Forums / Just For Fun

327,367 total conversations in 8,666 threads

+ New Thread


Smurfs And My Little Pony : Friendship Is Magic

Last posted Jun 29, 2012 at 05:44AM EDT. Added Jun 28, 2012 at 01:30PM EDT
29 conversations with 18 participants

They are kind of a smilar aren’t they?

Leaders


Nerd


Funny


Beauty?


Magic’s Existence
For Ponies ->Yes
For Smurfs ->Yes
Cooperation
For Ponies ->Yes
For Smurfs ->Yes
Enemies


Threat

I just found this interesting…

Jun 28, 2012 at 01:30PM EDT
Quote

hmmm… i never noticed that. good observation.

Jun 28, 2012 at 01:36PM EDT

At first I was skeptical looking here.
Then I was “I never though of that before.”

Jun 28, 2012 at 01:38PM EDT
Quote

It’s not surprising. MLP uses extremely simple archetypes.

Jun 28, 2012 at 01:40PM EDT
Quote

Cale wrote:

It’s not surprising. MLP uses extremely simple archetypes.

I believe so…

Jun 28, 2012 at 01:41PM EDT
Quote

I think many shows use the Leader, Nerd, Funny, Shy and beauty characters so you could at least have a wider selection of characters to like. Mind you, smurfs and MLP ARE both kids shows. Magic is something children can’t grasp, so it leaves them in wonder. It’s mysterious and it’s different from technology, something they can use everyday. Friendship and helping out each other is also a common in any kid shows now-a-day. It’s suppose to show that you can’t do everything by yourself. Having friends means you have people to have fun with and who care about you.

All in all, I think you’re trying to point out something to bait someone into thinking MLP ripped off Smurfs. But, I was glad to give you my opinion and views on the situation you pointed out concerning these two shows.

Jun 28, 2012 at 01:59PM EDT
Quote

Cale wrote:

It’s not surprising. MLP uses extremely simple archetypes.

Well, I wouldn’t say simple. The characters themselves are quite deep and multi-faceted. It’s just the archetypes are very, very common, and just about every other children’s show uses them. It’s not just the Smurfs and My Little Pony, you could draw comparisons with a bunch of other shows are well. Standard industry practice, “use the same archetypes so kids can relate to them.”

And I believe this discussion should be in Pony General.

Jun 28, 2012 at 02:03PM EDT
Quote

Cale wrote:

It’s not surprising. MLP uses extremely simple archetypes.

Kasrkai, where do you get off using such big words?

You are a cat.

You shouldn’t even be speaking English.

Jun 28, 2012 at 02:07PM EDT
Quote

Yu-Gi-Oh also uses these archetypes.
The power rangers.
Even spongebob well the magic part is iffy.

Jun 28, 2012 at 02:11PM EDT
Quote

Hmmm….




Jun 28, 2012 at 02:13PM EDT

Orks can be like smurfs too. :D

Because they are fungi type creatures and the smurf’s homes are fungi as well ofcourse.

Last edited Jun 28, 2012 at 02:24PM EDT
Jun 28, 2012 at 02:23PM EDT
Quote

Hmmm…

Yep, no other place with a leader, nerd, funny character, attractive character, fantastical stuff, teamwork, enemies, or a big bad than the Smurfs and MLP.

Last edited Jun 28, 2012 at 02:40PM EDT
Jun 28, 2012 at 02:40PM EDT
Quote

Solaire the Element of Jolly Cooperation WINS!

Flawless Victory!

Jun 28, 2012 at 03:54PM EDT
Quote

You’re out of your mind if you think Friendship is Magic is anything like the Smurfs. For instance, FiM has never been considered Fascist propaganda, like the Smurfs.

Last edited Jun 28, 2012 at 04:04PM EDT
Jun 28, 2012 at 04:04PM EDT
Quote

Nearly every kids show use these traits, they’re the traditional stereotypes.

Jun 28, 2012 at 04:17PM EDT
Quote

Fridge Logic wrote:

You’re out of your mind if you think Friendship is Magic is anything like the Smurfs. For instance, FiM has never been considered Fascist propaganda, like the Smurfs.

So your argument here is that because the Smurfs could have been modeled after the Nazis that nothing between the shows is similar at all? Well first off MLP: FIM has already been pointed out to promote racism and segregation so that can be a point of likeness between the two if you want to pull that card. Second, the argument you are making is like saying that sandwiches and hamburgers have no similarities because someone put ketchup on their burger. They are both still meat and bread, they simply decided to switch around the type of bread and the specific meat, maybe add toppings.
The underlying archetypes are very obviously the same, these are the archetypes that are chosen for just about every show, give or take one.
EDIT: now I’m hungry

Last edited Jun 28, 2012 at 04:33PM EDT
Jun 28, 2012 at 04:31PM EDT
Quote

Twins the Serendipitous Serval wrote:

Well, I wouldn’t say simple. The characters themselves are quite deep and multi-faceted. It’s just the archetypes are very, very common, and just about every other children’s show uses them. It’s not just the Smurfs and My Little Pony, you could draw comparisons with a bunch of other shows are well. Standard industry practice, “use the same archetypes so kids can relate to them.”

And I believe this discussion should be in Pony General.

I can’t agree that they’re “deep”. The majority of character interaction follows a “Personal Fault>Reprimands>Correction” line. While that isn’t a bad thing in itself, it can’t be considered deep or poly-faceted in anyway. Nor is there evidence of ulterior character development as a result beyond the first two episodes.

Twilight is still book-obsessed, Fluttershy is still withdrawn, Rainbow Dash is still a bitch, Rarity is still vain, Pinkie Pie is still randumb, and Applejack is still shit.

While these things are central to the characters themselves, and necessary to retain as-per a family show, there isn’t any trace of a true change in habit or development beyond talking to each-other more.

This isn’t a bad thing. The entire purpose of simple characters is to zone in on a specific piece of behavior and magnify it. What each character lacks in depth, they make up for it in interaction with others. Each flat card leans to another to build a Card-House of consistent (If not predictable) interaction and exposition.

And Card-Houses are pretty cool.

Jun 28, 2012 at 04:53PM EDT
Quote

@RPP:

Normally I’d ask what the fuck you mean about MLP promoting segregation and racism, but today I’m gonna go ahead and ask what the fuck you mean about MLP promoting segregation and racism.

If you mean Zecora, it did the opposite, in that it said not to judge others by their differences, and to learn what the person is like, instead. It said not to judge a book by its cover.

If you mean the three tribes, they again did the opposite, in that the characters were put in a bind because of their hate, and only getting past differences and seeing that they could be friends saved them.

@Kais:

While they are somewhat predictable archetypes, I’d say they’re far deeper and more unpredictable than most incarnations of their specific ‘character’. They also go under some level of character development and learn their lessons, something that’s rarer in many movies, much less TV shows. Their personalities change, to some degree, based on these lessons, so I’d say they’re more multi-faceted than a large majority of other characters in shows and movies.

Twilight was (understandably) anti-social, and her friends coaxed her out of the shell. Rainbow Dash was boastful and had stage fright, but he friends pulled her through both predicaments. Applejack was too prideful and stubborn to accept help, but eventually learned her lesson and accepts aid more readily. Fluttershy was a push-over, but she sort of got over it (if her handling of Angel is any indicator). etc.

I wouldn’t say they’re the best, most awesome, perfect interpretations of their archetypes ever, but they are very good, relative to others.

Jun 28, 2012 at 05:33PM EDT
Quote

Explosive Lasers AKA Solaire AKA Sexiest wrote:

@RPP:

Normally I’d ask what the fuck you mean about MLP promoting segregation and racism, but today I’m gonna go ahead and ask what the fuck you mean about MLP promoting segregation and racism.

If you mean Zecora, it did the opposite, in that it said not to judge others by their differences, and to learn what the person is like, instead. It said not to judge a book by its cover.

If you mean the three tribes, they again did the opposite, in that the characters were put in a bind because of their hate, and only getting past differences and seeing that they could be friends saved them.

@Kais:

While they are somewhat predictable archetypes, I’d say they’re far deeper and more unpredictable than most incarnations of their specific ‘character’. They also go under some level of character development and learn their lessons, something that’s rarer in many movies, much less TV shows. Their personalities change, to some degree, based on these lessons, so I’d say they’re more multi-faceted than a large majority of other characters in shows and movies.

Twilight was (understandably) anti-social, and her friends coaxed her out of the shell. Rainbow Dash was boastful and had stage fright, but he friends pulled her through both predicaments. Applejack was too prideful and stubborn to accept help, but eventually learned her lesson and accepts aid more readily. Fluttershy was a push-over, but she sort of got over it (if her handling of Angel is any indicator). etc.

I wouldn’t say they’re the best, most awesome, perfect interpretations of their archetypes ever, but they are very good, relative to others.

I wasn’t saying that I believed that it was some sort of segregation promoting propaganda, I was pointing out flaws in FL’s logic and pointing out the absurdity of many theories about children’s shows. It was very much the opposite of what you are implying, I found it silly that people would bolt ideas like that onto a show about friendship and anatomically inaccurate animals that talk, and I was using that absurdity in argument. I’m sorry for that misunderstanding, as it was bad wording on my part.
I have nothing against the brony fandom, I am actually a member of it. I’m not exactly going to get involved in a “Who is le best poneh” argument anytime soon but I support Faust and her fellow workers new version of the previously young-girl focused franchise.
So please everyone, let us not turn this into a pony vs anti-pony argument thread like so many others, this is an archetype discussion thread, let’s keep it that way.

Jun 28, 2012 at 05:43PM EDT
Quote

@RPP:

Yeah, I was just wondering what was meant by the promoting segregation thing. I didn’t think you actually thought that, I just wondered who made the argument (fahking Commies, that’s who).

Beyond that, I do agree that the Smurfs being Nazis doesn’t really debunk the OPs point, but the point doesn’t even need debunking, because it’s a baseless argument, really. The post with Star Trek characters was my argument against it, because an adult show about military spacemen killing aliens and fucking green women has the same archetypes, situations, etc.

Jun 28, 2012 at 06:00PM EDT
Quote

Explosive Lasers AKA Solaire AKA Sexiest wrote:

@RPP:

Normally I’d ask what the fuck you mean about MLP promoting segregation and racism, but today I’m gonna go ahead and ask what the fuck you mean about MLP promoting segregation and racism.

If you mean Zecora, it did the opposite, in that it said not to judge others by their differences, and to learn what the person is like, instead. It said not to judge a book by its cover.

If you mean the three tribes, they again did the opposite, in that the characters were put in a bind because of their hate, and only getting past differences and seeing that they could be friends saved them.

@Kais:

While they are somewhat predictable archetypes, I’d say they’re far deeper and more unpredictable than most incarnations of their specific ‘character’. They also go under some level of character development and learn their lessons, something that’s rarer in many movies, much less TV shows. Their personalities change, to some degree, based on these lessons, so I’d say they’re more multi-faceted than a large majority of other characters in shows and movies.

Twilight was (understandably) anti-social, and her friends coaxed her out of the shell. Rainbow Dash was boastful and had stage fright, but he friends pulled her through both predicaments. Applejack was too prideful and stubborn to accept help, but eventually learned her lesson and accepts aid more readily. Fluttershy was a push-over, but she sort of got over it (if her handling of Angel is any indicator). etc.

I wouldn’t say they’re the best, most awesome, perfect interpretations of their archetypes ever, but they are very good, relative to others.

Each case is another sample of the Plot-Line I exampled bellow. While each case is a change in behavior for a specific character and apparent growth, this fails to show in the long-term, leaving the limited development that occurs to be hollow, and very much apart from true development.

The first two episodes revealed a change in Twilight, but nothing else has grown steadily. Rainbow Dash still fails to show and consideration or humility, Applejack still demonstrates a lack of regard for exterior support, and Fluttershy is still a push over.

As a whole and in every slice of life predicament, they show solid evidence of realism in both behavior, reaction, thoughts, and feelings. The falling is that over the arch of the series, none of the episodes problems and resulting conclusions make any serious impact.

If it were the case that the characters had development, they would lose the Parts-Of-A-Whole characteristics of a multi-archetype cast. Realistically, they would change habits, attitudes, maybe even so far as to make larger new relationships and career choices as influence grows.

This has to be avoided in order to retain a simple and relatable cast.

Jun 28, 2012 at 06:04PM EDT
Quote

A lot of shows (as said by everyone else) contain these stereotypes in order to cast good morals, so..yeah! There will always be that influence. It’s seen in Scooby Doo..powerpuff girls…every old show, ladies and gentemares.

Jun 28, 2012 at 06:19PM EDT
Quote

Fridge Logic wrote:

You’re out of your mind if you think Friendship is Magic is anything like the Smurfs. For instance, FiM has never been considered Fascist propaganda, like the Smurfs.

I can’t believe someone took the bait…

Last edited Jun 28, 2012 at 06:23PM EDT
Jun 28, 2012 at 06:22PM EDT
Quote

Cale wrote:

I can’t agree that they’re “deep”. The majority of character interaction follows a “Personal Fault>Reprimands>Correction” line. While that isn’t a bad thing in itself, it can’t be considered deep or poly-faceted in anyway. Nor is there evidence of ulterior character development as a result beyond the first two episodes.

Twilight is still book-obsessed, Fluttershy is still withdrawn, Rainbow Dash is still a bitch, Rarity is still vain, Pinkie Pie is still randumb, and Applejack is still shit.

While these things are central to the characters themselves, and necessary to retain as-per a family show, there isn’t any trace of a true change in habit or development beyond talking to each-other more.

This isn’t a bad thing. The entire purpose of simple characters is to zone in on a specific piece of behavior and magnify it. What each character lacks in depth, they make up for it in interaction with others. Each flat card leans to another to build a Card-House of consistent (If not predictable) interaction and exposition.

And Card-Houses are pretty cool.

Yep, all your points are valid and substantiated (except for that Applejack remark which was highly opinionated, came out of nowhere and made no sense in the context of the rest of your post).

They’re not quite that deep, but they’re certainly not one dimensional. I’d argue to say that the characters have developed in the long run, even if only a little. Each of the mane characters gets along with the others much better now. Their inner personality hasn’t changed much, but their relationships with others have definitely improved. Especially Fluttershy. After Putting Your Hoof Down, Fluttershy became more assertive, like when she said no to Rainbow Dash and stomped all over her when Rainbow tried to get her to join the competition in Hurricane Fluttershy. She wouldn’t have done that without her coming to the realization that a little assertion can go a long way.

You can’t say there’s massive character development, but it’s there, all right.

And really, same goes with human beings. We all develop, but in the end, we stay ourselves, whether that be vain, shy, random, etc.

Your Personal Fault>Reprimands>Correction is missing a step. It should be “Personal Fault>Reprimands>Correction>Self Improvement.”

Also Explosive Lasers said everything I said and better a few posts above.


I really feel like a mod should close this before this turns into another Pony debate thread. Keep it in Pony General please. We need to reach 200 pages anyway.

Last edited Jun 28, 2012 at 07:59PM EDT
Jun 28, 2012 at 07:52PM EDT
Quote
Skeletor-sm

This thread is closed to new posts.

Old threads normally auto-close after 30 days of inactivity.

Why don't you start a new thread instead?

Hauu! You must login or signup first!