Why Tracey Ullman HATES 'The Simpsons' (Yet, Also INSISTS on Getting Credit for the Show's Success)
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 1 окт 2024
- Blending sketch comedy, musical numbers and dance routines, “The Tracey Ullman Show” is a variety series, which aired weekly from April 1987 to May 1990. The show was conceived and co-created by veteran television producer, James L. Brooks, as a means to highlight the titular star of the show and her multi-faceted talents. However, the series instead became famous for being “that show” that “The Simpsons” started on.
Originally, “The Simpsons” were only supposed to be brief wraparounds, as “The Tracey Ullman Show” transitioned in an out of commercials, though the shorts were eventually given their own segment on the series. Ultimately, “The Simpsons” shorts proved significantly more popular than the ullman show itself. And, while “The Simpsons” went on and became a cultural phenomenon, shaping television history, “The Tracey Ullman Show” drifted into obscurity, becoming just a footnote in the history of “The Simpsons”.
Understandably, given the usual circumstance of having her own show upstaged by what was effectively filler, Ullman has always had an unusual relationship with "The Simpsons”. Predictably, as it became clearer and clearer that a significant portion of people - if not the vast majority of people - were tuning into her show to watch the shorts, Ullman was jealous, and even bitter about the success of “The Simpsons”, which she felt was at her expense.
Publicly, Ullman appeared fine with the attention that “The Simpsons” received. However,
behind closed doors, members of the Ullman’s staff were well aware of how exactly she about for the shorts….and her attempts to undermine the cartoon’s success.
Then, after “The Simpsons” became a sitcom, right when “The Simpsons” were at the height of their popularity in the early 90s, things between Ullman and “The Simpsons” turned ugly, when Ullman took legal action against the show - over intellectual property relating to a cartoon that she had no creative involvement with, and, as it would be revealed years later, actually hated.
"I created the Simpsons, sort of."
-Tracey Ullman to Lara Croft on Robot Chicken once
Episode?
@@eddy7457 season 5 episode 3
@@dexstewart862 Hey! A guy who gives the answer we're looking for. Yeah baby, yeah!
@@DlcEnergy The Sketch
ruclips.net/video/rdF99-0xmIw/видео.html&ab_channel=HouseofCroft
It’s interesting to hear more about this as I’ve heard little bits and pieces of her not being fond of The Simpsons, but not enough to be able to see the bigger picture beyond the fact the segments were more popular than anything else on her show, which is fairly understandable for her being upset since she didn’t really have much to do with those segments, beyond the fact they were on her show, but the fact she’s still upset after all these years is pretty ridiculous. She’s still very wealthy and has many talents beyond being an actress and comedian.
She didn't sound that upset to me...
I dunno, if I was a talented performer and the best thing i ended up being known for was somethingIi didn't do, I'd be a bit resentful.
@@crnkmnkyshe doesn’t want to come across as bitter and so she’s doing her best to hide how much she’s unhappy with how The Simpsons is so popular, while she didn’t really have much to do with them other than the fact the Simpsons shorts were on her show. Lot of people on the entertainment industry, especially those who act, tend hide such things in order to seem alright with something that actually bothers them.
@@henrybelman7424true. Though, considering how she still is able to get work and hasn’t really burnt a lot of bridges, I’d say she overall should be fairly happy. I can defiantly see how one would be upset the most noteworthy aspect of their show decades ago is something they didn’t create nor had anything to do with in anyway, but I guess since again she’s still able to not just be pigeonholed to her 80s show and still does comedy as well as appearing on various TV shows and films, regardless if she has anything to do with the shows and films beyond acting, I guess if I were in her situation I’d just to move on with my life and focus on what I’m doing with my career. Of course that’s me and not her. I think it’s sort of unfortunate she’s not able to really let it go to a good extent. I can see her frustration of how The Simpsons is still on after it being over 30 years, but her saying how she’s never been asked to be on The Simpsons when in fact she was on an episode of The Simpsons in the 90s is quite sad to me.
yeah she needs to get over it already, it's getting old.
I am old enough to remember saying "A whole episode of The Simpsons?! WHOA!"
Why did I totally hear that in Bart's voice?
Man it must've been amazing
"I don't have to sit though Tracey Ullman to see the Simpsons anymore? 😱"
I've been looking forward to a more in-depth explanation for the feud.
While it is true most people haven't heard of the Tracey Ullman Show these days, it wasn't exactly a nothing show back at the time. Like all Fox shows prior to the Simpsons, it was never a ratings monster, but it was very well received and won 10 Primetime Emmys in 3.5 seasons, including Outstanding Show, while being nominated in that category for its entire run. Ullman won a Golden Globe for Best Actress.
I only know who she is because she played Kronk's love interest in Kronk's new groove.
@@AslanKyoya1776And I don't know who you are. Our lack of knowledge isn't that relevant, though.
@@noneofyourbusiness4616 This is your mama, who the hell is this?
@@noneofyourbusiness4616 - Except Tracey Ullman is supposed to be in the entertainment business. You know... that thing where people are supposed to be more well known than the average person. Or did you forget that part?
@@clit_niblr0375 en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_awards_and_nominations_received_by_Tracey_Ullman
This is like the coffee shop J. K. Rowling wrote in claiming credit for "creating" and "nurturing" Harry Potter.
@serenity1378lol cope
or like scumlord J.K Rowling herself claiming credit for creating Harry Potter when she stole it from Troll 2.
@serenity1378 genuine question, what did Matt Groening do?
Oh God... I didn't know that.@serenity1378
@@cultreader9751 He basically created the main characters and their scenario and the writers fleshed it out over time into what we know now.
Tracey hired the two actors for her show that became the voices of Homer and Marge. Yes the show could have gone on with two other actors, but they are both so good at doing those voices that this may be Tracey's actual contribution to The Simpsons.
Then why doesn’t she just say that?
Tracy picked Dan Castellaneta and Julie Kavner for the Tracy Ullman Show. She did not select them specifically for the Simpsons. When the shorts went into production the people in charge hired Julie and Dan to save money on casting since they were already available. Tracy had nothing to do with that. In fact, she didn't have anything to do with getting her own show. It was created for her by Fox studio executives. She just showed up and performed. I think it is true that she hated the Simpsons shorts and believed voicing cartoon characters was beneath her. The excuse of being too busy does not hold up when you consider that it takes only a few minutes to record a page of simple dialog. She wasn't too busy when the Simpsons became a hit. She realized her mistake and rushed to voice a couple of characters.
I actually think she deserves a little credit in the creation of the Simpsons. It's probably difficult for folks to imagine a time before The Simpsons existence, but I remember the premieres of both of these shows. The Simpsons undoubtedly overshadowed Tracey's show from the opening pilot. It was easily the best part. But at the time, I knew who Tracey Ullman was. I had no idea what The Simpsons was. Without her fame & popularity, the idea to create a cartoon with Groening may never have occurred to Brooks in the 1st place. I was aware of her distaste for it, but she did allow it to be on her show ultimately. She was asked to do a voice & declined. But it still made it's debut on her show. Apparently, no one believed The Simpsons could make it on it's own. I can also understand her anger. If you're working on a brand new show & all of a sudden, your entire cast is now more busy with something else, it's gotta be pretty frustrating. The Simpsons still didn't become the show it's really known to be, until a few years later. I'm a 1st 9 seasons kinda guy. But you can't deny the show became bigger than the sum of it's parts, somewhere around seasons 3-5. By that point, Ullman was a faded memory.
On the few occasions that Mike Reiss has talked about the origins of The Simpsons, he says little to nothing about Tracey Ullman outside of her eponymous show, he seems to remember The Simpsons as a continuation of "It's Gary Schandling's Show" more than anything else, he claims that everyone at Fox disrespected them and not just Tracey Ullman, and that the popularity of the Simpsons was not built slowly over several episodes, it was virtually instant.
@@holdingpattern245 I'm gonna be honest with you. I don't dislike Mr. Reiss. But I don't take much of what Hollywood types say seriously. Most of it is BS. They are only telling you what they want you to know. Many details, they'd just prefer no one know at all. I can understand. But assuming Tracey's show had little or nothing to do with the success of The Simpsons sounds like the rantings of someone who has too much emotion involved. I watched all 3 of the shows mentioned. The Tracey Ullman Show had The Simpsons IN it. There was no other show containing the Simpsons in any way. My first time ever seeing The Simpsons was the night The Tracey Ullman Show premiered. It just didn't exist before that. The people who work on the Simpsons worked for other shows before that, but they didn't create these characters, no matter how much they wish that were true. The Simpsons immediately upstaged & outdid Tracey Ullman. But without her show as the vehicle to introduce the characters to the world, there wouldn't be a show at all. Obviously, Brooks didn't think he could make a stand-alone primetime cartoon or he would have just done that instead. Groening had no plans to do TV at the time & no one else was offering, so Ullman's show does deserve some credit. Especially since I & everyone I knew owned a Bart Simpson T-Shirt before the show even began. It's all anyone was talking about the day after the premiere. When the The Simpsons was announced to become it's own show, it was "Duh" moment. Of course it became it's own show. It was an immediate success. That's the only part Mr. Reiss seems to be correctly representing in your take on whatever it was he said. However, I don't think Tracey earned any money & I think she needs to realize that The Simpsons is the reason people watched her show in the 1st place. At least, that was the case right after the premiere of the pilot. But not before that. Everyone knew who Ullman was but Groening & The Simpsons were nothing nobodies. In the Tracey Ullman days, Matt Groening called most of the shots. I've never heard anyone mention Mike Reiss's name when speaking on the creation of the Ullman shorts. I'm afraid he'll have to stick with The Critic when talking about such things & anything he knows about Simpsons creation is just him telling you stories someone else told him. Literally hearsay. My guess is, he was referring to the creation of the separate show that began in Dec of '89 & not the early shorts which began airing in '87. That would make more sense.
@@MurderTheMouseIf we're talking firsthand accounts, the shorts were totally written and storyboarded by Matt Groening and developed and produced by James L. Brooks, meanwhile I don't think Ullman even developed or produced her own show, and Fox's market research indicated that most Simpsons viewers were unaware of the shorts even in the first season. To use an exaggerated example, imagine if Bronson Pinchot felt entitled to a cut of the profits from Steve Urkel merchandise, because Family Matters was a spin-off of a recurring character from Perfect Strangers.
@@holdingpattern245 I'm not sure who this is response is meant for, considering how clearly I mentioned that Ullman deserves nothing in the way of monetary payment. All I said she deserved, in fact, was credit for allowing it to take place on her sketch comedy show. I also went on to say that she faded into obscurity because her show wasn't good. Did you even read my response? I realize it was long, but you were confused by my original comment, so I painstakingly explained myself in further detail, yet you have responded with an argument that makes no sense. Also... FOX market research? Seriously? I was there. The reason you're not understanding those numbers, must be because you just weren't around at the time. I don't mean to assume, but it can be hard to imagine a world without the existence of these characters. But I assure you, that time existed. Tracey Ullman didn't make The Simpsons wildly popular, the T-Shirts did. Her show put The Simpsons in front of the eyes of people like myself. Kids around the world instantly loved it. Then the shirts were everywhere. They were banned in schools across the country. By the time The Simpsons premiered, it was already a hit. That's why so many people had never seen Tracey Ullman but knew what The Simpsons was. It had already become a phenomenon before the premiere. Ullman was already irrelevant by that point. This was all mentioned in my previous reply, BTW. I'll just add an example: Pokeman. I know what Pokeman is because it's the most successful franchise of all time. Many of those people who tuned in, had never seen Ullman but knew what this show was because these characters were not only on T-Shirts, but on the news as well. But in the case of The Simpsons, older people checked it out & liked it. Then it exploded to the point that it's origin quickly became unrecognizable. But the original spark happened on The Tracey Ullman Show, & whether she or anyone else like it or not, that will always be true. So come on. Lets have another meaningless retort that reiterates another opinion that I've already expressed.
@@MurderTheMouseI want to reply, but a page of text comes at me each time I do, so if that's how you win arguments then good work.
Part of the reason Ullman's US show on Fox isn't remembered on its own merits is that I think it's never been available to buy on home media. I don't even know if it's been rerun via broadcast. Makes me wonder if there's some licensing nightmare between the different contributors.
Music licensing issues.
When her HBO show Tracey Takes On was finally released on DVD they completely butchered and censoredthe episodes so much that some episodes were only 3 minutes instead of 24. Poor Tracey can't get abreak with DVD/digital releases of her shows.
That show reran on Comedy Central in the ‘90s
To be fair To Tracy Ullman. Matt Groening wasn't happy to have Jay Sherman Guest star on the Simpsons. That was just one episode.
Why? Did he not like Lovitz or just didn't want to do a crossover?
@@mprattyh3 Groening thought that Brooks/Jean/Reiss’ show should “stay in its own lane”. It was petty bullshit
Too bad, that was always one of my favorites. Probably because I loved movies and Hollywood related stuff as a kid.
He was probably bitter about Family Guy too, when it started rapidly climbing up the ladder.
Greening was "forced" by Fox to mention or cross-promote other Fox Series on his show because of the Simpsons popularity at the time. From Married w/ Children, Martin and yea the Critic. He apparently was not a fan of doing this and found it super annoying to do
1990’s: Oh shut up Tracy, The Simpsons is now the best show on television.
2000- : Never mind Tracy…my bad.
Tracey Ullman still does some shows in the UK every now and then so she still sticks in people's minds here. I do remember interviews constantly bringing up the Simpsons when they should be discussing her work, so I can see where some frustration comes in.
No she’s not , nobody talks about her
@@JimmyJames10-k7v I do.
@@crnkmnky bot
@@JimmyJames10-k7v Beep, boop. I know you are, but what am I?
Well she should be proud that she helped the Simpsons become a huge success.
Lol. I always knew about Tracy Ullman Simpsons shorts. But never knew what the hell is tracy Ullman
I mean, the “I breast-fed the yellow people” line is a somewhat elegant and quick-witted way of admitting that, no, she didn’t created them but also rightfully claiming that, yes, her name was used to promote them initially, while not reducing herself to a mere actress playing herself (truthful as that may be, of course). Notice how she didn’t call herself the “mother”, instead comparing herself to a wet nurse… There’s a lot of latitude to that analogy, which makes it a bit of an evasive answer, for perfectly understandable reasons.
Tracy obsession with the Simpson success makes her underestimate her talent. If she wasn't so focused on undermining the Simpsons she could have and still be a huge success. She took her eyes off of her on achievements to envy anothers achievements.
I disagree, I still think she's overestimating her talent. I've met people at the drive thru with more talent than her.
Keep in mind folks that these two are talking about the most successful British comedian in history.
@@ck9103 Sorry, kiddo, no we're not talking about Russell Howard or Jimmy Carr. You're probably thinking of Gary Glitter, though, and I don't find that funny at all.
@@ck9103 More successful than anyone in Monty Python! More successful than Charlie fuckin' Chaplin...... this champ's a real genius.
@@aick It is certainly unfortunate, but 'success' isn't defined as "having the most cultural impact" in the entertainment world.
She did not create nor write for The Simpsons. I seriously doubt that she personally had anything to do with the decision for The Simpsons being featured on her show. Anytime the history of The Simpsons has ever been discussed, her show is credited as being the place where The Simpsons got started. So I’d say enough credit has been given.
She's still the richest British comedian, worth twice as much as John Cleese, so what's she complaining about
Is that before or after he did that brilliant skit of being one of the captains who steered the ship into the Brexit iceberg before he put on a rat costume to desert it as it sank?
That's a good thing for her as she is jot qualified to hand scrub John Cleeses' comedy jock strap.
I think Ricky Gervais is probably a bit richer,or Jane Leeves for that matter.
@@TheDarkRodentSay what you will about her, but she’s incredibly fucking talented. She and Cleese are both amazing comedians. She’s just a different kind of one. Tracy’s great strength is her characters. When she plays a character she’s created, she completely and utterly EMBODIES that character. Sure, sometimes she’s wearing tons of makeup, prosthetics and whatnot, but even without it, she still basically becomes a whole other person when she’s playing a character. She’s a phenomenal impressionist who’s great at accents. I read that when she was developing her Fox show, she made sure to visit lots of different places in middle America so that she could master as many American regional dialects as possible. She puts a lot of work into her craft.
@crescentfreshbret If she's so talented where is her body if work from the last 3 decades
Members of her cast from The Tracy Ullman show are the voices of the Simpsons.
I was a fan of Matt Groening (from his comic strip) and Tracey Ullman (from her music) before the show they shared and remained a fan of both for years after. As far as their more recent projects go, Ullman can still make me laugh but Groening hasn't done anything I've liked for a long time. Also, Ullman was obviously joking about wanting theee minute segments on The Simpsons. Not sure how "I breast-fed the yellow people" is being taken seriously here, either. She's a comedian, and that's a funny joke.
Well put.
What about Futurerama
I'd take all those jokes as nothing more than jokes, if it wasn't for the suit
I saw Groening do a panel with Lynda Barry, another cartoonist/novelist. She was hysterical, and he was a fucking snore
@J.S.3259 True, but that's not fair. Lynda Berry was brilliant and had an amazing charisma. I used to love her on Late Night. You can see her appearances here on youtube. She's a 10/10 human being.
As far as this "feud" nonsense,I never trust entertainment business lawsuits as indicators of anything the civilians can understand because I know a little about the business of lawyers, agents, and how they think about "their" artists and it really dosen't work like people imagine. Same with publishers, studios, and other forces that have nothing to do with the artist.
My whole family loved Tracy Ullmans music and impressions and tuned in for that. It's how we discovered The Simpsons and we watched that too. It looked to me like something went on behind the scenes with writing staff or something to do with the production of the show and I don't know exactly what that was, but perhaps that played a role in her personal experience. I wouldn't be so foolish to imagine I know, though. Life in Hell was cool. The Simpsons were cool. Matt is ok.
This is silly to me.
But yeah, Berry I'm sure slaughtered him as she's one of the most interesting people who ever lived as far as I'm concerned.
When the Teacher gets jealous of the Student's success
Ego is a self inflicted disability. To be connected to both the "early years" of Fox and the beginning of The Smipsons could've been humbling and legendary in itself, but nah, gotta be mad and feel usurped 🙄 Still, I'd be interested to see that initial contract, because a deal is a deal, and the language of that contract is very important.
Now I wanna watch the Gary Shandling Show 😆
While she definitely deserves some credit for the show getting off the ground, I also believe, 'The Simpsons,' more than paid her back by being the only thing worth watching in the last season of her show.
No she doesn't, she had nothing to do with it, she should've been happy she had a show at all
The Simpsons is the only reason anyone under 50 has even heard her name before
Pretty Sad tbh
And, yet no one ever talks about Dr. N!godatu, the other cartoon on the Tracey Ullman show.
Right. Now _there's_ a weird animation style!
I actually watched the Tracey Ulman show when I was a kid and remember loving when the Simpsons shorts came on. It's funny because I remember mainly watching her show but as soon as the Simpsons aired, I pretty much stopped watching it and mainly paid more attention when Simpsons specials, etc came on. Her show did introduce it to the world but the same happened with Jim Carrey and Jamie Foxx on In Living Color and I don't see Keenan Ivory Wayans attacking them for their paychecks.
from what I've read, Groaning was waiting for his meeting with Brooks for the animated show pitch and in the waiting room struck up a conversation with someone and was made aware of the possibility the deal would lose him ownership of his creation, so Groaning left to a coffee shop and made the simpsons drawings up in an hour and pitched them instead of Life in Hell
smart idea
Something tells me that when Matt Groening was given the opportunity to do the simpsons on the tracy ullman show, all the people that worked simultaneously on The Simpsons shorts and the tracy sketches probably became more interested in doing the Simpsons because it was something new being done with animation since most cartoons in the 80s were basically action cartoons that either were superhero inspired or were just action cartoons being made to sell toys and preach morals to kids.
It was precisely from there that The Simpsons was successful from the beginning, it was because of how innovative they were, not for nothing it was one of the animated series of the late 80s that broke the mold and one of the ones that started the Renaissance era as well.
You left out that Butterfinger began using Bart Simpson in its TV commercials while the shorts were still airing as part of the Tracey Ullman Show (for at least a year before they got their own TV show). “Nobody better lay a finger on my Butterfinger”
i won't start babbling about something i wasn't there for, but judging on the info presented by this video, it really does seem like she did not care about the "silly cartoon" in the slightest until The Simpsons became the powerhouse it is today and she started seeing the dollar signs she missed out on. She says "sorry i didn't have the time to appear in the early shorts" but it really comes off as "if i knew what this would become i would be 200% involved in every aspect of it". She's already a massively successful artist and the way she tries to insert herself on a (at the time) small cartoonist work in any way she can comes across as really gross, scummy, and unbelievably greed.
I disagree. She is entitled to something. The Simpsons was on the show and Fox has the resources to fork over some dough. I'm a Simpsons fan and think that is fair.
@@icecreamhero2375 if a comic strip is published on a newspaper and the newspaper had nothing to do with the creation of that comic strip, is the newspaper company entitled to anything besides the money of how many copies it sold? Does Garfield, Peanuts, Marmaduke, any old comic strip rights belong to any of the newspapers they were originally published on? She had nothing to do with the creation of the cartoon, it was only published on her show and only after it became successful she goes as far as claiming she " *created* " it. Very very suspicious attitude. Also, how does being a Simpson's fan mean anything in this argument?
@@rodrigomarcondes5857 damn everything you said was logical and made sense. The other guy pretty much thinks she’s entitled for no apparent reason and should get paid just because “fox has the resources”. Idk why some ppl feel like they’re owed anything for not doing shit
The best take
@@rodrigomarcondes5857 That is completely different. A syndicate like (United and Andrew Mcmeel ) puts the comics in the newspaper, not the newspaper itself. The newspapers buy the rights to have the comic in the newspaper. It's not like Tracey Ulman bought the Simpsons already made to be on her show. Gracie Films the same people who made the Tracey Ulman Show produced the shorts. The closest equivalent would be the Syndicate getting money from the comic strip. Which they do. The Tracey Ullman show is a show all about her and the Simpsons was on her show. It being on her show contributed to its popularity. I brought up that I am a Simspons fan to show that I can like the show but not be biased towards them.
The Tracy Ullman show was a breakout success for FOX, you need to remember that their biggest hit up until this point was Married: with children, a great show by all reguards but not exactly one that was pulling in the demographic FOX was shooting for at the time. The Simpsons shorts were a huge part of the shows success but it could also be argued that without the exposure from the Tracy Ullman Show The Simpsons could have become just another obscure piece of lost media.
EDIT:Tracy Ullman is kind of a big deal to alot of 40 something Americans who grew up with Monty Python, Are you being served?, Mr. Bean and The Yong Ones on PBS.
Tracy's show is where I first saw the Simpsons. She deserves a lot of credit. That animation was crude!! She got a lot of flak for the cartoon being on her show, and Tracy showed strength to continue to have it.
Even if Ullman didn't do diddly-squat in making the Simpsons shorts while they were on the Tracey Ullman Show, that's immaterial if she had a contract that gave her a percentage of merchandising rights for any spinoffs. Unless you actually produce a copy of the contract & show what was in it, I'm not entirely comfortable with a portrayal of Ullman as greedy, when it may have been the studio who were violating their contract with Ullman. The WGA writers' strike shows that Hollywood can be very greedy in backing out of the financial commitments it makes to writers and performers.
Dude, its been 30+ years. I think greedy is the wrong word but she IS incredibly petty. I mean seriously if you spend more than 30 years saying you deserve credit for something you had no control over then you have wasted your so called talents. Had she used that exact same energy trying to do something of her own that rivaled The Simpsons success or at least tried to then maybe we'd all be "Oh yeah! Tracey Ullman! She goes hand and hand with The Simpsons! Truly the biggest icons of the 90's and they both boosted each other!" Rather than "Oh yeah The Simpsons started in The Tracey Ullman Show... Who's Tracey Ullman though?"
I think she does deserve some credit as the pilot vehicle through which the series found success, but there has to be a line. At some point, The Simpsons success is entirely it's own.
I've heard the Tracey Ullman Show as throwaway piece of trivia of The Simpsons, but never heard who this person was to begin, I didn't even know if it was a man, woman, or just some kind of random name for a short lived sketch show, when I was born The Simpsons were already on their peak and even airing internationally but this is the first time ever, I can put a face to the show where The Simpsons first aired, and the feud it came with.
If she never sued, people would be more kind to her when she says helped make the Simpsons what it is.
Because...well she kinda did. Putting bumper segments was suggested to her, and, after seeing Life in Hell, she must have aggreed to it. And she hired the voice actors for Marge and Homer.
I think if she felt that was a big part of helping Simpsons to be "birthed," no one would mind.
But the fact that she stupidly thought that she deserved a cut of the merchandise is what turned everyone against her.
Let's be real: Tracey Ullman was a very talented No-Hit Wonder in America,but do give her for helping launch The Simpsons. But it's the old TV story of an offshoot being more popular than the original show it came from or a series standing on its own two feet the latter examples Facts of Life from Different Strokes, Family Matters from Perfect Strangers. Or Law & Order SVU eclipsing the Original Law & Order by multiple seasons(27th season?) Even the Law & Order reboot didn't stand a chance nor the L&O:Los Angeles (remember that?) Ms Ullman needs to grow up a bit
You did not include Tracy breaks the news, which may be the best work she's ever done. Her impressions of Angela Merkel, Jeremy Corbyn, etc. Were exquisitely done.
This is like Amanda Bynes saying she deserves credit for making Drake and Josh. It was a segment on her show yes but unless she grabbed a pen and wrote the episodes along with the writters, animated along with Groening and his team or pitched the show to Fox herself there is no credit to give 😅
Drake and Josh was a segment on the Amanda Show? Wow I did not know that.
@@jadedheartszThey didn’t have a “Drake and Josh” segment, they were just fellow sketch actors.
Her show is the only reason they exist. Matt didn't want to lose control of his strip, but didn't want to turn down Brooks so he created it just for the Ullman show. If it wasn't for her show, they wouldn't have been platformed or even created. I'm a Simpsons fan, but you can't deny that. So regardless I think she should have gotten a cut.
Tracy Ullman was great in Robin Hood: Men in Tights. Her show was very good, but not as good as The Simpsons.
I think if she was more involved initially, she might’ve actually had a case. It was theoretically a spin off.
I remember the time "The Simpsons" shorts were becoming more popular than the actual comedy show that was running them in between commercial breaks...But weren't they both created to make people laugh? Just become funnier if your mad at their success, would be my advice to the "Ullman's" of the world.
She is quite a bit funnier than current episodes of the Simpsons.
I honestly don't remember, I was too young to enjoy the skit comedy as much as the cartoons at that age.
I didn't find her HBO series funny later on. Her impersonation of the archetype of an Asian woman on that show was pure cringe.
To get an idea what it was like, just use this clip from The Simpsons, but replace Krusty with Tracy Ullman: ruclips.net/video/hpgzjK1_zwM/видео.html
@@Zavitor The Simpsons had Apu played by a white guy a lot longer than Tracey did her Asian character.
@@noneofyourbusiness4616 seeing it done via live-action is way more cringy though.
Slags off the Simpsons yet chooses scripts like A Dirty Shame… 🤦🏻♂️
Interestingly, The Simpsons played every other week, the other weeks it was another cartoon called "Dr. N!Godatu". Groening didn't want to adapt Life in Hell, so he made up a show based on his own family when he was a child. Bart is based on him. His father's name was Homer, his mother was named Margaret, but everyone called her Marge and he had two sisters named Lisa and Margaret Jr, who everyone called Maggie. Life in Hell was basically a reflection of his adult life with "Hell" being a metaphor for the big city (L.A.)/being on your own for the first time. More or less that life sucks and isn't going to get better.
Don't feel bad, Tracey-- the same thing happened to Betty Boop from Popeye.
If it will make HER feel better…. Thank you Tracey Ullman!!!
I saw Tracey at my work today....she look's amazing...still :)
Guys, let me tell you how funny that episode was to me, when homer when trying to get Flanders business to fail. the scene where he's laughing, while he's eating and begins to choke. I always thought that scene was the funniest thing I've ever seen, when i first saw it back in the 90's!
Here's the kicker.... When i was watching this clip, that Ambivalent Vulture posted, i didn't know that the scene from that episode was going to be in his expose about the feud with Tracy Ullman. So i was eating something, and guess what happened? I CHOKED LIKE HOMER!! LMFAOOO!
i COULDN'T STOP LAUGHING, SO I THREW UP! So after i stopped the video, so i could keep from laughing, i got some paper towels and cleaned up my vomit.
I laughed some more, just thinking about the irony of me choking, just like homer was in this clip!
Thanks for the laugh, i needed that! Even though it damn near killed me! ^_^
You usually don't see that much effort into making up a story for a RUclips comment. Very odd.
I don't see what the lawsuit was all about. _The Simpsons_ was _hardly_ the first spin-off show in existence, so a precedent had already been set by then. What was it?
If she was positive about it from the start instead of being all cloak and dagger she could have rode that wave instead of taking the L.
Inasmuch as I never watched a single episode of her show, until I got free tickets to an animation show about a month before the Simpsons show first aired, I knew nothing of the characters. I seen the reaction of the audience as every one of the Simpson shorts aired and was blown away by the reaction. I knew then the show was going to be a huge success.
Must be awkward that Julie kavner was on Tracey takes on ..
It really shouldn't be...
Nothing more annoying than misinformed response comments.Sigh
@@ScratchthechalkBoard "Misinformed." I don't think you know what that word means. {sigh}
Nobody said anything about Julie and Tracey having beef. Over time, Julie and her costars had _their own_ financial disputes with the _Simpsons_ producers. I could easily see the two of them having a functional working (and personal) relationship without The Yellow People ever coming up.
But I could be wrong too…
I never took to the Simpsons, preferred Tracy's work.
Yeah but you can at least say she gave them a platform although The Simpsons themselves in the team behind it had to actually do the work in order to take best advantage of the platform they had and clearly even those that cheaply done cartoon there was talent there but without a platform it is possible no one would have realized how good the Simpsons were
She didn't give them shit. It was her producers and Fox themselves. I seriously doubt she had that much if any creative power over what was included outside of what was directly involving her so I doubt she even knew the Simpsons were gonna be part of the show until it aired
She was like one of those bosses that paid an employee minimum wage and claimed that they were getting paid much more in exposure, then when said employee hit the big time, the boss comes in, insisting on collecting fees owed to them for allowing the employee to use their company to promote their work.
this reminds me of the beef that Witcher's creator and CDPR had. It's best to work together then work against each other.
she deserves some credit...she provided the simpsons a platform and cast. the two shows will always be linked.
I mean, if you think the shorts are so bad, produce content thats funnier lol
It’s weird that I remember being there to see the Tracy Ullman Show and seeing the Simpsons animated shorts on there for the first time but I can’t remember a single other sketch or segment from the show beyond that.
I get that she’s PROBABLY a wee bit salty that the one portion of her show that she had ZERO presence in ended up going on to even greater heights of fame and recognition.
You have your own axe to grind. Leave Tracey alone.
This is unfortunate. I’m a fan of both Tracy and Simpsons.
Can't really blame her for thinking the Simpsons was part of her show tbh. She should have recognised the quality of the shorts early on and secured the exclusive rights for her show or whatever. We should all be thankful she didn't have that kind of foresight.
Tracey Ullman never became anything more than Tracey ullman.... where the Simpsons..... became the SIMPSONS... I can see why she'd have some kind of animosity..... yet still want the paycheck.
Tracey Ullman is still funny today, while The Simpsons stopped over a decade ago.
It doesn’t matter if she didn’t work on the shorts herself. She gave the shorts a platform. That is way easier than getting a show green-lit on a prime time network. So yes, of course. She is entitled to something. But if she was really trying to get rid of the shorts from her show and then wants something once he gets huge. That’s when it becomes tricky. Because yes, she provided a platform. But there’s still a lot of greed involved. Just because something she was affiliated with became huge. So it’s sort of like a 50-50 thing. She should be given some credit. But not necessarily what she’s asking, in my opinion.
from what i've heard FOX put the shorts on her show without her permission.
4:25 calling akbar and jeff "room mates" is like when historians say "they were just good friends" at men who openly had sex with each other.
akbar and jeff are gay. this isnt some headcanon or thing thats heavily implied, like sam & max, its literally stated time after time and most strips focusing on the two focus on their sexuality and make jokes about that.
very very early on its sort of ambigous and joked about what their relationship is but as it progressed it stopped pulling punches. akbar and jeff are gay. thats their whole gimmick thats their joke.
I remember watching her show thinking "This is so well done. She's amazing." Then not laughing a lot. Appreciative and impressed but not waiting for next week. I don't know if the variety of characters hurt her show? Did we want just one, the real Tracy and not the repertoire of characters? In Living Color did the same kind of stuff but had an ensemble rather than one star dominating. The 90s HBO material was perfect however.
Out of the 30 year years of the show going I think Bart get an F is still one the most rated episodes of the series so maybe is ironic her only voice was on that episode.
She's virtually unknown in the UK (or just a name who had a US show or an 80's music career), the amount of people who think she's American is pretty funny, got to be at least 80%. Her humour just doesn't connect, unlike things like The Simpsons.
I have never heard of Tracey Ullman but I can’t remember a time when I didn’t know what the Simpsons was.
I could see if she actually created the Simpsons, but she didn’t whatsoever. 🤷🏾♂️
Therapist: Bunny Bart doesn't exist. He cannot hurt you.
4:33:
Honestly all her actions are pretty reasonable even if she isn't some kind of saint. Sure the lawsuit is pretty shaky, but it's not like she personally sued Matt Groening. If I thought I could get millions of dollars by suing a massive company on tenuous grounds I'd probably do it too.
On a side note, Tracy Ulmann can still be quite funny. Look up her "Merkel vs. Trump"...
Tracey Ulman was entitled to that money. The Simpsons was on her show. She doesn't need to contribute to it. It was on her show.
Ulman should at least be grateful, if the Simpsons had never been invented she would be forgotten.
Ullman is a brilliant performer. And it was her very success that led to The Simpsons. She was thrown under the bus on that one.
Well if it was in her contract then she does deserve just good foresight on her part
The Tracey Ullman Sobriety test sketch is one of my all time favorites. :)
I understand, it stole her thunder but became famous on her show. I guess give her a little credit. Wasn't Castlellaneta a cast memeber of that show?
Him, Julie Kavner, Harry Shearer and I think Nancy Cartwright were all on her show
I was there as a kid for the big Simpson's boom in the early 90s! Tho I didn't learn till many years later that they actually got their start on the Tracey Ullman Show.
I didn't know till just *now* that she was actually British and phenomenally talented.
Such a shame she couldn't have a good relationship with the studio.
She could have, potentially, gone on to create some wonderful characters that could have become mainstays and got involved with some of the writing.
I get why she'd hold some resentment tho.
from what ive seen the way the simpsons were on her show and the way they were shown in the series didn't have much to do with each other either ..... tho the simpsons and 90210 were what fox needed after married became over the hill .......
The only reason anyone born after 1990 knows that the Tracey Ullman Show existed is because of the Simpson
That and it being one of the original primetime FOX shows in 1987, a trivia question that used to come up quite a bit. I don't know if they do them anymore but FOX used to air anniversary specials for the network every 5-10 years that recapped the history of the channel
Unless you're in UK or you've watched Mrs America in the USA
When the Tracey Ullman show aired in the U.K., the Simpsons segments were edited out.
I have a strong recollection of how much I loved the Tracy Ullman show and how indifferent I was to the Simpsons Shorts. They were OK, but I never would have paid much attention to them had they not been imbedded in the workings of her show. This was not an unusual opinion at the time mind you. I actually think I was disappointed in the shorts as I was already a fan of Life In Hell and they did not seem to live up to that standard in my mind. I think it is safe to say that if it had not been for Tracy Ullman, there never would have been a Simpsons series. Maybe she has no right to benefit financially from the series, but she certainly built the garden that they grew out of. Keep in mind the voice actors for the Simpsons were the actors cast as players on HER show!
Nice try, Tracey
Just like she can't prove she had input you can't prove she tried to sabotage it or Groening. She tried to sue for royalties. There isn't a shred of proof other than hearsay that she tried to ruin the show
Brooks gave her a chance, he gave Matt a chance. So brooks is the one who MADE the Simpsons
Did you intentionally put in every twister face? 🧐
it's actually pronounced Klasky Chupo
A couple of things wrong, first of all, a vignette in a show can't really tell you ANYTHING about its popularity. Those 'bumpers' were actually pretty stupid, even Sam Simon, its showrunner had no real inkling it would succeed. Its true it premiered with 'the highest rating on fox' but almost nobody was watching fox.
And Tracey Ullman has gone on to pretty heavy acclaim from a 'variety show', which was just 'odd' to do at that point.
But the show was making SO much money in the nineties that it made sense to sue them. Even Harry Shearer, who is obscenely wealthy thanks to voicing a 22 minute show says that he's both over paid AND getting screwed.
So she'd be nuts to at least not TRY to sue, and I think she said she ended up with teh show basically paying for a trip to Italy each year. However, since she has always insisted on owning her own shows, she's hardly poor. And just go watch 'death to 2020' if you think she's just a footnote. Hell by now The Simpsons are just a footnote of the original simpsons.
And the main reason her variety show isn't seen is the big mistake of using music, which always kills syndication or sales.
No wonder she’s so good at playing horrendously annoying characters…
She obviously hated the shorts. If she actually liked them, she would have contributed to the voice talent for multiple characters and would still be making money off of that today. What a jealous person.
Imagine trying to become a successful TV comedian yet all your audience ever talks about is that animated segment that is more popular than you. Of course Envy and resentment would brew. Like Saturday Night Live and Jim Henson. Of course us Brits don't hold grudges. Yeah she's British.
You: "Of course us Brits don't hold grudges. Yeah she's British."
Also you: "Thankfully Zombie Simpsons was her payback."
Me: BRUH, hypocrisy and arrogance.
PostScript: I am Venezuelan.
Tracey Takes On is hilarious.
Idk I like Tracy and the Simpsons.
Hello Mummy......it's KAY
Where is tge DVD of "The Simpsons: Eat My Shorts: the pre-Season 1 tv and flim shorts collection"?
@ 7:37 I didn’t know that until looking at this video.
Thankfully Zombie Simpsons was her payback.
You: "Of course us Brits don't hold grudges. Yeah she's British."
Also you: "Thankfully Zombie Simpsons was her payback."
Me: BRUH, hypocrisy and arrogance.
PostScript: I am Venezuelan.
Lore of Why Tracey Ullman HATES 'The Simpsons' (Yet, Also INSISTS on Getting Credit for the Show's Success) momentum 100
I loved Tracey Ullman on Ally McBeal
The Simpsons has overstayed it's welcome a hell of alot longer then Tracey and that's giving it 10 seasons of being Gold.
Simpsons still rocks u fool
Then it began animated to South Korea, on a shoe string budget.
They need the work