Well, they were kind of interesting.
And the più I watched, I realized, the Family Guy characters were very well developed... Yeah, and Seinfeld had a plot.
I was talking with my friend the other giorno who actually kicked off this little epiphany in my head. She watches the Simpsons, but not Family Guy. She points out that while the characters on the Simpsons can be crude, lazy and just plain mean at times, they also had softer sides, like when Bart was best Friends with Lisa, o when Homer apologized to Lisa in a crossword puzzle (these are just off the superiore, in alto of my head). She pointed out that Family Guy characters never (or very, very rarely) have any moments like that. She confessed an interest in Stewie and Brian, but an outright loathing of Peter.
Her argument was that Peter was the flattest of flat characters, and not just because lives in a two dimensional world. Peter, like the Simpsons, is crude, lazy and just plain mean... and that's pretty much it. He has absolutely no character arc, whereas Homer does. He hasn't changed at all since the first season of Family Guy.
I found myself agreeing with everything she said.
Don't get me wrong-- I still get a kick out of Family Guy. But the più I watch it, the più I wonder... what exactly is Peter's appeal? Is he really as flat as he seems? Sure, he loves Lois, but why exactly is it that Lois loves and continues to put up with him? What are his redeeming qualities? If he were a real person, would te be his friend?
No, seriously-- I'm asking te folks these questions. Is Peter deeper than he seems, o is he flatter than a pancake on Jupiter? What do te guys think?
