Slashdot Mirror


Futurama to be Resurrected?

KingDaveRa writes "Futurama could follow in the footsteps of Family Guy and re-enter production more than two years after it was axed. The animated series, brainchild of Simpsons creator Matt Groening, ended after four produced seasons amid lackluster ratings and broken scheduling on broadcast network Fox." From the Reuters article: "Reps for 20th Century Fox have declined to comment on the news, but Variety says initial negotiations have begun. If revived, it's unclear exactly which network would air the new episodes. While Fox housed the original series, the show found new life once reruns began showing on the Cartoon Network. Comedy Central subsequently snapped up the off-air rights and will exclusively air the repeats beginning in 2008. " A follow-up to Groening and Cohen's recent comments.

508 comments

  1. futurama by ducatier · · Score: 5, Funny

    Good news everybody!

    1. Re:futurama by Rei · · Score: 5, Funny

      (Execubot rolls dice)

      Executive Beta: "Groening Cartoons Are Back!"

      Ahhh, so many memories, so many strange fluids gushing out of patients' bodies....

      --
      "WANTED: Sinking ship seeks rats."
    2. Re:futurama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      Eh, I think you mean "Good news, everyone!"

    3. Re:futurama by dpille · · Score: 5, Funny

      Ahhh, so many memories

      *Pushes button* And now they're gone.

    4. Re:futurama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How the hell is this modded 5? A 3 word misquotation? Are Fox Execs running this place now?

    5. Re:futurama by PrescriptionWarning · · Score: 0

      ahhh, but will it be viewable in a suppository?

    6. Re:futurama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not to completely nit-pick, but it's

      "Good news everyone!"

      Sorry, I just love Futurama. And I loathe NASCAR with a hatred that cannot be expressed in words...

    7. Re:futurama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good news everybody!

      Anyone with a weak heart may wish to leave the room. Goodbye!

  2. Wewt! by tradiuz · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    Woot!

    I cant wait to start watching Futurama again...

  3. I'm axing a question by User+956 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Futurama could follow in the footsteps of Family Guy and re-enter production more than two years after it was axed.

    Well, i'm waiting... what did they ax it?

    --
    The theory of relativity doesn't work right in Arkansas.
    1. Re:I'm axing a question by voice_of_all_reason · · Score: 1

      Very clever, it took me a few reads :)

    2. Re:I'm axing a question by FrontalLobe · · Score: 0

      Has any body axed them? They might respond... *waits to see if anyone catches the joke*

      --
      -FL
    3. Re:I'm axing a question by systemic+chaos · · Score: 5, Funny

      You're obviously used to ancient pronunciations, like when you say Christmas instead of Xmas.

    4. Re:I'm axing a question by TheWanderingHermit · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think it was because of people like me.

      They kept moving it around and putting it in times like after football games. I never knew if it was on or not, and just couldn't keep up with it. I'd set the VCR and it might or might not get it, even if it were on -- or might get the first x minutes of it because the game delayed it. I'd set the VCR for longer time, but that didn't always work because there were other shows I'd tape.

      So, after a while, I couldn't tell if it was on or not and, after one time where it wasn't on for several weeks, I thought it was cancelled. I don't watch a lot of tv, so I wouldn't see ads for it, even if they were shown.

      If Fox had just given that (and Family Guy) a real timeslot where you could see it every week, maybe they'd have made more money off it.

      But, then again, this is the network that told Joss Whedon they were going to start showing Firefly without the pilot movie, then couldn't figure out why it got low ratings and also cancelled John Doe after one season.

      I avoid shows on Fox (and anything on sci-fi other than Stargate and Galactica for the same reasons) because I know if it is at all interesting, it'll take 2nd billing to all the crap they *think* will get high ratings, they'll never give it a real chance or promote it much then wonder why nobody watches and cancel it.

      If networks want to play games like that, I've got other things to do in life. I'll wait and catch the series in re-runs or buy it on DVD so the producers and not a crappy network (like Fox or SciFi) gets money from it.

    5. Re:I'm axing a question by voice_of_all_reason · · Score: 1

      Hey, if it means naked hot tubs on Freedom Day, I'm all for acclimating!

    6. Re:I'm axing a question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You sir, are an idiot.

    7. Re:I'm axing a question by swillden · · Score: 1

      that was fucking stupid.

      Whereas your post was a model of brilliance, wit and insight.

      Thank you ever so much.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    8. Re:I'm axing a question by Dun+Malg · · Score: 2, Insightful
      that was fucking stupid.

      Whereas your post was a model of brilliance, wit and insight.

      News flash: his post was not intended to be a model of brilliance, wit, or insight.

      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
    9. Re:I'm axing a question by sconeu · · Score: 1

      You missed GP's joke. He didn't ask "Why was it axed", he asked (or "axed"), "What did they axe it?".

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    10. Re:I'm axing a question by genner · · Score: 0, Troll

      that was fucking stupid.

      Whereas your post was a model of brilliance, wit and insight.
      News flash: his post was not intended to be a model of brilliance, wit, or insight.


      News flash: neither was his, or yours, or mine.

    11. Re:I'm axing a question by golgotha007 · · Score: 0, Troll

      no, he's just black.

    12. Re:I'm axing a question by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      I think you missed the joke. In the Futurama world, people don't say "ask" they say "axe." People don't say "Christmas" they say "Exmas." People don't ask, "are we screwed?" they ask, "are we boned?" And filthy houses don't get overrun by rats, they get overrun by owls. There's probably more of these that I can't think of right now...

      The GP was joking that they got "axed" (asked) something.

    13. Re:I'm axing a question by crystalattice · · Score: 1

      Wow, naked hot tubs. Sounds kinky.

      And here I thought hot tubs had some sort of cover.

      --
      Free Programming BookLearn to program
    14. Re:I'm axing a question by Bo'Bob'O · · Score: 1

      I don't know, they could have axed it a lot of things.

    15. Re:I'm axing a question by golgotha007 · · Score: 1

      no, he's just black.

      Oh sorry, I meant to say:

      no, he just black.

      I promise to learn my ebonics use better next time.
      I'm white, can you ever forgive me?

  4. What's to stop Fox from doing it again though? by Spazntwich · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Fuck them. It's a pity Fox ends up with such draconian ownership of shows, or Groening could have brought new Futurama episodes to a better network. Now he's once again at the mercy of their idiotic policy on show cancellations.

    1. Re:What's to stop Fox from doing it again though? by DarthTator · · Score: 1, Funny

      I agree. Its enough to drive this robot not to drink!

    2. Re:What's to stop Fox from doing it again though? by generic-man · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What other network would have picked up Futurama to begin with? The show's not exactly cheap to make, and Groening already had an in with Fox.

      --
      For more information, click here.
    3. Re:What's to stop Fox from doing it again though? by tompaulco · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Don't get me started on Fox's cancellatino policies. I can't count how many times the Simpsons Halloween episode has not aired until after the TV season was already over, and of course by that time, they've already cut scenes and are running it as a rerun (even though it was never run before). It's always annoying when they show you a teaser clip to advertise the show, and that clip didn't make it through the rerun editing.
      Or how about how they always pre-empt shows on Sunday evenings because of some dumb sports game that runs long. Hint, hint FOX. Sports games ALWAYS run long. Why don't you schedule some crap that nobody wants to watch so you can preempt that instead of the Simpsons.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    4. Re:What's to stop Fox from doing it again though? by eatmadust · · Score: 1

      fox has a sad history of cancelling really cool shows, IMHO!
      let's hope they realize that not only cancelling futurama was a mistake, but also firefly :(

    5. Re:What's to stop Fox from doing it again though? by voice_of_all_reason · · Score: 1

      I don't understand, can you elaborate?

      Why would Groening sign a contract that says he can't continue his show with another network if Fox cancelled it? Who would agree to that?

    6. Re:What's to stop Fox from doing it again though? by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's not just Fox. I hate that about TV...A lot of times a good show targeted toward a niche viewership won't make it on a regular primetime network, but WILL make it on a network geared toward that niche. But networks camp on their rights to the show until its too late to make more. I always find that to be infuriating, especially since they kneejerk kill shows after two and three episodes these days.

      --
      ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
    7. Re:What's to stop Fox from doing it again though? by Rei · · Score: 2, Funny

      Things are going to be different this time. Before, Fox was demanding and possessive. But now, it wants them to do stuff and stay with them all the time.

      --
      "WANTED: Sinking ship seeks rats."
    8. Re:What's to stop Fox from doing it again though? by Spazntwich · · Score: 0

      Not to sound cliche, but basically because everyone else is doing it. See the reply below yours.

    9. Re:What's to stop Fox from doing it again though? by Keith+Mickunas · · Score: 1

      The Halloween special is always shown during the regular season. Often times twice in the same week in case you miss it on Sunday. Now quite often it doesn't show until sometime in November, but it does air well before the season ends.

    10. Re:What's to stop Fox from doing it again though? by bhirsch · · Score: 1

      Yeah. Those assholes are all concerned with details like no one watching the show. Though I do like Futurama, I have never known of anyone beyond Slashdot who did too.

    11. Re:What's to stop Fox from doing it again though? by Rude+Turnip · · Score: 1

      "Don't get me started on Fox's cancellatino policies."

      Tell me about it, I thought "House of Buggin'" was great, too!

    12. Re:What's to stop Fox from doing it again though? by dgatwood · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Yeah. I sent a letter reaming one of my local stations for preempting the first twenty minutes of a movie. They could easily have reduced commercials to make up the time, but didn't. The station didn't even have the guts to respond.

      Here's a hint to programming managers.... Scheduling a sports event is a lot simpler than you think.

      Step 1: block an extra hour for the sports event.
      Step 2: book sports guests to fill that hour.
      Step 3: when (not if) the game runs over, trim the time per person.
      Step 4: if it runs -really- long, cut entire interviews.
      Step 5: since you've probably paid to have interviews with those folks, tape the interviews off-air at the end.
      Step 6: schedule a regular sports follow-up show later in the week and use the interviews taped after the game.

      My suspicion is that the people doing the scheduling are just clueless. As I said in a brief speech to a room full of network execs, TV personalities, and communications faculty a few years ago, when you pay people peanuts like most TV stations do, the best and brightest tend to seek careers elsewhere.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    13. Re:What's to stop Fox from doing it again though? by SimGuy · · Score: 1

      I don't know where you live, but I don't know a single person that doesn't like Futurama. :)

      --
      I don't care, but don't let that stop you from trying to tell me anyway.
    14. Re:What's to stop Fox from doing it again though? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds like my ex wife.

    15. Re:What's to stop Fox from doing it again though? by LordPhantom · · Score: 1

      Nothing.... it was called Firefly....

    16. Re:What's to stop Fox from doing it again though? by pegr · · Score: 1

      Damn it, this is a Futurama thread, not a Firefly thread! You guys ruined the last Futurama thread with all the Firefly discussion. Hey, I've never seen Firefly, I'm not inclined to see Firefly, I may even like Firefly, but for now, I can't get enough Futurama! (Pun intended...)
       
      As for Comedy Central running Futurama reruns starting in 2008, who cares? I've seen all the episodes and have all the DVDs. Unless there are new ones to enjoy, why bother?

    17. Re:What's to stop Fox from doing it again though? by DavidTC · · Score: 1

      No. The people scheduling sports are assholes, not clueless.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    18. Re:What's to stop Fox from doing it again though? by jandrese · · Score: 1

      My wife hated the show until she actually watched some of the re-runs with me. It helps that not all of the jokes in the show are juvinile. A lot of people turned it off the instant Bender literally shit a brick and never watched it again and missed episodes like Jurassic Bark.

      She still hates Family Guy and Robot Chicken though.

      --

      I read the internet for the articles.
    19. Re:What's to stop Fox from doing it again though? by knight37 · · Score: 1

      Why don't you schedule some crap that nobody wants to watch so you can preempt that instead of the Simpsons.

      I thought that's what the Simpsons was. Simpsons was funny... 10 years ago.

      --
      Knight37 - Once a Gamer, Always a Gamer
    20. Re:What's to stop Fox from doing it again though? by jandrese · · Score: 1

      Sometimes I wonder if the execs didn't realize what was happening.

      "Sir! Futurama last week got a 0 share!"
      "Nobody watched it? Get that crap off of the air!"
      (meekly) "But sir, it was pre-empted by Football again"
      "I don't care. If nobody is watching it I'm not going to pay for it. Get a King of the Hill rerun in there or something, I don't care"

      --

      I read the internet for the articles.
    21. Re:What's to stop Fox from doing it again though? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      meh, that's because people who don't "get" the show are always in the back room jacking on and stuff.

    22. Re:What's to stop Fox from doing it again though? by Pxtl · · Score: 1

      Don't be silly. Such people are perfectly capable of doing both. Face it, anybody who works in the entertainment industry knows where to get an 8-ball and a hooker and not much else.

    23. Re:What's to stop Fox from doing it again though? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Heck, they edit programme repeats in your country? You need to get a better TV network.

    24. Re:What's to stop Fox from doing it again though? by saltydogdesign · · Score: 1

      Watch PBS. They won't cancel anything.

      --
      // This is not a sig.
    25. Re:What's to stop Fox from doing it again though? by Tongo · · Score: 1

      I dunno, I think the brick shitting was the funniest thing I've seen on TV.

    26. Re:What's to stop Fox from doing it again though? by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      nope not clueless. the sports fans make up 500% more demographics than all the Simpsons, Family guy and futurtama fans combined.

      NFL, NBA and NHL on their own make massive more cash aired per game than any of the toon shows make during an entire season.

      THAT is why they preempt things for sports. It's the cash cow.

      Right now we are selling Spots for the Pistons playoffs starting at $11,000.00 per 30 seconds. you will not get anyone buying airtime at that level for a new simpsons episode.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    27. Re:What's to stop Fox from doing it again though? by Tripster · · Score: 1

      Showtime are bad for this, Dead Like Me was a quirky show that gained decent ratings and critics liked it, we were enjoying it but then apparently the head of Showtime personally didn't like the show and cancelled it. Nice.

      No more subscription to Showtime for this household, there is no use getting into watching one of their series if they're always going to get cancelled fairly early on. In that case I'll just download them.

    28. Re:What's to stop Fox from doing it again though? by reed · · Score: 1

      No, it's just that *way* more people watch the game than futurama (sorry), and therefore sports commercials bring in way more revenue.

    29. Re:What's to stop Fox from doing it again though? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why don't you schedule some crap that nobody wants to watch so you can preempt that instead of the Simpsons.

      You've got to remember who you're dealing with here. Fox is the propaganda arm of the Republican party. What do you expect?

    30. Re:What's to stop Fox from doing it again though? by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 1

      Dead Like Me rocked. I was irate when they cancelled that. What the hell is the point of paid TV when they'll randomly cancel the decent shows?

      --
      ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
    31. Re:What's to stop Fox from doing it again though? by The_REAL_DZA · · Score: 1
      Why don't you schedule some crap that nobody wants to watch so you can preempt that instead of the Simpsons.


      That's what they think they are doing (hint: they know it's Fox, they just think that all their shows are (still) crap -- they've never realized that they actually have shows that people really want to watch. I guess that's the real danger of a season full of shows like "When Cross-Dressing, Botched-Plastic-Surgery Celebrities Attack"...)

      --


      This space intentionally left (almost) blank.
    32. Re:What's to stop Fox from doing it again though? by tim1724 · · Score: 1

      I guess this is one of those rare cases where those of us on the west coast have the advantage. sports stuff is nearly always over before the sunday night lineup starts. :-) .. I guess UPN and Enterporn was another similar case. (I remember hearing several complaints from people in the eastern time zone about UPN showing basketball or something instead of ST:E)

      The west coast has to deal with a lot of really stupid crap, like tape-delaying the frickin oscars.. whenever that happens, they end up announcing results on the local news _before_ the event is aired on TV .. recently they seem to have figured that out and are showing it live. Or worse .. tape delaying shows which have call in segments, or other components which just don't work if it's not live. (yeah, like someone is going to remember to call in or participate in a web survey/chat/whatever 3 hours before the show airs.)

      But as annoying as tape-delays are, they don't compare to not being able to see the show at all.

      --
      -- Tim Buchheim
    33. Re:What's to stop Fox from doing it again though? by theguyfromsaturn · · Score: 1
      I agree that sports makes more money, but it still does not invalidate the parent's strategy:

      Here's a hint to programming managers.... Scheduling a sports event is a lot simpler than you think.

      Step 1: block an extra hour for the sports event.
      Step 2: book sports guests to fill that hour.
      Step 3: when (not if) the game runs over, trim the time per person.
      Step 4: if it runs -really- long, cut entire interviews.
      Step 5: since you've probably paid to have interviews with those folks, tape the interviews off-air at the end.
      Step 6: schedule a regular sports follow-up show later in the week and use the interviews taped after the game.

      I agree that pleasing there more numerous viewers makes sense. But scheduling it this way does not alienate the remainder of the viewers. Annoying your viewers does nothing to improve your ratings. The parent quote explains a very simple way to keep the majority happy, without annoying the rest. It's a win win situation.
      --
      I like my dinosaurs feathery, and my pterosaurs hairy (or is it pycnofibery?)
    34. Re:What's to stop Fox from doing it again though? by BooRolla · · Score: 1

      You forgot Step 7) Profit!

    35. Re:What's to stop Fox from doing it again though? by kimvette · · Score: 1

      Yep! They both speed up playback by dropping a couple of frames per second PLUS the chop out parts of scenes, just so they can fit one more 30-second advertisement in that half-hour space.

      Remember, here in the us; MONEY = GOD ALMIGHTY, even if the gain is short term and can result in a long-term loss. No one thinks long term any more.

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
    36. Re:What's to stop Fox from doing it again though? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Right now we are selling Spots for the Pistons playoffs starting at $11,000.00 per 30 seconds.

      Eleven thousand? Is that a typo? Eve if you're off by an entire order of magnitude - which I have to assume you are as even UPN's worst show commands better than $20k - The Simpsons commanded more than double that in 1999.

      Oh and: NFL, NBA and NHL on their own make massive more cash aired per game than any of the toon shows make during an entire season.

      The last Superbowl - pretty much the most expensive TV time there is - was went for $2.4 million. That's about 8-9x more than an average Simpsons episode, so that claim is utter crap.

      The thing is, no one is saying sports doesn't draw in more viewers and isn't more "important". We're just saying be honest about it!. Football games always run long. We know this. So stop lying to us and making us guess when it shows will be on. Schedule an extra hour or whatever, and throw some sports filler in. There's always sports filler available, pre-game shows talk about nothing at all for hours on end.

    37. Re:What's to stop Fox from doing it again though? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fox is very corprate, they care more about money than they care about quality of their programing or viewers that watch it.
      A change like this would cost more money than it is worth. It will change the tight schedualing of prime time, and they will loose many Underwriters for shows that would be lost.

    38. Re:What's to stop Fox from doing it again though? by kimvette · · Score: 1

      Clerks (animated) is a shining example of that. :( It's one of the few shows that would have really made it on UPN because UPN was practically begging Kevin Smith for the show, but he went with ABC because ABC convinced him that UPN would be instant death for the show. It (apparantly) turned out that ABC didn't really want Clerks, but that they did not want their competitors to have it. They promoted the premiere (delayed until late spring), kind of, then it shifted timeslots before it even aired, and then cancelled before the premiere even aired. They ended up airing two episodes and then everyone had to wait for the DVDs to see the rest (all SIX episodes. Blah.)

      At least Fox gave Futurama and Family Guy half a snowball's chance in Hell. Kind of. I think there are some at Fox who really wanted the show to succeed but the folks in programming/scheduling didn't "get" the shows and sought to sabotage them by playing musical timeslots, and putting them in the worst possible timeslots they could find.

      Did Futurama really have to NOT have a delayed start? Did has-been athletes really have to drone on about how great/crappy/mediocre the just-aired game was for 20-30 minutes into the show, then cut over to the show after it ran 20-25 minutes, leaving the last 5 to 10 minutes for people to watch? Jumping in the middle of a Futurama episode often leaves one thinking "Huh? I don't get it" - especially episodes like "The Why of Fry" or "Roswell that Ends Well" or "Time keeps on slippin'" where "getting" the episode really relies on catching tbe beginning of the show. But, at least they stuck through it for three seasons before finally cancel^H^H^H^H^Hcutting production orders short. (remember, FOX never cancels shows, they cut orders short and put them on permanent hiatus)

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
    39. Re:What's to stop Fox from doing it again though? by kimvette · · Score: 1

      No kidding. Even my mom (age 62) My mom doesn't "get" the computer, physics, or math jokes, but she loves Bender's antics. I told her it's on Adult Swim/Cartoon Channel at night and she catches it on there sometimes.

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
    40. Re:What's to stop Fox from doing it again though? by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      Big deal, so they have 6 times as many people Tivoing through the commercials. I'd bet the people that watch Futurama have 6 times as much disposable income as the guys watching Football anyway.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    41. Re:What's to stop Fox from doing it again though? by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 1

      Actually, from what I've seen, this year they are doing just that. They've schedule Fox Overtime or some such nonsense where the ex-jocks yammer about the day's games at 7:00PM Eastern. So if a game goes longer than 30 minutes over (which is tricky to do unless it goes into overtime), the ex-jocks get less time.

      As for cutting out the football game, sorry. I'd rather see the end of the game in most cases. I was visiting my parents in Vermont several years ago (before they got DirecTV). CBS had stopped covering the NFL, but the local CBS-affiliate, WCAX, had gotten permission to run the NFL games because there was no Fox affiliate in the area. They still had to run the CBS programming at the scheduled time. It rather sucked when there was 1:50 left and the Pats were driving downfield to win the game. Tom Brady throws a pass and--tick tick tick tick "Welcome to 60 minutes."

      Besides, anybody else remember "The Heidi Game"? They can't afford to going buying new switchboards every week... :^)

    42. Re:What's to stop Fox from doing it again though? by Tripster · · Score: 1

      Showtime has always struggled to compete with HBO it seems, at first I think Dead Like Me was their answer to competing with Six Feet Under, I personally liked DLM more than SFU but I guess the person who gets to run SHO just didn't like the show so he/she pulled the plug.

      They've done the same to other shows I think too, you'll just get into the show and suddenly all mention of it will be gone from the channel itself and their website. You have to go search Google to find out what happened and usually it is just quietly cancelled.

      I guess we should be thankful that Stargate SG1 managed to get a long run there before moving to SciFi.

    43. Re:What's to stop Fox from doing it again though? by generic-man · · Score: 1

      Sports schedulers remember The Heidi Game and plan accordingly. Not enough people would watch X hours of post-game blather on the main network (that stuff gets shunted to ESPN/FSN) but football is still much more lucrative than most prime-time shows.

      Fox at least had "The OT" this season to pad out games to the nearest half-hour, though they didn't always air it.

      --
      For more information, click here.
    44. Re:What's to stop Fox from doing it again though? by Caldeso · · Score: 1

      You'd be surprised at the number of people watching both. Geeks (especially stats and econ geeks) are starting to become more drawn to football (along with everyone else; popularity's only increased since the early-90s CBA). http://www.footballoutsiders.com/ for pure stats analysis geekery (and more common geekery in discussion threads; there's a particularly memorable one from last year discussing a Tuesday Morning Quarterback that pretty quickly evolves into a discussion of relativity). http://www.footballcommentary.com/ for a probability-based analysis of football strategy. Those two sites are just off the top of my head, I know there's more.

    45. Re:What's to stop Fox from doing it again though? by QuantaStarFire · · Score: 1

      Of course they're clueless. They schedule events that take 4-6 hours on average at 3 in the afternoon, and instead of showing what should've come after the game was SUPPOSED to be over, they jump right into whatever's supposed to be on at that time. "We now return to that shitty show called 'The War At Home', already in progress."

      What they need to do is offer sports-free channels for people who aren't interested in a bunch of burly, sweaty men ramming into each other, and they can show everything that would otherwise get cancelled because of poor decisionmaking.

    46. Re:What's to stop Fox from doing it again though? by gozar · · Score: 1
      NFL, NBA and NHL on their own make massive more cash aired per game than any of the toon shows make during an entire season.

      ABC hasn't made any money off of Monday Night Football for several years, that's why it's moving to ESPN...

      I agree with a previous poster. Primetime Sunday nights shouldn't start until 8EST if you are showing a football game!

      --
      What, me worry?
    47. Re:What's to stop Fox from doing it again though? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I've never seen Firefly, I'm not inclined to see Firefly, I may even like Firefly, but for now, I can't get enough Futurama! (Pun intended...)"

      What pun?

    48. Re:What's to stop Fox from doing it again though? by dimension6 · · Score: 1

      I'm in Hawaii, you insensitive clod!!

    49. Re:What's to stop Fox from doing it again though? by dgatwood · · Score: 1
      The thing is, the slot after a football game is pretty much guaranteed to be run into. It's just a question of how much. If you schedule the entire hour, then at worst, people get bored with the post-game wrap-up and turn it off. It's not like very many of those folks were going to stick around to watch Heidi anyway. For the few who were, they'll go off and nuke a pizza and come back at the end of the hour and watch it.

      The block after a football game is blown whether they pad it with commentary or with some rerun of a show that they think almost no one will watch. At least if they pad it with sports commentary, they won't be angering the three people who actually wanted to watch that show.

      That said, as others have noted, this could also be solved neatly if all the networks would just have their own cable sports channel and keep the two completely separate....

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    50. Re:What's to stop Fox from doing it again though? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cartoon Network could do it easily. They have a large enough budget for the crap that airs on Adult Swim weekdays after all. No shortage of cash flow there

  5. My Little Girl Rejoices by Chagatai · · Score: 4, Funny
    My three year-old daughter loves Futurama. Her favorite character? Bender, naturally. She would see a commercial or the DVD set in the store and shout, "Look, daddy! It's Bender!" Gratefully, she does omit the, "Bite my shiny metal ass."

    --
    --Chag
    1. Re:My Little Girl Rejoices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sure she means "Daddy Bender" :-)

    2. Re:My Little Girl Rejoices by User+956 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Gratefully, she does omit the, "Bite my shiny metal ass."

      What's your daughter doing with a shiny metal ass?

      --
      The theory of relativity doesn't work right in Arkansas.
    3. Re:My Little Girl Rejoices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      oh yeah, this is real +1, insightful material here. totally worth the mod points.

    4. Re:My Little Girl Rejoices by cmpalmer · · Score: 1

      You know, I really hate to come off as a prude, but...

      My kids (who are a bit older) both love Futurama and quote it continually and they are very exciting about the idea that there might be new episodes (we've seen all of the others one or more times), but I have a fear that they might want to compete (or compliment) Adult Swim, South Park, Family Guy, American Dad, etc. and make it more "adult". I trust Groening, who's walked a fine line for a long time between the family OK (if not friendly) and more adult themes, but I still worry about the networks.

      Two of *my* favorite cartoons are South Park and the Boondocks, but I don't watch those with my kids (yet)...

      --
      -- stream of did I lock the front door consciousness
    5. Re:My Little Girl Rejoices by faderanger · · Score: 1

      are you sure Bender is the right robotic role model? (not that this doesn't warm my heart!)

    6. Re:My Little Girl Rejoices by Jozer99 · · Score: 1

      Isn't futurama a bit mature for a 3 year old girl? Its a great show, but there is no shortage of swearing, adult situations, and even some nudity. Plus, bender isn't really much of a role model (you remember the episode where he became a star on all my circuits).

    7. Re:My Little Girl Rejoices by Chagatai · · Score: 1
      Sesame Street has become the mind-numbing drivel of Elmo's World. Teletubbies and Boobah only serve as a low-budget acid trip enhancer. Captain Kangaroo's ship travelled across the river Styx. Mister Rogers is in a far better neighborhood (God bless him). The Electric Company had its power shut off. 3-2-1 Contact crashed and burned.

      Now, there are shows like Between The Lions, Caillou, Higglytown Heroes, Lazytown, and The Backyardigans that have some good content and we watch and discuss them with her. Futurama is not my daughter's staple cartoon or TV show. Is it too mature for her? I would be lying if I said it didn't have some things that were more appropriate for teenagers.

      --
      --Chag
    8. Re:My Little Girl Rejoices by zerocool^ · · Score: 1


      What's your daughter doing with a shiny metal ass?

      Anything she wants...

      --
      sig?
    9. Re:My Little Girl Rejoices by sprag · · Score: 1

      Hear hear! My 3 year old loves Futurama (she likes Zoidberg, with Bender a close second). She too, doesn't repeat Bender's catchphrase (nor Zoidberg's "I feel like a summer guy!"), but she finds it pretty entertaining. Her (now 5 year-old) cousin, on the other hand, did use the phrase "I could get through here if I didn't have these damned arms" which got her in trouble...

      I suppose its only a matter of time before we have to cross that bridge.

    10. Re:My Little Girl Rejoices by Uart · · Score: 1

      I don't think Futurama is really a kid's cartoon.

      --

      Opinionated Law Student Strikes Again!
    11. Re:My Little Girl Rejoices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My 7 years old boy started watching futurama few months ago and I joined him. I like it too, it may not be for kids, but I think it's not near as bad as Family Guy. I don't let him watch Family Guy.

    12. Re:My Little Girl Rejoices by dangitman · · Score: 1
      are you sure Bender is the right robotic role model?

      Bender is the ideal robotic role-model for children. He promotes multiculturalism, and above all, he takes responsibility for his actions. Children will know the consequences of pretending to be a woman to win at sports games. They will understand why not to play God with a miniature civilization. They will learn the perils of selling their bodies. They will know damn well not to accept inferior-quality cigars or Martinis.

      Who are you going to trust more than Bender as a robotic role-model? Sony Aibo? Microsoft X-Box? That pathetic robotic kid from A.I? The Crushinator? Roy Batty?

      Bender may not be perfect, but there is no better example of robolescence in the whole of New New York. Sometimes I think the people who diss Bender must have brainslugs.

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    13. Re:My Little Girl Rejoices by chigun · · Score: 1

      I trust D.A.R.Y.L.

      --
      swanker than you
  6. how not to attract an audience by ChipMonk · · Score: 4, Insightful

    lackluster ratings and broken scheduling on broadcast network Fox.

    How much did the latter cause the former?

    1. Re:how not to attract an audience by g051051 · · Score: 1

      Well, it was impossible to watch the show. As soon as football season started, Futurama would vanish. I can't tell you how many times I went to my TiVo to watch the show, only to see the end of a football game.

      Further adding insult to injury, the show at 7:30 that never was pre-empted was King of the Hill reruns. It would make me crazy to see the repeats being run on time when the first-runs were constantly pre-empted. I just don't understand why Fox even bothered to schedule a show there, when it NEVER got a chance to run during football season.

      Finally, the show was never meant to run that early on a Sunday. It was a much more adult show, and needed a later time slot.

    2. Re:how not to attract an audience by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I absolutely despise FOX for this... they're doing it right now with Arrested Development and it drives me insane. I think my TiVo is about ready to commit seppuku.

    3. Re:how not to attract an audience by ChipMonk · · Score: 1

      my TiVo is about ready to commit seppuku.

      How would it do that? Download and install Windows XP on itself?

    4. Re:how not to attract an audience by dc29A · · Score: 1

      How much did the latter cause the former?

      IMO, Futurama failed on Fox because it's intellectual humor. How many Fox regulars would understand this joke?

      Horse race announcer: "And the winner is ... Number 3, in a quantum finish."
      Professor Farnsworth: "No fair! You changed the outcome by measuring it!"


      There were plenty of geek humor in Futurama, like Bender's CPU being a 6502, church of Robotology: 10 SIN, 20 GOTO HELL, and so on. Unfortunately the average american person likes to watch people eat rats on TV (X Factor yay!) or some (insert retarded reality show) instead of quality TV.

      Smart humor, geek humor has no place on mainstream TV. Even if Fox had aired Futurama 24h/day it would have failed.

      Groening should have forseen this and approached a niche channel for it, Discovery Channel or Comedy Central. Definitely not Fox.

    5. Re:how not to attract an audience by tdemark · · Score: 1

      I can't tell you how many times I went to my TiVo to watch the show, only to see the end of a football game.

      Count yourself lucky.

      I would have been happy to see the end of a football game instead of what Fox had on. At least a football game is entertaining. Usually Tivo would have 15 minutes of commercials intermixed with 15 minutes of the verbal masturbation that they call 'post game'.

      Sometimes, they would have 2 minutes of commercials, come back to a placard with the final score, some dojob would announce 'There you have it, the New York Giants over the Philadelphia Eagles, 21 to 17. We'll be right back after this', and then two more minutes of commercials.

      Fox can bite my glorious golden ass! (being from Universe 1, of course)

      - Tony

    6. Re:how not to attract an audience by hsmith · · Score: 1

      just look at arrested development. one of the best shows on TV. i love the shows, i own all the dvds. BUt i have only seen 4 on the new episodes this season. Why? Because they play it randomly on Mondays. Like there will be 4 weeks without a new episode, then they will play 2 in a nite. then 2 weeks later they will play another one. you can't get a constant user base when you don't have a constant play time!

    7. Re:how not to attract an audience by Generic+Guy · · Score: 1
      Groening should have forseen this and approached a niche channel for it, Discovery Channel or Comedy Central. Definitely not Fox.

      Actually, I would have to applaud Fox for even taking a chance on a series like this. The "major" networks are probably the only ones with deep enough pockets to afford a fully-animated weekly series like Futurama.

      There were plenty of geek humor in Futurama, like Bender's CPU being a 6502, church of Robotology: 10 SIN, 20 GOTO HELL, and so on.

      A couple more good geek jokes:

      • Prof. Farnsworth: "Dark Matter... each pound of which weighs 10,000 pounds."
      • In the convenience store booze aisle: a box of Klein beer, served in Klein bottles.
      • Walking thru the health gym, past various workout machines including a woman (shown from waist-up) on the Kegelizer.
      --
      { - Generic Guy - }
    8. Re:how not to attract an audience by PhoenixPath · · Score: 1

      "constant"

      I do not think this word means what you think it means...

      But...at least you were consistant in its misuse.

    9. Re:how not to attract an audience by amliebsch · · Score: 1

      It's the little things you only notice on second or third viewings that are such a pleasure, e.g. in a two-second setup to the interior of a prison, a sign which reads: "COMMANDER RIKER'S ISLAND"

      --
      If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.
    10. Re:how not to attract an audience by arose · · Score: 1

      A fate worse then death.

      --
      Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
    11. Re:how not to attract an audience by default+luser · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Don't worry, this is the same retarded channel that cuts longer anime series like Full-Metal Alchemist and Samurai Champloo into two. They leave a LONG 6-month hiatus between them with only a week's worth of promos before they start picking things back up.

      And since I don't watch promos, I have no idea, really. If I didn't have Tivo, I would have missed the start of new episodes completely.

      I like to point out that Adult Swim is currently whining about their poor numbers for Saturday night, even though they are showing new episodes. Of course, this wouldn't have anything to do with cutting series in half and leaving people hanging.

      Don't worry, they treat all shows EQUALLY SHITTY. I'm amazed they get any viewers at all, it's easier to find a Ronco infomercial than find where the fuck in the lineup Adult Swim moved your favorite show this week.

      --

      Man is the animal that laughs.
      And occasionally whores for Karma.

  7. Cue comments... by maynard · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...about the resurrection of Farscape and Firefly for an "F" trifecta!!!

    1. Re:Cue comments... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry... can only pick one... Family Guy already came back.

    2. Re:Cue comments... by Androclese · · Score: 1

      You must have missed the news, Farscape is back: Claudia Black Joins Stargate SG-1

      Sometime in Season 11, Ka D'Argo will replace Teal'c as the muscle / Apostrophied name character.

      --
      I thought my post was funny. Your results may vary.
    3. Re:Cue comments... by maynard · · Score: 1

      Oh God I hate that show. And while Claudia Black is hot there's no amount of her naked hugging a dance pole that could get me to watch it.

    4. Re:Cue comments... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dear god, anything but Farscape.

      I'd go for a ressurection of Dukes of Hazzard with the movie cast before I'd watch Farscape.

    5. Re:Cue comments... by dr_dank · · Score: 1

      So the Trekkers who want to see Scott Bacula's show continue should lobby for the renewal of Fenterprise.

      --
      Where does the school board find them and why do they keep sending them to ME?
    6. Re:Cue comments... by NuShrike · · Score: 1

      Dunno.. her naked dancing around Daniel's pole seems to have done the trick.

    7. Re:Cue comments... by Viper+Daimao · · Score: 4, Funny

      And while Claudia Black is hot there's no amount of her naked hugging a dance pole that could get me to watch it.

      There's defintely an amount of naked hugging a dance pole that could get me to watch it, and I eagerly await the experiments to quantify this amount.

      --
      "In the game of life, someone always has to lose. To me, if life were fair, that someone would always be Oklahoma." -DKR
    8. Re:Cue comments... by Comboman · · Score: 1

      Why limit it to the "F"s? Let's bring back all the premature Fox cancelings: Dark Angel, Strange Realms, Lone Gunmen, Wonderfalls,...etc.

      --
      Support Right To Repair Legislation.
    9. Re:Cue comments... by thechao · · Score: 1

      I think you're looking for this website.

    10. Re:Cue comments... by PhoenixPath · · Score: 1

      *pukes all over keyboard*

      How dare you mention, or even mentally theorize such a catastrophe, you insensitive clod!

    11. Re:Cue comments... by 6*7 · · Score: 1

      The beginning of episode 1 of season 4 of the Family Guy:
      http://onsnetis.boldlygoingnowhere.org/fg-401.avi
      (playback only tested with mplayer and vlc)

    12. Re:Cue comments... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm desperately hoping for the resurrection of Wonderfalls. I'm not holding my breath though...

    13. Re:Cue comments... by LEX+LETHAL · · Score: 1

      Don't forget about Harsh Realm.

    14. Re:Cue comments... by gfreeman · · Score: 1

      There's defintely an amount of naked hugging a dance pole that could get me to watch it, and I eagerly await the experiments to quantify this amount.

      Paging the Professor ...

      --
      Ceci n'est pas un sig.
  8. Re:get some priorities, people! by Spad · · Score: 5, Funny

    Futurama is being resurrected and you're talking about Ariel Sharon?! You disgust me!

  9. Sunday? by OakDragon · · Score: 2, Insightful
    They needn't bother airing it on Sunday again, unless it's late. Football will just roll over and kill it like it did before, and like it's doing to "King of the Hill" now.

    I wish they could just resurrect shows on Cartoon Network. Unfortunately, that's probably not possible.

    1. Re:Sunday? by User+956 · · Score: 2, Funny

      I wish they could just resurrect shows on Cartoon Network. Unfortunately, that's unpossible.

      fixed that for you.

      --
      The theory of relativity doesn't work right in Arkansas.
    2. Re:Sunday? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      King of the Hill needs killin'.

      If I want to laugh at some idiot conservative Texan these days, I put on CNN.

    3. Re:Sunday? by stinerman · · Score: 1

      I can recall when 4pm football games almost never ran past 7pm. King of the Hill was always shown in its 7:30 time slot and Futurama was only pre-empted a couple of times. Now, as you say, King of the Hill is being pre-empted more often than not.

      If Fox was smart, they'd kill off "The War at Home" and put King of the Hill in that place, making for a full 2 hrs of cartoons on Sunday nights. If games are running longer due to instant replay or, more likely, increased adverts, then they need to quit leaving the 7:30 time slot open for a program that is pre-empted more often than not.

    4. Re:Sunday? by Orne · · Score: 1

      I dunno, I hear monday nights are now free...

    5. Re:Sunday? by Plaid+Phantom · · Score: 1

      I wish they could just resurrect shows on Cartoon Network. Unfortunately, that's impossible.

      Fixed it for you, too.

      --
      All comments are properties and trademarks of the voices in my head. Not like I'm gonna claim them.
    6. Re:Sunday? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Anyone noticed Fox using syndicated episodes of The Simpsons to surround syndicated episodes of King of the Hill and Malcolm in the Middle?

      I presume it is to boost the ratings of these shows, but the only effect it has had on me is to stop watching altogether. King of the Hill and Malcolm in the Middle are fine shows, but neither is an especially good fit between episodes of the Simpsons.

    7. Re:Sunday? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If Fox was smart, they'd kill off "The War at Home" and put King of the Hill in that place, making for a full 2 hrs of cartoons on Sunday nights.

      I agree on euthanising "The War at Home", but I'd rather see them put Futurama in its place for a full 2 hours of cartoons. Even better, I think, would be this order: Simpsons, American Dad, Futurama, Family Guy. Why? Strong entrance and exit, combined with interlacing the groups (Groening & MacFarlane), presumably with the benefit (to Fox) of catching more eyes. Also, I don't think most fans of King of the Hill really fit in with the others - the humor isn't irreverent enough. However, the humor of the offerings from Groening and MacFarlane seems to me to resonate.

      T

    8. Re:Sunday? by stinerman · · Score: 1

      I agree completely. I was just working under the assumption the King of the Hill would be sticking around while Futurama might end up just being on Adult Swim.

  10. Thats nice and all..... by ZiakII · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    But where is my damn Firefly series =(

    1. Re:Thats nice and all..... by Anonymous+Monkey · · Score: 1

      I hate to say this, but I'm glad firefly is gone. Why? Two words "Star Trek". That's right, we all remember how great it was but it was draged on until it died a gasping panting and undignified death. I enjoyed Firefly, and I would rather remember how it was great, then see draged on forever, until it's just a shell of what it once was.

      --
      We are the Borg...
    2. Re:Thats nice and all..... by LordPhantom · · Score: 1

      Uhh.... yes, because one season of a show totally explored everything in that series.
      It's not like there was more charachter development or plot lines to look at...oh..wait...darn. It's not as if Star Trek didn't have 5 shows, a cartoon, -many- movies, books, etc. Firefly had... a partial season run and a movie... yup - they're spent.

    3. Re:Thats nice and all..... by Anonymous+Monkey · · Score: 1

      Firefly still had room to grow, and I admit it did die before it's time. But I would rather have something like Firefly die before it's time than become an undead zomby of a show that plods through prime time.

      --
      We are the Borg...
    4. Re:Thats nice and all..... by converge18t · · Score: 1

      Like The Simpsons?

  11. Cool, but... by Jethro · · Score: 3, Interesting

    As cool as more Futurama episodes would be, I think the last episode was just perfect as a Last Episode. In fact, some of the almost-last episodes were so good that I just dont' think it could be anything but a step back.

    --


    In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is kinky.
    1. Re:Cool, but... by RPoet · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I think the episode was carefully crafted to be "good enough" for a final episode, but also appeal to both fans and Fox that cancelling the show would be immature. Witness the last line of the last episode: "Please don't stop playing, Fry. I wanna hear how it ends."

      There are many, many more stories screaming to be told about the Futurama universe. Fox were fools to stop playing. We wanna hear how it ends!

      --
      "Oppression and harassment is a small price to pay to live in the land of the free." -- Montgomery Burns.
    2. Re:Cool, but... by Jethro · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Oh, I'm sure there's a lot more places the show could've gone. Totally.

      But the show's too linear, I think. I dunno. It's not like I /wouldn't/ watch new ones and love them, I'm just happy with how it is now. And frankly I dont' trust Fox not to ruin it again! There were SO many episodes on the DVDs that I'd never seen despite my best efforts (ok, TiVO's best efforts).

      Family Guy is a show that can just pick up wherever it dropped off. Futurama, I'm not sure. And I say this because (in my opinion) Futurama is a MUCH higher-quality show.

      --


      In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is kinky.
    3. Re:Cool, but... by raoul666 · · Score: 1

      I have to agree. While there are many unanswered questions and directions they could go in, I don't think the series would work with Fry and Leela as a couple.

      Futurama: the Movie, however...

      --
      When cryptography is outlawed, bayl bhgynjf jvyy unir cevinpl
    4. Re:Cool, but... by shmmeee · · Score: 1

      Yes, an episode that starts with the text "See you on another network" is perfect to end a series.

    5. Re:Cool, but... by Jethro · · Score: 1

      I don't think the series would work with Fry and Leela as a couple.

      Probably not, and after the last episode it'd be very very sad if they were not a couple. You can just see the lame "Oh we were a couple but we broke up" thing...

      --


      In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is kinky.
    6. Re:Cool, but... by Jethro · · Score: 1

      Of course, a 2 second blurb at the begining of an episode is TOTALLY indicative of the content of the episode, right?...

      --


      In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is kinky.
    7. Re:Cool, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm thinking maybe the series picks up again in some sort of alternate universe (not literally), with only Fry, Bender and the professor carrying over?

      Time to ditch Amy, Zoidberg, Hermes and (puts on flame suit) Leela - maybe have Fry and Bender show up *another* 1000 years in the future, and the professor appears as part of some holographic archive?

    8. Re:Cool, but... by Jethro · · Score: 1

      I think you needed to put the flmae-suit on way before the Leela comment (;

      Nope, sorry, that sounds like an swful idea to me. I don't want a spin-off. What I want is for them to not have cancelled it in the first place (:

      --


      In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is kinky.
    9. Re:Cool, but... by 1stpreacher · · Score: 0

      Yea... I don't think so... First of all, how can you get rid of Zoidberg? He IS the show!

      I smile just thinking about him having seconds of the salty slug.

    10. Re:Cool, but... by Dachannien · · Score: 1

      If the series had to end, that episode ("The Devil's Hands are Idle Playthings") was as good a last episode as you could possibly have. But every show deserves its shark-jumping moment, and the only way we'll get that out of Futurama is if they make more episodes :)

    11. Re:Cool, but... by wed128 · · Score: 1

      Hey...worked for seinfeld

      Plus that would open up a new level of dick jokes...

    12. Re:Cool, but... by Jethro · · Score: 1

      Seinfeld started out that way. Also I meant it'd be sad for me (:

      --


      In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is kinky.
    13. Re:Cool, but... by AigariusDebian · · Score: 1

      You mean like the end of Buffy season 5 and cosequental ressurection in season 6? Now there is a series with a great ending! (and post-ending, remember how Angel and Spike were looking for Buffy after the end in the last season of 'Angel'?)

    14. Re:Cool, but... by zerocool^ · · Score: 1


      And the last line of Family Guy (pre-reserection) was:

      Peter: "I'm going to go microwave a bagel... and have sex with it".
      Quagmire: "Butter's in the fridge!"

      They left that one open to having a comeback didn't they?

      --
      sig?
    15. Re:Cool, but... by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      It's pretty hard to top Bender fighting Godzilla. I guess he didn't really, though... but if he had, that's SO what he would have done!

    16. Re:Cool, but... by Planesdragon · · Score: 1

      I don't think the series would work with Fry and Leela as a couple.

      You weren't paying attention.

      Fry and Leela were a couple from the first episode of the first season. They just didn't realize it.

    17. Re:Cool, but... by bicho · · Score: 1

      Proff Fansworth: ...and that is what would have happened if we hadn't been cancelled...

      --

      errera hunamum ets
    18. Re:Cool, but... by name*censored* · · Score: 1

      Yes but you have to realise that the Futurama team were starting to work into their little niche in that season. In almost every show it takes time (usually several seasons) before both the voice acting and writing really starts to take off. You can see it in shows like Scrubs, Stargate (SG-1), Family Guy and even The Simpsons, where the animation/character cohesion is fairly crude. But these shows continue improving for several more seasons until (inevitably) they do something that makes a lot of people unhappy (The Simpsons continues targetting the demographic that grew up with The Simpsons, and not younger viewers). The point is, Fox cancelled Futurama just as they were reaching their niche, so it's far more likely that they were going to continue improving (as in other shows) and not declining...

      --
      Commodore64_love: I don't comprehend people who're so frightened of death that they'll bankrupt themselves to stay alive
    19. Re:Cool, but... by kimvette · · Score: 1

      Futurama was great - geek humor, slapstick, AND it could pull at your heart strings, particularly 'Jurassic Bark' and 'The Devil's Hands Are Idle Playthings'

      I found 'The Devil's Hands Are Idle Playthings' to be particularly moving, because I so enjoyed the show and knew it was the end even though FOX was denying all the way through that it wasn't cancelled (FOX doublespeak)

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
    20. Re:Cool, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Immature"? Did you mean "premature"?

  12. atleast they realize their mistakes by tont0r · · Score: 1

    fox does a horrible job at getting the word out to the correct people. family guy was an amazing show. and i was getting annoyed with going to my friends, asking if they saw last weeks episode and they reply with 'whats family guy?'. futurama was the same thing. no one felt like watching it or didnt know about it until it hit dvd/adult swim. i fear arrested development will fall into the same pit.

    1. Re:atleast they realize their mistakes by Asakusa · · Score: 3, Funny

      What's "Arrested Development"?

      --
      The prisoner of hope is sustained and encouraged by his hope, even as he is confined by it.
    2. Re:atleast they realize their mistakes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's "Arrested Development"?

      A show so awful that I can't even sit through it just to soak in the beauty of cast member Portia de Rossi.

    3. Re:atleast they realize their mistakes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe this should be modded funny or maybe you are serious. I don't know. In case you are serious, Arrested Development is already gone. Fox officially cancelled it last month and said "Don't bother to do any more episodes beyond the 13 we paid for because we aren't paying for any more".

      I didn't particularly like Arrested Development so I'm not sorry. I will say that Fox gave this show every chance they possibly could have, unlike Futurama. It was about impossible to watch anything on Fox without them plugging Arrested Development. America doesn't want to watch it. Get a clue! What finally caused Fox to give up was not too long ago when they ran back to back new episodes on a Tuesday night and it got absolutely hammered in the ratings. In fact, the viewership for House, which is a big hit for Fox and followed Arrested Development that night, dropped off substantially and Fox executives realized that not only does nobody want to watch it, the show is potentially poison as a lead in to shows that people DO want to watch.

    4. Re:atleast they realize their mistakes by beejhuff · · Score: 1

      They appear to be working towards doing the right thing since they've picked it up for a 3rd Season.

      That's coming to a close soon, and they've apparantly decided not to pick up the last 9 episodes of the third season, which is shame. All is not hopelessly lost, though, so if you're a fan, visit SaveOurBluths and show your support.

      --
      Bryan "BJ" Hoffpauir
    5. Re:atleast they realize their mistakes by magicchex · · Score: 1

      For some reason, you just caused me to laugh out loud while reading Slashdot for the frist time ever. My dog now thinks I'm crazy and I have to deal with this fairly strong evidence that I'm a nerd.

      Thanks alot bro

      --
      How many fulltime jobs can one man have?
    6. Re:atleast they realize their mistakes by pNutz · · Score: 1
      What's "Arrested Development"?

      Hip hop group from the early 90's. "Tennessee" was their big single. Only thing that rings a bell.
      --
      Death and danger are my various breads and various butters.
    7. Re:atleast they realize their mistakes by Digital+Vomit · · Score: 1
      family guy was an amazing show. and i was getting annoyed with going to my friends, asking if they saw last weeks episode and they reply with 'whats family guy?'.

      You're friends with Patrick Duffy?

      --
      Modern copyright is theft of culture from everyone and it retards the progress of the useful arts and sciences.
    8. Re:atleast they realize their mistakes by caitsith01 · · Score: 1

      Correction - whilst fox has reduced the order to 13 episodes, they have not officially cancelled Arrested Development and are currently shopping it around.

      I would also like to take this opportunity to state that if you do not think Arrested Development is funny then this is a reflection on your own lack of a sense of humour, or at least the fact that you have a 'different' sense of humour ("Man fall down... funny" perhaps). I would rate it as close to the funniest comedy ever made.

      --
      Read Pynchon.
  13. How long? by Conspiracy_Of_Doves · · Score: 1

    How long until we get something definite?

  14. Life... by pizza_milkshake · · Score: 4, Funny

    Life is hilariously cruel.

    1. Re:Life... by ajlitt · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Don't talk to me about life.

  15. Woooo-Whoooo! by philipmather · · Score: 1

    Woooo-Whoooo!

    --
    Regards, Phil
    1. Re:Woooo-Whoooo! by QuantaStarFire · · Score: 3, Funny
      Woooo-Whoooo!

      That's just air escaping from the folds of his fat!

    2. Re:Woooo-Whoooo! by mranchovy · · Score: 1

      That's just air escaping from the folds of his fat!

      You read it, you can't un-read it!

      --
      I am so smart!
      I am so smart!
      S-M-R-T!
      I mean S-M-A-R-T!
  16. Sure, but what about "Everybody Loves Hypnotoad?" by MilenCent · · Score: 1, Funny

    It's always had high ratings!

  17. Re:Eh, it's not worth it. by Spad · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Compared to the Simpsons at Season 4 or the Simpsons now? I've watched all of season 17 of the Simpsons so far and it's just not funny any more - it's become a vaguely amusing sitcom.

    Maybe if Futurama is brought back and becomes a sucess, Fox can finally kill off the dying cash cow that is the Simpsons and put it out of its misery.

  18. You can bite my shiny metal ass! by mmell · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Ariel Sharon, while an important element of Middle-East politics (even World politics), is not intriguing to a technology-oriented crowd such as exists here on /.

    We have our priorities here . . . if we cared about politics, trapped miners or egregious violations of law by our elected officials, we'd all be surfing CNN.

    You must be related to Zapf Brannigan!

    1. Re:You can bite my shiny metal ass! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For the love of humanity, please don't read CNN even (and especially) if you do care about those sorts of things. As a real news source, CNN are about as useful as FOX. (ha! almost on topic!)

  19. I for one.. by Fr05t · · Score: 1

    ...Oh wait that was The Simpsons. In that case, each pound of dark matter weighs over 10,000 pounds!

    1. Re:I for one.. by MattyDK23 · · Score: 1

      In that case, each pound of dark matter weighs over 10,000 pounds!

      You were the kid in my grade 4 science class who thought a pound of rocks weighed more than a pound of feathers, weren't you?

    2. Re:I for one.. by tolan-b · · Score: 1

      It's a quote from the show... About that kid...

    3. Re:I for one.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      whoosh, feel clever now do you?

  20. Please include in any contract... by phillymjs · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...a provision stating that Futurama will NEVER be scheduled anywhere near the timeslot of a God damned football game.

    I don't know how many times I sat down to watch a TiVo'd episode of Futurama, only to discover that what was recorded was the last 20 minutes of some stupid NFL game.

    THAT is why it got poor ratings, because the FOX idiots stuck it in the 7pm Sunday death slot.

    ~Philly

    1. Re:Please include in any contract... by JohnnyLocust · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I never understood that. I though the show had been canceled a year before it actually was. I only rediscovered the show was still running just in time to catch the very last episode. (sigh)

    2. Re:Please include in any contract... by Buran · · Score: 1

      TiVo can't seem to get listings straight to save its life anyway. I sit down to watch "Cold Case" or what's supposed to be an NBC-aired CSI (which doesn't sound right to me but that's what the season pass says) and I get something that's not even related, like a news report or something. WTF?

      Blame the guides as much as you blame the network.

    3. Re:Please include in any contract... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right, because following a very highly rated program is a sure killer. Did it ever occur to you that maybe the show was just not very good? And no, DVD sales are not an indication of a show's quality, so save that crap.

    4. Re:Please include in any contract... by jandrese · · Score: 1

      That's 60 minutes. If a game runs long NBC just moves the rest of the schedule back. My wife watches Cold Case too and she's just told the Tivo to record the next show too because games always run long.

      --

      I read the internet for the articles.
    5. Re:Please include in any contract... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Christ almighty are you serious? You think the Sunday Night Football demographic would carry over to watch Futurama right after?

      My fucking lord and butter, you're a moron.

    6. Re:Please include in any contract... by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

      AMEN! That damn football pre-emptive scheduling pissed me off too.

      Way to "promote" a new series, FOX, never let it be on 90% of the time!

    7. Re:Please include in any contract... by Octorian · · Score: 1

      And these days, it seems the post-football-game slot has the following order...
      Simpsons ...some show I don't care about...
      Family Guy
      American Dad

      I have my TiVo set to record the 3 above-mentioned shows. As such, when the game runs long, I usually just get Family Guy spread across two recordings. Then I hop on a BitTorrent search engine and dig up the other two shows. Thankfully I've got an HTPC, so I can still watch 'em on the TV.

      It would be really neat if TiVo were capable of changing its scheduling around long-running football games and other interruptions, but I really don't know how it would get the data to be able to do so.

    8. Re:Please include in any contract... by Richthofen80 · · Score: 1

      Someday, when TV really is digital like they promised, a little flag or box will pop up asking you which you'd rather see. Currently, not only does digital broadcasting have the ability to deliver the stunning picture and sound of HDTV, but it also has the ability to deliver four SDTV (standard def.) shows on one channel. Imagine if your Tivo could see this, and when you scheduled, asked you which you'd rather see.

      --
      Reason, free market capitalism, and individualism
    9. Re:Please include in any contract... by Mr+SaLTy · · Score: 1

      I don't know how many times I sat down to watch a TiVo'd episode of Futurama, only to discover that what was recorded was the last 20 minutes of some stupid NFL game.

      What was even worse was that lots of times the game would be done like 3 minutes into Futurama starting and then they would show like 20 minutes of POST GAME crap after it. Thats what REALLY ticked me off.

    10. Re:Please include in any contract... by southpolesammy · · Score: 1

      Probably going to burn some karma here, but whatever, I have it to spare.

      "Dear sheltered Futurama/TiVo geeks -- perhaps you've heard of the Heidi Game where in 1968 an NFL game was pre-empted in favor of a made-for-TV movie of the children's story Heidi? The backlash from that was enormous, and is the reason that NFL games, with their big fan base and big money in/out-flows, takes precedence over scheduled programming.

      Wake up and smell the money. If you compare the viewerbase, the ad revenues, and the amount of money paid by Fox to air the NFL vs. Futurama, it should be clearly evident where Fox's loyalties should lie."

      For the record, I watch football, am a DirecTiVo freak, and have casually watched Futurama in the past and liked it. However, if you want to have a valid case, then go convince advertisers to pay Fox more to air their spots during Futurama than the NFL. Otherwise, you're never going to win this battle.

      P.S. -- wouldn't that Sunday 7pm timeslot be the same slot that CBS' "60 Minutes" routinely cleans house with? Ever think that this may be partly due to dovetailing from NFL games?

      --
      Rule #1 -- Politics always trumps technology.
    11. Re:Please include in any contract... by drxray · · Score: 1

      Sending digital data like TV show start/end times along with TV broadcasts has been done for a while. It's pretty neat, the bits are hidden in the unused scanlines on analog TV. The "live" version that can avoid last minute rescheduling is called PDC, and check out Teletext.
      Isn't the switch to digital TV in the US coming with some form of teletext? Adding PDC would surely be a big selling point.

      --
      Slashdot - Mutual Assured Discussion
    12. Re:Please include in any contract... by evilpenguin · · Score: 1

      I don't think anyone here was suggesting that Futurama be run in place of the last fifteen minutes of some NFL game. I think they were suggesting that perhaps Futurama should have been run in a regular time slot on some other night. A show that is still finding an audience simply will not live in the variable "post game" slot.

      Don't worry about your karma. The universe handles that...

    13. Re:Please include in any contract... by evoltap · · Score: 1

      During the 2004 baseball postseason, fox had the rights to everything. (of course) Sometimes two games would be scheduled back to back and the first game would run long. They would then direct the people looking for the second game to FSN which I assume stands for fox sports network. Viola, both games on. I guess this cuts out all the people who just get local TV, though. It's just interesting that they would do that for sports but wouldn't THINK of doing it for "some cartoon". Or imagine if they had football on the local fox and put the simpsons on the coveted fox news? Bill O'Rielly would go apeshit.....(if he's capable of any higher levels of apeshitness)

    14. Re:Please include in any contract... by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I, and probably every other Futurama fan, have nothing against football. Fox could show 23 hours of football a day for all I care. But they should not be scheduling a first-run TV show to run at time when it's usually the middle of the third quarter. Fox programming schedulers are either evil or idiots. Probably both. They were probably punishing Matt Groening for being smarter than all Fox management put together, even though Fox would have died in the late 80's without him (and "Married with Children").

      However, I can also say that the NFL and Fox have gone out of their way to make a game with 60 minutes of play time stretch to something like 3 or 4 hours of clock time. I'm sure I can speak for many football fans when I suggest that they could try to speed up the game a little bit. Of course, they will have to get used to the idea of having a signal-to-noise ratio (i.e., actual-clock-ticking-down time to lame-car-commercials-and-inane-banter time) something bigger than 1 to 4.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
    15. Re:Please include in any contract... by southpolesammy · · Score: 1

      Interesting that Groening is still there and most of the rest of Fox's mgmt has turned over several times since.

      BTW, I totally agree with you re: real-time game length. 3.5 hrs is way too long for a 60 minute event. Here's a thought -- make the "delay of game" penalty a "loss of down" penalty as well. This should actually result in speeding up the game by making coaches and players accountable for clock mgmt. We may even be able to reach a happy medium whereby "delay of game" does not also cause "delay of start of Futurama".

      Of course, that would cut into advertising revenue for the sake of the sport and the fans -- silly me....

      --
      Rule #1 -- Politics always trumps technology.
    16. Re:Please include in any contract... by Nukenbar2 · · Score: 0

      TV Execs don't care about you because they know that you are going to fast forward through the commercials.

    17. Re:Please include in any contract... by encopitt · · Score: 1

      Or... The officials could stop taking timeouts for "TV". I actually saw a ref call this once while watching a Seahawks/Cardinals game last year... made me laugh my ass off.

    18. Re:Please include in any contract... by geekoid · · Score: 1

      just limit the pregame and postgame to 30 minutes.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  21. Family Guy, Futurama... by BlueThunderArmy · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Here's hoping for new life for Arrested Development in 2008!

    Fox could save themselves a lot of trouble by just not cancelling these shows in the first place. Low ratings for a critically-acclaimed show? How about better promotion and not jacking around with the schedule? The word-of-mouth behind these programs makes people want to watch them, but that doesn't do much good if new viewers can't find the proper time slot.

    1. Re:Family Guy, Futurama... by megarich · · Score: 1
      Low ratings for a critically-acclaimed show? How about better promotion and not jacking around with the schedule? The word-of-mouth behind these programs makes people want to watch them, but that doesn't do much good if new viewers can't find the proper time slot.

      I agree with you on both accounts. You have to give a show some time to develop. I mean look at shows like full house and seinfeld. They didn't take off when they first air but over the years they became wildly popular and drew in high ratings. And yes it doesn't help either if you can't find when the show is on.

    2. Re:Family Guy, Futurama... by kin_korn_karn · · Score: 1

      Fox is outsourcing audience development to the other networks.

      Fox puts the show out there on their own network, and gathers some hardcore fans. They then cancel it when it gets cost-prohibitive, and sell the rights to Cartoon Network. If it fails there, they know it never had a chance. If it doesn't fail, then they know they could make more money on it so they buy it back.

    3. Re:Family Guy, Futurama... by masdog · · Score: 1

      You have to give a show some time to develop.

      I agree, but why should network execs give shows time to develop when they can throw in an instant success like American Idol??

  22. It's funny they mention the comic book... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...which I have found to be, frankly, terrible compared to the show. It's not that Bongo comics can't do better. Their Simpsons comic, when I read it, seemed very much like episodes of the show. Just, Futurama is pretty awful. Here's hoping they _don't_ use that as inspiration for the initial run of episode sor it _will_ get canned again.

  23. What about Firefly? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Someone had to say it!

  24. Re:get some priorities, people! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're right of course, my apologies. I guess God isn't prepared to save his mass-murdering posterior, so it's up to science! I vote for mechaSharon

  25. hmm by engagebot · · Score: 3, Funny

    "If only there was some way to know which can of slurm has the winning bottlecap..."

    "wait, what did you say? I was too busy using this ray gun to look inside of stuff."

    --
    Han shot first.
  26. Re:Eh, it's not worth it. by MilenCent · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Robot Chicken's pretty good (and Venture Bros. is awesome) but I tend to think Adult Swim's Flash shows are overrated. You can only take that kind of absurdist comedy so far, and some of them (12 Oz. Mouse) are actually painful to watch. I wonder if anyone will remember them in ten years, as there's a good chance that once the novelty's worn off, they'll go downhill fast.

    But I'm pretty stoked about the prospect of Futurama returning.

  27. I have a love hate-relationship with Futurama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hate:
    The werecar, killer santa, and holophoner are some of the gayest concepts ever.

    The alcohol-fueled party robot who finds electricity (drugs) are bad, is just plain stupid in its false drug-warrior duality.

    The Fry-Leela love thing just seems forced for mainstream consumption. Fry is better at oblivious than smitten. The main character interaction seems the most flawed to me.

    Love:
    Branigan and Kiff. Give them their own show and make the other characters side-lines.

    Amy Wong and Family. Love that interaction.

    Zoidberg the Jew Crustacean. Loved the side-stories with the old Hollywood production and his attempts at breeding.

    Hermes and Farnsworth are always good for a line or side story. Shredded, you say?

    All in all, I think FR suffered from being Groening's least dark effort. FR needs more cynical and darkness.

  28. Re:Sure, but what about "Everybody Loves Hypnotoad by MindStalker · · Score: 1

    Darnit, I never read the subject line first, and had to backup to figure out WTF you were talking about. Bravo Hypotoad you have stolen my life from my once again!

  29. Evidently, you're in the minority. by mmell · · Score: 1
    I don't think the exec's at Fox will bring back Futurama just on a whim.

    Regardless of where the viewer support comes from (Adult Swim on Cartoon Network in this case), the people at Fox obviously percieve that there is a sizeable percentage of the viewing population ready to see more of the antics of Frye, Leela, Bender and a cuddly alien that excretes spaceship fuel.

    1. Re:Evidently, you're in the minority. by Andy+Gardner · · Score: 2, Interesting
      see more of the antics of Frye, Leela, Bender and a cuddly alien that excretes spaceship fuel.

      what about the rest?

      Fry: What's so wonderful about Leela being normal? The rest of us aren't normal. And that's what makes us great. Like Dr. Zoidberg. He's a weird monster who smells like he eats garbage and does.
      Dr. Zoidberg: Damn right.
      Fry: And the professor's a senile amoral crackpot.
      Professor: Oyeeaii.
      Fry: Hermes is a Rastafarian accountant.
      Hermes: Tally me banana.
      Fry: Amy is a klutz from Mars.
      Amy: Whoops.
      Professor: And Fry, you've got that brain thing.
      Fry: I already did!

    2. Re:Evidently, you're in the minority. by Alakaboo · · Score: 1

      Leela, there's nothing wrong with anything.

  30. Bite my shiney metal ass....! by Kranfer · · Score: 0

    Nice to see Fox is finally coming around and bringing back the shows they cancelled that everyone loved.

    --
    -- Josh
    "Whoopie! Man, that may have been a small one for Neil, but that's a long one for me!" - Pete Conrad
  31. Re:Eh, it's not worth it. by kmhebert · · Score: 1

    I don't think the time should be wasted on this show, when it could be better spent elsewhere.

    And you're referring to time better spent... watching television?!?!

    --
    Regular Meta Moderators are not more likely to get mod points.
  32. Resurrected? by MaestroSartori · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Good news, everyone! :)

  33. Re:get some priorities, people! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This guy has been doing this Ariel Sharon troll all day long. Not even a politics zealot could be doing this, so I say it's the GNAA or something. Fuck off moron.

  34. TV execs don't have a clue by grasshoppa · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Firefly, Farscape, Family guy, Futurama

    What do these shows have in common? These are great shows that were killed before their time due to poor decisions of TV execs. Everything from showing the series out of order to playing musical timeslots to abruptly killing the series without advanced warning, these shows were actively campainged against by the execs ( although I can't imagine why you'd want to mess up a money maker ).

    This is why I don't watch TV anymore ( in fact, I don't own a TV ). I purchase DVDs, and I get to watch things ad free through liberal use of dvd decrypter and dvd shrink.

    --
    Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
    1. Re:TV execs don't have a clue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And they all start with the letter F!

    2. Re:TV execs don't have a clue by Quince+alPillan · · Score: 1

      They also all start with the letter F.

    3. Re:TV execs don't have a clue by solios · · Score: 1

      They all begin with the letter "F". :P

    4. Re:TV execs don't have a clue by Cashlock · · Score: 1

      They also all aired on Fox. You can be angry at Fox for mismanaging these shows, but at least the network was willing to put these types of programs into production. Which other broadcast network (not cable) takes these kinds of risks? I'll also miss Arrested Development when it gets canned but at least Fox gave us three seasons.

    5. Re:TV execs don't have a clue by alnjmshntr · · Score: 1

      Since I started watching american television this is something that is especially noticeable. Where I come from a series is aired once a week, from ep 1 to end, at the same time, every week, very predicatably.

      Over here you never know what's going to happen. One week the episode is on, the next it's replaced by something else, then you are watching a re-run from a previous season, then you are watching back-to-back episodes or back-to-back-to-back-to-back episodes. It's bizarre.

      --
      If I had created the world I wouldn't have messed about with butterflies and daffodils. I would have started with lasers
    6. Re:TV execs don't have a clue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Farscape never aired on Fox. It aired on SciFi.
      _____

      Why am I not surprised that the script-filter word is "nausea"?

    7. Re:TV execs don't have a clue by TeamSPAM · · Score: 1

      Well Farscape was on the Sci-Fi channel and not Fox. Though it seems half the shows I start to watch on Fox get canned. I figured House wouldn't last a season since I liked it and it's on Fox. If I was the creator of a TV show and Fox was interested, I would make sure my contract had a couple of clauses added. 1.) The show will always be aired in it's designated time slot unless approved by me. 2.) The episodes will air in the order I specify. Firefly was screwed by the first one and I feel "The Tick" was screwed by the second one.

      --
      Brought to you by Team SPAM! where we believe: "Information in the noise!"
    8. Re:TV execs don't have a clue by Ironballs · · Score: 0

      "Falling Down" begins with the F

      Is it also a TV Show cancelled by FOX?

    9. Re:TV execs don't have a clue by fumblebruschi · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Actually Farscape was killed because the parent company of the Sci-Fi network went bankrupt, and Farscape cost too much to make. At least they wound up the story in the two-part movie (wich I thought was pretty good.)

      That's one more reason I thought Firefly would be a great pickup for the SF Network--not only does it have a pre-made audience, it would be cheaper to make. Eight regular characters and only a half-dozen sets, plus one or two CGI shots an episode, and you can come in under budget pretty easily, I would think.

      Unfortunately, Fox still owns the broadcast contract, and has shown no willingness to let someone else buy it from them. They only let Paramount make the movie because it wasn't TV competition--and even then they wouldn't let them use the word "Firefly" in the title or the ads. In all seriousness, I think the weakest point of the movie (which I thought was really great otherwise) was the title, which I think really hurt it at the box office. Who would go see an action movie called "Serenity", if they hadn't seen the show? They would have been much better off calling it something like "Captain Reynolds Versus the Cannibal Space Pirates", or the eqivalent.

    10. Re:TV execs don't have a clue by just_another_sean · · Score: 1

      What do these shows have in common? /raises hand... Ooh, ooh, I know, pick me!

      They all begin with F?

      --
      Creationist Textbook Stickers Declared Unconstitutional by CowboyNeal
    11. Re:TV execs don't have a clue by spack · · Score: 1
      Firefly, Farscape, Family guy, Futurama What do these shows have in common? These are great shows that were killed before their time due to poor decisions of TV execs.
      Silly me, I thought it was that they all started with the letter "F".
      --
      For those who fight for it, life has a flavor the sheltered will never know.
    12. Re:TV execs don't have a clue by deblau · · Score: 1
      Firefly, Farscape, Family guy, Futurama. What do these shows have in common?

      I'm going to go out on a limb here, and say they all begin with "F".

      --
      This post expresses my opinion, not that of my employer. And yes, IAAL.
    13. Re:TV execs don't have a clue by BrettJB · · Score: 1

      Actually, Firefly was screwed by your second clause as well, since they didn't air the pilot as the first episode. It felt as though I'd picked up a good book, but started reading it at chapter 6 or 7 before cutting back to chapter 1 for the backstory. Silly TV execs.

      --
      Smell that? You smell that? Burning karma, son. Nothing in the world smells like that...
    14. Re:TV execs don't have a clue by Damek · · Score: 3, Funny

      Their titles all contain vowels! ...

      What, you thought I was going to jump on the "they all contain F!" bandwagon? Pfft.

    15. Re:TV execs don't have a clue by b1t+r0t · · Score: 1
      Since I started watching american television this is something that is especially noticeable. Where I come from a series is aired once a week, from ep 1 to end, at the same time, every week, very predicatably.

      It used to be that way over here, too. But then some brainiac in the networks figured out that if they run incremental reruns, they can always put new episodes on during the sweeps week. It also let them have a looser production schedule, so that they would have an extra couple of days to make each one.

      --

      --
      "Open source is good." - Steve Jobs
      "Open source is evil." - Microsoft
    16. Re:TV execs don't have a clue by b1t+r0t · · Score: 1
      Firefly, Farscape, Family guy, Futurama What do these shows have in common?

      They're all on DVD. Which Max Headroom still isn't. (except on bootleg DVD)

      --

      --
      "Open source is good." - Steve Jobs
      "Open source is evil." - Microsoft
    17. Re:TV execs don't have a clue by Viper+Daimao · · Score: 1

      How much did Farscape cost to make? I've heard numbers around $2mil for an ep of Firefly. I think part of it comes from Serenity since they actually build the whole thing out

      --
      "In the game of life, someone always has to lose. To me, if life were fair, that someone would always be Oklahoma." -DKR
    18. Re:TV execs don't have a clue by pthisis · · Score: 1

      Over here you never know what's going to happen. One week the episode is on, the next it's replaced by something else, then you are watching a re-run from a previous season, then you are watching back-to-back episodes or back-to-back-to-back-to-back episodes. It's bizarre.

      There's this moronical thing called "sweeps week" 4 times a year (February, May, July, November). Local advertisers set their rates for the rest of the year based on the networks' ratings in sweeps week. Consequently, networks have an interest in having great ratings that week, even if it means their overall ratings are somewhat lower (you're better off revenue-wise with, say, 120,000 viewers in sweeps week and 90,000 viewers the other 12 weeks of the quarter for an average of around 92,300 than you would be with 95,000 viewers every week).

      One consequence is that networks will often have a popular show stop airing new episodes for a few weeks before sweeps week, and then they can promote the heck out of "Next week on an all-new Lost!" during sweeps week.

      There's no good reason that local advertisers do their ratings this way instead of looking at week-to-week ratings. It's just tradition. National advertisers switched to week-to-week ratings long ago.

      --
      rage, rage against the dying of the light
    19. Re:TV execs don't have a clue by dave1g · · Score: 1

      And FOX axed Dark Angel to make room for that bastard firefly show. I suspect you can tell which I liked better.

    20. Re:TV execs don't have a clue by Elf-friend · · Score: 1
      Fox is especially bad in this respect, IMHO. The American networks have padded seasons out with reruns for as long as I remember (since the early '80s), and I expect they've done it since at least the '60s; but Fox is worse than usual about it - probably because they juggle the schedule so much. Growing up I would say that it was rare for a timeslot to change mid-season, unless something got cancelled; but Fox does this all the time (my family didn't get cable, and hence Fox, until around '95). There's no continuity from week to week, it's like all of their program planners are ADHD or something. Often times they don't give a show a chance to take hold in a timeslot before bumping it for a few weeks, when it comes back, they don't promote it, so only the most dedicated viewers are able to follow it.

      Futurama was a prime example, as is Arested Development now: moved from timeslot to timeslot, aired inconsistently, and under-promoted, then the exec's wondered why they languished. Hell, Arested wasn't even given a chance to air during November sweeps, and went on hiatus (and, of course, came back without fanfare).

      Furthermore, Fox doesn't seem to realise that some series popularity is not only timeslot-dependent, but dependent on the shows around it. E.g., Sliders did okay on Friday nights until The X-Files moved from Friday to Sunday.

      Of course, now all the other networks have started to do these things as well (I swear it's contagious). In addition, summer series (which are a recent phenomenon - summer used to be just reruns) spill over into fall because of sports-related preemptions (not bad-mouthing sports, BTW, I watch a fair bit myself, though I do wish they could have the World Series games in the afternoon, like they used to, at least on weekends). This further mucks up the schedules, as they start the fall lineup in September, but are still airing summer shows until November, causing timeslot conflicts which the summer shows seem to win nine times out of ten.

      You're right: it really is bizarre, and seems so even to those of us who've been watching American TV all along.

    21. Re:TV execs don't have a clue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would totally go and see a film called "Captain TightPants vs the Terrifying Space Monkeys".

    22. Re:TV execs don't have a clue by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

      And FOX axed Dark Angel to make room for that bastard firefly show. I suspect you can tell which I liked better.

      Everyone has personal likes and dislikes. Canceling Dark Angel may have annoyed you, and may have even been a bad idea, but Dark Angel is out on DVD, and is in no way a top seller. It doesn't even outsell the 4th season of the Golden Girls. Firefly, on the other hand, is the number one selling TV series on DVD, outselling prime time blockbusters like Lost. Even the most clueless of TV executives has to wonder how they can justify axing a show with that kind of demand, before even playing all the episodes they paid to make.

    23. Re:TV execs don't have a clue by ewanrg · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You said:
      "Firefly, Farscape, Family guy, Futurama
      What do these shows have in common?"

      They all begin with F.

      Seriously. Think about it. They're on the Fox network (begins with F) and they began with F, all of them. Doesn't it seem like a conspiracy to you?

    24. Re:TV execs don't have a clue by Clith · · Score: 1
      Firefly, Farscape, Family guy, Futurama

      What do these shows have in common?

      They all start with "F"! It must be that someone saw these shows filed under "F" and thought they had "failed", so they cancelled them.

      --
      [ReidNews]
    25. Re:TV execs don't have a clue by blake3737 · · Score: 0

      They all start with F. Which brings new meaning to the phrase "that show got f-ed"

    26. Re:TV execs don't have a clue by RzUpAnmsCwrds · · Score: 1

      Firefly

      As much as I loved Firefly, the ratings were bad and it only appealed to a very limited audience. Even Serenity was a commercial flop.

      Firefly might have worked as a show on cable, but it didn't have the ratings to be on broadcast television.

      Network execs aren't in business to broadcast the best shows, they just want the shows that make the most money.

    27. Re:TV execs don't have a clue by grasshoppa · · Score: 1


      Network execs aren't in business to broadcast the best shows, they just want the shows that make the most money.


      Go lookup the top TV series DVD sellers. Then come back here and tell me they killed it to make room for something that would make more money.

      Oh, and I have heard so many people buying the series dvd because they saw the movie and thought it was amazing ( which it was ).

      --
      Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
    28. Re:TV execs don't have a clue by Ubergrendle · · Score: 1

      Firefly, Farscape, Family guy, Futurama. What do these shows have in common? These are great shows that were killed before their time due to poor decisions of TV execs.
      br. BZZZTTTT! Wrong! They are all shows that start with the leter "F". You didn't watch much of Sesame Street growing up, did you?

      --
      John Maynard Keynes: "When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do?"
    29. Re:TV execs don't have a clue by evilviper · · Score: 1
      Firefly, Farscape, Family guy, Futurama

      What do these shows have in common? These are great shows that were killed before their time due to poor decisions of TV execs.

      Farscape started out as a really amazing show, but got so off-the-wall stupid and devolved into a lot of out-of-character petty bickering and an extensive love story that it was so bad as to be unwatchable, by about the 4th season, IIRC. "The Peacekeeper Wars" was so bad I wish I could un-watch it.

      Now, perhaps the execs somehow caused that to happen (getting rid of writers, drastically cutting funds, etc) but I really can't say Farscape was killed before it's time. If anything, I would have liked to see it put out of it's misery a season or two earlier.

      Family Guy was a great show, but unfortunately, has returned as a shadow of it's former self. About half the shows are decent, and only a fraction of those are "good". If they can't do any better for Futurama, perhaps it would be better off staying dead. (Sorry guys)
      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    30. Re:TV execs don't have a clue by pasm · · Score: 1

      I am unsure about things like this. Look at something like Fawlty Towers or The Office for example these were "cancelled" (in so much as that the writers - who were also the stars - ended them even though I am am sure that the networks would still have commissioned more) at just the right time and now are such classics in many ways because each show was perfect and ended leaving the audience wanting more. On the other hand Groening has a unique talent at keeping a show fresh. I still find it easy to laugh at The Simpsons which has never really fallen into a rut.

    31. Re:TV execs don't have a clue by patio11 · · Score: 1
      Firefly, Farscape, Family guy, Futurama

      What do these shows have in common?


      They all start with the letter F?
    32. Re:TV execs don't have a clue by Mark+Hood · · Score: 1

      Firefly, Farscape, Family guy, Futurama

      What do these shows have in common?


      They all start with an F, as does Fox.

      Coincidence? I think so....!

      Mark

      --
      Liked this comment? Why not buy me something nice
    33. Re:TV execs don't have a clue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As much as I loved Firefly, the ratings were bad and it only appealed to a very limited audience.

      The ratings sucked because Fox doesn't know how to air a show properly. There was obviously a large demand for it, as DVD sales showed. Fox just managed to fuck everything up, as usual.

  35. The Trifecta of F by OrthodonticJake · · Score: 1, Funny

    Have you ever noticed this? If the show is on Fox, is good, and if its title begins with F, it is f*cked. Family Guy, Futurama, Firefly. If this is true, though, 2/3 of the trifecta will have been resurrected. But we all know Firefly is never coming back.

    --
    I regularly report MSN spam to the Hotmail admins.
    1. Re:The Trifecta of F by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess that makes it a trifucta.

    2. Re:The Trifecta of F by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      from what I heard, it has a good chance of returning

    3. Re:The Trifecta of F by Jozer99 · · Score: 1

      Arrested Developement

  36. Dissapointing by fermion · · Score: 3, Interesting
    I find the 'new' family guy was a big let down. I think they would have done better to put all the effort into American Dad and just let Family Guy rest in peace.

    There are certainly benifits to bringing old shows back, mostly a known audience and fewer development costs, but in terms of entertainment I find that these shows add very little.

    I enjoyed Family Guy, but face the facts. It was cancelled because it pushed too hard (When you wish upon a Weintstein), and clearly they show was nuetered before it was let back on the air.

    --
    "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
    1. Re:Dissapointing by just_another_sean · · Score: 1

      What!? When you wish upon a Weintstein... That was one of my favorites! And as for new vs. old. I think Family Guy has always been kind of hit or miss. It's the one liners and perfect moments that are funny but I can't think of many whole shows that were just outstanding. (Except When you wish upon a Weintstein) :-)

      --
      Creationist Textbook Stickers Declared Unconstitutional by CowboyNeal
    2. Re:Dissapointing by killermookie · · Score: 4, Insightful

      My view is opposite. Yes, I agree that Family Guy isn't as strong before it was cancelled, but I seriously can't stand American Dad. I've completely given up on American Dad and no longer watch it. Frankly, I'd rather that they stop American Dad and focus their attention and strength on Family Guy.

    3. Re:Dissapointing by arr4 · · Score: 1

      HUH? Watered Down? Did you even SEE the FCC episode? Hello, "Side-Boob" was frickin Hysterical. Family guy has been "amplified" by the return, and is now the Tentpole skein on the Fox Sunday Night lineup.

    4. Re:Dissapointing by inkdesign · · Score: 1

      When You Wish Upon a Weinstein didn't even air until a year or so after the show had been cancelled (on Cartoon Network no less) so I doubt that had much to do with it. More like poor ratings due to FOX shifting around the time slot and so on.

      IMHO, the new episodes have been pretty damn good, and not "nuetered" at all as far as I can tell.

    5. Re:Dissapointing by kertong · · Score: 1

      I couldn't agree more. I've always wished Family Guy would return, and I rejoiced when it did.

      But I find myself not watching FG anymore. It's always: "This is worse than the time I met so and so" *flashback*, "This is almost as bad as the time stewie did so and so" *flashback*, "This is worse than the time I was so and so", *flashback*.

      It's getting old, imo. I don't remember FG seasons 1-3 being this formulaic.

    6. Re:Dissapointing by ClioCJS · · Score: 1
      Picky people like you are precisely the reason Family Guy and Futurama were cancelled.

      (Even if you specifically liked both shows, the fact that person X exists such that he likes Cartoon Y but not Cartoon Z, when both are on at the same time and essentially almost the same thing, is a nitpicking naysayingness found in enough people ot be repsonsible for the destruction of all the good cartoons.)

      Family Guy > American Dad? American Dad > Family Guy? Depends on the episode. Sometimes King Of The Hill > Simpsons! It happens (unfortunately).

      --
      -Clio
      Karma: Bad (mostly from not giving a fuck)
      Blog: http://clintjcl.wordpress.com
    7. Re:Dissapointing by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      Same here. American Dad strikes me as just a pathetic effort to make the same formula-- ONLY BETTER!

      For instance, why have one wacky 'pet' (a talking dog) when you can have two? An alien *and* a talking goldfish! Of course, the goldfish never gets any lines because he's 1) hard to write for, being confined to a tank and 2) not funny anyway.

      Anyway, the only good part of American Dad is Patrick Stewart. Unless he's in the episode, I don't bother.

    8. Re:Dissapointing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Klaus: If you need me I'll be in myn crapper. Ohh, I'm always in myn crapper.

      --

      Kazim: ...Do you want to get stoned?
      Hayley: Yes! Oh, my God, it's been, like, forever.
      Kazim: You would like to be buried up to your neck and have a crowd of angry men throw rocks at your head?
      Hayley: Oh. No.

      --

      Comedy gold.

    9. Re:Dissapointing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But I find myself not watching FG anymore. It's always: "This is worse than the time I met so and so" *flashback*, "This is almost as bad as the time stewie did so and so" *flashback*, "This is worse than the time I was so and so", *flashback*.

      It's getting old, imo. I don't remember FG seasons 1-3 being this formulaic.

      My wife bought me the full set of FG DVDs for Xmas, and the flashbacks are plentiful. Maybe it's only just now getting old to some viewers - I still find them just as funny (or, sometimes not) on the new shows as they were on the old.

      T

    10. Re:Dissapointing by bigwang · · Score: 1

      See, American dad is as similar to Family guy, as Family Guy was to The Simpsons.
      They all are animated comedies centered around a family, but they are all different types of shows.

      If you came in expecting Family Guy (Which I imagine a lot of people were), you were dissapointed. But American Dad is a fantastic show. It has plotlines that are written like a regular live-action television show. It's a more serious and contemplative show than Family Guy. It's still funny, just in a different way than Family Guy.

    11. Re:Dissapointing by __aailob1448 · · Score: 1

      Screw that and screw you!

      I loved Family Guy then and I love it now. And I love American Dad too.

      What the fuck are you going to replace them with? Reality shows and extreme makeovers? Get a fucking clue!

      it's not like every show is a Scrubs or an Arrested Development. The vast majority is shit.

      People like shit. Look at how successful that piece of shit LOST is.

      And don't get me started on the O.C and Smallville.

    12. Re:Dissapointing by kimvette · · Score: 1

      Actually some affiliates did air it, only it was censored. I don't see why though - it wasn't all that offensive considering all they were doing is making fun OF stereotypes.

      "OMFG better not air it, it might offend the hyper-sensitive hippies"

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
  37. Re:Eh, it's not worth it. by Gulthek · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I respectfully disagree. I place Futurama above Family Guy, Simpsons, ATHF, Sealab, Robot Chicken, and Home Movies. Superior to all in animation, writing, acting, and plot. And it had an amazing mix of emotional moments and hilarious comedy. And an absolutely stunning number of tie-ins, in-jokes, frame-jokes, etc.

  38. TV-YA, bud by Thud457 · · Score: 1
    Bender is hardly an appropriate role model for a young girl.

    Are you some kind of robosexual?!!!

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  39. Yeah Futurama. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Futurama was a good tv show that basically got knocked off the air because of long football games if I remember correctly. It was never consistently scheduled so I never got into the habit of watching it.

  40. You're wrong. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Trifecta means three.

    They already did Family Guy, so that would make four.

  41. Why wasn't Futurama First? by CMiYC · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I don't understand how Family Guy was re-lauched when Futurama wasn't. While I enjoy Family Guy, I think Futurama is an overall better show. The humor is more developed, the artwork is cleaner, and the concept is fun. Family Guy just feels like a dumber Homer Simpson combined with acid flashbacks. Which I do find funny, but not mroe than Futurama. Granted, I'd like to see Bender and Stewie in a cameo scene. From each show, they are my favorite (if not the best) characters.

    1. Re:Why wasn't Futurama First? by Guppy06 · · Score: 1

      Family Guy got priority because American Dad was making money. Groening and Cohen don't have any new projects to demonstrate "See? We can make money!" in the same way; heck, we had Futurama to begin with because of Groening's success with The Simpsons.

    2. Re:Why wasn't Futurama First? by decipher_saint · · Score: 1

      The ridiculously high DVD sales for Family Guy showed Fox that there was money to be made by bringing it back.

      I'm sure the Futurama sales were good enough to make them at least consider bringing the show back.

      --
      crazy dynamite monkey
  42. what? by engagebot · · Score: 2, Interesting

    "But honestly, it's not that good of a show. Compared to the Simpsons, it doesn't come close. Against Family Guy, it pales in comparison. And the other shows for that age range are Aquateen Hunger Force and Robot Chicken, which are much more interesting than Futurama."

    What are you talking about? So you like Family Guy and Simpsons better. So what? Have you flipped through your cable channels lately?

    Even if you like said shows better, Futurama is more than worth bringing back considering it's infinitely better than 99.5% of what's on tv.

    --
    Han shot first.
  43. YAY! by huber · · Score: 1

    I would be the happiest girl in the world!!! I love the Simpsons Futurama and Family guy. But give me choice and i'll pick futurama every time.

    1. Re:YAY! by Lars83 · · Score: 1

      Wait...so you're a girl? On Slashdot?

      Heeey.....

    2. Re:YAY! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      girls read /. ?

  44. Re:Eh, it's not worth it. by raoul666 · · Score: 2, Informative

    If you think simpsons is better than futurama, I don't think you're getting most of the jokes. The simpsons, especially in recent years, is the cartoon for the masses. It reuses the same material time and time again. Futurama is the cartoon for nerds. The references, the science jokes, the time paradoxes, all make it an interesting intellectual viewing, while still being light enough to be enjoyable if you don't get them all.

    As for comparing it to family guy, I'd argue that the genre is so vastly different, it'd be similar to comparing classical and punk rock. I love both, family guy for the mindless craziness and belly laughs and futurama for the "oh...I get it...hehehehe" type.

    --
    When cryptography is outlawed, bayl bhgynjf jvyy unir cevinpl
  45. Re:get some priorities, people! by User+956 · · Score: 1

    You're right of course, my apologies. I guess God isn't prepared to save his mass-murdering posterior, so it's up to science! I vote for mechaSharon

    In the future, everyone votes for mechaSharon. That is, until he's defeated by Richard Nixon in the year 3000.

    --
    The theory of relativity doesn't work right in Arkansas.
  46. What would Bender say? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Fox can bite my shiny metal ass!"

  47. Bender yes, Ditka no! by spyrochaete · · Score: 1

    There really isn't much more info here than the last time /. covered the issue.

    http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/12/20/175421 1&tid=129&tid=133

    I can't wait till the re-release, but how about pre-empting football for cartoons for a change? I'm sick of having to watch men tackle one another and grab each other's pigskins for an hour just to find at the last minute that Futurama's been dropped, postponed pretty much until the stupidbowl.

    1. Re:Bender yes, Ditka no! by fumblebruschi · · Score: 1

      how about pre-empting football for cartoons for a change?

      Can't happen. The networks follow the "Heidi Rule", which states that nothing is more important than football. This goes back to a game in November 1968 when the network switched away from a Jets-Raiders game with under a minute to play and the Raiders far behind, in order to start the prime-time movie of the week, which was "Heidi". In the last forty-nine seconds of the game, which viewers didn't get to see, Oakland scored a touchdown, made an amazing end-zone fumble recovery, scored another touchdown, and won the game.

      The negative reaction from football fans was so huge that the networks had to promise that they would never again cut away from a football game in progress, NO MATTER WHAT. Alien starships land, China signs eternal frienship pact with Russia, Bill Gates donates a fortune to the Free Software Foundation, they're still going to show every down. That's written into their contract with the NFL.

      And honestly, it's the right decision. I love Futurama too, but for every one person who watches Futurama, there are a hundred people who would rather watch football. At best, Futurama brings the station a modest profit; football puts two full quarters of the fiscal year in the black by itself.

    2. Re:Bender yes, Ditka no! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not ALWAYS the right decision. Remember what happened when an XFL game ran over into Saturday Night Live's timeslot.

  48. The main question by Some_Llama · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Is will the original writing staff be re-hired, this is what really made the episodes in the first place, I remember reading somewhere about the high number of PH.ds and MBAs they had working on the writing staff, not that degress automatically mean anything, but I thought it was interesting given the type of jokes that I would often laugh at but my wife would have no clue what was funny about them...

    1. Re:The main question by gnovos · · Score: 1

      I thought it was interesting given the type of jokes that I would often laugh at but my wife would have no clue what was funny about them...

      My favorite were the ones we would BOTH laugh at.... but for completely different reasons.

      --
      "Your superior intellect is no match for our puny weapons!"
    2. Re:The main question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I seriously do not mean to troll you. But, what the hell? How can you marry someone who doesn't get the same jokes as you? I mean, yeah, maybe she's exceptionally kinky in the sack, but, fuck. Kinky people are a dime a dozen. What makes or breaks a relationship is how you share comedy.

    3. Re:The main question by Some_Llama · · Score: 1

      Well we share a lot of things together, like comedy, but in different ways.
      Being with someone who is exactly like you seems like it would be boring after a while, isn't variety the spice of life?

  49. Re:get some priorities, people! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    for that line of thinking, Ariel Sharon is dying and yet here you are posting on Slashdot forums about how much people posting on Slashdot forums are disgusting you. I think causality just collapsed again.

  50. I'm all for it ... by operagost · · Score: 1, Insightful

    As long as it doesn't turn into a partisan political mouthpiece like "Family Guy" has. If I want to see one-sided political humor, I'll read "Doonesbury."

    --

    Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    1. Re:I'm all for it ... by Sheetrock · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yeah, it's kind of a bummer that the only choice for right-wing comedy on the air right now is Fox News.

      --

      Try not. Do or do not, there is no try.
      -- Dr. Spock, stardate 2822-3.




    2. Re:I'm all for it ... by Eli+Gottlieb · · Score: 2, Funny

      As long as it doesn't turn into a partisan political mouthpiece like "Family Guy" has. If I want to see one-sided political humor, I'll read "Doonesbury."

      You seem to have misspelled "American Dad" and "The Boondocks".

  51. Adult Swim does it again by The+Infidel · · Score: 0

    First Family Guy, Now Futurama. Woot.

    Now they need to show reruns of Voyagers, Automan, and Manimal, and see if the resurrection magic strikes thrice (and quatrice?, quince?)

  52. Re:get some priorities, people! by systemic+chaos · · Score: 0, Offtopic
    Ariel Sharon is dying and you lot are here talking about Futurama?! You disgust me!
    "Dennis, our lives are in your hands and you have butterfingers?"
  53. you probably liked HHGG in the cinema, too by Thud457 · · Score: 1
    You'll love the big-budget live-action Hollywood blockbuster. In theaters 3/17/2008 - 3/18/2008!

    Wait, nobody ever likes that stuff.

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  54. Precedent for Firefly????????? by Dr.+Spork · · Score: 1
    Futurama was cancelled after it started sucking. Well, not sucking like the Simpsons now sucks, but it was certainly past its peak.

    On the other hand, Firefly had an amazing half-season on Fox before it got cancelled. I personally think it was the best sci-fi show ever made, and I've seen many. So it's Firefly they should be talking about, not Futurama.

    1. Re:Precedent for Firefly????????? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Futurama was cancelled after it started sucking.

      nnuuuuhhh uuunnnhhh. Firefly sucked.

    2. Re:Precedent for Firefly????????? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The movie Serenity threw some serious shit at the Firefly universe and crew, so I think it would be very difficult to continue the series while maintaining the spirit of the original.

    3. Re:Precedent for Firefly????????? by Ekarderif · · Score: 1

      I don't what the hell you're talking about; (production) season four had some of the best half-hours ever shown on television. "Jurassic Bark", "Where No Fan Has Gone Before", "The Farnsworth Parabox", and "The Devil's Hands are Idle Playthings" and all exceptional episodes. In addition, both "The Why of Fry" and "The Sting" are among my favorite episodes in any TV show ever along with "Roswell That Ends Well"; Firefly's "Out of Gas" and "Ariel"; and Buffy's "Becoming, Part II", "Earshot", and "Hush". Past its peak? Not even close.

  55. Re:Eh, it's not worth it. by dancingmad · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I think you're very much mistaken.

    Simpsons has been on a very steady decline since about the time Futurama cmae out (even before than, perhaps). The SImpsons was very much running out of steam and while Futurama channeled some of its style and wit, it also brought a lot of fresh ideas to the table. I feel like the first few episodes are a bit slow, but after that I feel pretty much the entire run compares very favorable with even the Pax Simpsona (say seasons two through six).

    As far as Family Guy is concerned, during both program's initial runs I might ahve agreed with you. But especially when they are put back to back, it is obvious how much intellectual humor is in Futurama. It ages well becaues in someways it is a standard sitcom, but with a sharp sense of humor and intellectual writing. Family Guy mostly relies on shock value and easy jokes. While they were funny, its not a show I personally can watch over and over again (and this is discounting the post cancellation Family Guy, which lacks even the heart of the original). Family Guy simply does not stack up well - Futurama's humor is smarter, better written, and ages much better. Care was taken with Futurama and it shows.

    Furthermore, Futurama had some of the best animation on TV. Unlike the poor art of Family Guy (the creator of Ren and Stimpy lambasted FG for it's art style, saying any 10 year old can do it, according to FG's wikipedia page), Aqua Teen (which I love, but still, is no prize pig as far as animation is concerned), Futurama was extemely well done and even the first season looks good these days.

    The Simpsons is a bit of a send up of the family sitcoms of its periods, while Futurama riffs on Friends and Seinfeld style shows of the 1990s. The sense of humor is far more bizarre, but its grounding in some sort of reality means it pairs up really well on adult swim with shows like Aqua Teen.

    --
    "There is no time, sir, at which ties do not matter," Jeeves, (Jeeves and the Impending Doom)
  56. Why does Fox cancel the good shows? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Futurama, Family Guy, Firefly, and Wodnerfalls all had great DVD sales, yet Fox axed all of them.

    Who the hell is running Fox's programming dept these days?

    1. Re:Why does Fox cancel the good shows? by stinerman · · Score: 1

      You forget that these shows don't bring in as much profit as $REALITY_SHOW. Reality TV is incredibly profitable (low talent / production costs, etc.) which is why that genre has been forced down our collective throats for the past 4 years. Networks don't care if a show is "good" they care only if it is profitable, and maximally(?) so at that.

  57. time to burn incense and pray to the media gods by faderanger · · Score: 0

    hermes is the appropriate diety, right?

  58. Re:Eh, it's not worth it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Please mod parent as high as possible!

  59. If I Only Had... by SenorPez · · Score: 3, Funny

    ... my Fing-Longer, I could activate the What-If machine, and see what would happen if FOX brought back Futurama.

    Instead, I'll just enjoy the syndication, instead.

  60. HD? by ERJ · · Score: 1

    If they bring it back, it would be pretty sweet if they did it in 16:9 HDTV. Fox already airs a lot of their shows in HD, why not a cartoon?

    1. Re:HD? by echocharlie · · Score: 1

      Is Futurama using cel-animation or CG? It might make a difference on the ability to do HD.

    2. Re:HD? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Then we'd finally be able to see Amy's obscene tattoo!

    3. Re:HD? by ERJ · · Score: 1

      Nice obscure reference...mod up.

  61. At least by everphilski · · Score: 1

    At least Arrested has a good time slot now. I don't think they will get bumped around as much this spring (damn you prison break!)

    1. Re:At least by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Arrested Development definatley won't be getting bumped around this spring because it won't be on. Fox cut the production order down from 24 shows to 13. I'm not sure but I think last week might have been the last one of the season.

  62. For Proper Viewing, Take Red Pill Now by digitaldc · · Score: 1

    If accidentally watched, induce vomiting.

    --
    He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
  63. Re:Eh, it's not worth it. by vapspwi · · Score: 1

    Disagree. Futurama wasn't consistently funnier than the Simpsons in their prime, but it was close. Futurama was much better than the Simpsons episodes that were airing concurrently, though, by a longshot.

    JRjr

  64. Motivation for Groening by thaerin · · Score: 3, Insightful

    A Futurma comeback has been mentioned before and every time I've found myself thinking "Oh how kick ass is this gonna be?!!!" But then I have to wonder if it'll be the same Futurama that we've all come to love. Besides a heaping helping of cash, what else is there to motivate Groening into continuing the series? He's always been vocal about his dismay of the Fox execs cancelling the show in the first place. That seems like a big chip to carry on one's shoulders, though I suppose a few extra 0's on a paycheck can put a smile on anybody's face. I just hope his love of the characters and fanbase are enough to ensure the series returns to it's former glory.

    --
    If big boobed women work at Hooters do one legged women work at IHOP?
    1. Re:Motivation for Groening by Guppy06 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "what else is there to motivate Groening into continuing the series? He's always been vocal about his dismay of the Fox execs cancelling the show in the first place."

      True, but he's found love on a Time-Warner owned network. I think [as] has given allowed Groening to give Fox their comeuppance and forced Fox to approach the negotiations with some humility.

    2. Re:Motivation for Groening by castleguardian · · Score: 0
      >though I suppose a few extra 0's on a paycheck can put a smile on anybody's face.

      Bender: {on phone with Leela's agent} Put a "1" and two "0"s after that figure or we're through. [Pause] Deal! {Hangs up}

      Leela: Wow! How much money do you get me?

      Bender: $100!

      --
      --- Welcome my son, welcome to the machine.
  65. Re:Eh, it's not worth it. by chrismcdirty · · Score: 1

    Agreed. In Family Guy, I can get almost every joke in one sitting of the episode. Futurama, OTOH, I've seen each episode probably 5-10 times each, and I usually spot a new joke that I didn't catch on to before.

    --
    It's like sex, except I'm having it!
  66. Re:Eh, it's not worth it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Intellectual humor? Most of Futurama's jokes are blatantly obvious and aren't what I would consider to be intellectually stimulating or even particularly creative. Please give contrary examples if there are any.

  67. Pales in comparison? by fwitness · · Score: 1

    I've liked all three shows in their time, Family Guy, Futurama and the Simpson. Even King of the Hill has some great moments. However, it's Family Guy I just don't get the fan following for. The formula is so tried that the jokes have to be extremely funny not to make me wince.
        My biggest problem is the bad comedy writing. MacFarlane's idea of a seguay(sp?) is to say "this is better than the time..." and queue random nonsensical joke skit. Do the "almost like that time.." thing 500000 more times in one minute. God I hate that bit. It's just a way to have an in-show skit without doing proper writing to make it actually funny.
          Writing this post makes me remember the time I asked to borrow Kate Moss' new Motorola RAZR phone. >
        See people? The joke is funny, the rest of it isn't.

        Now, if you read through to this point, flame on.

    --
    -- I have fans? Wow.
    1. Re:Pales in comparison? by DavidTC · · Score: 1
      The nonsensical segues are the joke.

      If you treat Family Guy as a copy of the Simpsons, you will be disappointed. Family Guy is, in many ways, a parody. Not of whatever obvious thing they are parodying, but itself and other shows that parody things.

      When Peter bangs his shin and they spend 45 seconds on him sucking air through his teeth and wincing, it isn't because they think that would be funny for 45 seconds, or they needed to pad the show out. (There are a lot better things to pad a show with.) It's quite obviously not funny that long, which is the point.

      And doing that twice would clearly be overkill, which is why they do, indeed, do it twice.

      See, the real difference is that the Simpsons starts with a funny plot, and then adds gags.

      Family Guy, OTOH, is making fun of every level. Yeah, there are funny gags, but there are funny meta-jokes, where they make fun of themselves and their own plot, there is anti-humor, where everyone expects a joke, so it's actually funnier there's not one, or that the joke is extremely unfunny, and some things just basically make no sense at all, like Brian and Stewie talking.

      Obviously, that's not for everyone. But don't go watching Family Guy and expect a sitcom.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    2. Re:Pales in comparison? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At what point is Family Guy a 'parody', and at what point are the writers just lazy hacks?

      I believe FG has always been of the 'lazy hack' sort.

    3. Re:Pales in comparison? by Eli+Gottlieb · · Score: 1

      Sufficiently meta'd metahumor is indistinguishable from a crappy excuse not to have real jokes.

    4. Re:Pales in comparison? by lgw · · Score: 1

      Agreed. The fact that other shows are stupid doesn't make FG funny by being even more stupid in the same way. When Stewie isn't talking, the show is unwatchable IMO. Stewie is the only original comedy on the show, and he's great, so obviously there's some talent in there somewhere, but I've never understood how a pop-culture reference and no actual joke was suppoes to make me laugh.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    5. Re:Pales in comparison? by name*censored* · · Score: 1

      The "like the time..." gag is probably continually used to keep it going down the path Futurama, which was probably *too* clever (and subsequently alienated people who didn't get it)... Statistically, there are as many less-than-average-intellegence people as there are smart people, but they probably have more time for watching television (repetition dealienates hostile or confused audiences, makes them comfortable etc.). Which is why a successful cartoon (Family Guy, The Simpsons) does well to pander to them (even if the loyalty/fan base is lower). Unlike most FG fans, I seem to be the only one irked by the things like Peter continually hitting his shin and sucking in air for a minute, and Stewie's patronising rants (usually to Brian, you know, the ones where his voice gets higher and higher) MORE THAN the "like the time" gags. They're much more repetitive than the "it's like the time" gag, because they are virtually verbatim of each other, whereas the "like the time..." gag at least is different to other "like the time..." gags.

      --
      Commodore64_love: I don't comprehend people who're so frightened of death that they'll bankrupt themselves to stay alive
    6. Re:Pales in comparison? by DavidTC · · Score: 1
      I think you're supposed to be irked by that. That's why they do it the second time.

      Not that the Simpsons haven't done things like that. I seem to recall Sideshow Bob stepping on a few rakes in a row. However, they chickened out and cut to black after they showed he was surrounded by a field of them. On Family Guy, he'd have stepped on every single one of them, on screen.

      It's not a matter of intelligence. Family Guy has almost as many obscure references as Futurama, although normally in literary and political fields instead of scientific.

      It's a matter of what kind of humor you find funny. And as humor is basically when you expect one thing and get something else, so it's really a matter of what you expect. Did you expect Peter to bang his shin? No, ergo, it's funny. And then, thanks to years to watching TV, you expect them to show you a few seconds of it and then cut away...and they don't. Ergo, funny again.

      I've come to the conclusion that Family Guy is only funny if you know comedy conventions well enough that you can basically predict a joke two seconds in advance within every scene in the Simpsons. Family Guy goes and does 'the wrong thing' one of ten times, like having nonsensical flashbacks that aren't funny, or, at least, are only funny because they don't fit. Or they when they add a laugh track and have the characters react like they're actually filming in front of real audience laughter. Or the many musical numbers, which show up without following any of the normal rules of musicals, like actually having an emotional point or even being about something relevant.

      However, Family Guy breaks the standard expectation of comedy enough that quite a few people actually get annoyed at it while watching, which makes it rather unfunny to them. Don't think when I say it 'breaks the rules' that that somehow magically makes it the funniest show in the world. The rules of comedy have come about for a reason.

      Of course, Family Guy also includes plenty of standard jokes and some semblence of a plot. Go too crazy, and people will stop expecting normality, and thus nothing will be funny at all.

      And, FYI. The cancellation of Futurama was for one reason and one reason only...Fox. That is the entirely of the reason of the cancellation. 80% of the people who found The Simpsons funny and managed to watch Futurama a few times liked it. If Fox had put it with the Simpsons as a lead-in for the three years it was aired, right now we'd be talking about the cancellation of The Simpsons and the takeover of its position in television by Futurama. Instead, they moved it around, failed to promote it, and preempted it by other stuff. (You can't blame them, they are legally required to do that every sci-fi show they air. It's a little known FCC regulation.)

      And Futurama had vastly more standard audience than Family Guy. Family Guy was just brought back because of the crazy ratings it got on the Cartoon Network, airing along with insane shows like Sealab 2021 and Aqua Teen Hunger Force. Cartoon Network found a really weird niche that was perfect for Family Guy, and probably the only place on TV where it would get better ratings than Futurama when aired next to it.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
  68. Re:Eh, it's not worth it. by th1ckasabr1ck · · Score: 2
    I hate statements which just absolutely state that one form of entertainment is better than another.

    Personally, I prefer Futurama over every show that you list there. The only one that comes close is the Simpsons, and that's tough to judge since the Simpsons has 15 (?) seasons worth of material.

    Futurama was a strange show. It was always hilarious - but sometimes it was intelligent (Announcer: "And we have a quantum finish!" Professor: "No fair! You changed the outcome of the race by measuring it!"), sometimes it was WAY out there, sometimes it was sad and touching (I dare you to watch the episode with Fry's dog and not tear up a little). And on top of all that, sometimes it was actually REALLY good sci-fi! That's a very rare thing on TV.

    Also Zoidburg was friggin hilarious. All he had to do was walk on the screen and I was already laughing.

  69. Dumber than the average Fox Exec? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Lets face it: Fox Execs are dumber than the average viewer.

    Sure most regular people dont get or catch the joke after joke after joke that shows like Arrested Development have in them.

    Smart humor is dead. At least on Fox it is.

    Kinda fitting since Fox News is on for the sole purpose of dumbing-down america with slanted 'news'.

    If you havent figured it out now, just buy the DVDs, and hopefully Arrested Development and smart shows like it will move to some sort of On Demand syndication system.

  70. Re:futurama... to smart for mass consumption by dfn5 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I'm afraid Futurama has just too much geek humor for it to last very long. For instance

    Speaker: And the winner is ... Number 3, in a quantum finish.
    Farnsworth: No fair! You changed the outcome by measuring it!

    I'm sure the masses just don't get this kind of stuff. I'm surprised it made it as long as it did. But here's hoping *Raises glass of Benderbraü*

    --
    -- Thou hast strayed far from the path of the Avatar.
  71. Concentrating too much on the cast... by ivan256 · · Score: 1

    For Futurama to return, the studio would need to re-sign the show's production team, as well as voice stars Billy West, Katey Sagal and John DiMaggio.

    Quite honestly, who cares so much about the voice talent? I mean, it would be nice to have them back too, but it's the writers that matter. Family Guy had some voice changes in the early years and it wasn't a big deal... but they brought the show back from cancelation with sub-par writing and now it's really just fan service. The straight-to-DVD "movie" was especially bad. What made Futurama good more than anything was that it was smart and funny. The first season shows were the best by far.

    If they're just going to bring the voices and art back to milk a few more dollars out of the brand, I say don't bother. Either do it right, or don't do it at all.

    1. Re:Concentrating too much on the cast... by 91degrees · · Score: 1

      Quite honestly, who cares so much about the voice talent?

      It can actually make a big difference. When they replaced the voice of Twiki in Buck Rogers, there was a mass write in campaign from fans to change it back. And like Mel Blanc, the Futurama voice actors are really quite good at what they do. Bad acting can ruin even the best writing.

    2. Re:Concentrating too much on the cast... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is absoultely critical that they get the voice actors back. They are hugely talented and their contribution to the overall quality of the show should not be underestimated.

    3. Re:Concentrating too much on the cast... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The writers for Futurama would look like crap without the tremendously talented artists and voice actors that bring their ideas to life with style and wit. I could hire some bum off the street to star in a broadway production, but even the best script in the world won't keep the show from flopping. Actors matter and other artists (animators, lighting designers, composers, etc.) matter.

    4. Re:Concentrating too much on the cast... by ivan256 · · Score: 1

      Please point out to me where in my comment I said they could be replaced by shitty voice actors.

      It matters that they're good, not that they're the same.

    5. Re:Concentrating too much on the cast... by Ekarderif · · Score: 1

      I know for a fact that Billy West and John DiMaggio are ecstatic about working with more Futurama. I'm pretty sure Katey Segal is quite interested as well, though I'm not certain about that. The cast loved what they did, and there should be no problems getting them back on.

    6. Re:Concentrating too much on the cast... by gozar · · Score: 1
      Quite honestly, who cares so much about the voice talent?

      I don't want to under-stress the importance of good writing, but voice talent is just as important. I didn't think much about it until I read an interview of Billy West. He was talking about all these big animation movies tanking, and how part of the reason is because they go for the big names to do voices instead of tailoring the voices for the characters. Try to imagine Michael J. Fox doing the voice of Fry vs. Billy West? Who's going to make the character more interesting?

      --
      What, me worry?
    7. Re:Concentrating too much on the cast... by kimvette · · Score: 1

      How many voiceover actors can cover the same breadth as Billy West? Billy West = the new Mel Blanc. Throw any character at him and he can do it.

      If they won't fork over the dough to get Billy, they'll have to either kill off some characters or hire multiple other actors to cover what Billy can do.

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
  72. Re:get some priorities, people! by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

    You came on a topic about Futurama and bitched about Ariel Sharon? You disgust me!

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  73. Re:Eh, it's not worth it. by seanellis · · Score: 1

    "And it had an amazing mix of emotional moments and hilarious comedy."

    Agreed. I'm afraid to say I actually shed a tear over the fate of Seymour the dog.

  74. Network failures, shark jumping by Boss+Sauce · · Score: 3, Insightful
    This is further evidence that the major US TV networks have lost touch with the way technology has changed how people consume their media. Futurama gained a huge audience on Cartoon Network because they can show a few episodes a day, so it's not tough for people to catch one. The way the networks operate, there's a tiny window of opportunity for watching a show, so it's very hard for people to "catch on" to something. A few things the networks could do to make sure good shows get a real chance:
    * When a show's schedule changes, let one last show air in the old time slot, with "we're moving!" notices every time the show goes to or comes back from commercial.
    * Support their own programming by cutting down on informercials and re-airing episodes of prime time shows late and early, with "if you missed it..." plugs.
    * Put them online or on iTunes and let people share them x number of times, so they can spread shows around.

    (As for Arrested Development, I love the show and have watched every episode numerous times. Afternoon Deelite is still hard to beat. At the same time, I wonder what kind of staying power it has or if it *should* go on for more than two seasons-- a lot happens on the show, so why does the end have to be doom and gloom? I'd love to a LITERAL shark-jumping moment (maybe Buster, in a leather jacket, loses a foot?) in the second to last episode, with Henry Winkler there to save the day (and get hired back as the family attorney).)

    1. Re:Network failures, shark jumping by mobilesteve · · Score: 1

      I'd love to a LITERAL shark-jumping moment (maybe Buster, in a leather jacket, loses a foot?) in the second to last episode, with Henry Winkler there to save the day (and get hired back as the family attorney).)

      There was a literal jump the shark moment in the Burger King episode when they are down at the docks. Henry Winkler goes, I am going to get breakfast at Burger King and he jumps over a dead shark to exit the scene

  75. Re:Eh, it's not worth it. by MaceyHW · · Score: 1

    "No fair, you changed the outcome by measuring it!"

  76. Re:futurama... to smart for mass consumption by Traiklin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    you forgot their timeslot to.

    Sundays at 7 (6 central), perfect time for a show to fail, seeing as how Football always seems to run over that time.

    Let's not forget fox's wonderfull advertising of the show aswell, I saw all of 2 commercials for the show during it's 4 year run.

  77. Reporters... Don't They Know Anything? by Evil+Closet+Monkey · · Score: 5, Funny
    From the Article:
    The series revolved around Fry, a pizza delivery boy, who is accidentally frozen for a thousand years. He wakes up in the year 3000 and befriends sassy one-eyed pilot Leela and cranky robot Bender, who both work for an intergalactic delivery service run by a distant nephew of Fry's.

    Leela worked at the Chrionics lab, getting her job with the delivery service at the same time as Fry.
    Bender was ending his carrier as a bender, rather drastically, when he met Fry. Also joining Planet Express at the same time as Fry and Leela.

    My last shred of faith is shattered. How are we ever to trust the news media again!?

    1. Re:Reporters... Don't They Know Anything? by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      You have to admit that for 95% of the episodes, that description is right on.

      Also it's "Cyrogenics" and "Career."

    2. Re:Reporters... Don't They Know Anything? by Kjella · · Score: 1

      All it lacked was the word now, as in "now working for". Also, if you want to nitpick then Fry wasn't accidentally frozen for a thousand years. No further spoiler will be revealed.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    3. Re:Reporters... Don't They Know Anything? by Random832 · · Score: 1

      Eh? Do what, now? Unless you're talking about the one with Stephen Hawking (which IIRC was a "what if"), you're incorrect.

      --
      We've secretly replaced Slashdot with new Folgers Crystals - let's see if it notices.
    4. Re:Reporters... Don't They Know Anything? by 6*7 · · Score: 1

      No, parent is talking about "The Why of Fry": http://www.tv.com/futurama/the-why-of-fry/episode/ 165483/summary.html

    5. Re:Reporters... Don't They Know Anything? by DA-MAN · · Score: 1

      Also it's "Cyrogenics" and "Career."

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cryogenics

      From the article: Cryogenics is a branch of physics (or engineering) that studies very low temperatures or the production thereof. In common parlance, it is often mistakenly used to refer to the highly specialized field of cryonics.

      The grand parent poster had it right, although he did misspell it as Chrionics.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cryonics

      --
      Can I get an eye poke?
      Dog House Forum
  78. Sliders by TechHSV · · Score: 1

    Next they need to bring back Sliders. And not the Sci-Fi channel version which sucked. But the original, that would be a good day.

  79. Re:Eh, it's not worth it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I had a feeling you'd mention that. But it's not funny. It's not even really intellectual. It's just a cheap one-liner that anyone whose ever glanced at a pop-sci magazine, news article, or TV program would get. Futurama is full of these blatant jokes with no coherence, consistency, or proper set-up.

    In the Slurm episode, when we see Bender's innards, I noticed his brain was a 6502. That was quite amusing and a funny little "easter egg" if you will but despite being memorable, it didn't make me laugh at loud nor did it redeem the show for me. The rest of the episode was just a cheap Willy Wonka parody.

  80. Re:Eh, it's not worth it. by lawpoop · · Score: 1

    I have to chime in here. I hate that stupid show with the happy meal characters. I have a lot of friends who watch it, and when I've sat down at watch it with them, I've never seen them laugh at it. The premise sounds like it could be funny, but it never is. Maybe it's meant to be surreal, but it really comes off more as a lousy attempt at humor rather than absurdity. It's just lame joke after lame joke. And when friends recount plot narratives, the idea seems like it could be funny (remember the time meatwad did ...), but they don't actually laugh.

    I can't believe the show is as popular as it is. I think it *could* be funny and a lot of people believe in it and are waiting for it to be funny. But it's not. Somehow it acquired some hipness and everybody thinks they have to watch it in order to be "with it".

    That character Carl really could be funny, but he never does anything funny!

    --
    Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
    -- Pablo Picasso
  81. To be fair... by TCQuad · · Score: 1

    There are probably 31,415,927 different deus ex Farnsworth contraptions that could undo that entire last episode and make everyone forget it ever happened.

    1. Re:To be fair... by Jethro · · Score: 1

      That's exactly what I'm afraid of.

      --


      In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is kinky.
  82. You poor unfortunate man by Excen · · Score: 2, Funny

    My three year-old daughter loves Futurama. Her favorite character? Bender, naturally.
     
    Bender. Bender Bending Rodriguez. The whoring, hard drinking, foul-mouthed bending robot. I put the over/under at 3 months past her 18th birthday when she first dances on a brass pole for dollar bills.

    --
    "No beer until you finish your tequila!" -Leela's Dad
    1. Re:You poor unfortunate man by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does it make you feel good to insult a baby ?
      Or maybe it turns you on to imagine a 3 month old girl as a stripper ?

    2. Re:You poor unfortunate man by assassinator42 · · Score: 1

      First, he said 3 months after 18. Second, his point is that Futurama probably isn't a good show for a 3 year old.

    3. Re:You poor unfortunate man by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I meant to say 3 years old, it's current age. My point was just that I think it's not correct to compare a 3 year old girl with a stripper because she listens to Futurama. If a guy would talk like that about my daugther I would be really upset. This guy don't know much about respect...

  83. Re:Eh, it's not worth it. by MalaclypseTheYounger · · Score: 1

    I will always miss Harry Goz, Captain Murphy from Sealab 2021. The shows (WITH captain Murph) were almost all hilarious, very much less so when he passed away.

    I don't get 12 Oz. Mouse, Squidbillies is a bit too 'stupid' for me, and ATHF is hit-or-miss, usually miss.

    But I can watch Futurama, Family Guy, Venture Bros, Sealab, Harvey Birdman, and Space Ghost over and over again, and still enjoy them. And probably will for years to come.

    --
    Check out the best P2P sharing website: MEDIACHEST.COM
  84. Avoid Fox like the Plague by TheSkepticalOptimist · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If Matt Groening had any brains, he would avoid Fox like the plague. Same goes to other innovative show creators like Joss Whedon.

    I don't know what goes on over there at Fox, but how many decent shows have been axed for no good reason and others left on inperpetuity. Are you telling me that Kind of the Hill has had better ratings then Firefly?

    Fox doesn't realize the benefit of a small but loyal fan base. Even if shows like Firefly or Futurama only have a few million viewers, they are usually viewers that tune in faithfuly every week. With that kind of dedicated fan base, you can focus more targetted advertising to a generally similar group of viewers. This opposed to a shows like American Idol that, while having 20+ million viewers, are so varied and wishy washy (only watching the show until their favourite contestant is axed) that you can't find any common advertising ground to target the viewers. In the end, you can actually get more money for advertising slots for cult shows like X-Files, Buffy, and Futurama because advertisers know there is are at least a few million Geeks faithfully watching every week that probably would want to buy some electronic underwear with PDA capabilities.

    But Fox, in general, has been abysmal in terms of promoting innovative programming and instead dumping tired cliche sitcoms (at a time when sitcoms are dropping faster then flies on crap) and keeping long running and tiresome franchises like the Simpson's and King of the Hill on forever. Fox is realizing they are losing an audience, and so now have to rely on pulling up past successes in order to fill their timeslots.

    But if Matt had a brain, he would can the Simpsons and bring Futurama to another network and end any relationship with Fox. Even if Futurama was reserected, Fox will probably keep it going sporadically until they find some other Malcom in the Middle, Married with Children, Simpson's, King of the Hill, American Dad, War At Home clone devoid of talent to replace it.

    Quick poll. Does anybody still watch Fox these days?

    --
    I haven't thought of anything clever to put here, but then again most of you haven't either.
    1. Re:Avoid Fox like the Plague by neurojab · · Score: 1

      I think the problem is that Fox is a small network that wants to be a big network (or is a big network with the history of a small netwkork).

      A big network wants banal crap that 80% of people will watch just to get them back into their tv-induced stupor. These shows are designed to be OK for everyone, and get big ratings from a wide demographic. There's no room in a big network for anything challenging or different.

      A small network, on the other hand, succeeds best on niche shows. A small, but loyal fanbase will watch these shows and provide the network with steady, targeted, ad revenue.

      FOX seems to have program directors with a small network mentality, but executives with the big network mentality. This results in niche shows getting greenlit, but later cut because they don't have the "big network" ratings.

    2. Re:Avoid Fox like the Plague by windowpain · · Score: 1

      It's really not up to Fox. The advertisers call the shots. Broadcast TV is a mass medium. It's about as far away from targeting as you can get. Cars, beer, medicine, laundry detergents, soft drinks--stuff you can advertise to many millions of people at a time. "[V]iewers that tune in faithfully every week" are of no significance. A pair of eyeballs is a pair of eyeballs. The more pairs that tune in, the more you can charge per commercial spot. And the more profitable the show.

      Something like golf attracts people who are much more affluent than most people so advertisers will pay a premium for a smaller audience. But cartoon shows aren't like that.

      --
      Insert witty sig here.
    3. Re:Avoid Fox like the Plague by __aabwba5127 · · Score: 0

      "If Matt Groening had any brains, he would avoid Fox like the plague." So basically you're saying the creator of The Simpsons, one of the longest running, most glorious, funniest shows ever, and of Futurama as well, is dumb? I don't understand how you got modded insightful.

    4. Re:Avoid Fox like the Plague by Itanshi · · Score: 1

      its a funny thing, in japan they air shows in debt spending as little as they can safely to create the show and rely on merchedise and dvd sales which most of the time can become huge in profits.

      american shows can't handle debt and don't do much in the way of dvd sales. i want dvds of all those old shows that were on tv like battle tech, starcom, botsmaster, that nintendo show

    5. Re:Avoid Fox like the Plague by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Quick poll. Does anybody still watch Fox these days?"

      Actually, the Sunday night lineup (when it's actually on) barring the War at Home is the only network TV I actually watch anymore...

  85. Bring Back Arrested Development Next by oc-beta · · Score: 1

    That is all that I ask

    1. Re:Bring Back Arrested Development Next by Jessehk · · Score: 1

      Agreed! Arrested Development is the most funny show that I have ever seen on TV.

  86. You think that's bad... by TCQuad · · Score: 1

    I don't know how many times I sat down to watch a TiVo'd episode of Futurama, only to discover that what was recorded was the last 20 minutes of some stupid NFL game.

    That's nothing compared to the time I was TiVo'ing an episode of Family Guy and got a special message from the President!

    In Fox's defense, though, they do appear to be airing a post-game special called "The OT" for the purpose of handling the game's run-over. It airs during that hour that they never schedule the game to last until, but always does.

  87. Hurray! by QuantumPion · · Score: 2, Funny

    Now Zoidberg is the popular one!

  88. This was announced last week by fak3r · · Score: 1

    Really, I even wrote about it back then:

    Futurama to return?
     
    ...and I see this trend as being a 'good thing (tm)' since it puts the 'voting power' back to the fan, and not to the flash in the pan audience who always needs a new reality show to latch on to. (can't wait until Arrested Development gets brought back, not that it's gone yet...but the clock ticks...)

  89. Because what we REALLY need by solomonrex · · Score: 1

    Is ANOTHER Simpsons knockoff/spinoff/show. This confirms Simpsons as the 'Mad Magazine' of TV. We're coming up to Simpson's 2nd DECADE soon (if you inlclude the Ullman appearances). I got sick of it like 10 years ago, because, like Robin Williams and Mad-Libs, they just make the same jokes year after year and insert different names to match current events.

    Why everyone else hasn't grown out of it, too, is beyond me.

    1. Re:Because what we REALLY need by Dachannien · · Score: 1

      Have you actually watched Futurama? Because it's not like the Simpsons at all. Yes, the animation style is Groening's, but the show flows in a completely different manner (read: coherently) and includes plots ranging from outrageously hilarious to tear-jerkingly touching. The writing staff has/had several Ph.D.'s on it, meaning the humor was really sophisticated (and well-received by the Slashdot crowd for this reason). It didn't depend on the Homer randomness that plagues every Simpsons episode (which, though funny, gets tired after a while).

      These are characters with depth, characters you can relate to and sympathize with - and considering that the characters are robots, 160 years old, cyclopses, lobsters, and Chinese, that's saying something :)

  90. Stick it at 8:30 PM slot! by antdude · · Score: 2

    Dump that lame comedy show (forgot its name). Put it after The Simpsons and before Family Guy. 8:00 to 9:00 is now Matt Groening's hour. Also, you get two hours of animation domination on Sunday nights! Perfecto. :)

    --
    Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    1. Re:Stick it at 8:30 PM slot! by CheechBG · · Score: 1

      Parent for the win.

      I believe you are searching for "The War at Home" which I have watched all of 10 minuted of before my head exploded by the lame comedy and shitty acting. I luckily was able to reassemble it in time for Family Guy and American Dad. Believe me when I tell you, it was a close one.

    2. Re:Stick it at 8:30 PM slot! by antdude · · Score: 1

      Yep, that's the show. Thanks for the clarification. :)

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    3. Re:Stick it at 8:30 PM slot! by kisrael · · Score: 1

      At the risk of 'causing some head 'splosion...

      I did like this one line:
      [On having to cook for his son's new vegetarian diet] "I mean, how hard could it be to cook vegetables? What's the recipe for Broccoli? Oh yeah, right...'Broccoli'!"

      --
      SO YOU'RE GOING TO DIE: The Comic for Dealing with Death
  91. Don't Worry. by Farrside · · Score: 4, Funny

    Fox would never allow something like that to happen.

  92. What really killed it... by mofomojo · · Score: 1

    ..which is no surprise to anyone, was the broken scheduling.

    People schedule when they want to watch something, with Fox however, during this period, it became sorta random for viewers. However many fans that it did have we turned off since it had become an impossibility to find when to watch it.

  93. Re:Because Family Guy is a decent show by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think you have that backwards.

  94. the movie has already been announced by Andreas+Schaefer · · Score: 1

    hmmm, not sure about the tv deal, but the movie was just recently announced:
    http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0471711/combined/

    1. Re:the movie has already been announced by Eli+Gottlieb · · Score: 1

      IMDB is practically a wiki, that page is fake.

      Bubble->Burst();

    2. Re:the movie has already been announced by Ekarderif · · Score: 1

      The movie was never officially announced. Billy West had an interview stating that he has been working on a Futurama movie, but this has never been confirmed (nor denied) by any other staff member. These publicized talks could very well be announcing that move.

  95. Re:Eh, it's not worth it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    it had an amazing mix of emotional moments and hilarious comedy.

    The best example for this is Jurassic Bark. If you haven't seen this episode yet do not read about its ending unless you want to spoil a great experience.

  96. You got that right... by Otto · · Score: 3, Interesting

    If Fox had just given that (and Family Guy) a real timeslot where you could see it every week, maybe they'd have made more money off it.

    Absolutely. Fox bungled Futurama like no other show before. Even my Tivo couldn't keep up with the continously changing schedule. The reason it got low ratings is that absolutely nobody knew when it was on.

    When it started getting aired on Adult Swim, I was finally able to see a whole season or two of shows that I have never seen before. Not for lack of trying, mind you, it was just impossible to know when they aired them.

    Family Guy, however, I never did understand why they cancelled it. It had a decent timeslot, and it was getting increasing numbers of viewers. They just shot it down before it built up a large audience. These days it seems like they cancel a show if it's not an instant hit, which is stupid, of course. Firefly was totally mishandled by airing the episodes wrong (you can't do that when there are story arcs and characters to be developed). They shot down Wonderfalls, a terrific show, after only 4 episodes that *nobody knew about* because they failed to advertise the thing!

    Fox just has the most amazing bunch of idiots running the network. It's simply incredible how dumb these decisions are.

    --
    - Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day, but set him on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life.
    1. Re:You got that right... by pthisis · · Score: 1

      Family Guy, however, I never did understand why they cancelled it. It had a decent timeslot

      ???

      I tried to watch Family Guy, but it was never in the same timeslot for more than 2 weeks at a time. It got pushed around every night of the week, and would be on for 2 weeks, then have a several week hiatus, then air another episode on a different night.

      Futurama at least had a couple months of being on after the Simpsons before they started jerking it around. Family guy might've been in that spot once or twice but not with any regularity.

      --
      rage, rage against the dying of the light
    2. Re:You got that right... by SquadBoy · · Score: 1

      Yeah. Fox has a long proud tradition of doing that.

      But the first post was a Futurama joke. From "Xmas Story".

      --

      Cypherpunks: Civil Liberty Through Complex Mathematics. Those who live by the sword die by the arrow.
    3. Re:You got that right... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or the classic Onion headline, "Black community terrorized by ask murderer".

    4. Re:You got that right... by Digital+Pizza · · Score: 1
      You guys are all assuming that the "failure" of Firefly, Futurama and Family Guy were unplanned. (Hmm, too many "f"s in that sentence :)

      The execs in charge of greenlighting those shows were ousted from Fox in a power struggle with another set of execs who favored cheap, high-return reality shows.

      Causing the failure of your former rivals' projects is an age-old political move. Screwing up the scheduling of those shows was intentional.

      So I've heard.

      --
      We apologize for the inconvenience.
    5. Re:You got that right... by name*censored* · · Score: 1
      (In reply to your comment) Family Guy got cancelled, because although it was popular, it was extremely controversial and was targeted by many special interest groups (for example, the controversial "When you Wish Upon A Weinstein" episode which was probably the "straw that broke the camels' back"). Or that's what I've heard, anyway. (In reply to this story) So this is a
      • definintive
      confirmation of the series' reanimation, and not just speculation like the last /. story?
      --
      Commodore64_love: I don't comprehend people who're so frightened of death that they'll bankrupt themselves to stay alive
    6. Re:You got that right... by ejp1082 · · Score: 1

      Family Guy, as I recall, got a lot of flac for being controversial - besides the potty humor, sex jokes, and violence, they managed to target just about every special interest and minority under the sun. Not even in a satirical way, but a lets-stereotype-and-make-fun-of-it way. Family Guy had a decent viewership in its first run, but not enough to ride out the controversy it stirred up.

      Firefly, I believe, was a victim of internal politics - the executives who greenlighted it got fired and the new executives rather intentionally mishandled it. Futurama was either a victim of something similar, or else simple gross incompetence.

      Shows like Wonderfalls, I can't figure out why they even greenlight them, since they obviously have no interest in supporting them once they're on the air. It's such a quirky premise that it can only ever hope to develop a cult following - but a cult following takes a long time to develop - at least a season, possibly two or three. You can debate the wisdom of taking a risk on a cult show that will see most of its profits only in afterlife, but if you're going to produce one and put it on the air, at least have the balls to see it through. Cancelling it after four epsisodes is just a monumental waste of money.

    7. Re:You got that right... by Otto · · Score: 1

      The "When you Wish Upon A Weinstein" was never aired in the original run, so I don't know why everybody keeps pushing that as the reason for the shows cancellation. I mean, nobody ever saw it until it came out on the DVD. It was later aired on Cartoon Network, and then later aired again in the replay on Fox when they picked it back up (albeit slightly altered).

      Frankly, it's not all that controversial, IMO. South Park was more controversial. Still is, for that matter.

      --
      - Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day, but set him on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life.
    8. Re:You got that right... by Some_Llama · · Score: 1

      "Fox just has the most amazing bunch of idiots running the network. It's simply incredible how dumb these decisions are."

      It's because all of the talent is in the news spin department.

  97. Re:Sure, but what about "Everybody Loves Hypnotoad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's been going downhill since season three, though...

  98. I'll never understand football. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Whats with football fans anyway?? ITS THE SAME FUCKING SHIT EVERY GODDAMN WEEK! Nothing different or even -slightly- interesting ever happens during a football game. Some overpaid self-important asshole throws a ball & some other overpaid self-important asshole catches it & people think its the fucking rapture. Dont you ever get tired of watching millionaires chase a goddamned ball??

    I guess theyll do anything for another excuse to drink cheap beer & yell about stuff.

  99. Fox? by Witzbold · · Score: 1

    I am not sure if Fox really understands the potential for TV shows. The cancel some good cartoons, then Cartoon Network picks it up, they gather a huge cult following then fox wants them back. DAMN YOU FOX....DAMN YOU!

  100. Re:get some priorities, people! by tiny-e · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    [quote]Ariel Sharon is dying [bbc.co.uk] and you lot are here talking about Futurama?! You disgust me![/quote]

    I'm going to file that under: "Who give's a Jim-Daddy fcuk?"

    Now go play in traffic.

  101. Purge Fox Programming Executives Regularly by doggo · · Score: 1

    I love/hate Fox. I love 'em for producing some of the coolest television shows. I hate 'em for cancelling nearly every show I've liked, except the Simpsons, which, as said elsewhere here, I lost interest in a decade ago.

    Maybe Fox needs to start treating their programming executives like they treat the audience. Change their workdays and hours around randomly without telling them. Don't tell anybody in the company who they are or what their jobs are. Then just up and fire 'em.

    But seriously, Fox needs to clean house. They need to develop a new set of business practices with regard to programming. I mean, think about it, over the last ten years, how many shows that you liked has fox cancelled. How many shows that you hated ran forever?

    I mean, you'd think they'd have figured it out by now, if you don't promote a show, and you reschedule it randomly it will fail. If you don't let the show run a few episodes so that the audience can get to know the characters, it will fail. I mean, c'mon, it's television programming and marketing. It's not rocket science.

  102. It ended well by davidwr · · Score: 1

    The final episode was a good series ending.

    To do new shows now now would take away from that.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  103. They'll have to re-hire a TON of people for this! by sgant · · Score: 4, Funny

    I mean, the voice talent alone. You have to get the people that do the voices of Philip J. Fry, Professor Farnsworth, Dr. Zoidberg, Zapp Brannigan, Leo Wong, and various other people. I mean that's 5 people right there you have to re-hire!

    Can they find all these guys again? They could be anywhere! They may all have scheduling conflicts or something...

    waiting for someone to state the obvious about this of course

    --

    "Leo Fender was in a 'state of grace' when he designed the Stratocaster." -- Paul Reed Smith
  104. Get a life! by drafalski · · Score: 1
    It starts one letter away in the alphabet, but man I'd love to see "Get a Life" back on the air. Take a look at the episode guide, what modern show could compete with:
    Strange Brew - after being exposed and nearly killed by toxic waste, Chris and Gus awaken with new talents. Gus is an origami master, able to fold napkins into the most delicate of forms, while Chris gains super-intelligence. They decide to employ Chris' new smarts to win every spelling bee in the world. While the 'bee groupies' eventually start to annoy Chris, they make it all the way to the championships. Unfortunately, the effects of the toxic waste wear off, and Chris forgets how to spell 'pants'. The masses turn on him, sickened that he'd cheat the spelling bee organization by way of toxic waste.
    (from XE review)
    1. Re:Get a life! by Shadarr · · Score: 1

      I'd just like to see Get a Life on DVD.

    2. Re:Get a life! by StalinsNotDead · · Score: 1

      There're two volumes available. For a total of 8 out of 22 episodes. Buy them so they are more inclined to release the remainder.

      --
      Thanks to the internet, we can now all die alone together! -SomeWoman
    3. Re:Get a life! by kimvette · · Score: 1

      Looks like it already is on DVD but only two DVDs, four episodes per

      http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/search-handle-ur l/ref=br_ss_hs/002-0633731-1797615?platform=gurupa &url=index%3Ddvd&field-keywords=get+a+life&Go.x=0& Go.y=0&Go=Go

      I'll be passing on it until they release the entire series.

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
  105. Re:futurama... too smart for mass consumption by Kankraka · · Score: 5, Interesting

    You've absolutely hit the nail on the head. I used to live (aswel as attend school) in a small town where... erm, the general population was as confused about anything beyond farming as Fry was when he witnessed his first game of Blurnsball. A friend of mine and I used to spend our spares in the "cafeteria" watching Futurama and just talking about whatever. Sometimes a few people would join us in watching Futurama and at every nerdy joke, or technical joke, or anything above and beyond the mainstream there failed to be anything out of them. Not even a snicker. Of course they got the slap stick side of it. If Fry got hit, burned by eating Bender's sterno-nicoise, or if Kif was forced to look up Brannigans, uhh skirt? Or if Kif falls off the roof after an Amazonian pokes at him.. They laugh. There were even people who called us losers for watching Futurama, because it wasn't funny. Regular people couldn't see the true hilarity of it. Part of me wishes new episodes would go straight to DVD instead of being aired on tv. No one can screw around with their timeslots then, those that truly appreciate the series will be able to watch them over and over again with no worry about a football game taking valuable Futurama-Time. I dunno, I'm kinda off on a tangent here. Fact is you've got it completely right, the humour is just too intelligent for the mainstream. Kind of saddening, isn't it.

  106. Lt. Commander Data, is that you? by User+956 · · Score: 1

    My comment was a pithy pop-culture reference intended to generate a laugh response, commonly known as "a joke" among the higher-level anthropoid species.

    In this context, the choice of language was perfectly cromulent.


    --
    The theory of relativity doesn't work right in Arkansas.
    1. Re:Lt. Commander Data, is that you? by Plaid+Phantom · · Score: 1

      intended to generate a laugh response, commonly known as "a joke" among the higher-level anthropoid species.

      Ah. How ironic. So was mine.

      I was, however, unaware of that specific Simpsons reference, seeing as how I have not nor currently do watch said television show. Thank you for that moment of cultural enlightenment.

      --
      All comments are properties and trademarks of the voices in my head. Not like I'm gonna claim them.
  107. Re:They'll have to re-hire a TON of people for thi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think about 3 of those characters are played by the same guy.

  108. Here's what they should do by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    FOX really needs to put Futurama into the Sunday slot between the simpsons and family guy, and just get rid of "The War at Home." That way, you get a steady stream of viewers that either like the Simpsons, Futurama, Family Guy, and American Dad, or are just too lazy to change the channel. That would be the situation now, except for it being "The War at Home" and all... I don't know about you guys, but I'm tired of giving that show second chances...

  109. Firefly? Please!? by Ruvim · · Score: 1

    Please, tell me Firefly is next!

  110. Family Guy has, what, ONE voice casting change? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seriously, I know they had 2 Megs, what're some of the other changes?

  111. Re:get some priorities, people! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have faith that Hitler will sodomize you with a cactus in the next world.

  112. Re:Eh, it's not worth it. by AeroIllini · · Score: 1

    ...Fox can finally kill off the dying cash cow that is the Simpsons and put it out of its misery.

    Right, because it would be better if Fox cancelled the show that makes them the largest piles of cash.

    The Simpsons may not be as good as it was in the glory years, but it's still averaging a healthy 10 million viewers a week. And it's also one of the most recognizable shows on television, which makes it attractive to advertisers.

    The entire television situation can be boiled down to this: the people watching the shows are not the customers, they are the product. The advertisers are the customers. And whether or not a show stays on the air has everything to do with economics. If not enough people watch, then the show is pulled. Period. With the numbers the way they are, cancelling a show may piss off two or three million viewers, but that's ok; this other show we have gets FIFTEEN million a week!

    These television executives are not stupid; after all, they did get very rich off of a totally ad-supported revenue stream. The intelligence of the writers is still up for debate, but their job is only to get you to watch, not to create art*.

    You can have art, or you can have business. But you can't have both.

    *There are of course exceptions to this rule, when great writing and lots of people watching converge. But they are very very rare.

    --
    For security, the MD5 hash of this message and sig is 09f911029d74e35bd84156c5635688c0.
  113. Again? by XMilkProject · · Score: 1

    This is surprisingly similar to the exact same story 15 days ago...

    How many times do we have to post a story that about "Futurama possibly being restarted but no one knows for sure"

    --
    Big ones, small ones, some as big as yer 'ead!
    Give 'em a twist, a flick o' the wrist...
    1. Re:Again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not enough times!

  114. Does not compute by merlin_jim · · Score: 1

    Fox to approach the negotiations with some humility.

    Fox.humility = true;

    Runtime error - object does not support this property or method

    --
    I am disrespectful to dirt! Can you see that I am serious?!
  115. Not the case with AD... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    After all the acclaim and awards, Fox actually did the right thing by not only renewing it but also giving it a GOOD time slot (Monday primetime) and decent advertising. The show is just not getting watched by people.

    I think this is simply a case where the general public doesn't want to watch something so different and unconventional.

    1. Re:Not the case with AD... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've half-seen probably 7 or 8 episodes of this show and it generally fails to hold my interest... Not to offend, but what I have seen so far didn't strike me as particularly different or unconventional. It was occassionally sort of funny, but seemed pretty much like your standard network TV sit-com trying to be wacky.

      I will say it is vastly superior to The War at Home though... How Fox can give King of the Hill the post-football timeslot of death while total shit like The War at Home holds tight to the post-Simpsons slot is beyond me...

  116. Re:Eh, it's not worth it. by Luyseyal · · Score: 1
    Compared to the Simpsons at Season 4 or the Simpsons now? I've watched all of season 17 of the Simpsons so far and it's just not funny any more - it's become a vaguely amusing sitcom.

    Well said.
    -l

    --
    Help cure AIDS, cancer, and more. Donate your unused computer time to worldcommunitygrid.org. Join Team Slashdot!
  117. Aqua Teen Hunger Force by Luyseyal · · Score: 1

    Aqua Teen Hunger Force is definitely "hit-or-miss, mostly miss" as stated by another poster. Having said that, there are 2 episodes I liked, laughed at, and still laugh at, the MC Peepants episode and the Happy Time Harry one with uncredited comedian David Cross.

    FYI,
    -l

    --
    Help cure AIDS, cancer, and more. Donate your unused computer time to worldcommunitygrid.org. Join Team Slashdot!
    1. Re:Aqua Teen Hunger Force by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      Not the Mooninites? The first two Mooninites episodes were genius. But pretty much everything in the second half of season two on stunk. They need to kill it off.

    2. Re:Aqua Teen Hunger Force by Luyseyal · · Score: 1

      I just didn't think the Mooninites were very funny. /me shrugs

      -l

      --
      Help cure AIDS, cancer, and more. Donate your unused computer time to worldcommunitygrid.org. Join Team Slashdot!
  118. Area Man Constantly Mentioning...... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Area Man Constantly Mentioning He Doesn't Own A Television
    http://www.theonion.com/content/node/28694

  119. It's like that old story by Tim+Browse · · Score: 2, Funny
    All this axing of shows, and then they come back with DVD sales, and then the people that axed them want to make them again. It keeps happening. It's just like the story of the grasshopper and the octopus. All year long, the grasshopper kept burying acorns for the winter, while the octopus mooched off his girlfriend and watched TV. But then the winter came, and the grasshopper died, and the octopus ate all his acorns. And also he got a race-car.

    Is any of this getting through to you?

  120. What about Tru Calling by alex549us18 · · Score: 1

    I know this wont come back but it was an awesome show and it of corse was cancled when it was the best! and waht about The Inside.... now that could happen it wasfuckin' awesome but they canceled it aftewr only like 3 damn shows! I thaught that was one of the best shows fox had but they're retards and cancel good shows!!

  121. Re:Eh, it's not worth it. by mcsestretch · · Score: 1

    Oh, man. I'm getting tears welling up just thinking about that ending.
     
    I haven't watched that episode since it aired. That track on the DVD is collecting dust.

  122. Re:get some priorities, people! by Jozer99 · · Score: 1

    Wrong, at some point he was defeated by either Jack Johnson or John Jackson, the clones.

  123. Re:get some priorities, people! by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

    Ariel Sharon is dying and you lot are here talking about Futurama?!

    Please, Futurama is way funnier than Sharon. I mean, what good jokes has he ever told? I have no interest in watching video of him, and if Fox puts him on for half an hour, I won't be watching. You reality TV fans must have brain damage.

  124. Actually it's just one dumb assistant... by mykepredko · · Score: 2, Funny

    that keeps getting told to get the "F outta here".

    myke

  125. Boondocks a cartoon series? by Crizp · · Score: 1

    Is that Boondocks the comic strip Boondocks by Aaron McGruder?

    1. Re:Boondocks a cartoon series? by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      Cartoon Network's produced a cartoon series based on the comic. IMO, it stinks to high heaven... the animation is cheap as dirt and it's not as well-written as the comic it's based on, and most of the characters are cardboard cutouts personality-wise.

    2. Re:Boondocks a cartoon series? by tolan-b · · Score: 1

      Tis.

      Slightly different feel with the cartoon, though that's to be expected I suppose.

      I like it though.

    3. Re:Boondocks a cartoon series? by cmpalmer · · Score: 1

      Maybe I should qualify favorite. I've really liked one or two of the Boondocks episodes, the rest have been mediocre or at least unfocused.

      --
      -- stream of did I lock the front door consciousness
    4. Re:Boondocks a cartoon series? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have to respectfully disagree. Maybe it's just because I had never heard of the comic strip prior to the show, but the first four episodes hit me as the best TV I've seen in the past 5 years or so, animated or not.

      The last three episodes have been a bit of a let down storywise (although the Adventures of Black Jesus came alot closer to the mark than the Playstation Killer or ), but I found the first four incredibly funny with a surprising level of balance and much higher quality artwork than the majority of the shows on Adult Swim.

  126. Re:futurama, FOX, and bring back Firefly by Shirlockc · · Score: 1

    Fox is leading the way for showing how old-style TV content and programming just won't work in the new digital, downloadable world. The network producers are still "selling" TV shows based on advertising dollar. The drive seems to be what can be produced for the most eyeballs so they can get advertising $. They don't seem to appreciate the niche market and targetting strategies which currently works for the web -- ebay is the biggest niche market there is. Quality/Niche shows like Firefly and Futurama may not get as many eyeballs to begin with (never mind the time slot mixups or the last-minute preumpts for football) but the audience is loyal and certainly can be target marketed to probably with better success. I understand that it's expensive to produce a TV show (hence the upswing of reality TV) but the model doesn't work anymore, not if there's a market they're not fullfilling. I don't and never watch football so where's my TV? Where's my chance to be marketed to? Though to be honest, given a choice, I'd bittorent and skip all the commercials. So where's the drive to change the model? How about having the niche audience pay for the show's production as have been bruited about on the Firefly.fan net. $1M/episode, how many fans are willing to put their $ where their mouth is to fund the production for further seasons of their cancelled favs?

  127. Re:Eh, it's not worth it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have been watching a lot of Harvey Birdman lately and have found that on an intellectual level it is somewhere between Simpsons and Futurama. Both cartoons have amazing potential - Birdman for the ability to draw upon the vast resources of former Hanna-Barbara cartoons and Futurama for the endless number of scenarios possible with a futuristic show.

    Look at Doctor Who - it had such a long running in part because the storyline could be endlessy open-ended. Birdman is a postmodernist's dream come true with witty new interpretations of semi-bland cartoon art. But Futurama coming back, that is something I hope to see - but as others have said I hope that they don't screw it up (i am very leery of sequels - Star Wars jumped the shark with Return of the Jedi in my book).

  128. O RLY? by Imp00 · · Score: 1

    YA RLY!

  129. Re:Eh, it's not worth it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The episode where Fry writes the opera for Leela is about as good as it gets. The whole running joke with what is 'irony'? Was just too good. The robot devil's serendipitous plot to get back his hands from Fry. I've seen that episode at least 15 times and I laugh long and hard with every viewing - that episode is completely packed solid with jokes and jokes within jokes.

  130. Re:futurama... too smart for mass consumption by tolan-b · · Score: 1

    Network President: And Executive Gamma, programmed to underestimate middle America.

    Execubot Gamma: It's funny but is it going to get them off their tractors? ;)

  131. Re:get some priorities, people! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't know. Visiting the Temple Mount a few years back was pretty funny.

  132. Re:get some priorities, people! by User+956 · · Score: 1

    Well, regardless, it's time someone had the courage to stand up and say: "I'm against those things that everybody hates."

    --
    The theory of relativity doesn't work right in Arkansas.
  133. Re:get some priorities, people! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See that is your problem. Always hoping for something to happen in the next world rather than focusing on making this one a better place.

    Stop buying the propaganda, Israel is not without sin. The Nazi's treated the Jews just as bad as the Israelis treat the Palestinians.

    So, keep on walking around with you head stuck up your ass in this life!!!

  134. Re:Eh, it's not worth it. by zerocool^ · · Score: 1


    Disclaimer: I love futurama - probably my favorite cartoon, when taken as a series.

    The problem with Futurama is that it's soooo hit and miss. Family Guy isn't intellectual, but it's almost always funny, if you like the dick-and-fart jokes. Futurama, when it's on, is funny and intellectual, more than anything else on TV. But, when it's bad, it's fucking terrible.

    Seriously, take a look at season 5 of Futurama:
    Jurassic Bark (best episode of the series)
    Devil's hands
    The Why of Fry
    The Sting ... These are all EXCELLENT TV. Jurassic Bark is probably the most poingient thing I've ever seen on a Television screen.

    But, look at the rest:
    Kif gets Knocked up a Notch
    Less than Hero
    Spanish Fry
    and the big one... Bend Her
    These episodes are unwatchable.

    That's why I don't even juxtapose FG and Futurama. It can't be done. When you put an episode like "Time keeps on slippin'" next to a Family Guy episode, Family Guy looks retarted. When you put "Bend Her" next to FG, you wonder how the Futurama episode got on the air.

    ~Will

    --
    sig?
  135. Re:futurama... too smart for mass consumption by GrievousMistake · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Nonsense! Futurama is like Shakespeare and Ibsen; it works on all levels. Well, not quite like Ibsen, but still, I did read somewhere (here, I think) that while they do try to cram in as much "high-brow" jokes as possible, they won't let it detract from the story.
    Most of the humor in Futurama is of the "everybody gets it" variant. I can't immagine Zack Brannigan being anything less than hillarious even if you've never heard of Star Trek. And then you get the "No fair! You changed the outcome by measuring it!" lines that really are the icing on the cake, and makes Futurama rather unique in the field of humorous cartoons. Where else do you get pinball references, Titanic parodies, quantum physics jokes and booze and hookers in such a neat package?

    --
    In a fair world, refrigerators would make electricity.
  136. mod parent UP! by Boss+Sauce · · Score: 1

    sorry this AD stuff is OT, but Steve, thank you! must run home to TiVo asap...

    1. Re:mod parent UP! by Ether · · Score: 1

      Don't forget that Henry Winkler was the first to jump the shark....

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jumping_the_shark#Ori gin

      *ayyyyy*

      --
      --I hate people when they're not polite -"Psycho Killer", Talking Heads
  137. Re:futurama... too smart for mass consumption by squeemey · · Score: 1
    I would have to disagree here.

    I am not as "geekey" (geeky?) as some people I know, and I am sure I missed a lot. But I still enjoyed the show.

    I think a lot of people got at least part of the humor quite a bit of the time. Also, the plots were well written with interesting moral story lines.

    The "experts" who measure the popularity of such programs got it wrong as they did "Star Trek", because of their faulty ways of measuring viewership.

    But like you, I will prefer seeing the DVD's rather than watching all the commercials, like I do "Count Duckula".

    --
    Bill
  138. I'm willing to bet.... by Null537 · · Score: 1

    ...the first season contains countless references to Family Guy and how it is an inferior show.

  139. Re:They'll have to re-hire a TON of people for thi by nofx_3 · · Score: 1

    Yes, Yes, we get the fact that these characters were all played by Billy West. Unfortunately he is currently busy with the wild success of the Ren & Stimpy adult party cartoon and will not be able to work on Futurama again.

    --
    Visualize Whirled Peas
  140. Re:Eh, it's not worth it. by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

    Everyone has their favorites. Personally, I thought "The Sting" was eh. But I love "Less than Hero". (Kif gets Knocked Up had moments, "evil Lincoln!", but I agree the other two pretty much all stunk.)

  141. well, then good news by roman_mir · · Score: 1

    it's a suppository.

  142. Original Variety Article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  143. mod parent funny by mecz · · Score: 1

    I wish I could rate this funny...

    Parent is actually not(!) offtopic.

    ...you could rate it redundant though...

  144. Television. . . by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 1
    There is no pain, you are receding.
    A distant ship's smoke on the horizon.
    You are only coming through in waves.
    Your lips move but I can't hear what you're saying.

    When I was a child I caught a fleeting glimpse,
    Out of the corner of my eye.
    I turned to look but it was gone.
    I cannot put my finger on it now.
    The child is grown, the dream is gone.
    I have become comfortably numb.

    -Pink Floyd, Comfortably Numb

    -FL
  145. Re:futurama... too smart for mass consumption by tntguy · · Score: 1

    Anyone that doesn't get the episode Jurassic Bark is just dead inside. Regardless of edyookayshun.

  146. Television is a drug. . . by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 1
    The breeze at dawn has secrets to tell you.
    Don't go back to sleep.

    You must ask for what you really want.
    Don't go back to sleep.

    People are going back and forth across the doorsill
    where the two worlds touch.

    The door is round and open.
    Don't go back to sleep.


    There is a way between voice and presence
    where information flows.
    In disciplined silence it opens.
    With wandering talk it closes.


    -Jelaluddin Rumi

    -FL
    1. Re:Television is a drug. . . by aeoo · · Score: 1

      Very nice. Where did you get this Rumi poem, if you don't mind me asking? I haven't seen this one before.

    2. Re:Television is a drug. . . by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 1
      Very nice. Where did you get this Rumi poem, if you don't mind me asking? I haven't seen this one before.

      It was drawn in crayon on a piece of brown paper and given to me by an amazing girl who is now traveling all over the world. I keep it hanging on my wall to remind me of several things. I don't know where she got it from.

      Though, I was looking it up on the web to check the spelling of Rumi's last name, and came across this site with another poem, (the last four lines of my previous post). It was posted right after the, "Don't go back to sleep," poem and I liked how it resonated, so included it as an afterthought.


      -FL

    3. Re:Television is a drug. . . by aeoo · · Score: 1

      Nice. :) Yea, I really don't care if it's Rumi's or not or where it came from -- I was just mildly curious.

  147. Re:Eh, it's not worth it. by tiny-e · · Score: 0

    Allrighty then... here's your big chance. Please dazzle us with an example of your humor that IS intellectually stimulating, or particularly creative.

    I'm thoroughly confident that it will be worth the wait.

  148. Re:futurama... to smart for mass consumption by linzeal · · Score: 1

    Try the Futurama Adventures even my dumb as a dodo Sociology roomate liked it.

  149. Fox and [AS]/Cartoon Network probly air em... by Zantetsuken · · Score: 1

    since it was originally on Fox, and picked up by Cartoon Network's Adult Swim block, those would be the most likely two networks to air the new episodes.

  150. Re:futurama, FOX, and bring back Firefly by TheWanderingHermit · · Score: 1

    You make some interesting points, but you seem to have overlooked one important fact:

    The PRIME way Fox makes money on their shows is advertising dollars. If they offered downloads, they'd make money that way, but it is the production company itself that makes money on the toys, DVDs, and other merchandise. Now, if Fox is the production company, then, yes, they do make money on the merchandise. I don't think that is the case, though, for Futurama, Family Guy, or Firefly.

  151. NO! -- Voiceovers are from producers !! by Barryke · · Score: 1

    Most of the voices are of the writers or producers or script writers themselves, so rehiring wont be neccesary. Mostly the same guys as work on The Simpsons series.

    see: [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Futurama%5B/url% 5D

    Also; i love family guy, but it isn't broadcast here. :(

    --
    Hivemind harvest in progress..
    1. Re:NO! -- Voiceovers are from producers !! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not sure where you got this bit of misinformation, since it wasn't in the wikipedia article you linked...

      All of the characters listed above are performed by Billy West (that was the joke). In addition, Katey Segal does Leela, Jon Dimaggio does Bender, and there are a few others. None of those people are writers or producers. I don't know of a single writer or producer who has done a voice, certianly not a major one.

  152. Its about darn time!!!! by TheZorch · · Score: 1

    Yes, Futurama is coming back!

    All hail Bender! All hail Bender!

    More death by snu-snu!!!!

    Sorry, but I just had to get that out of my system. :-)

    --
    Michael "TheZorch" Haney
    thezorch@gmail.com
    http://thezorch.googlepages.com/home
  153. Firefly/Serenity DVD(s) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    This comment won't be very interesting as I'm an anonymous coward fanning the firefly flames. No even worse, this could even be considered an AD for the Serenity DVD recently release. Worse yet, you could say I'm spamming the slashdot boards. Yes thats it! Buy the Serenity DVD and increase the size of your penis! Buy the Serenity DVD and get low interest morgage rates. Buy the Serenity DVD and I will transfer 30 Billion US dollars to your account, with 25 hot virgins giving you a massage!

  154. Re:futurama, FOX, and bring back Firefly by Shirlockc · · Score: 1

    I wasn't suggesting that FOX offer downloads. I was suggesting a completely different model all together that cuts out the networks. The artists/producers like Joss Whedon, Neil Gaiman, David Boncho etc. would go directly to their audience, us, and sell us their ideas/shows/content. We vote with our wallets. It would be content on demand. They're the ones that should earn the $ anyway, not the networks or the publishers who are constantly complaining about the investment risks vs. reward equation. If enough $ gets the show/project greenlighted, then the shows can be bittorented or otherwise delivered -- new viewers will have to watch the targetted ads prior to getting the feed.

  155. Re:Eh, it's not worth it. by NMZNMZNMZ · · Score: 1

    Completely agree with you. While I love most of Adult Swim's shows (Harvey Birdman is genius), Futurama just had the advantage of full funding from a real network. They hired some great people to write and act for the show, and I hope they manage to bring them back.

  156. Re:get some priorities, people! by zaphod8829 · · Score: 1

    Kudos for linking to an article _from_within_that_very_article_ Excellent.

    --
    .sig
  157. the reason Fox gets the brunt of these complaints by johnpaul191 · · Score: 1

    ok, pure speculation, but....
    i would assume they get the brunt of these complaints because they have had shows jump to cable channels with far smaller promotion budgets and they become hits. not just for viewers, but the DVD sales. that makes you wonder what Fox did wrong. (also people are still angry about firefly and think it could have had a good run... maybe John Doe too)

    didn't fox also have Stargate initially? that show just keeps going on cable. if the current team was running Fox TV the same way years ago i am sure the X-Files would have been axed in one or two seasons. there are people now just as upset that Arrested Development was axed. the producer(s) said they want to move it to another network/cable/anywhere, and as far as critic approved cult TV shows that is definitely one of them. i think it's too weird for the average TV watching dullard. the lack of a laugh track may also make them uncomfortable. some people have to be assured something was funny.

  158. Re:futurama... too smart for mass consumption by carninja · · Score: 1

    I can't stand that episode. I have to turn it off everytime it comes on. It all goes fine and dandy until that last little montage, and then you're sitting there left half-crying screaming "WTF?! NOT FUNNY! NOT FUNNY AT ALL! LESS SAD MORE FUNNY *sniff*"

  159. Call me Pollyanna... by Atario · · Score: 1

    ...but I like them both.

    I admit, at first, I thought American Dad was a pale imitation, but it has found a place of its own now.

    --
    "A great democracy must be progressive or it will soon cease to be a great democracy." --Theodore Roosevelt
  160. Re:futurama... too smart for mass consumption by Kankraka · · Score: 1

    Huh, and I thought I was the only one that could actually be tear jerked by that episode. It's truly saddening at the end and every time I see it, I make a point to take a looong time during the last commercial. Geeks have hearts too!

  161. Geeks have Hearts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Artificial ones!

    1. Re:Geeks have Hearts by stor · · Score: 1

      In a jar beside the bed!

      Cheers
      Stor

      --
      "Yeah well there's a lot of stuff that should be, but isn't"
  162. Best. Fururama. Geek. Joke. EVAR! by Chris+Tucker · · Score: 1
    --
    Guaranteed! This comment 100% Anthrax free!
  163. Re:get some priorities, people! by stor · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Ariel Sharon is dying

    Good news, everyone!

    Cheers
    Stor

    --
    "Yeah well there's a lot of stuff that should be, but isn't"
  164. Re:futurama... too smart for mass consumption by dangitman · · Score: 1
    Where else do you get pinball references, Titanic parodies, quantum physics jokes and booze and hookers in such a neat package?

    I dunno, in some kind of sphere?

    --
    ... and then they built the supercollider.
  165. Re:futurama... too smart for mass consumption by dangitman · · Score: 1
    C'mon.

    The Leela/Fry story-arc is way more tearjerking and emotionally compelling. A dog that can bark 'Walking on Sunshine'? That's small potatoes compared to the parasitic worms, the holophone, the Devil's Hands, moving the stars into a giant love message. the alternate universe where Leela and fry are together just because of Leela's coin-tosses and ghost stories.

    But I agree with your gist. Futurama is a great love story, not a homage to trivia and slapstick.

    --
    ... and then they built the supercollider.
  166. You can only take my money for so long... by Black.Shuck · · Score: 1
    Farnsworth: No fair! You changed the outcome by measuring it!

    I'm sure the masses just don't get this kind of stuff.
    Maybe, but in the next scene Fry gets electrocuted trying to retrieve a dollar-bill that's stuck to a power-line using a rake.

    "You can only take my money for so long - before you take it all, and I say 'Enough!'"
  167. mystery science theatre reference by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In the episode where Bender becomes a wrestler (Raging Bender), they go to a movie and are making snide remarks when an annoyed Crow T. Robot from MST3K tells them "Don't talk during the movie" .

    The only MST reference I've ever seen on TV...outside of MST3K....The Master approves...

  168. No by geekoid · · Score: 1

    he was Cryogenically frozen.

    "From the article: Cryogenics is a branch of physics (or engineering) that studies very low temperatures or the production thereof."

    In order to be frozen, would someone need to produce cold temperatures?

    Cryoics is the act of perservings someone for future revival.
    Cryogenics would be how it was done.

    Considering that Fry did not undergo vitrification, it is questionable if the term "Cryoics " even applies here.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  169. Re:Eh, it's not worth it. by ibentmywookie · · Score: 1

    Dr. Zoidberg: Now open your mouth and let me look at that brain.
    Dr. Zoidberg: No the other mouth.
    Fry: I only have one.
    Dr. Zoidberg: Really?

    --
    -- The doctor said I wouldn't get so many nose bleeds if I just kept my finger out of there!
  170. Re:Eh, it's not worth it. by ejp1082 · · Score: 1

    Nitpick: technically there was no "Season 5". All those episodes were leftovers from season 4; the DVD sets organize them properly.

  171. Basic Econ of Niche Networks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's simple. Shows that don't make the license cost plus profit get canned; sometimes they get canned for failing to meet hurdle rates of return or opportunity costs (what you could make in ad rates with another show).

    Networks don't have the viewer as the customer. They have advertisers as their customers cause that's who pays the bills. Of course demos and willingness to pay to reach them enter into it but it's also a numbers game.

    Specialty netlets on cable like Sci-Fi are another matter. They pay a LOT less for licensing so can live off lower rates (and in return they give advertisers tightly targeted demos). So a show that is a "success" in a cable environment probably gives up a great deal of licensing money in moving there or compared to being on a major network.

    Even then show producers (all the big studios) run a deficit of about $1 million per episode with the hope that they will make it up with: syndication sales; DVDs; foreign sales.

    Futurama is easy to start up again; you're just talking voice work which is cheap and easy; cheap animation abroad. It certainly could have been done just as easily on Cartoon Network or something.

    But the bottom line is that you will NEVER see a show "targeted towards a niche viewership" being successful unless it has a niche cost. You're talking cheap and easy animation. Hourlong shows just cost too much; even the cheapest run around $3 million per episode, shooting in Canada or some other subsidy haven.

  172. MOD PARENT UP!!!!! +5, Funny! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Are you mods blind or just stupid?

  173. Demographics by name*censored* · · Score: 1

    Are you trying to say that advertisers do NOT specifically advertise at certain times or on certain shows? Think about it...would a beer company ask to advertise on "sesame street"? No, they'd ask to advertise when the football's on, and most likely any station would agree to this. Don't believe me? Turn your TV on at one in the morning...if your country is anything like mine, it will be chock-a-block with dating agency services ads and (for some reason) ringtone ads. It's the same with futurama.. If Fox were running an hour and a half block of fairly nerdy cartoons (FuturamaThe SimpsonsFamily Guy), then I would think that that's the FIRST place people selling pants-with-integrated-wifi would ask to advertise. If Fox would just realise that these shows target an ultra-specific demographic (especially one notorious for their disposable incomes) and the viewership is particularly consistent, then there would be absolutely no reason not to fund these shows.

    --
    Commodore64_love: I don't comprehend people who're so frightened of death that they'll bankrupt themselves to stay alive
  174. Re:futurama... to smart for mass consumption by Will2k_is_here · · Score: 1

    I don't understand the time slot conflict. An 8:30 timeslot is PERFECT right now. You get Groening's Simpsons/Futurama duo followed by MacFarlane's Family Guy/American Dad combo. The perfect "animation domination" as they tried to call it.

  175. Re:They'll have to re-hire a TON of people for thi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not sure if that was meant as a juke or not...
    Because all those voices were done by one person, Billy West.

    Without him, it will fail.

  176. Re:They'll have to re-hire a TON of people for thi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Good news everybody, they found Billy Wests head in a jar preserved from one thousand years ago. Now we can start remaking them again ... plus there is a can of anchovies with it. We're rich!

  177. Re:futurama... too smart for mass consumption by Kankraka · · Score: 1

    Indeed the story of Leela and Fry was quite emotional and indeed sad! But, at the end of The Devils Hands are Idle Playthings, we are led to believe they eventually did get together (without a diamond scrunchie I might add.) In Jurassic Bark, we find out Seymour waited YEARS for Fry to come back, until finally giving up and lowering his head and closing his eyes one last time. Though I guess that doesn't explain how he was fossilized standing up... We also learn Bender is 40% Dolomite, thus making him 150% of bending greatness. (40% Titanium - A head in the Polls, the aforementioned 40% Dolomite - Jurassic Bark, 30% Iron - 30% Iron Chef, and finally 40% Zinc from Fry and the Slurm Factory. However, Bender mentions he's not a good calculator in the episode The Cyber House Rules... which is impossible, because when he meets Flexo in The Lesser of Two Evils, he's able to determine that both he and Flexo's serial numbers are expressible by the sum of two cubes) ... I'm going to bed now, clearly I've looked too far into this.

  178. Re:get some priorities, people! by Geoffreyerffoeg · · Score: 1

    Well, why don't they just make an Ariel Sharon's head and feature it on Futurama?

  179. Re:futurama... to smart for mass consumption by bigwang · · Score: 1

    You know, I love futurama as much as the next geek, but CBS runs "60 minutes" at 7pm on sundays, and it is always being run over by football. And it's still one of the top rated shows.

  180. Re:My Little Girl Rejoices (moving OT...) by gozar · · Score: 1
    Now, there are shows like Between The Lions, Caillou, Higglytown Heroes, Lazytown, and The Backyardigans that have some good content and we watch and discuss them with her. Futurama is not my daughter's staple cartoon or TV show. Is it too mature for her? I would be lying if I said it didn't have some things that were more appropriate for teenagers.

    Check out Hi-5 on TLC in the early morning. My daughter loves the show!

    --
    What, me worry?
  181. Re:Eh, it's not worth it. by alva_edison · · Score: 1

    Zoidberg: Now open your mouth. <pause> Zoidbreg: No, your other mouth. Fry: I've only got one mouth.

    --
    He effected a bored affect.
  182. Re: PBS Cancellations by some+guy+I+know · · Score: 1
    Watch PBS. They won't cancel anything.
    They cancelled Ken Burns' "The Civil War" after just one week.
    --
    Those who sacrifice security to condemn liberty deserve to repeat history or something. - Benjamin Santayana
  183. Re: PBS Cancellations by saltydogdesign · · Score: 1

    They cancelled Ken Burns' "The Civil War" after just one week.

    True, but it took a decidedly weird turn when the war ended after just a few episodes.

    --
    // This is not a sig.
  184. Re:get some priorities, people! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ariel Sharon is dying and you lot are here talking about Futurama?! You disgust me! Woot! He deserves it, the war mongering lot, next up Dubbah and the lot..

  185. Re:futurama... too smart for mass consumption by Sloppy · · Score: 1

    Damn, I'm glad I'm not the only one.

    --
    As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
  186. Re:the reason Fox gets the brunt of these complain by kimvette · · Score: 1

    Showtime had Stargate:SG1 initially, IIRC

    --
    The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
  187. Re:futurama... to smart for mass consumption by Tombstone-f · · Score: 1

    It's never overrun by football. They start it after the game ends and push everything else that night back by the same amount.

  188. Re:futurama... too smart for mass consumption by dangitman · · Score: 1
    In Jurassic Bark, we find out Seymour waited YEARS for Fry to come back, until finally giving up and lowering his head and closing his eyes one last time.

    But it's just not believable enough (considering this is a show about a Pizza delivery guy who goes to the future!). I think it's more likely that Seymour went back for the pizza scraps, and "Walking on Sunshine" was actually Fry's hallucination induced by 80s pop music and Coca-Cola. The Fry and Leela story is one that happens every day, today, in the past and in the future. Even Fry admits this when he decides not to revive Seymour. It's a dog, they love food.

    --
    ... and then they built the supercollider.
  189. Futurama comeback! by lumbercartel.ca · · Score: 1

    So, there is hope for intelligence on television after all! This is one of the better shows on these days, and these days intelligence is a lost art on both television and radio (e.g., the real reason Howard Stern moved to satellite was probably mostly to get away from all the stupidity, government regulations, etc.).