Seinfeld

SEINFELD BLOG

Buy Seinfeld DVD!

Seinfeld Script Search:

Your comments on the DVD commentaries

Season 7 on DVD



Save 30%

Pay only:

$34.99

Author Message
redrules







PostPosted: January 5, 2005 10:06 AM 

What are your opinions the commentary/inside looks/notes about nothing which accompany the three season DVD release.
I love Seinfeld but some of the things I have heard on the commentary are nonsense and this is unfortunately begining to affect my enjoyment/opinion of the show/actors/writers.

Let me start with 'The Baby Shower'

I recall Larry Charles making a big deal about how clever the writing is that has these multi stories going on at the same time and managing to bring them all together in a manner that is not contrived.
Then please explain the convenience of 1)Elaine's roommate being sick, (she and the pregnant lady have no mutual female friends with houses or larger apartments, a baby shower being held in a bachelor pad!I ask you.) 2) conveniently the cable guys do not do the job in Jerrys when they were doing Kramers place. 3) in the car to Jerry's apartment Jerry says to George 'it would be one thing if i asked a favour but to offer to pick me up', how did George know he would be at the airport if Jerry didn't ring him to let him know and therefore ask for a lift.
In the same scene Jerry works out why George is so eager to bring Jerry home when he spots the red collar, Larry Charles says that George could never fool Jerry and yet a few minutes later Elaine only has to look at George and immediately knows what is going on.
At the beginnig of the episode Elaine asks what the big deal is about the Kennedys after Jerry and George bring them up, later she brings them up and Larry Charles on the commentary says this is an insight to Elaine's character how she is obsessed with the Kennedys. What?
He also thinks the shoot out scene where the lead character is killed is new and innovative. But in my opinion its terrible. Fair enough Kramer's 'what have you done with my cable boy' is funny otherwise the scene is neither funny or real looking(in the sense of the show)so you know it has to be a dream sequence.

Well this is just my two cents worth, for now, I have more.

Seinsmelled
Bob Sakamano

Posts: no

Reply: 1



PostPosted: January 5, 2005 10:23 AM 

3) in the car to Jerry's apartment Jerry says to George 'it would be one thing if i asked a favour but to offer to pick me up', how did George know he would be at the airport if Jerry didn't ring him to let him know and therefore ask for a lift.

Jerry could've just told George he was going to fly to his show and he'll be arriving back at whatever time. George then took it upon himself to offer to pick up Jerry in order to have access to his apartment.


I was watching the "Inside Looks" on the episodes, and during one of them, Jason Alexander states (I believe this was during "The Pen" look), "This is one of the episodes I wish we didn't shoot, and there was one more episode too." Does anyone know which episode he is referring to? I wonder if it was "The Puerto Rican Day" episode...

redrules
Bob Sakamano

Posts: no

Reply: 2



PostPosted: January 5, 2005 11:54 AM 

Sorry, in relation to point 3) I should have mentioned the convenience here is the cancelation of Jerry's show which brings him back to New York when he is not expected, which leads to him ringing George.
But also if Jerry's plane made an emergency landing because of the blizzard, the show was cancelled because of snow, how convenient that he still managed to get a flight back in time for the shower.

Bookman
Queen of Confrontation

Posts: 3535

Reply: 3



PostPosted: January 5, 2005 12:00 PM 

Redrules, you said a lot. I just want to address a couple of things.

1. Listen to Larry Charles's audio commentary on "The Library." When you put this together with the stuff on "The Baby Shower," it sounds like LC believes the "early attempt" to "intersect" the storylines in "The Baby Shower" missed the mark, compared to "The Library."

2. On "The Baby Shower," just a few seconds before LC says Elaine has an "obsession," he says Elaine has an "interest" in the Kennedys. "Interest" sounds right, and probably makes Elaine no different from most Americans. You'd think a writer would be more careful with his word selection. On top of which, all the subsequent episodes that refer to Kennedys (including "The Boyfriend," indirectly) tend to show the WRITERS to be obsessed with them, not Elaine.

redrules
Bob Sakamano

Posts: no

Reply: 4



PostPosted: January 5, 2005 8:24 PM 

Surely Elaine and the writers are one and the same, she is fictional after all Smile

But the point I am making is that Elaine's first mention of the Kennedys is 'whats the big deal about the Kennedys' or words to that effect, to me this implies that Elaine is not interested, never mind obsessed, with the whole Kennedy clan saga, yet this is contradicted by the writer in his commentary at the very point where Elaine utters these words.

Bookman
Queen of Confrontation

Posts: 3535

Reply: 5



PostPosted: January 5, 2005 9:12 PM 

Actually, redrules, Elaine and the writers are not one and the same, precisely BECAUSE Elaine is fictional. Elaine's fictional, but the writers aren't. Perhaps if Elaine had been written by only one writer, then one could argue they're one and the same. But Elaine's lines over 9 seasons were probably written by more than a dozen writers.

Moreover, over the 9 seasons, the Kennedys might've be mentioned as often as Superman, Jerry's obsession. I think that makes a pretty good case for collective obsession on the writers' part, and yet we agree Elaine had no such obsession.

Finally, if you had listened to Larry Charles's commentary more carefully, you would've heard him say this was the "beginning" of Elaine's interest in the Kennedys. And that's true, because of all her subsequentwe interest, as shown in "The Contest," "The Chaparone," and "The Bottle Deposit," and maybe other episodes.

redrules
Bob Sakamano

Posts: no

Reply: 6



PostPosted: January 7, 2005 1:01 AM 

I will take your second point first. He starts saying 'This is the first time we mention that she has an interest in the Kennedy....Her obession with the Kennedys...gave a shade to that character that would be used later on' at the very point that Elaine finishes saying "Would you two stop with the Kennedys, why does everybody make such a big deal about the Kennedys, what is this fascination, who cares, its all so boring".
I don't disagree that Elaine will have an interest (as early as half way through this very episode, thus contradicting her earlier speech, but thats not my proble), I don't disagree that this is the first mention of the Kennedys by Elaine, it is after all early on in season two and these things are just being established. This is fine.
What I disagree with is his statement in commentary of her interest at the very point in the episode when she has quite clearly expressed DIS-interest in the Kennedys. This is my point.
As to your first point. I was responding, jokingly (the smiley) to your 'not Elaine' as meaning (jokingly)that she has her own opinions on the matter. It wasn't suppose to turn into a war of words.
That said I am deadly serious about the first issue. Laughing

Bookman
Queen of Confrontation

Posts: 3535

Reply: 7



PostPosted: January 7, 2005 12:13 PM 

Redrules, you're killin' me.

Your point was never that Larry Charles happened to make his Kennedy-obsession statement at the very moment Elaine seemed to be undermining him, i.e., a timing issue. You simply mentioned the timing of it in passing, in your second post. If the timing had really been your point, you would've said it in your first post. You didn't. Your point, to which I responded (and remember, of all the things you addressed in your first post, I elected to respond to only two), was that you took issue with the SUBSTANCE of what Larry Charles said, namely, (your words) "this is an insight into Elaine's character how she's obsessed with the Kennedys."

And talk about "war of words"! I agreed with your friggin' post. I simply tried to explain Larry Charles's statement away by saying he selected his words sloppily. Since we agreed Elaine had an interest in the Kennedys, and if we agree that Larry Charles would've been fine if he stopped right there, where was your beef with my first post? I was agreeing with you!

Finally, I saw your little smiley-face in your second post. I chose to ignore it. What you'd said was neither funny nor cute, and punctuating it with a smiley-face didn't make it that way. So I did what any right-thinking person would've done under the circumstances: I pegged you for a weasel and fired back accordingly. Was that wrong? Should I not have done that? You know, if anyone had said anything to me at all when I first started here that that sort of thing was frowned upon...

Can we just agree, now, that Larry Charles was wrong when he said Elaine was obsessed with the Kennedys and be done with it?

redrules
Bob Sakamano

Posts: no

Reply: 8



PostPosted: January 7, 2005 1:58 PM 

I agree that my initial post was pretty poorly worded on this issue and have learned a lesson.

I would also like to leave it at that but to say I take offence at the 'weasel' remark.

Jeremy
Low-Talker

Posts: 1

Reply: 9



PostPosted: January 7, 2005 8:30 PM 

It seems to me that you're missing the point, the whole point of Elaine saying "Who cares about the Kennedy's, anyways?" and then later on in the episode being fascinated with them is mostly due to how eager she is to please and gain the approval of her snobby performance artist friend who's pregnant, so she says one thing and then behaves a completely different way when actually face to face with someone, which is actually one of the overarching themes of the show, right?

richo
Low-Talker

Posts: 1

Reply: 10



PostPosted: January 17, 2005 4:48 AM 

Back to the original topic, being opinions on the commentaries of the DVDs, I would have to say I too wasn't too happy with them for the most part.

Whith the Jason/Julia/Michael commentaries, the whole time it's just the three of them laughing at each others' jokes, with no real insight.

The Larry David/Jerry Seinfeld commentaries are almost all quiet because they're enjoying the episode, and when either does talk, the other one normally has to correct what the other says because they weren't totally right.

I think Larry Charles is quite good, but he seems to come across as very arrogant, which ruins it for me.

The best so far I think was Tom Cherones and the set designer (Thomas Azzari I believe) on "The Parking Garage". It was truly insightful and interesting.

If they're just gonna go in and enjoy the episode and just add to the studio audience, I hardly see the usefulness of this feature. At least watch the episode a few times and get the laughs out of your system and work out what you're going to say before pressing the record button.

CosmoKramer
Germaphobe

Posts: 21

Reply: 11



PostPosted: January 19, 2005 4:44 PM 

I LOVE the commentaries.

I actually like that \/:
Whith the Jason/Julia/Michael commentaries, the whole time it's just the three of them laughing at each others' jokes, with no real insight.

I enjoy all of the commentaries but it would be cool if more the cast & crew commentaries were insightful and interesting.

Jean Paul Jean Paul
Low-Talker

Posts: 1

Reply: 12



PostPosted: January 31, 2005 2:52 PM 

Did it ever occur to anyone might have been lying when she claimed not to be interested in the Kennedys?! Often we publicly avoid what we most desire; especially under the critical gaze of friends like Jerry and George who will take advantage of every opportunity to make fun of you. Plus you guys are getting way too involved with semantics, all the while claiming not to (a sure sign of obsession with language)

#2. How in the fuck are you going to question the creator of the show? Do you have some stake in the character of Elaine?
I would dare to say Larry Charles knows whether E is obssessed or not.

#3 Have we all forgotton how E got the job with Mr. Pitt? She dresses up like Jackie O.


If you need me to clear up anything else, I'll be thinking reasonably on other relevant topics.

Bookman
Queen of Confrontation

Posts: 3535

Reply: 13



PostPosted: January 31, 2005 3:23 PM 

I AM obsessed with language. I'm Bookman.

And I do have a stake in Elaine. I'd like to bang her (but since she's fictional, I'll take Julia Louis-Dreyfus, although Connie Sellecca--nothin' wrong with that!).

And I don't question the creator of the show--I question Larry Charles, who was just a writer, and who, in one breath, said Elaine had an "interest" in the Kennedys, and in the next he said she was "obsessed." "Obsessed" is quite a step up from a simple "interest." Frankly, when he said "obsessed," in the context in which he said it, he sounded like he was talking straight out of his ass.


jean paul jean paul
Low-Talker

Posts: 1

Reply: 14



PostPosted: February 2, 2005 3:23 PM 

Apology!
I'm sorry. I wrote Larry Charles in my post,
but the whole time I was reading the posts I was thinking Larry David. But I still stand by my claim that "Lainey" is obsessed and not just interested in the Kennedys because she exhibits behavior that suggests it. And my other exuse is that Elaine is based on a former girlfriend of Larry David. So in my misinterpretation I was desperate to make several points. Sorry again.

P.S. Thanks for not busting my ass. I just read my post and it was pretty snooty. And I hate when people are condescending (sp?) on the internet.


Join the discussion:














Very Happy Smile Sad Surprised
Shocked Confused Cool Laughing
Mad Razz Embarassed Crying or Very Sad
Evil or Very Mad Twisted Evil Rolling Eyes Wink
Powered by MTSmileys
Check to Subscribe to this Comment:
(email field must be filled in)



Subscribe Without Commenting







Copyright ©2003, Mark Carey.  










OtherResources