Peep Show is pretty good but a great deal darker than Seinfeld which tends to keep its comedy pretty tame- which in my opinion is what makes it so good.
There’s an episode of Peep Show where one of the two main characters kills a dog and then feeds it to his girlfriend- the owner of the dog. Totally different level of dark. It’s a totally different sense of humor actually.
Being regrettably engaged is a relatable situation, and miraculously being relieved of that engagement thru a freak accident is definitely Seinfeld’s darkest moment but is still fairly innocent. It’s actually one of the reasons season 7 is so unique and funny but I would hardly put it next to Peep Show in terms of darkness.
What actually happens is Jez accidentally runs over his "girlsfriend"'s dog (hard to really car her a girlfriend when they had only just met) while backing up the car, then hides the body in a messenger bag to conceal the incident. Later in the episode, he tries to burn the corpse but fails at that. Toward the end, they're on the girl's father's boat, and the girlfriend asks what's in the bag. Jez replies that it's barbeque chicken(?) and reluctantly takes a bite. Shortly after, they find the dog's collar in the bag and discover the horrible conclusion.
Jez may be a lot of things (selfish, lazy, etc.) but he's no murderer.
Maybe I misremembered it but your description of the episode doesn’t really refute my argument at all- that’s all far more disturbing than any situation on Seinfeld.
There's no maybe about it; you clearly misremembered if you thought Jez murdered a girlfriend's dog and then purposely fed it to her. Not only that, but it's uncharacteristic of any of the characters on the show.
The premise of the episode can be boiled down to the following:
1. Jez meets attractive girl.
2. Jez wants to date this girl (they get along well).
3. Jez accidentally does something that would prevent #2 from happening.
4. Jez tries his darndest to hide his mistake.
5. The truth gets found out and girl casts Jez away.
The entire ordeal is comical because Jez makes repeated efforts to hide the dog's corpse and fails at every turn. The only really "dark" thing about the episode is that the dog was pregnant, which was only briefly mentioned (and easily forgotten).
Never used the word "murdered" not sure where you got that from? He did in fact kill the dog.
> then purposely fed it to her.
I did misremember this part. I still stand by the idea that eating a dog in front of their owner is really, really dark.
> The premise of the episode can be boiled down to the following:
> 1. Jez meets attractive girl. 2. Jez wants to date this girl (they get along well). 3. Jez accidentally does something that would prevent #2 from happening. 4. Jez tries his darndest to hide his mistake. 5. The truth gets found out and girl casts Jez away.
If you ignore the part of the script where Jez KILLS the girls dog and then EATS IT IN FRONT OF HER then yeah it is pretty innocent.
> The only really "dark" thing about the episode is that the dog was pregnant, which was only briefly mentioned (and easily forgotten).
If you think that is the only really dark thing about the episode then I think you and I might really disagree on what constitutes dark and this argument is pointless.
> Never used the word "murdered" not sure where you got that from?
> one of the two main characters kills a dog and then feeds it to his girlfriend- the owner of the dog
The way you framed it implies murder. Yes, he kills the dog but it is entirely accidental, which is the relevant part that you conveniently omitted for the sake of your own argument.
> If you ignore the part of the script where Jez KILLS the girls dog and then EATS IT IN FRONT OF HER then yeah it is pretty innocent.
Again, you're intentionally framing it in a misrepresentative way. He only takes a bite out of a piece of the burnt corpse out of desperation because the group of people present are inquiring about what is in the bag. He says it's BBQ chicken and takes a bite to try to convince the others that's it completely innocuous. He's not doing it out of malice; he's doing it out of panic. And he's definitely not enjoying it either as he's visibly uncomfortable with doing it.
Anyone who watches the episode will clearly see that the way you're framing the whole episode is completely skewed and disingenuous.
Jez kills the dog. Jez then eats the dog. In front of the dogs owner. No amount of hand waving or interpretation changes that it is what happens in the episode. It is also very dark.
So what you're saying is that pertinent details that provide context for any given situation is "hand waving" and irrelevant? Seems like an obtuse approach to arriving at a conclusion.
The pertinent details are that he eats a person's pet in front of the pets owner! His motivations don't matter! His motivations do not absolve him from his actions. No Seinfeld character comes close to this level of sociopathy and I challenge you to come up with an example where it does.
And just for the record I like peep show, and I think the holiday episode is funny if a bit disturbing.
