts (17 comments total)

Hell, the same thing is true of any sitcom, with very few exceptions. It's the tuning period. I suppose you could follow Brooks' maxim and "plan to throw one away", but that begs Murphy's Law pretty egregiously. There's just not going to be the cash to make a bunch of test or warmup episodes of anything.

Anyway, I liked Futurama #1.... and I'd be willing to bet $5 that you wouldn't have the same reaction to a double-blind comparison of Animaniacs #1 and #5.
posted by lodurr at 2:23 PM on November 4, 2004

On the commentaries for the Simpsons, it is mentioned how they had already done the first few episodes before they saw any of the animation come back from Korea. So the art quality basically suffers from the Pilot-episode syndrome for more than one episode. It’s also very expensive to send stuff back to be re-animated if it’s wrong.

This would imply the same is true for the voice talent since the voices are done before the animation. The voice of Homer changed pretty drastically, but they claim it wasn’t a conscious decision. I’d imagine that they also get a better idea of who the character is supposed to be once they see some completed, animated episodes.
posted by Gary at 2:28 PM on November 4, 2004

I just watched the other night the first two episodes of The Jetsons on DVD, they weren't as good as some of the later ones. as gary says, they probably "get" a character right after a few episodes
posted by matteo at 2:42 PM on November 4, 2004

It's true about television in general.

look at the first season of seinfeld. It's a bit for them to:

a) fine tune
b) get the stupid overdone stories taht are in every sitcom out of their system.
posted by filmgeek at 3:01 PM on November 4, 2004

The first three episodes of Transformers were the best.
posted by b1tr0t at 3:01 PM on November 4, 2004

It's true of almost any television show for all of the above mentioned reasons, as well as...

1) The more the cast, directors, writers, and (in the case of cartoons) animators work together, the more they recognize each other's strengths, and how their work can best compliment one anothers.

and

2) The nature of the development process. While each studio and network develops shows slightly differently, they all generally operate like this -- one crew of executives works in "development" working on the show during its infancy until it makes it on the air. Once on the air, usually "current" executives then take over -- allowing development execs to work on the next crop of shows. However, during the first few weeks of production, there's always an overlap of executives overseeing any show -- the current exec., the development exec., and very often the network or studio president (if it's a high-profile show). The idea being it creates a "smooth transition" however, with net result is twice the network and studio notes a writing staff will have to deal with. You know what they say about too many cooks...
posted by herc at 3:19 PM on November 4, 2004

It might be more true for cartoons because the barrier to entry is lower. It's way cheaper to vet a cartoon than a 13 episode run of a sitcom, so you can take more chances. Plus a lot of animation nowadays is on smaller networks (remember what Fox was when they took a chance on one alcholoic's sock puppets).
posted by yerfatma at 3:28 PM on November 4, 2004

Most artists evolve this way. Check out early Peanuts or Garfield cartoons for a shock; the characters almost look like attempts to avoid copyright infringement of their later selves. Early on, the artist is doing their thing deliberately, thinking about every line and so on. Over time this becomes unconscious, like a gesture, and requires less thought. The essential core of the art is streamlined and the extraneous parts fall away.
posted by kindall at 3:33 PM on November 4, 2004

The first three episodes of Transformers were the best.

Even then, those three episodes were remarkably different from the rest of the show (animation quality is hard to judge since it was all remarkably poor until the movie). Optimus had a battle axe that came out of his hand, the jets had powers they (almost) never used again, and Autobots were flying. That's more to do with it being a three-part pilot episode than cartoons in general, though.
posted by Gary at 3:34 PM on November 4, 2004

I can't stand to watch anything from the Simpsons first two seasons. The animation really, really bugs me. Also, the characters were not fully formed, so they were both stereotypical and inconsistent. The show didn't really pick up momentum until the middle of the third, as far as I'm concerned.
posted by squirrel at 6:19 PM on November 4, 2004

I believe in the three season rule. It's almost like they ought to make, and then throw out the first two.

Think about the best shows you know: the first two seasons were weak. Almost all of the new star trek series follwo that rule. TNG and DS9 get better later in the series.

And I can think of as many that violate this rule: South park, the original star trek and the Sopranos. It's not just sitcoms/cartoons.
posted by filmgeek at 6:26 PM on November 4, 2004

The first three episodes of Transformers were the best.

The first five episodes of Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles were the best.
posted by furiousthought at 6:59 PM on November 4, 2004

Counterexample:
Batman: The Animated Series, the first episode being "On Leather Wings." Of course, that particular show is atypical.
I agree with everyone else, that it takes some time for the writers+animators+voices to get the show's feel hammered down.
posted by j.edwards at 7:44 PM on November 4, 2004

Clerks: the animated series has a nice, consistent look over its six-odd episodes.

What about the CGI classic ReBoot? I honestly can't remember enough of the episodes to say for sure.

Or Invader Zim, which they changed after a season or two...

Or Ren & Stimpy which (IIRC) sacked its complete crew and started anew after one season.
posted by codger at 10:46 PM on November 4, 2004

Friends and ER started strong, but I'd argue that each season of both was weaker than the one that came before it.
posted by herc at 12:07 AM on November 5, 2004

REBOOT - I have to say that show was excellent from the beginning, but definitely improved over the course of its run

(I think I'll pull up my Hexadecimal desktop theme in honor of that show - good memories)
posted by Julnyes at 8:08 AM on November 5, 2004

i'd say it has a lot to do with character development - they need to be over the top and exaggerated on the first few episodes, so that you know character A is the jerk, character B is the slutty sexpot, and character C is the wise-ass. after a while they can settle down a little and not be so one-sided, but they hit you over the head with it early on so you knopw how to respond to everyone. i mean, would you have been able to watch seinfeld if the first episode had been with the characters as they were in the fourth season? i think it would have taken too long for people to get the characters, and the show wouldn't have done well.

now south park... hell, season one i can't much watch any more. it's so over the top "let us gross you out with our foul-mouthed brats" that i didn't expect it to last, as i figured the novelty would wear off too quickly. but they've made the show a lot smarter, which i'm happy about. and it's still gross, of course. but keeping it like they did in season one? it would have been off the air by now, because the novelty of foul-mouthed kids wouldn't have been enough to sustain it. now i find myself waiting for the closing joke, like the douchebag vs. turd sandwich episode.
posted by caution live frogs at 8:19 AM on November 5, 2004