• MudMan@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      46
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      10 days ago

      Hell, I was even old enough when it was airing to think it was overrated then.

    • whotookkarl@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      10 days ago

      Generational labels tend to divide by arbitrary boundaries more than actually give you insightful information about something exclusive to the group.

      • Auli@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 days ago

        Same goes for younger generations. Everyone old is a boomer.

    • abaddon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      10 days ago

      The years for Millennials go up to 94-96, Seinfeld finished in 98. I doubt many that young would have seen it. I was born in 86 and I barely watched Seinfeld re-runs.

      • IMongoose@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        26
        ·
        10 days ago

        Seinfeld was hugely syndicated. I was born in the 90s and watched tons of reruns of it. I think they played it after or before the Simpsons which my family always watched.

        • ditty@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          10 days ago

          Yeah same I watched reruns of Seinfeld every weeknight growing up from '98-05 at least if not later

      • synae[he/him]@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        10 days ago

        I was born in 84 and have seen every episode multiple times. Except the clip shows, because once you figure out that’s what’s happening you know better next time around and skip them.

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        9 days ago

        The years for Millennials go up to 94-96

        ?? What do you think millennials were doing after 1996? Did they just phase out of existence?

        I was born in 86 and I barely watched Seinfeld re-runs.

        People had Seinfeld on in my college dorm during the mid-00s. It was one of the most syndicated shows of its era. If you remember 9/11, you remember Seinfeld.

        • abaddon@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 days ago

          I commented on someone who seemed to think that millennials wasn’t the correct generation because millennials must have grown up watching Seinfeld. Many did, but many didn’t. I know many people around my age that didn’t watch it so it’s fairly safe to assume that people who were 2-4 years old when the show ended might not have seen it, even re-runs. Remembering it and watching it enough to have an opinion on it are two different things.

    • iAmTheTot@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 days ago

      It’s not like every millennial watched it growing up. It’s not inconceivable that there are millennials who are seeing it now for only the first time and find it offensive.

        • iAmTheTot@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 days ago

          My partner is a millennial and she had never seen Seinfeld until we first watched it together a few years ago. It’s not that inconceivable to imagine not everyone grew up watching the same things as you.

          • MudMan@fedia.io
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            9 days ago

            No, it’s definitely fine and possible. A thriving industry of Youtube reaction channels hinges on that plausibility. It’s just the concept of the OP’s headline implying it’s a generational thing when it definitely isn’t.

  • Dagwood222@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    114
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 days ago

    Ummmm, the whole point of the show was that the people were horrible.

    The show ended with them jailed after they made fun of a guy who was getting mugged.

    • Lumidaub@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      67
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 days ago

      The gang on It’s Always Sunny is worse but they are obviously not people we’re supposed to empathise with. It’s quite a bit less obvious on Seinfeld.

      • dylanmorgan@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        26
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 days ago

        I feel like the distinction is that on Sunny the gang is “punished” for their shitty behavior, and on Seinfeld they basically never were. (I don’t include the season finale because that was just a cop-out to give the show an ending.)

    • glimse@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      27
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      10 days ago

      I might be overthinking it but feel like Seinfeld was more a show about normal people who sometimes do shitty things - just like real life. I can’t think of anything truly horrible any of them did on the show, just a bunch of “social” wrongdoing. Telling a secret, sleeping at work, the perfect comeback, etc. It’s famously a show about “nothing”

      Then IASIP is about a bunch of assholes riling each other up to be horrible for their own benefit.

      I think Seinfeld is the more “important” in the grand scheme of television for it’s groundbreaking approach but in a vacuum, IAS is the better show.

        • Beacon@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 days ago

          Yes, but that’s season 9, which is after Larry David left as writer. While Larry David was there thru season 7 the characters were quirky regular people who sometimes made bad choices like all humans do sometimes. After Larry David left and Jerry Seinfeld was writing the show by himself from season 8 forward, the characters became much more fucked up, and the show was also way less funny

      • ryathal@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        10 days ago

        George and Elaine are pretty psychopathic in the show. Jerry occasionally gets to be the good guy, but isn’t much be better than them. It’s way beyond social faux paus.

    • HobbitFoot @thelemmy.club
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      10 days ago

      The show is still a very 90s show with 90s sensibilities. There is a lot of media from that time that hasn’t aged well.

        • HobbitFoot @thelemmy.club
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 days ago

          I think that 90s media may be a bit more problematic because it was more willing to have the kinds of discussions that 80s media would never had.

          • RupeThereItIs@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            8 days ago

            Yeah, the “discussions” in the 90s where about normal behavior in the 70s and 80s.

            Hell the 80s religious and political scene in America is what inspired A Handmaids Tail.

  • cobysev@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    72
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    10 days ago

    Millennial here. I tried to watch Seinfeld back in the day, and I thought it was kind of meh. But there was one character I really hated on the show. He had a whiny pathetic voice, was always complaining about something or another, and was just an awful actor, unlike the rest of the cast. I thought, if they just removed that one guy, the show would be great and I’d enjoy it so much more.

    I found out later, that guy was Seinfeld. So… I never really got into the show.

    • expr@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 days ago

      Yeah also a millennial and it’s just… not that funny? I get that plenty of shows haven’t aged perfectly, so it’s not that. Friends has plenty of moments that haven’t aged well (lots of gay jokes about Chandler come to mind), but the comedy still holds up really well. Seinfeld… Not so much.

  • stinerman [Ohio]@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    43
    ·
    10 days ago

    It’s weird that “this group of people don’t like that show that you like” is supposed to create some sort of negative reaction. My enjoyment of a thing does not depend on a certain number of other people liking it.

    I must be numb to “outrage is the best way to engage people” that everyone uses these days.

    • Queen HawlSera@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      10 days ago

      To be fair, Outrage Marketing does work, but it usually isn’t this obvious.

      Like when Disney announced that the Snow White remake would have Seven Multicolored Normal Sized Human People? And later it turned out the final movie will indeed have dwarves?

      That was just done to get bigots talking about the flick. Wouldn’t be surprised to learn Aerial being black in the newer Mermaid movie was the same thing. I mean it worked, people were too busy defending Disney from criticism for this move that they didn’t notice the movie is, like most Live Action Remakes of Non-Live Action media, shit.

      Hey Disney, bring back your 2D Animation, have them do another Lion King, then dub it over with the audio for the Mufasa film. I guarantee I’ll actually consider watching the damn thing if you do that. (These Live Action remakes have got to be a Money Laundering scheme or something)

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        9 days ago

        Hey Disney, bring back your 2D Animation

        Disney used to churn out plenty of entertaining live action shows without issue.

        The problem isn’t with the medium, it’s with the company. They’ve fired too many writers, put too much stock in CGI, and devolved too much of the editing process to the marketing department.

        But the idea that the folks who brought you Tron, The Mighty Ducks, and Pirates of the Caribbean can’t make good live action cinema is crazy.

      • WhiskyTangoFoxtrot@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        9 days ago

        Before The Little Mermaid Disney made live-action remakes of Pinnochio and Peter Pan. Neither of them had a substantial outrage associated with them and I didn’t hear about either of them until they’d already released and flopped.

        • kjaeselrek@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 days ago

          Imagine making a live action Pinocchio and not putting Guillermo del Toro in charge

    • Queen HawlSera@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      10 days ago

      Ya know how growing up, our parents called every system a “Nintendo”, even if it was clearly a Playstation or a Sega Genesis?

      Yeah that’s what boomers do with age groups. Anyone younger than them is a “Millenial Zoomer on Youtube’s TikTok app”

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        9 days ago

        Ya know how growing up, our parents called every system a “Nintendo”, even if it was clearly a Playstation or a Sega Genesis?

        My parents called everything an Atari

  • you_are_dust@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    40
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 days ago

    We were the ones watching it when it was first airing. I don’t think there was anyone in my highschool that wasn’t watching it.

    • egrets@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 days ago

      If you’re a boomer, the older half of Gen X are also boomers and everyone younger is a millennial.

  • jmcs@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    42
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    9 days ago

    Are we talking about “Seinfeld”, the slightly overrated comedy TV series, or “Seinfeld”, the horrible human being?

  • Let's Go 2 the Mall!@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    9 days ago

    Meh, Jerry Seinfeld has been pushing the “I’m too offensive for young people” and “I’ve been cancelled” nonsense for a while now. He’s just old and not funny anymore. Turns out telling the same jokes for 30 years doesn’t get a lot of laughs. What is the deal with millennials anyway!

    • pyre@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      9 days ago

      he unequivocally walked that back recently. said he was wrong to think that and it isn’t a thing. he probably had a talk with his kid or something.

      • Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 days ago

        He probably had a long talk with his PR counselor and was advised that he stood to loose more then he would gain if he stuck to that.

        • pyre@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 days ago

          I don’t care honestly. the message is more important than the motive.

  • A7thStone@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    9 days ago

    I’m an Xer and I didn’t like Seinfeld, but that’s mostly because I don’t like embarrassment comedy. It’s the same reason I don’t like Will Ferrel and Ben Stiller, but to each their own. I don’t begrudge anyone else finding it funny, it’s just not my vibe.

    • blipcast@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      9 days ago

      I’m not saying you have to like Seinfeld or anything, but I wouldn’t consider it embarrassment comedy. It’s more about the gang being a bunch of sociopaths, like an early version of IASIP.

    • slingstone@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      9 days ago

      I agree on the embarrassment humor. Cringey stuff is worse than the most hellacious and gory horror to me most of the time.

      Sienfeld never really hit me that way, though. It just seemed stupid and contrived in a very “look how edgy and relevant I am” sort of way.

  • DarkFuture@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    edit-2
    9 days ago

    That right there is some clickbait. I’m millennial and I was watching the show when it was on and loved it.

  • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 days ago

    What‽ I grew up on it and I’m as young as we get. No it’s his current stand up that’s in poor taste and one night of Kramer’s stand-up that’s actually offensive

    • Queen HawlSera@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      10 days ago

      I got a few laughs with Kramer’s stand-up. Not at the racist non-jokes themselves, but when those lines were remixed with out-of-context scenes from Seinfeld.

      George: “He’s black? I thought he looked Irish… What’s his last name?”

      Kramer: yells the N-word

      George: calmly…That’s not Irish

    • Kroxx@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 days ago

      Yeah as another one of the youngest millennial (or the oldest gen Z depending on which year you classify the generational turn-over) I’ve never really understood the whole millennials are offended trope.

      I grew up watching south park, family guy, ATHF, honestly pretty much everything on adult swim or comedy Central. There isn’t much that offends me except glorifying ultra wealth, and that isn’t offensive, it pisses me off personally.

      All of my friends are the same way, honestly they are mostly more offensive than me even.

      There has been exactly 1 millennial I know of that has shit takes like this and he’s 2-3 years older than me. That’s it 1 even though college, of course these articles aren’t written to be accurate, it’s just rage bait.

      • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 days ago

        I’m definitely not gen z (30), but yeah. I do definitely think there are lines in comedy as do many of my friends, but I grew up on some really tasteless shit. As a teenager I liked a lot of it, but as an adult I’ve come to want nothing to do with comedy that’s offensive to be offensive unless there’s a point. I still love Always Sunny, but south park stopped amusing me when I became an adult.

        I honestly think a lot of it comes down to millennials seeing jokes explicitly at the expense of people just living their lives as offensive or in poor taste.

        But also I think the concept of offensive has basically become so culturally loaded as to be difficult to use for anything other than mocking those whose sensibilities or sense of humor differ from yours.

  • EnderMB@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 days ago

    Almost every time an article like this is posted, the contents are the result of one or two comments out of thousands, or a Reddit post that didn’t gain much traction outside of “eh, sure, I guess?”

    Tangentially related, IMO there should be an “author review” site, where if someone posts a stupid article like this, it is referenced in a database against their name and their frame of reference for the content is called out. Rank “journalists” against this, and eventually the people starting out in the industry posting AI-generated shite that doesn’t hold up will start to err on the side of caution.

    • adam_y@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      9 days ago

      You’ve just re-invented journalistic standards and peer review.

      It is how the news cycle is supposed to work. One journalist says something, others verify or disprove it publicly.

      The problem is that there is now no difference between journalism and content or between news channels and platforms.