NationStates Jolt Archive

South Park or family guy? I think its family guy by a mile.

No point in comparing them, really. It's two different approaches to satire and parody.

No point in comparing them, really. It's two different approaches to satire and parody.

You ass, this is time number what you've beaten me to the punch?

Sigh. I have to hand it to you, you're fast.

Family Guy is boring compared to South Park.

You ass, this is time number what you've beaten me to the punch?

Sigh. I have to hand it to you, you're fast.

Apologies -- it was an easy call to make, and I'm up unusually late.

Meanwhile: ME ASS! Yes! Let me be your beast of burden!

Real, biting social criticism, accessible humor and up-to-date gags

versus

Uncreative, unsubtle politically based insertions, inaccessible references to irrelevant pop-culture from decades past, and a veritable inability to respond to events at hand.


Family Guy blows.

Family guy, doubtlessly.

South Park, definitely.
Family Guy has funny moments, but more accidentally than intentionally. It's far too conservative in its approach, and the jokes are often older than me.

South Park has a cast of funny characters.
Family guy has stewie.

South Park wins by leagues.

South Park or family guy? I think its family guy by a mile.

In that case, South Park.

Don't like Family guy, love South Park.

Family Guy has exactly two decent characters, Stewie and Brian. Mostly the interplay between them.

South Park is usually actually funny. They replayed the Scott Tenormen episode last night. God that's still hilarious. Cartman's little Xanatos gambit was golden.

I like Family Guy. South Park is running out of clever episodes to make.

I like Family Guy. South Park is running out of clever episodes to make.

When's Family Guy gonna start?

When's Family Guy gonna start?

Who cares? Family Guy has more to offer than South Park.

Who cares? Family Guy has more to offer than South Park.

That's debatable. I find Family Guy far too conservative, prudish and mainstream... not really funny, either.

That's debatable. I find Family Guy far too conservative, prudish and mainstream... not really funny, either.

The Road to... episodes are fairly decent. The rest of the characters are too stupid to be funny. If I wanted to mock retards I'd weld the doors closed on a short bus.

That's debatable. I find Family Guy far too conservative, prudish and mainstream... not really funny, either.

I find it better than South Park, which has increasingly grown more distasteful as the seasons progress. But this is a matter of taste.

That's debatable. I find Family Guy far too conservative, prudish and mainstream... not really funny, either.

Prudish? Family Guy?

That was a joke, right???

Prudish? Family Guy?

That was a joke, right???

Compared to South Park? It looks like a Mary Whitehouse endorsed show next to South Park.

Compared to South Park? It looks like a Mary Whitehouse endorsed show next to South Park.

Bah South Park is like Howard Stern... it gets by on shock humor and 'OMG I can't believe they went there' moments.

But I hardly think Family Guy is prudish just because they DON'T take the shock path for its own sake.

Compared to South Park? It looks like a Mary Whitehouse endorsed show next to South Park.
Indeed. The episode when Cartman injects Kyle with AIDS... that made me cringe. Nothing that bad in Family Guy.

Bah South Park is like Howard Stern... it gets by on shock humor and 'OMG I can't believe they went there' moments.

But I hardly think Family Guy is prudish just because they DON'T take the shock path for its own sake.

I'm not too keen on shock itself (that's why I never really liked things like Jackass)... but I love humour that will make me laugh before my brain kicks in saying "Eeeeeewww!!! Sick!!! I can't believe they did that!"
And South Park does that. Also, it makes me fall of the sofa with tears in my eyes cause I'm laughing so hard.

Family Guy just doesn't make me laugh. It occasionally makes me smile a little.

Indeed. The episode when Cartman injects Kyle with AIDS... that made me cringe. Nothing that bad in Family Guy.

One of my favourite characters is Mr Garrison... :D

And one of my favourite episodes is the one with the woodland critters on christmas.

I'm not too keen on shock itself (that's why I never really liked things like Jackass)... but I love humour that will make me laugh before my brain kicks in saying "Eeeeeewww!!! Sick!!! I can't believe they did that!"
And South Park does that. Also, it makes me fall of the sofa with tears in my eyes cause I'm laughing so hard.

Family Guy just doesn't make me laugh. It occasionally makes me smile a little.

I liked South Park in the first few seasons when the satire was actually intelligent and there was a point to it. Now it's like one long experiment in seeing what they can get away with and it's just not funny to me anymore. I like intelligence in my humor.

This is the same reason I lost interest in Howard Stern, by the way. He used to be genuinely witty but now it's no better than what a bunch of bored 13 year olds would come up with.

Don't mind either, neither is as good as Futurama and they are both better than American Dad.

I find Peter Griffin an interesting character because to me he seems to have no redeeming features whatsoever. I suppose that could be a cultural thing, possibly in the US he might be seen as quite likeable. Though I can't think of any equivalent character in anything else - even arch villains usually have some appeal.

Don't mind either, neither is as good as Futurama and they are both better than American Dad.

I find Peter Griffin an interesting character because to me he seems to have no redeeming features whatsoever. I suppose that could be a cultural thing, possibly in the US he might be seen as quite likeable. Though I can't think of any equivalent character in anything else - even arch villains usually have some appeal.

That is my one big gripe about Family Guy, that Peter seems to grow stupider with each passing season. This problem is also found with Homer Simpson, and it's gotten quite old.

That is my one big gripe about Family Guy, that Peter seems to grow stupider with each passing season. This problem is also found with Homer Simpson, and it's gotten quite old.

But Homer is quite likeable and decent at heart whereas Peter Griffin is just an unpleasant character.

But Homer is quite likeable and decent at heart whereas Peter Griffin is just an unpleasant character.

True.

True.

I agree though that Homer's stupidity increased as the shows quality declined, it really did start to jar in the later episodes.

Family Guy is not funny. It hasnt been funny since the second season.

I agree though that Homer's stupidity increased as the shows quality declined, it really did start to jar in the later episodes.

I think the problem is that while Homer was always a goofball, it was at least still plausible that he could be an effective parent and hold a job. When his apparent intelligence dropped below that line, it starts to unravel the character.

The problem with Family Guy is that it's too formulaic. Once you've seen five episodes you should probably wait until some kind of head injury wipes your memory before watching another five.

Bah South Park is like Howard Stern... it gets by on shock humor and 'OMG I can't believe they went there' moments.

But I hardly think Family Guy is prudish just because they DON'T take the shock path for its own sake.

QFT

Medium.

But Homer is quite likeable and decent at heart whereas Peter Griffin is just an unpleasant character.

I call that Seinfeld syndrome. The whole Larry David/Jerry Seinfeld take on characters is completely off-putting. Unenlightened self-interest is around me all the time -- why would I want to see more of it on television?

As I said before, Family Guy and South Park are two different approaches to satire/parody. FG relies on cultural references from Gen X (for the most part -- the "Road to..." episodes are a notable exception) and deliberate counter-representations of commonly held beliefs and "sacred cows".

Whereas SP takes all sacred cows and butchers the living shit out of them.

Both depend on exaggeration and shock to get laughs, and both have been, and continue to be, hit or miss when it comes to the delicate combination of insight and crassness.

Some of you might look a little deeper in your own preferences than "this one sucks". Judgement without reasoning doesn't help anyone understand why you think the way you do.

Wow, this is actually a lot harder than I thought it'd be. I'd say that the run of the mill Family Guy episode is better, but a good South Park is much better than a good Family Guy episode. I prefer South Park overall.

I find it better than South Park, which has increasingly grown more distasteful as the seasons progress. But this is a matter of taste.

The thing about South Park is that the best episodes are parodies of other shows/movies. Once they ran out of things to mock, the show kind of grinds to a halt (unless they kill kenny, and in the process create a great season). South Park can't just be a collection of jokes like Family Guy can, so it's harder to write for. I hate to say it, but it may be time for South Park to wind down (or get even more focused on current events :()

I tend to see the two as really two different types of comedy.

Family Guy is meant to be a sitcom, much along the lines of the Simpsons, as mentioned before. Many of its individual jokes tend to be more parodic than anything, poking fun at pop culture from both Generation X, as also mentioned before, and this generation.

South Park is more of a satire, taking on the issues of the day more than pop culture. Pop culture references can be found in the show, but at its core, it does have some sort of message in every episode, which is usually, "Hey, wake up and have some reason here, people." Family Guy does at times have these sorts of messages, but they're more of the sitcom type, such as, "Did the main character of the episode learn a lesson that can apply to his/her life?" South Park takes on satire from shock value, and really, many of its "OMG I can't believe they DID that!!!1!" moments are funny because they are satirical in nature. If certain people were not famous for doing certain things or having certain personalities, or if certain issues weren't making the headlines at the time (or we didn't remember the time they made the headlines), it wouldn't be funny.

South Park relies on this type of humor more than Family Guy, but it can provide for more original humor in the process. Episodes of South Park have to be written quickly to be current, and that takes real talent on the writers' part. Sometimes they miss and just end up providing shock value, but sometimes it's gold. Family Guy can use and re-use all of the old sitcom standard plots and throw in all of their random jokes in the process. Family Guy's originality, therefore, could be more easily seen, even if it's not truly as original or as shocking because it's so random and unexpected for the environment it's in, even if the plot is something that's been done repeatedly in the past.

Anyway, those are the differences I see. BTW, I think Robot Chicken could fall into this discussion as well, as it seems to be a mid-point between Family Guy and South Park in random shocking humor.

I think they're both fairly decent shows, as I am easily amused, but I think King of the Hill is pretty awesome.

I tend to see the two as really two different types of comedy.

Family Guy is meant to be a sitcom, much along the lines of the Simpsons, as mentioned before. Many of its individual jokes tend to be more parodic than anything, poking fun at pop culture from both Generation X, as also mentioned before, and this generation.

South Park is more of a satire, taking on the issues of the day more than pop culture. Pop culture references can be found in the show, but at its core, it does have some sort of message in every episode, which is usually, "Hey, wake up and have some reason here, people." Family Guy does at times have these sorts of messages, but they're more of the sitcom type, such as, "Did the main character of the episode learn a lesson that can apply to his/her life?" South Park takes on satire from shock value, and really, many of its "OMG I can't believe they DID that!!!1!" moments are funny because they are satirical in nature. If certain people were not famous for doing certain things or having certain personalities, or if certain issues weren't making the headlines at the time (or we didn't remember the time they made the headlines), it wouldn't be funny.

South Park relies on this type of humor more than Family Guy, but it can provide for more original humor in the process. Episodes of South Park have to be written quickly to be current, and that takes real talent on the writers' part. Sometimes they miss and just end up providing shock value, but sometimes it's gold. Family Guy can use and re-use all of the old sitcom standard plots and throw in all of their random jokes in the process. Family Guy's originality, therefore, could be more easily seen, even if it's not truly as original or as shocking because it's so random and unexpected for the environment it's in, even if the plot is something that's been done repeatedly in the past.

Anyway, those are the differences I see. BTW, I think Robot Chicken could fall into this discussion as well, as it seems to be a mid-point between Family Guy and South Park in random shocking humor.

YES! Thank you, what I wanted to say but didn't. And I agree, Robot Chicken is gold, too bad it's only about 11 minutes to an episode. Hilarious.

YES! Thank you, what I wanted to say but didn't. And I agree, Robot Chicken is gold, too bad it's only about 11 minutes to an episode. Hilarious.

I like that Robot Chicken is so short. It's better to leave someone wanting more than to wear out your welcome.

South Park, No contest.

I would like to have a moment of silence for The Simpsons: without it, neither of these shows would have begun.

I don't regularly watch either show, but this is what I've gotten from the episodes I have seen:
South Park is funniest when the characters actually act like somewhat real kids. For example, when the boys build a ladder to heaven so they can find out where Kenny hid his candy ticket, that's funny, because I can imagine a bunch of id-driven eight-year-olds being very concerned about the fate of their dead friend's candy. I can also imagine adults mistaking this greed for something special, the love for a departed friend. The satire is not great, because it's too heavy-handed and too topical. I like The Onion and The Simpsons more.
Family Guy is funny when it steals ideas from The Simpsons.

I'm more amused by Family Guy.

Family Guy. No contest in my mind.

American Dad, duh...
:rolleyes:


I love south park, which is why I have www.allsp.com bookmarked

I use to watch South Park years ago, and if I happen to be flipping through channels and pass it, will pause for a bit.. but usually move on. I prefer Family Guy by far, watch it on tbs almost every evening.

Family Guy, since at least some jokes have at least some intelligence to them. The majority of South Park jokes, eh, not so much.

Futurama was by far the funniest of the lot. Out of these two I prefer South Park.