Slashdot Mirror
Matt Groening on Futurama, Simpsons and Fox
dipfan writes "Simpsons and Futurama creator Matt Groening, in an interview with the FT, says that the Fox network didn't understand or support Futurama. Groening says: "They haven't really supported it. I think it's a worthy companion to The Simpsons and we're really proud of it. But Fox gave it a bad slot and zero promotion for the last three years." He also accuses the channel of meddling with the show, making complaints that the characters were "too mean". He's hoping to change Fox's mind, and endorses the online petition to try and save the show. The good news is that he's got other ideas for new shows if Futurama really does get canned, and talks about new Simpsons plots involving Enron, and Krusty The Clown running for Congress." His feelings shouldn't be a surprise to anyone who saw the first act of "Homer the Moe", but what I thought was interesting was his comments on Fox and how he's not interested in moving networks over the futurama thing.
Hopefully the new ones won't be on par with the quality of the episodes these days. Once they lost Connan, they started steadily going downhill.
Fox has a long history of utterly failing to pay attention to the worthwhileness of their shows - giving good shows the boot while bad shows - say, for instance, Greg the Bunny - get prime airtime. The Simpsons just happened to be the right combination of edgy and comfortably marketable to get and keep a prime spot for so long - and any show that doesn't live up to those standards seems to be summarilly dropped, despite the fact that the bar is unreasonably high...
This flies in the face of science.
I wouldn't mind The Simpsons ending its run at this point. Better that than risk something awful happening, like one of the voice actors quitting or getting canned or Fox insisting on some egregious change.
Anyway, there are so many episodes in syndication that I can watch reruns for weeks without getting bored.
What WOULD be tragic: Groening not having a shot at another show. Surprise us, Matt!
Stefan
* #1 Candidate for overused annoying chic media term.
I'm amazed Futurama has lasted as long as it has considering that it's not only in the 7 pm Sunday death slot, but that it's preempted continuously during the football season. Add to that the fact that this past season didn't start with regular new episodes until January, and you've got a recipe for lost viewers.
Greg the bunny is funny.
And the recent episodes of the X-Files are deeply conspiracy-laden, heart-wrenching and mind-busting masterpieces.
Personal preferences aside - Fox has had a history of poor choices where the schedule and programming of their stations is concerned.
On another subject, quoth the interview:
But Groening is also pragmatic about the show's shelf-life. "Because animation is such an intensely painstaking process, it wears people out, and audiences are always looking for surprises. When any character is as stupid as Homer Simpson, it's hard to keep surprising the audience."
Groening has a remarkably mature and insightful view of his own mortality and the limits of a particular genre. While the Simpsons make an excelent foil for poking fun at any cultural situation, economic event, or global personality (and as such, has a much much longer life expectancy than, say, Garfield (no offense to Garfield), who has said just about all there is to say on the subjects of laziness, gluttony, and hatred of dumb-but-cute), at some point, almost certainly, the majority of people watching the show will say "Ho hum, Homer's dumb, headlines, Bart whines, Lisa's smart - who gives a fart? Pass the booze - I'd rather snooze." (Or something, perhaps in slightly less doggerel.) We can only hope that Groening recognizes this point and brings us to a stunning (and satisfying) conclusion before the show becomes bogged down with the dead weight of unfunny seasons.
This flies in the face of science.
"I do feel sorry for the people who think the Simpsons are "clever". I wonder if they've ever read anything by Evan Dorkin [houseoffun.com] or Dan Clowes [fantagraphics.com]."
Okay... so the Simpsons really isn't funny. I guess all my laughter was an allergic reaction to really bad TV?
I think it's funny how people use their individualism to try to rise above other people. They never seem to realize that the tip of their nose ends up higher than their forehead when they do that.
I have no regrets. Both the Simpsons and Futurama are quite amusing to watch, and their style of humor has yet to be replicated by anybody. Hmm... isn't that the definition of clever?
"Derp de derp."
I've seen this comment a few times.
I think what it comes down to is that GtB is a great sendup of what life is like in Hollyweird. It's a great, biting satire about the kinds of things that TV executives can relate to.
Greg the Bunny is TV executives what Dilbert is to the IT worker.
Family Guy (the episode where the Grim Reaper took a holiday was sheer brilliance) and most Futurama episodes are just as biting as Greg the Bunny -- but most of the jokes probably have no real meaning for a TV executive; they're aimed pretty squarely at what life's like for Joe and Jane Sixpack. (Incompetent managers, bad investments, the Internet, Star Trek geeks :)
Trouble is, most Joe and Jane Sixpacks don't like to see themselves made fun of. It reminds them of how lame they are. Hence the fact that most Simpsons episodes have their funny moments, but they've lost (if indeed, they ever had it) that acerbic, biting cynicism that the original "Life in Hell" comics had.
That leaves the Slashdot crowd - most of whom loves satire as an art form - for stuff like The Tick, Family Guy, and Futurama. I mean, c'mon, how could we not laugh at the "Napster" episode of Futurama? Or the AOL episode ("My god... it's full of spam!"). We love satire, even when it's directed at us.
(And yes, I also lament the loss of the Dilbert series, but that was a UPN thing, not a FOX thing, so it's not really on topic here :)
Bottom line: GtB is being given a chance because TV executives probably think it's riotously funny. I think the gags are "kinda funny", but I can't even tell you when the show airs.
In contrast, I tuned in to Dilbert (and tune in to Futurama) religiously - the jokes that TV executives think of as "kinda funny" are the ones I find riotous.
I don't think I've regularly watched the Simpsons in years, though. Yeah, Life in Hell had to be toned down for TV, but that's probably why I never got hooked on the Simpsons.
That online petitions don't work.
This came out of a report from an anime convention last week. The studio reps said that they would pay attention to petitions for new series, but not online petitions. I suspect that Fox would pay even less attention.
I don't think there's been a single example of an online petition having an effect. Please provide examples if I'm mistaken.
www.lucernesys.comHorizon: Calendar-based personal finance
Seems to me that the Simpsons has reached the point of being a minor religion...
As folks will quote scripture, so folks will quote the Simpsons.
It's on Sunday, and plans are made around it. Those that watch think those that don't are wierd.
You can also attend throughout the week, but the sermons seem a bit canned and dated.
The characters consistently show reality through a fun-house mirror and have representation from most ethnic groups/stereotypes.
Why not? I'm sure someone somewhere hates the Simpsons with passion enough to start a small war, and that's all the qualification I need.
-JPJ
Feh.
You're thinking too hard.
As I've posted above - Greg the Bunny is funny.
It has nothing to do w/satire or demographics. It's really simple. It's puppets doing crass things. That is way too funny. When the fat bear puppet literally "ripped a new one" I laughed so hard I thought I might hurt myself.
Have you seen the muppet posts floating around here lately? You've got to be quick to catch them before they are modded down into oblivion. I've read the sex one and the eating muppets one. Anyways-- they are hilarious because it's about puppets and people doing crass things.
That's all there is to it.
.
It's hard to believe that's how Micronians are made. Why don't we see it right now by having you both kiss one another?
I don't think the current heads at Fox want angry characters or self-referential satire. For some reason television has climbed that hump and has moved back to Spelling-like plain-jane sitcoms.
The mid to late nineties TV landscape was covered with amusing shows that took pot-shots at everything, including themselves and especially the sitcom formula. Mr. Show, Upright Citizens, Simpsons, Family Guy, The Daily Show, etc were groundbreaking shows. They didn't take anything as above-criticism and developed an intelligent edge through insightful comedy.
Now look at the popular comedies on Fox. Bernie Mac, King of the Hill, Malcolm in the Middle, etc. They're more based in the Love Boat tradition of wacky sitcom than in the Simpsons tradition of satire and irony. This is what people want. The Neilsons have spoken and Fox isn't listening to the raves, but only to the complaints about shows being too brainy, mean, or smartassed.
Cable seems to be picking up the slack with shows like the Man Show, Sealab 2021, etc. Hopefully the Simpsons spirit will live on in the minds of writers willing to take a small risk.
Groening's talk of making an Enron episode reminds me of how low the Simpsons have sunk. Who, five years from now, is going to remember Enron? Hell, who cares _now_ about Enron?
Believe me, Enron will be remembered, along with words and phrases like "Watergate," "Whitewater," "S&L Collapse," "Teapot Dome," "Iran-Contra," and so on. I know it isn't good to admit it when straining to maintain a disaffected, too-cool-to-care, above politics Generation Z-ster posture, but people *do* care about Enron.
But the Simpsons went down that primrose way a long time ago, ever since they started cracking jokes about the Internet, and making episodes featuring George Bush and Bill Clinton [...]
Oh, no shit, man, who remembers US presidents? How obscure!
"John F. Who????"