How come Eddy and Jimmy never became Scrappies (Ed Edd n Eddy)

Okay, I'll admit that it was very hucking filarious!

Thing about Kevin for me is that while he was a Jerkass, save for the middle name episode, he was never a Karma Houdini. And yeah, he would also be the victim of slap stick as well (not as much as the Eds, but it was there.)

Sarah and the Kankers were. I hated the Kankers, not necessarily because of the Double Standard, but because they never lost. There was like one episode where Jonny kicked their ass, and even at the end of it they got the upperhand on the Eds in the end anyway.

Not just the Eds, Kevin got caught up in that too.

Haven't we already finished this discussion months ago?

You can always request a mod to lock a thread, if you don't want people necro-ing.

Before this thread is locked - Those damn Kankers, Jimmy & Sarah ALL SUCK ASS (IMHO, of course!). End of Discussion.

Agreed...!

I disagree. I don't think anyone in that show sucked or was evil, they're just kids. And Kids Are Cruel. That's it.

I think it's largely due to the fact that their personalities lean so close to traditional bullies. Kid audiences HATE bullies, especially ones that often get away with laughing like these lot sometimes did.

Jimmy was really just a Butt-Monkey, and his moments of triumph (even if those were usually at the Eds' expense) were Moments of Awesome in their own right.

The only time Jimmy was grating was when he would abuse his connection with Sarah to get his way.

THANK you. I only thought Jimmy was annoying when he went along with Sarah and her dickery.

I guess it's made more glaring by the fact that the Eds tend to be cursed by Failure Is the Only Option. Par some very rare instances, the outcome for every episode is for the Eds to end up the losers, whether they deserve it or not. I suppose it can be more irritating because, while the rest of the cast do sometimes get punished, it seems the universe will designate them to win as long as they are against the Eds (eg. Jimmy is usually The Woobie, but even he can bully the Eds and get off scot free, Double D is twice The Woobie and doomed to suffer either way).

I admit I'm not big on when shows revolve themselves around making a specific character suffer.

edited 16th Jun '13 7:22:03 PM by Psi001

Agreed.

I still don't get how some people here get so upset that the Eds get beat up every week. It's cartoonish, inimitable violence where half the humor is how over-the-top the Eds' injuries get. Plus, they all tend to bring it on themselves.

I didn't like it because I really like the Eds, and I always felt so sorry for them whenever they had a Downer Ending.

Words from my 11-year-old self.

And I get confused when people act like the Eds are the victims in all this. I mean, they still did stuff like digging up Kevin's yard just to get inside to watch TV, the Mucky Boys incident, the no-rules incident, and of course, the Thing-A-Ma-Jig scam.

Well, not for nothing, a beating is pretty disproportionate retribution for all that stuff. But maybe I'm just some hippy-dippy guy who doesn't like physical violence as retribution for anything or even the concept of revenge in general.

And honestly, regarding that last point, the kids in the cul-de-sac have no one to blame but themselves if they fall for a scam by the Eds, having seen them try to scam them time after time after time. If you know that a salesman is gonna steal from you every time you see him, you don't go in his store!

edited 16th Jun '13 9:06:40 PM by 0dd1

I kind of agree with maxwellellis and 0dd1 about how it's annoying how fans act as if the Eds (Eddy, really) are always victims, but usually bring it down on themselves sometimes.

To me, I think that most of the time, Ed and Edd are the victims, while Eddy was the most unsympathetic and most annoying out of the Eds.

I don't like the kids (usually Sarah, Kevin, and sometimes Jimmy) because sometimes they sometimes bully the Eds (unprovoked)

edited 16th Jun '13 9:55:29 PM by MsCC93

Eddy was a real dick and TBH I think had it not been for him the Eds would be liked a lot more, particularly Edd who was shown getting along fine with kevin of all people at one time when he was by himself.

Rolf could be a bit of a Jerkass at times and him being Kevin's closest guy buddy didn't help. The only really nice non-ed characters were Johnny and Naz. Jimmy occasionally but he was manipulative.

You had me up until that last sentence.

As said it's the fact the Eds are always punished for their crimes and then some, while the others can get away with it a palpable number of times, which makes it seem less run on karma and more just fate skewed against them (Double D outright lampshading this when the universe does everything in it's power to stop them getting a free jawbreaker).

It's why people complain about the treatment of characters like Donald Duck or Squidward. They are usually jerks who bring it on themselves, but there's a double standard for other characters getting a free pass for even worse that makes it seem less like 'the Unsympathetic Comedy Protagonist gets their comeuppance' and more 'the universe gangs up on this guy for ten minutes'.

edited 17th Jun '13 5:13:54 AM by Psi001

Looney Tunes tended to be better at that. Sylvester was too much of a Butt-Monkey, but other than that, characters got hit by karma when they called for it. Even Bugs ended up paying when he stepped over the line. Daffy consistently brought most of his abuse on himself (Duck Amuck aside), Elmer still was a guy who went out to kill other sapients fors sport, Foghorn was an obnoxious jerk...)

The biggest innocent victim I can think of in LT is probably Penelope, who had unfortunate shades of a victim of sexual harassing.

edited 17th Jun '13 9:05:43 AM by NapoleonDeCheese

It really depended on the episode. Butt-Monkey humor, to me, is a very cautious branch of comedy, as it's easy to cross over the line and create something akin to the comedic version of Darkness Induced Viewer Apathy

There were some times when Ed Edd N Eddy crossed that line, though i can't think of too many specifics. Many endings just had things blow up in their faces in a more general way, ending on a neutral note (no win, but no real loss), like the episode where Edd needs sleep and his sleep-deprived Sea Ranch plans cause the whole Cul de Sac to flood. That was an example of a "bad end" done right.

Napoleon De Cheese: I think that's kinda why I like Team Rocket Wins or A Taste of Defeat endings, since they're almost always provoked by karma, and made it easier to accept the standard win/lose formula because you know it was actively working according to who deserved it. Sort of a display that 'if X character stopped being the bad guy he's get out fine, but he chooses not to'.

I know the first season let the Eds get the last laugh a couple of times another character was being a bigger jackass (e.g. "Sir Ed A Lot"), maybe a reason their actual losing streak didn't seem so cruel originally.

edited 17th Jun '13 1:30:58 PM by Psi001