I picked up the newest issue of Starlog today and turned to the page where they give little snippets of info about various SF shows. Seems that after demanding more money and virtually yanking Buffy The Vampire Slayer away from the WB, where it had been getting great ratings, it's not doing as well on UPN. I don't know exactly whose fault it is, but while last season was ok, it had to have been one of the weakest since the show started. With a couple exceptions, this season kind of stinks. I'll keep watching, but even I can see the quality going downhill. Exactly how stupid do you have to be to start screwing around with something that works?
Fox cancelled Dark Angel, which I heard was getting decent ratings to go with the show Firefly. Don't get me wrong, I happen to like Firefly, but exactly how many labotomies did the network exec who greenlighted this show have to go through before thinking that a literal space western would last more than the 13 episode trial season, especially when they didn't even like the pilot movie enough to air it?
Looking at these decisions, I once again have to wonder why I can't just walk into one of the networks and be given a high-level executive position in charge of programming. I can pick guaranteed losers and screw up successful shows as well as anyone else and I'd do it for 25% less than whatever they're paying the current crop of trained monkeys.
I'm a "Futurama" fan, so I know exactly where you're coming from. Once they've polished it off for good, I'll never watch FOX again. They seem to abhor success.
"You are watching FOX. Shame on you!!"
--Jay Sherman, "The Critic"
Every year dozens of new shows come on and I can tell which will be cancelled. Like the ones that get absolutely no press and just sort of appear only to disappear weeks later (Bram And Alice and girls club. Read in EW they were cancelled and I'd never even heard of them) . And shows with stupid titles and concepts (8 Simple Rules For Dating My Teenage Daughter. Horrible title, and just how long can she stay a teenager?).
TV (at least boring, repetitive, trend-following major network TV) is in an utter doldrum. Am I glad I get several hundred channels and own a DVD player.
Fox tried something new with 24. It gets good ratings and critical love, and it got ten Emmy nominations. Shouldn't that tell them something? Trying new things and giving them a shot actually works!
Those bastards cancelled Greg the Bunny. I freakin' loved that show. They've pulled just about everything except their absolute worst shows like Boston Public (it's unintentionally hilarious), Firefly (Rodenberry would puke), and Fastlane (sex, cars, guns, sex, explosions, cars, guns, sex, guns, sex, you get the picture)
Only show they won't cancel is The Simpsons, and that's because it's probably the greatest sitcom ever.
No offense to anyone who likes the fallowing...
When are they going to drop 'Mutant X'? I thought things that were that blatent a rip off (and that bad) only belonged on the sci-fi channel.
Why did they keep clubing the audience over the head with 'Family Guy'? It's on, then it's cancelled, then it's on, then they just run a special, then it goes away for a few weeks. Did one of the trained monkeys have a cousin who could do a second (or third) rate version of the animation they have on the simpsons? I no longer care if they run it or not as long as they don't give it the timeslot of something decent. "Make up your mind! (If you have one, that is...)"
-------ooo-'U'-ooo---------Kilroy was here.
I actually liked Family Guy. But I know what you mean about them cancelling it then it suddenly appearing back then going away again. This whole topic of stupid Fox execs makes me think of the Simpsons whenever they have the boardroom of college educated execs who think of the worst ideas.
"what should we do about marge simpson?"
"drop an anvil on her" "stick dynamite up her nose"- execs
From the Marge vs Itchy and Scratchy episode
Deena
I loved Family Guy and Greg the Bunny but they have both been axed. Maybe Fox will just stick with their original plan of running Simpsons 24-7.
Family Guy- Ripping off both The Simpsons and The Critic! Every two minutes- "Yeah, that happened to me once," and a flashback. "Yeah, that's true," and a flashback. Then thirteen more flashbacks. Then another.
Greg The Bunny- Huh, it only took them twelve years to rip off Meet The Feebles. And Sarah Silverman really, really needs to stop getting work.
The problem with Buffy the Vampire Slayer is that they lost some key players (Giles, Cordelia, Mrs. Summers, Oz) which may or may not be Fox's fault or the writers' fault or just bad luck... Then they have replaced them with lesser characters (Oz with that forgettable whatsherface, Cordlia with Anya, Mrs. Summers with Dawn), and they never replaced Giles at all (I mean even Steve Austin needed Oscar). Add to that the dreary plotline lately, the castration of Spike, and the systematic slaughter of some great villains with little to replace them, and you have a downward spiral. Is that really Fox's or UPN's fault? It's probably just what happens when actors leave. Is Sarah Michelle Gellar leaving because of the management or because she wants to move on?
ALL networks suck. Fox at least has produced the one non-news show I still watch regularly (The Simpsons) and they've made King of the Hill and Futurama which I enjoy occasionally. I cannot think of any other network that makes anything worth watching. I'm leafing through the listings in the paper. There's NOTHING.
So essentially I can agree with you but with a caveat: Fox's execs are the biggest idiots in the business... next to all the execs from all the other network.
>The problem with Buffy the Vampire Slayer is that they lost some key players
>(Giles, Cordelia, Mrs. Summers, Oz) which may or may not be Fox's fault or the
>writers' fault or just bad luck... Then they have replaced them with lesser
>characters (Oz with that forgettable whatsherface, Cordlia with Anya, Mrs.
>Summers with Dawn), and they never replaced Giles at all (I mean even Steve
I'm not so sure about that. Oz & Cordelia were both gone by the 5th season (Glory) and Joyce was killed off partway through it, but I still consider that a great season. It started with Dawn being introduced out of nowhere which upset the fans, but then there was a complete and logical explanation for the character.
>Austin needed Oscar). Add to that the dreary plotline lately, the castration of
>Spike, and the systematic slaughter of some great villains with little to replace
What bothers me about this season is that there doesn't seem to be any coherent direction behind the stories. In the season premiere there were zombie/ghosts and they went away when the talisman was broken. Who placed it there? For what reason? What was with the parade of villains that came out to talk to spike? I have the sinking feeling that this will just be swept under the rug. What about the most recent episode with the enchanted letter jacket? Where did it come from? Did the guy even know that it was enchanted or did he just think it was his charm? Even the lamest episodes of previous seasons didn't end without offering some kind of explanation, even if it was just a few lines at the end.
It's like previous seasons (even season 6) were thought out in advance, but they're just making this one up as they go along.
>them, and you have a downward spiral. Is that really Fox's or UPN's fault? It's
I don't know. I haven't checked, but I think it's likely that not all the writers and various other people who are actively involved in the show made the transition to UPN. Also, the change in networks has isolated the show from Angel, except for passing mentions in each one. That was one of the things I liked, it was almost like they were two parts of the same show. Plus, I'm sure UPN has had some influence over it, which is going to be different from the WB's influence, and that's usually never good.
Looking at when these shows were produced, both FAMILY GUY and GREG THE BUNNY seemed to be created to fill in the empty slots at times.
Like with FAMILY GUY, the show lasted for a year (as I can remember) on it's own and then was off the Fox network. Then when new shows like TITUS (which, I might add, was also canceled but later brought back for a one day moment to pad the empty slot for another Fox show) and THE BERNIE MAC SHOW were on Fox, FAMILY GUY was brought back to fill in the empty slots for a while. Thus, you had FAMILY GUY for an hour, TITUS for a half hour, and THE BERNIE MAC SHOW for a half hour as well. After that, FAMILY GUY just disappeared as well as TITUS. But even so, FAMILY GUY and GREG THE BUNNY were anything but stellar material.
FAMILY GUY played like a patchwork of various skits and edited together to play like a half hour show. Their were times when the humor just went nowhere (i.e. one scene has Peter Griffin walking around in an airplane, holding little tea cups to his chest, and saying "I'm Winston Churchill" over and over-HOW IS THIS FUNNY?). Sure, their was some good laughs but the show was just not very effective. One can say the same with THE SIMPSONS, but the animation in THE SIMPSONS is better and has more memorable characters to offer. How many people remember Peter Griffin or the little British talking baby on FAMILY GUY? I do and some of you might, but not many. FAMILY GUY just couldn't compete with THE SIMPSONS, both in terms of humor and creativity.
GREG THE BUNNY, while having some good laughs, was nowhere near as original as the critics claimed it was. It was just a virtual MEET THE FEEBLES ripoff using the same hand-held steadycam idea right down to the puppets having sick lives (but toned down for TV). And the critics claimed it was "original". Ha! Some of these "critics" need to do their homework.
As for TITUS, well that show is long forgotten. And yet, I really liked it. Stacey Keach was a hoot and his performance as the mean father kept the show going. But then, even I knew the show wouldn't last.
>How many people remember Peter Griffin
In the most recent Simpson's Halloween special, he was among the army of Homer clones. Real subtle message there...
I liked how one of the Homer clones looked like Homer from the first season.
I have to totally disagree with you on this one. family guy was a great show and one of my favorite cartoons (and i watch a lot of them). i found a lot of the humor to be more over the top than the simpsons. the best stuff revolving around stewie trying to kill his mother to end her "gynocracy". as for the bits and pieces, those were always supposed to be flashbacks that dealt with peter's more disfunctional moments.
i also found greg the bunny to be pretty funny while it was on. plus it went on a different tangent than "feebles" by having the puppets live in a human world.
fox has just has a poor record for killing off its comedies without really giving them a chance. "undeclared" was also really funny but it was canned after a year. these execs would probably have killed seinfeld too because it didn't start getting good ratings till a few years down the road.
Yes, I noticed Peter Griffin in THE SIMPSONS Halloween episode (considering that Peter Griffin's character was not created by the same team behind THE SIMPSONS, but he is in that bit part). Still, how many would remember him in FAMILY GUY? Now, he will just be remembered for that little cameo appearence and nothing else.
I do admit their were some funny bits in FAMILY GUY, but technically it was a MESS (both due to the networks re-tooling and it's "suprise pop-ups" to fill in some slots). True it was indeed more over the top than THE SIMPSONS, but to me the humor was just somewhat 'blah'. I do agree with you about Stewie trying to kill his mother; that's funny. But to see Peter Griffin act like his own version of Homer Simpson just doesn't cut it for me. Oh well, everybody has their own tastes be it FAMILY GUY or THE SIMPSONS.
Again, GREG THE BUNNY had it's moments as well, but it still categorizes as a MEET THE FEEBLES rip-off. And the fact that the critics claimed it was "original" is just hysterical to believe.
But looking at these two shows, what were the chances of FAMILY GUY and GREG THE BUNNY actually not getting canceled? And remember, this is the Fox network I am talking about here.
John wrote:
>
> >How many people remember Peter Griffin
>
> In the most recent Simpson's Halloween special, he was among
> the army of Homer clones. Real subtle message there...
Yeah. That was hella funny.
TITUS was axed for BERNIE MAC. That ain't right. That ain't right at all.
on another note, no show is too "bad" for Fox. These are the people who forced Ally McBeal, Bachlorettes in Alaska, American Idol, and the god of all unintentionally hilarious shows-BOSTON PUBLIC down our throats.
The first season of the Simpsons needs to be burned and forgotten. Homer talked funny, everyone acted out of charcter and it wasn't very funny. Barney was blonde and I swear I saw one where Smithers was black. Season two and onward is where the show got great, but for the past several years only the last five seasons or so have been shown in syndication.
There was a rash of joke-a-second "outrageous" cartoons like Family Guy, The Oblongs, God, The Devil And Bob and several others for a few years that tried to be The Simpsons. But they were missing something- the heart.
i think that if family guy had a fixed timeslot (say on sunday nights with the rest of fox's animated shows) it could have done very well. if memory serves, FG got bounced around on tuesday and thursday nights when NBC was grabbing nearly every viewer.
as for GTB, I still just don't see it. hell even mr rogers and sesame street had the "puppets as living characters" theme so it could be claimed that feebles wasn't original either. GTB and Feebles just threw in more adult subject matter which most people hadn't seen before. "original" can be a very subjective word. for all i know there could have been some program produced in communist russia (which you and I haven't seen) featuring "adult puppetry" that peter jackson got his ideas from
I swear I saw one where Smithers was black.
***** Matt Groening has said that Smithers was black in the first episode in which he appeared, but as his character sort of evolved into a servile toady they decided to change his race - I guess because it is a well known fact of PC canon that only white people are servile toadies.
Homer talked funny, everyone acted out of charcter
Umm, actaully you could say that they act out of character *now* compared to how they originally acted :)
Homer's voice changed because the voice actor had problems getting that voice to do much, so he had to modify the voice to get it to be more flexible.
Sweet Zombie Jesus! Dano managed to work the ongoing "white male = eternal victim of the Grand Conspiracy of Political Correctness" routine into a discussion of "The Simpsons," for crying out loud.
The real story, according to Matt Groening: Smithers was colored incorrectly--a weird purplish shade, actually--in his first appearance due to a miscommunication with the production in Korea. (In this episode, Smithers was depicted as a company spokesman, in denial, perhaps, but not servile in any way.)
Additional References:
"Smithers did appear to be black in one episode ("Homer's Odyssey"). He was not, though. It was a coloring error. If you look at it, it's sort of an off-black, somewhat akin to "a Caribbean sunburn."
--Eye On Springfield (http://www.powersauce.com/info.php?page=didyouknow)
"During production of this episode, Smithers was painted a dark color, almost black, rather than yellow. The mistake was entirely the fault of Klasky-Csupo, the animation company."
--Animated TV's "Simpsons" Bloopers (http://animatedtv.about.com/library/weekly/aa021901a.htm)
Haha! I was trying to outdo your SNL connection to the "Republican=Racist" routine. Whether it was an accident or not, I read in a TV Guide article on the Simpsons' secondary characters that MG changed it because he expected flack for making a black character "servile." I can't find an online version of the article, sorry. But www.snpp.com/episodes/7G03.html talks about how some un-named source from the show felt it ruined the "white sycophant" persona they were going for. Why does the sycophant have to be white? I'm not offended or angry about it as you'll no doubt insist in blowing what I said out of proportion, but I was a little disappointed in a show that has an otherwise solid record of scoffing at (or at least ignoring) PC twittering.