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.
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.
Fuck, that's the reason I gave up on the Simpsons years ago, and love Futurama!
Hey, FOX, why don't you bite my shiny metal ass? I'm an adult. Now that Bugs Bunny's been censored to hell, I'm left craving cartoons I can enjoy as an adult. If there's a demographic that leaves room in the lineup for Greg The Bunny (who's funny, but is hardly broadly-based social satire), there's gotta be room for Bender and the baby in "Family Guy".
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.
"Futerama would be good if it had better characters, better animation, better plots, better jokes, better acting, and better flow."
That's kind of funny, I was just thinking your post'd be good if it had better spelling, better presentation, a better point, better use of grammar, a better style of writing, and better use of commas.
Wouldn't have been easier to type "I don't like Futurama?". Even so, you picked a bad topic to post that under.
"Derp de derp."
As some of you are aware, when J. Michael Straczynski attempted to make a sequel to his popular Babylon 5 series, the network in charge (TNT) tried to control the creative direction of his show, Crusade. After only 13 episodes, Straczynski walked away saying that he either does Crusade his way or not at all. TNT had refused to relinquish creative control to the creator. Apparently, a similar showdown occurred between Simpsons creator Matt Groening and the FOX network while developing the Futurama series.
Groening said in a Playboy interview: "The current atmosphere in television is one of anxiety and fear. And Fox has been worried that Futurama isn't like the Simpsons. And I've said, 'No, it's exactly like the Simpsons: It's new and original.' But that hasn't calmed them down. Also, Fox expected to have our show under its thumb and was quite surprised when I adamantly insisted that we put this show together exactly as we do The Simpsons, with complete autonomy. So that's why you haven't heard anything positive about Futurama from Fox during the past year."
So, where TNT failed to compromise and save Crusade, the FOX network acquiesed to the creator and now has had a successful show in Futurama.
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
Yahoo News carries an interview with Groening. My favorite quote it "Although what happens generally if we win the Emmy for best animation show is that that gives us another couple of years to run it into the ground," he said.
ridicule. See Synonyms at caricature.
The genre of literature comprising such works.
Something so bad as to be equivalent to intentional mockery; a travesty: The trial was a parody of justice.
Music. The practice of reworking an already established composition, especially the incorporation into the Mass of material borrowed from other works, such as motets or
madrigals.
"Derp de derp."
Yes, it's probably true that online petitions aren't worth the server space their stored on which is why Futurama fans might want to consider writing a good old USPS letter. Rumor has it that big-wig studio execs are greatly swayed by your willingness to waste paper, time, and tax dollars. Here's their addresses at the Fox network:
Ms. Gail Berman
President
Building 100 Room 4450
10201 W. Pico Blvd.
Los Angeles, CA 90035
United States of America
Mr. Sandy Grushow
Chairman
Building 100 Room 5110
10201 W. Pico Blvd.
Los Angeles, CA 90035
United States of America
I don't want to give you a script but you might want to focus on Futurama's poor and frequently changing time slot and it's abundance of critical praise.
Telling a studio exec to bite any part of your anatomy (shiny or otherwise) is generally a bad idea.
The one that that I find most upsetting about the whole Futurama/Simpsons rivalry is that Simpsons seems to be treated as FOX's little darling and Futurama is the bastard child they want to pretend they never had.
Case in point? The Simpsons Archive (snpp.com) perhaps the single greatest authoritative Simpsons information source. Mostly culled I'm sure from countless USENET postings but the information contained there is priceless to the average Simpsons fan. Someone at work will utter a butchered version of some famous quote and in seconds we will have the exact wording, the episode it came from and (with a little step 2 magic) soon be watching the hilarious moment.
But is there such a resource for Futurama? Well there was...The Futurama Cronicles (frcr.com). Had much of the same kind of information, with upcoming episode dirt and all sorts of little factoids. I can't read the alien language, but those guys had it pretty much deciphered. I always wonder what the little clips during the intro came from and they always seemed to know.
But what was it, two years ago? the site got the Cease & Desist kiss of death. How can a site like snpp.com flourish and frcr.com disappear when both are basically cataloging and organizing USENET content? And what happened to the other Futurama sites like FuturamaOutlet and so on?
Honestly, it's like FOX is trying to deny Futurama even exists. The FOX website for the show is a flash-laden piece of crap that hasn't been updated since the show premiered (same with the Family Guy show site).
Bleah. Matt Groening must has some change in his pocket. He knows about the massive following his shows have on the Internet (he has been asked about ANiVCD and the whole VCD scene at every convention he's ever attended). In this post dot-com world, I think his projects would be the only ones that have a chance at working over the Internet. Produce the show straight to video and offer streaming downloads over the Internet. Hell, I see channel after channel on IRC doing exactly that.
So he's not interested in leaving FOX. Fine. But for god's sake...don't cast pearls before swine. How many musicians say that given the choice between languishing in a corporate vault and being enjoyed and shared by fans they would much rather give their work to the fans? Why can't Matt be the same way?
- JoeShmoe
.
-- I wonder which will go down in history as the bigger failure: the War on Drugs or the War on Filesharing
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.
One of the reasons that the early Simpsons episodes were so funny, and continue to remain funny, is that they were not topical, but universal. There were episodes about Bart and Lisa in school, Homer's troubles with his job, strains in Homer's and Marge's marriage--all standard if not hackneyed sitcom plots, you may say, but stories of general appeal, that are still funny more than a decade later. And that's true of nearly _all_ of the classic comedy that's still funny even fifty years later. Watch I Love Lucy or listen to the Jack Benny program and you're not likely to hear any joke or gag about some 40's or 50's political or social event. Both shows _do_ make use of cameos, and those "date" the show to an extent, especially when the star or bigwig has since become rather obscure (hands up everyone who's heard of Dore Schary or Ronald Colman!) But those classic shows, and classic Simpsons, because they avoid topical humor, have aged remarkably well.
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? 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 (I'm reminded that the Simpsons' funniest political episode, the one where Lisa goes to Washington, makes hardly any specific reference to the politics of the day), and running cameos from every two-bit celebrity or band who had their fifteen minutes, from Mark McGwire to N-Sync.
hyacinthus.