Reviews WesternAnimation / King Of The Hill

I couldn't disagree more.

I do.

Hank is a jackass, completely unsupportive of his son unless Bobby wants to do something he agrees with. He should be fired out of a cannon. Into a wall of spikes. Spikes that are coated with salt. And on fire.

Oh god, yes.

You seem to be missing the point. Since when is a flawed character a BAD thing? The whole POINT of most episodes focusing on Hank's relationship with Bobby is that by the end Hank learns to accept his son for who he is and be proud of him. That's called character development.

If Hank was universally supportive of everything Bobby did, questionable or not, there would be no conflict, and the show would *actually* be as boring as you think it is.

Oh no, Hank isn't flawed. At least not according to this show. It seems every episode is "look how right Hank is, and how much of an idiot anybody who disagrees with him is!" now the show does sometimes indulge in subtle mocking of Hank, but it's pretty obvious which side is supposed to be "Right" every time.

I'm sorry, but simply watching this show is something of a Berserk Button for me. I've tried. Damn, I've really, REALLY tried. Watching Hank Hill talk and act like an insufferable piece of trash not fit to wear the skin of humanity is a hell I assume the slothful must suffer through in the Fifth Layer. Screw being stuck in the mud the entire time, they plop them down in front of a 100 inch TV set (so you can't possibly miss it) and force them to watch for the rest of eternity.

It's rare a character can functionally cause a man to foam at the mouth. It takes a level of insensitivity and jackassery the world has yet to know, before Hank comes around that is. No man should sit there and let his mother take insults from their father like his mouth was the light machine gun of spite. No human should literally tell a man that his marriage is failing, and tell him to not say a damn word about it. And no sick son of a bitch should treat their son with such blatant disrespect and lack of support.

Yes, the show is not all about Hank. However, as the main character, the world has a habit of revolving around his head. Almost universally, as stated above, Hank is portrayed as right, and whoever else is wrong, even if the world needs to make characters for no reason act like complete and utter morons to make him so. Is the art nice? Respectable. The acting? Certainly Texan. The plotlines? Very much in line with a show about subtle, down-home roots and the quiet problems of the every day life.

So what's the problem?

The main character.

Perhaps, if King of the Hill had a character that learned anything at all, that wasn't absolutely stuck in his own methods of living to the utter exclusion of the humanity around him, and, for once, even the show would take a blatant crack at Hank and his problems, it might be watchable. It's over. It doesn't. The show ends as it begins: a self-important jackass without the any real bit of humanity continues to be the "only sane man." If this is the way the show is going, I'm glad it's gone! It-

-dart in the neck-

...huh... feel much... calmer now.

To be fair, it's rather hard for a show with no redeeming qualities to last as long as King of the Hill did. I'm sure, for the people it was meant for, it is quite the good show. The thing is, I'm not a Texan or a redneck. It's something of unfair for me to complain as much as I do about it. Simply put, in an honest review, the show is mildly watchable, though the protagonists may infuriate some. Certainly not a program for everyone.

It's called OPINION. ON BOTH SIDES! Whether you like the show or not is OPINION, so don't act like you're utterly right.

I don't see anyone implying any opinion is fact here, just stating our opinions on the show.

Couple of points: Northerners (being slow) won't get this show. Southerners do. Younger folks won't, because they actually think Harry Potter is "ingenius", and hasn't already been done, and that "Tweenlight" is "original". What is NOT lame is King of the Hill, being Southern, and acting Southern, for Southerners. The downsides are: Weak-assed role models, NONE of the men on that show will do what is right, right off, they wait an entire show to finally do what they should have done to begin with. And the fact that King of the Hill pushes "tolerance" and "acceptance" at every turn....makes a real man want to puke some.

I'm from Texas and detest Harry Potter. I've got no idea what the hell Tweenlight is, but it sounds retarded.

My hatred for unholy abomination that is Hank Hill remains as it always has, burning with the fiery passion of a billion exploding stars.

Look at the guy two reviews above me! (Anaheyla is sandwiched between us) Prejudiced, rude, compares the clever and well-written Harry Potter to the backwards schlockfest of Twilight, and apparently, he thinks tolerating and accepting others is nauseating. Yep, that's a real man right there. I'll say this for King Of The Hill - it certainly succeeded at getting things ugly in here.

I have to say that I really did enjoy this show. Of course, being a Texan (and a Libertarian), I DID understand all the subtle self-depreciating cultural in-jokes. The thing about these character is that some people REALLY DO act this way. Hank Hill did get a bit annoying at times, but I never got the idea that he was always right - he was just an intelligent man with old-fashioned morals trying to fit into the modern world. He didn't say anything about his father's sexism, he didn't support Bobby's artistic talents, held double standards, didn't try to correct his boss's cheating/drinking/gambling, was uncomfortable when dealing with anyone outside of the bounds of hetero-normality? That's how he was raised. A good part of the drama in this show is watching him cope with these situations, because he was raised with old-fashioned morals in a time/place where such things simply weren't done. Everything was swept under the rug and no one had to deal with it. He spends a lot of episodes having to confront The Elephant In The Room. He's not a BAD guy, he just has a system of values that doesn't quite mesh with YOURS. Considering some of these posts, I'd say you're being more intolerant of him than he was of anyone he ever met in the show.

And for the record, I am not a redneck. You do not have to be a redneck to enjoy this show. Not everyone from Texas is automatically a "redneck". I don't know if your stereotypes for "redneck" cover college-educated urbanites, so I'm just throwing it out there.

@Anonymous Apathy: I'm sorry if we offended you. I know that there are a lot of fights with this show. But I don't think most people were trying to label anyone who likes this show is a redneck.

All I was saying above was that this show seems to follow a very particular formula, and at the end of the episode the Straw target will be brought down or suffer karmic consequences. Everyone must conform to his views. The values and the comedy are fine, but if he is always revealed to be in the right in the end, what is the point of watching. I get that there is a subtle comedy there, and I liked it at certain points. But I just couldn't get over how much the show preaches, and or proves Hank inevitably right. Plus, it must be said he can be quite the Jerk Ass even when he had no reason to be. If there was more conflict and nearly every episode didn't end with Hank being right about everything, than maybe some of us would personally find this show more enjoyable.

Not everyone must conform to Hanks views. Quite the opposite, as circumstances often lead him to accept things which he had never properly understood/accepted before. He had to learn to tolerate homosexuality, or grow to accept that his relatives still have sex despite being OA Ps. These characters do not turn around and say - "okay Hank, we'll change our sexuality to appease you" or "Sure, we will no longer have sex if it makes you feel better". No, it is the other way round.

@Maninahat: Your probably right, but I haven't seen those two examples, or something like it. Were those earlier episodes?

Apologies on my... well, I was a bit of an asshole about the whole thing, I'll admit to it.

Seeing as I'm an Adult Swim junkie, I get my fair share of the show. I am a Southener, Alabamian as a matter of fact. My primary irritation comes from how heavily Hank is pushed as "always right" when his primary tactics of being "right" involve bullying others until he gets his opinion heard. For serious situations, like sexuality, yes, he gets shot down, but I find it hard to sympathize with a protagonist I personally do not agree with, and whose opinions I've found, at times, to be even downright offensive to me.

The best thing I can say for King of the Hill is that I am personally not the best person to review it. True, a review should have positives and negative sides, and I am the negative side. However, I would much rather said negatives come from one who can understand it.

Any volunteers?

I thought hank saw some character development within the series actually....

Just because Hank is flawed doesn't mean he isn't a good (or at least interesting) character. He's intolerant, yes, but you can see he's Good on the inside. He's a cariacture of that sort of person and it comes of well- not in your face and not too subtle

It just makes me sad that Bobby had to have two of his pets, pets that he genuinely loved, killed because they didn't conform to the ideal of a normal pet. I can almost understand the raccoon. But the snake? I have a snake. They're wonderful pets. They're not dangerous or bloodthirsty or a menace of any kind. Why Josh? WHYYYYYYY?

Guys, even racists, sexists, bigots, homophobes, nutjobs, and murderers have a human side.

I didn't find the series particularly funny, it was humorous but right now I can't think of a moment the series made me laugh (emphasis on can't remember) even less laugh hysterically like The Simpsons, Futurama, American Dad, South Park, Aqua Teen Hunger Force, Squid Billies etc. make me or at some point made me laugh. But even so I found the series very entertaining, which is surprising given the boring and stale feeling it gives you at the start (specially the animation). I understand the series doesn't try to make Hank as always right and that a jerk can be a good thing specially since everyone and their mother started doing it after the success of Seinfield, and I agree with Delta4845 that Hank has developed over the series. From his mind being unable to fathom the possibility of a Drag Queen to finding Bill and Bomhoer's jokes about Dale's father's homosexuality childish. But, the series does sometimes goes out of his way to make Hank be right even when he's wrong (the episode were Bobby wanted to be a husky model, the episode were Bobby became the school's mascot, the soccer episode), or for Hank to make bad but also selfish things without any repercussions (the episode about the robot grill and the mega church being one of the worst offenders).

Sweet mercy, this series is divisive!

I'm sortof in the middle of the "unwatchable/subtle and funny" camp...

The main character is so flawed as to be unlikable, and most of his characters arcs are unwatchable because he never ever learns anything, ever. The story is so divisive to me because Hank's treatment is so divisive. It's like the author's parading him around like the Messiah AND making fun of his stupidity at the same time, and the end result is that neither really works at all.

Aside from Peggy and Hank, most of the characters are flawed but interesting and funny. At least, IMO. In the later days moreso, when Bobby started developing... you know.... sentience.

Really, this show is the most bizarre hybrid of unwatchably bad, and subtle and interesting.... I totally get people on both sides of the argument.

You guys know what's funnier than watching King of The Hill?

Watching my fellow tropers argue relentlessly about the show.

Yep. That Robitussin is kicking in, and I'm just leaning back and laughing up a storm so early this winter morning.

By the way, guy above me? GREGOLE? He gets it. His comment makes the most sense to me, and it seems like the arguments get progressively less whiny and more intelligent as the comments continue on.

This might be the cough syrup talking, but I love you guys so much!

I think the episode with Soccer was less about Hank being right, because he quickly realizes what a mistake it was to get that grid-iron sadist a coaching job, and more Bobby and the other kids just got bored of that soccer league. It was a tad bit too touchy feely. There's nothing wrong with learning to respect your other players and fair play, but it went a little too far with the whole don't try to win bit. I'd get bored and go play football too.

There was also a few other episodes that showed that Hank and Bobby did have a good bond. The hunting episode where they both wanted to go hunting and at the end couldn't shoot the deer because it was unfair, and the racing episode where Hank ran across a race track while there was a race going on to protect Bobby from his jerkass boss.

In short, this may be an old review, but I think Hank did have a good side, and a strong one once you got past all the intolerance that was jammed down his throat as a kid.

The thing about the football episode was that Hank was the wrong one, but the episode couldn't end it at that and had to make the soccer coach suddenly take such an extreme and ridiculous dive in the other direction as some sort of I win or we both lose.

Hank's an idiot, granted, but the sympathetic view towards Hank is a bit of a reminder that our enemies, even in their worst light (looking at the episode where everyone was happy to watch Bobby get ruthlessly beat) are still human beings, with their own virtues and failures, like ourselves. Even when hank does something mean or creates a "Family Unfriendly Aesop", he often does it in compliance with his own morality—when it involves Bobby it's often for what he thinks is good for his son.