Futurama Movie Set For November 27

kevin_conaway writes "TV Squad informs us that the new Futurama movie will be available on November 27. The show will return as a full-length, high-def film sold on DVD. It will be followed by three additional films, and each film will be divided into four episodes, each to be aired on Comedy Central. So, that's 4 DVD movies or 16 new episodes."

Comments

Oblig.

[Jack Malmostoso]

Good news everyone!

Re:Oblig.

[kimvette]

I, for one, welcome Groening as our overlord!

Matt & David & Co.: if any of you are reading this I want to say THANK YOU for hanging in there and making these DVDs happen. Here's to hoping to the return of Futurama to full production! :) I will be buying at least five or six copies of this to be handing out as gifts to try to help increase popularity of (and thusly demand for) the series.

Re:Oblig.

[Zackbass]

It's a suppository!

Re:Oblig.

[Anonymous Coward]

Sweet zombie Jesus!

Re:Oblig.

[FlashBuster3000]

Tremble, puny earthlings. One day my race will destroy you all!

Re:Oblig.

[Anonymous Coward]

Sluh!

Re:Oblig.

[g0rAngA]

As granny always said, if you want a futurama movie released in November, you've got to do it yourself....god rest her zombie bones.

Re:Oblig.

[Anonymous Coward]

Why?

Whoop! Whoop! Whoop!

Re:Oblig.

[waynemcdougall]

The show will return as a full-length, high-def film sold on DVD.

But does it come in a convenient suppository format?

Re:Oblig.

[Anonymous Coward]

Mongoloid isn't a racial slur "against people from Mongolia"

Read up a bit before you try to get all uppity about someone swearing. Calling a Downs kid a Mongoloid idiot, sure, that lacks class. By itself, Mongoloid has a number of legitimate uses; 'fucking mongoloid' clearly invokes a historical context such as referring to the person with the mod points as if saying they're a Neanderthal.

Mongoloid by itself without any extra fun like "fucking" is just as legitimate as Caucasoid, so basically you're just up in arms over the fact that he was using the word "fucking" in his rant, right?

- Anonymous Mongloid

Re:Oblig.

[omfgnosis]

Oh fuck. Its use to describe people with Downs Syndrome is racist, and it was obviously intended in that way.

Re:Oblig.

[Anonymous Coward]

people with Downs Syndrome are not a race.

Re:Oblig.

[robably]

Just saying, but "Good news everyone!" was always the herald of really bad news. The tag should be !goodnewseveryone.

I'll get my coat.

Re:Oblig.

[omfgnosis]

Of course not. Your point?

Re:Oblig.

[Anonymous Coward]

Awesome. Awesome to the max.

Re:Oblig.

[Anonymous Coward]

No, I don't think it is any more obvious that it is suggesting that the moderators are downs afflicted than it is that it is saying that they're pre cro-magnon and can't figure out modern tools, let alone mod points.

Mongoloid as a term was usurped by Downs when he clumsily used it to try and scientifically associate "Mongoloid Idiocy" as some sort of genetic Caucasoid regression that expressed Mongol features (hence mongoloid) at great expense to the subject (hence the idiocy.)

In this case, Mongoloid only refers to the features, which were seen to be similar to, rather broadly, Mongols, and the idiocy part was separate, but also had a different connotation when he used it in his book which was titled something like "Survey of Idiocy". Downs syndrome got caught up here because they didn't understand it, not because it was initially seen as derogatory.

In this case, I strongly suspect the user was NOT suggesting that the moderators were downs afflicted, and rather more generally suggesting an association with Mongols, specifically in a historical sense as Mongoloid is most often used to refer to skulls and other remnants from cave man eras.

Out of curiosity, why the intense presumption about Downs Syndrome? Someone in the family or a friend? I'm not asking to insult, but just to understand why your emotions are so sharply defined along the pre-conceived notions you're defending.

Re:Oblig.

[Crunchie Frog]

Of course not. Your point? ... has obviously gone over your head.

Re:Oblig.

[omfgnosis]

People with Downs are not a race, but the term "mongoloid" is a racial term, which came to have connotations with Downs due to racist perceptions about biological traits of Mongols. Hence my fucking comment.

Re:Oblig.

[omfgnosis]

"In this case, I strongly suspect the user was NOT suggesting that the moderators were downs afflicted, and rather more generally suggesting an association with Mongols, specifically in a historical sense as Mongoloid is most often used to refer to skulls and other remnants from cave man eras."

Of course. They just happened to use a term that has those connotations, while obviously insulting the intelligence of the people in question, but the reference in no way was intended to refer to those connotations, it's just a mistaken coincidence. I see now.

Re:Oblig.

[MutantHamster]

Just to give my 2 Quatlus on the issue of it coming back to "full production," I think the future (not to jinx it) may be kind of bright. Comedy Central bid really high for the rights to air episodes of Futurama and they are going to have the three movies broken up into a series of episodes. Given that it has a built in fanbase and is easily much higher in quality than the -- what, 10 new shows they debut each year that fail miserably? (I put my money on Lil' Bush, that Body Shop show, and that show about the Halfway House not coming back next year) My prediction if Futurama is going to be a smash for comedy central. And given that, it's not hard to imagine they'll want to comission a new season after that.

Re:Oblig.

[Anonymous Coward]

you bloody mong! this goes down in the hall of stupidity, right up with with the guy who was adamant that "fanboi" was a racist insult

Re:Oblig.

[Darth_brooks]

Nixon: Thanks Morbo. How's the family?

Morbo: Belligerent and numerous

Re:Oblig.

[originalnih]

You need to stop posting.

Re:Oblig.

[0xdeadbeef]

I was with you until you used a racist slur against people from Mongolia. Seriously, is that fucking necessary?

Oh, sure, you bleeding hearts whine about the poor oppressed Mongols now, but you'll be shitting your pants and crying for your mama when the horde is breaching your walls.

Re:Oblig.

[Blakey Rat]

We've been jerked around with this news for like 3 years now. I'll believe it when I see the disk on a shelf, but I'm not investing any emotion into any more of these press releases.

Re:Oblig.

[Anonymous Coward]

WINDMILLS DO NOT WORK THAT WAY

Reason: Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING.

Re:Oblig.

[aichpvee]

People don't come in races.

Re:Oblig.

[Anonymous Coward]

Drawls...."I guess what we have here is a failure to communicate...."

So.

The original syndrome refers to a genetic anomaly in humans which commonly lowers the subject's intelligence. In caucasians the syndrome is associated with a characteristic facial appearance matching the mongoloid racial form, so it became known as 'mongolism'.

At this stage there was no particular intimation that the mongoloid racial type had a lower intrinsic intelligence than the caucasoid type. When Down described the syndrome in 1862, racism had not yet been invented as an industry, and discrimination amongst races was based on simple observation, modified by the belief that your race was, of course, the best. So the mongoloid racial types (being obviously more intelligent than the caucasoid) were often characterised by Westerners as being wily and cunning (as opposed to the less intelligent but more 'open' caucasoids).

In America the existence of slavery encouraged the belief that caucasoid American settlers were inherently superior to the imported negroid slaves, but this was a belief limited to America, and, later, South Africa. The rest of the world did not share it, and was typically astounded to see it in action when American troops came over to Europe during WW2.

Sometime after 1950 western left-wing thinkers found that they could gain a moral high-ground over the rising American influence in Europe by accusing Americans (and any other opponent) of 'unfair discrimination'. The Race Relations Industry was born, and has since gone on from strength to strength. One of its more powerful techniques is the concept of 'received offence'. This means that an insult can be created where none was intended, because the insult does not depend on the words spoken, but rather on the (claimed) understanding of them by the recipient. So someone looking at a landscape and saying 'I like the clouds' can be accused of racism by a person who interprets this to mean that, because clouds are white, this means that the viewer hates negroids.

Now we turn to the strange case of the mongoloid insult.

As used initially, it was almost certainly intended to mean that the 'mongoloid' moderator lacked intelligence. This, therefore, was not racist. However, the application of the Law of Received Offence enables the complainant to ignore the original meaning and concentrate on manipulating the words to achieve a racist aim. This is easily done - the word 'mongoloid' defines a racial type, so an insult was thrown at the moderator containing a racial adjective. Racisim - per se.

To confuse things further, the mongoloid race is generally known for its intelligence. Complaining that I have a typical asian intelligence means that I am probably in the top third of the school! So we have the paradox that, if the epithet is taken as referring to the race, it is not an insult, but rather a compliment.

The Race relations industry is nothing if not flexible, however. If a compliment is given, there must have been a corresponding slight. In this case, the mention of the word 'mongoloid' draws attention to the fact that the caucasoid and negroid races are of lesser average intelligence. So the remark IS racist, just not the kind of racism that it seemed to be.

Towards morning, however, Zarathustra laughed to his heart, and said mockingly: "Happiness runneth after me. That is because I do not run after women. Happiness, however, is a woman." Nietsche - Also Spracht Zarathustra

Re:Oblig.

[Arthur B.]

Sure they come in genetic statistical cluster created by natural geographical inbreeding. But we don't call them "races" cuz that'd be fascist or something like it.

Re:Oblig.

[Yendys]

/agree. Lil'Bush is funny but they really don't have far they can go with it. I'll admit i'm a little suprised that Adult Swim isn't involved with this deal though. Futurama and Family Guy are they two shows that cause me to tune in to Adult Swim when i get the chance. Outside of those two, and the occasional Robot Chicken/ATHF, I don't get into the other shows... Never been much of an anime fan, I suppose.

Re:Oblig.

[glindsey]

I think you mean "Sweet zombie (lips moving with no sound because network censors are too scared to say 'Jesus' on television)".

Re:Oblig.

[Anonymous Coward]

Thank you! That fucking mongloid didn't seem to capture the point that I was trying to make, which you quite elegantly outlined. Cheers!

(btw...it's clear which way I was using that, wasn't it?)

Re:Oblig.

[bigstrat2003]

That's good! Nixon's pro-war, and pro-family.

Re:Oblig.

[kanabal]

Everyone knows they cum in socks.

Re:Oblig.

[Anonymous Coward]

How come we have three main races in the world, then?

And before you use the moronic refrain that races cannot be seen in genetic patterns, they can, easily. See, for instance, http://info.med.yale.edu/genetics/kkidd/432.pdf#se arch='Understanding%20Human%20DNA%20Sequence%20Var iation%20pdf'

Re:Oblig.

[TheQuantumShift]

Good, still none can compare to: Sweet three toed sloth of the ice planet Hoth!

Re:Oblig.

[Anonymous Coward]

Absolutely. What are commonly seen as indicators of "race" (i.e. hair color/shape, eye shape/color, nose shape, adult height, etc.) are actually determined by culture, not heredity.

Re:Oblig.

[ahecht]

Actually, considering that people with Downs Syndrome have fundementally different DNA, you're right, they're not a race -- they're a species!

Re:Oblig.

[Dog-Cow]

Only if you wish to reproduce. Besides, it's fun, so who cares if it's necessary?

Re:Oblig.

[garry_g]

Can someone please sue the translation studio (Combrink) into oblivion that is responsible for the German translation of the series before this comes out? They absolutely killed the series by there totally miserable, misunderstood and flat out wrong translation ...

(I'm not concerned about myself, as I avoid watching much German TV)

Re:Oblig.

[Citizen of Earth]

But does it come in a convenient suppository format?

Yes, but you'll have to do some special exercises first.

Re:Oblig.

[Anonymous Coward]

Vikings, regularly 6 feet tall and taller, ate primarily fish and meat.

Asian diets generally consist of noodles and rice, simple carbohydrates.

Just an example to reinforce the parents statement.

Re:Oblig.

[kimvette]

I like Li'l Bush, and think it's pretty funny, However there is only so much you can do with the "Duhbya is an idiot" concept. It'll be overplayed by the time George's term is up.

Also, I'm ashamed to admit I voted for Bush, because I can't stand Kerry and his crappy record in the Senate.

Re:Oblig.

[Anonymous Coward]

And that's what emoticons are for, hardly what you'd call an investment e.g.

  c@@ --> --> DVD! =:-D

Re:Oblig.

[Dragonslicer]

God damned Mongolians always knocking down my city wall!

The subject said obligatory, and it doesn't get much more obligatory than that.

Re:Oblig.

[Anonymous Coward]

Death by Snu-Snu!

Re:Oblig.

[xeoron]

What makes this interesting is that the episodes that are cut from the films will be reworked to be independent episodes. More information about this can be found at gotfuturama.com

Re:Oblig.

[empaler]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4e3upOxWWsY

Re:Oblig.

[hguorbray]

sweet guinea pig of winnipeg

-OK they can't all be winners....

I'm just sayin'

Re:Oblig.

[Anonymous Coward]

You forgot the accent:

God damned Mongorians always knocking down my shity waw! Fixed that for ya..

Damn you, Mongorians! I'we get you if it's the rast ting I do!!!"

Oh I get it! You tink just cause I Chinese, that I buiwd warr! That's buwshit! I just rike you! I eat rice, and drive-ah rearry srow just rike-a rest of you!

Re:Oblig.

[Anonymous Coward]

Nobody will ever read, mod, or reply to, this post, as it is buried in a hole of ACs, mod downs, and in the middle of a large, offtopic, flamebattle.

This is a sad lonely post in the vast galaxy of Slashdot, lost in the even greater universe that is the Internet.

----------Fish----------

Re:Oblig.

[aichpvee]

It's because it would be inaccurate. The amount of genetic difference we see in human "races" is lower than would be required to distinguish races in other animals. I don't know if that would make calling them races fascist or just inaccurate, but either way we shouldn't do it. The only thing it really does is distract a whole lot of people from the real things they should be hating each other over.

Re:Oblig.

[dspratomo]

I, for one, welcome Groening as our overlord!

You can....
http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=79 001
...just don't fight with The Boss.

Re:Oblig.

[Anonymous Coward]

He didn't mean "mongoloid" as a racial slur; it's an out-dated (but still occasionally used) term for a person with Down Syndrome. When the disease was first identified, the person described its affects on caucasian individuals as causing them to have mongoloid skulls (mongoloid is also a technical term for a skull type that many asians have).

Of course, because the term was used to describe people with Down Syndrome, it's become a racial slur.

Finally

[gertin]

I missed Nixon.

Re:Finally

[Anonymous Coward]

Agreed. I've always felt that someone should produce a T-Shirt with Nixon's head on the front with the words "Who thinks they have what it takes to party with Nixon!?" on it (from the global warming episode), maybe with those two fembots shaking it on each side.

Imagine, jut for a moment, the looks you'd get from people who had no idea what it meant.

Re:Finally

[friedo]

Arrooooooo?

Re:Finally

[MonkeyBoy]

I found a T-Shirt a while back that had the slogan "Vote Robot Nixon!" or something similar, with a picture of Nixon's head grafted onto a large robot body.

Closest I could come to a Futurama shirt, and it wasn't the same body from Futurama... so it didn't turn out quite as good as I had hoped.

Still... a Robot Nixon is better than no Robot Nixon...

Re:Finally

[User 956]

You're talking about this one, maybe?

Re:Finally

[MonkeyBoy]

Yep, that's the one I got.

Re:Finally

[Anonymous Coward]

..."and then i'll go into peoples houses at night and wreck up the place!!! hahahaha!!!" - nixon on what he would do as president.

Re:Finally

[obergfellja]

I am a robot, why else would Earth women not date me...

[gets knife slice in arm] ... ...
[looks at blood]

Robots don't bleed, ... so that must mean ...that I am human. [relief sound] Oh, thank god! I'm human! It feels good to live again!...

Re:Finally

[Blakey Rat]

What's the deal with Futurama's constant parody of Nixon, anyway? Does anybody who's a fan of the show even *remember* Nixon? Hell, for that matter, do the writers of the show even remember Nixon, or are they just going by the standard "make fun of Richard Nixon" humor template?

I just find that odd. If it was Reagan, more people would relate I think. I mean, yes, ok, we get it, Nixon was a bad president, ha ha ha. But he's already been parodied in every comedy show there is, we don't need yet another go at it.

Re:Finally

[k_187]

I believe that Matt Groening has said his favorite thing about Futurama was that he could still make fun of Nixon.

Re:Finally

[Kadin2048]

I just find that odd. If it was Reagan, more people would relate I think. I mean, yes, ok, we get it, Nixon was a bad president, ha ha ha. But he's already been parodied in every comedy show there is, we don't need yet another go at it.

Lots of people really like Reagan. Heck, some people even remember Carter fondly. Go after anybody but Nixon, and you're just going to start a flamewar. But Nixon ... hell, nobody likes him.

Re:Finally

[elrous0]

Take that fancy naysayers who said Zoidberg would never eat again!

Re:Finally

[megaditto]

Lots of people like Nixon. You probably would too if you took the time to learn about his presidency.

While not the most moral, Nixon was probably the most brilliant president in the last 50 years. He certainly did a lot of good for this country.

Re:Finally

[Anonymous Coward]

Nixon did some good for the country, but he was also a certifiably batshit insane paranoiac. How could a comedian pass up an opportunity like that?

Re:Finally

[phaggood]

I just find that odd. If it was Reagan, more people would relate I think. I mean, yes, ok, we get it, Nixon was a bad president, ha ha ha. But he's already been parodied in every comedy show there is, we don't need yet another go at it.

Reagan = clueless
Nixon = evil

If Reagan won the world presidency election, his giant robot body would have toppled over asleep - tho if he'd said "bite my shiny metal-" while in Bender's body, everyone would have said "awwwwwww, isn't that cuuute!"

Plus, with his collagen-addicted Hollywood background, his head wouldn't have to be in a jar to have been preserved 1000 yrs.

No nightly reruns? a la Simpsons

[Anonymous Coward]

I would love to catch up on missed episodes...

Re:No nightly reruns? a la Simpsons

[kimvette]

Between now and then it is on Adult Swim five nights a week. Catch it there, or buy it on DVD. :)

Re:No nightly reruns? a la Simpsons

[Anonymous Coward]

It's on Adult Swim 7 nights a week by my last count.

They took over Friday nights a couple weeks ago, and "Action Saturday" starts off with, of course, a block of comedy. The only comedy they run worth mentioning on Saturdays is Futurama, the rest is almost always retarded crap (Home Movies, Oblongs, Shin Chan, etc.).

However AS's deal runs out later this year, at which point you'll have to watch both new & old episodes on Comedy Central. CC, you may remember, ran Mystery Science Theatre 3000 into the ground, then threw gasoline on the twitching corpse. My hopes are not very high for Futurama after CC gets ahold of it. CC will probably slap it into a 2am timeslot and start bitching about how nobody is watching...

Re:No nightly reruns? a la Simpsons

[Anonymous Coward]

CC will probably slap it into a 2am timeslot and start bitching about how nobody is watching... Still better than Fox and their habit of throwing promising year 1 shows against the current equivalent of Seinfeld or trailing a sports broadcast that guarantees a 25% overrun rate.

Re:No nightly reruns? a la Simpsons

[iamstretchypanda]

It's on Adult Swim 7 nights a week by my last count.

Thats funny, i wasn't aware they aired adult swim on Fridays ;).

Re:No nightly reruns? a la Simpsons

[rmoehring]

Actually, they just started airing Adult Swim on Fridays in the last month.

Re:No nightly reruns? a la Simpsons

[PopeRatzo]

Home Movies is retarded crap? You fucking Mongoloid.

Oh wait, we did that one already.

Never mind.

Let me be the first to say...

[G-funk]

...Giggity giggi- oh, wait...

Seriously though, this is fantastic news and makes it a lot more real in my mind. I hope they leave those god damned clone kids out of it though :)

Re:Let me be the first to say...

[jshriverWVU]

I hope they leave those god damned clone kids out of it though

Agree the clones in Futurama remind me of Scrappy Doo in Scooby Doo. Both annoying characters. Though I'm glad to get a solid date. This is one of my favorite American shows.

Re:Let me be the first to say...

[bigstrat2003]

There's only one clone, Dwight is a natural kid. :P

Dr. Zoidberg, A Medical Corporation

[Anonymous Coward]

How we missed ye, you ugly mudbug you...

Re:Dr. Zoidberg, A Medical Corporation

[Anonymous Coward]

Now ZOIDBERG is the popular one!

"Yes, yes, let's all gather around Zoidberg!"

Finally

[Tykho]

Life is worth living again!

About damn time

[sqrt(2)]

With the Simpsons ending, perhaps a successful release of these DVDs will help get the series back into full production. It was really far too brilliant to end after only 4 (3 production) seasons. I've been so angry with Fox ever since they canceled it and allowed the mind numbingly stupid show Family Guy back. Futurama is so much more deserving than that show. But it's never too late to start making good decisions.

Re:About damn time

[Rik Sweeney]

With the Simpsons ending

That's news to Matt Groening.

Re:About damn time

[Anonymous Coward]

Damn. I wish I read this comment before I started frantically Googling "Simpsons finale -movie"

Re:About damn time

[Capt James McCarthy]

"With the Simpsons ending"

I guess the two additional movies that the cast of the Simpsons movie are in negotiations for is rumor then?

Re:About damn time

[sharkey]

Just like this fall's schedule.

Re:About damn time

[Matt Perry]

That's news to Matt Groening.

Well, someone has to be the last to know.

The Velour Fog

[jomama717]

I only hope Zapp Brannigan plays a major role - he steals the show in my book. Best Shatner parody ever.

Re:The Velour Fog

[mrchaotica]

Whaddya mean, "parody?" Zapp plays it straight!

Re:The Velour Fog

[vranash]

Nothing about Zap is straight, except MAYBE his bagging of Leela, and we all know that's only because he mis-interpreted being 'introduced to a one eyed friend' :)

Re:The Velour Fog

[mrchaotica]

I knew somebody was going to object to that sentence...

Anyway, I meant "straight" in the acting sense, sort of, not in the sexual sense. Or in other words, I'm claiming that Zapp isn't a parody of Shatner because Shatner himself is that bad too.

Don't you just hate it when you have to explain a joke?

Re:The Velour Fog

[jez9999]

You've GOT to be kidding me. Zapp Brannigsn is the most fucking annoying Futurama character.

Re:The Velour Fog

[Anonymous Coward]

You win again, gravity!

Re:The Velour Fog

[kramulous]

And which one rocked your world?

Re:The Velour Fog

[technothrasher]

You've GOT to be kidding me. Zapp Brannigsn is the most fucking annoying Futurama character.

You're obviously confused and aroused.

Re:The Velour Fog

[Scott Wood]

Don't you just hate it when someone follows up a joke with another joke, and the humorless git who posted the original thinks the other person "just didn't get it"?

Re:The Velour Fog

[LarsWestergren]

And which one rocked your world?
Man, wish I hadn't already posted in this thread, funniest Slashdot comment I've read in weeks, and I have modpoints.

Re:The Velour Fog

[Anonymous Coward]

Then the original poster has to come crawling back to apologize like a bird on its belly.

Birds don't crawl.

They've been known to!

If my comment gets modded down tell my wife I said, "hello."

Re:The Velour Fog

[RealGrouchy]

I don't think you got it...

- RG>

Re:The Velour Fog

[Nf1nk]

In one of the commentaries on the DVDs Zap is described as Captain Kirk doing a William Shatner impression.

Re:The Velour Fog

[Anonymous Coward]

i had enough of zapp brannigan when his character appeared on hogans heroes as colonel crittenden. i hope he is killed.

Re:The Velour Fog

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, that's Asperger's for ya...

Re:The Velour Fog

[Joe Tie.]

It's really odd how often that happens on slashdot. I mean common to the point where it doesn't even surprise me anymore.

Re:The Velour Fog

[Anonymous Coward]

You wouldn't, by any chance, be small, white and part of an MIT research study, would you?

Re:The Velour Fog

[vranash]

Y'know there is such a thing as intentionally misinterpreting a comment :)

Seemed like too good of a joke to pass up :)

Oh thank GOD!

[doyoulikeworms]

That saved me a trip to the suicide booth!

Re:Oh thank GOD!

[ThirdPrize]

Shame.

Re:Oh thank GOD!

[obergfellja]

Thank you for using "Stop and Drop". America's Suicide booth, since 2008.

Re:Oh thank GOD!

[Prof.Phreak]

I wonder if by 2008, someone really will invent one of these...

Re:Oh thank GOD!

[TheoMurpse]

Coincidentally, the Stop'n'Drop-brand suicide booth becomes America's favorite next year according to Space Pilot 3000. Paradoxically, the return of Futurama may prevent it from becoming America's favorite.

Oh, and just because I see a lack of Calculon here: I suppose the show got brought back because of the voice actors' tremendous ACting TAlent(s)!!!

misnomer

[nedder]

Good 'ol "high def DVD". Fishier than 1000 year old anchovies.

Re:misnomer

[bob8766]

I wasn't even going to bother getting this DVD, until I saw the Hypnotoad. Now I want 10 copies!

Re:misnomer

[Giddeon Fox]

Dvd's do not work that way. GOODNIGHT.

Re:misnomer

[Enderandrew]

Technically a 480p image is within the range of high-def, even if it barely qualifies. So a progressive scan DVD can be called high-def, even if it pales in the comparison of a 1080p BluRay image.

Re:misnomer

[Enderandrew]

I don't know why I even bother responding to an AC troll, but 480i is standard definition. Standard definition is also 4:3 aspect ratio.

A DVD can put out a native widescreen 480p picture, which was the bare minimum for the original HD specs. Most high-def TV shows are broadcast in 720p, and the new high-def movie formats are 1080p, but most high-def TVs can't even support 1080p. There is no single resolution that defines HD content.

Re:misnomer

[@madeus]

480p - along with 576p - is often referred to as 'Enhanced Definition' (EDTV) but neither qualify as HDTV.

Re:misnomer

[Enderandrew]

Partially correct. These days a TV that can only produce 480p and not 720p is called EDTV.

However the ORIGINAL HD spec included 480p. That is why the original XBox says it supported high-def, when the games only went up to 480p.

Re:misnomer

[Anonymous Coward]

Better than that, it's high def dvd rendered with cell shading, it's so much def you can see where the poors on bender's shiney metal ass would be... were it not shiney, metal, and all exactly the same color

Re:misnomer

[Cancel-Or-Allow]

But this is HDTV. It's got better resolution than the real world!

Re:misnomer

[obergfellja]

Zoidberg here is becoming a crafty consumer...

Re:misnomer

[rdoger6424]

There were some games for the xbox (NBA Live 06 for example) that supported 720 resolution on the xbox.

Re:misnomer

[Belacgod]

And were they not spelled "pores."

Re:misnomer

[snicho99]

I don't know what the situation is in NTSC land. But here in Australian PAL land, (mu hah hah that's 576i or p for us), SD or standard definition is used pretty much interchangeably between EITHER 4:3 or 16:9 anamorphic.
Our SD digital transmission is anamorphic and our analogue broadcast is good old fashioned 4:3.
The parent poster is quite correct in that there is no standard resolution that defines HD content. It's a mess.
Seriously. You should try post producing a show that has been shot at 720p 29.97fps, but tagged as 50fps (over cranked), offlined at 576i / 50 (DV), and then conformed and onlined at 1080i / 50. It's enough to make you're head explode.
To be honest, it's just one of the reasons why us post production guys still have so much "love" in the "love/hate" relationship we have with film.

And yes you are correct. I'm completely off topic. But hey it's been a long day.

Re:misnomer

[thegrassyknowl]

But can we see Amy's obscene tattoo?

Re:misnomer

[Thraxen]

You're wrong. I don't know if 480p was at one point part of the HD spec, but I know for fact that it's not now. So it's technically inaccurate to call a standard DVD "high definition". And, as someone else pointed out, the Xbox had a few 720p games. The Xbox was capable of outputting both 720p and 1080i. XBox Media Center and other various homebrew apps and emulators made use of this ability.

Re:misnomer

[Shagg]

The ATSC standard (which defines digital television) covers 480i, 480p, 720p, and 1080i. The HDTV standard only defines 720p, 1080i, and 1080p. Many people confuse DTV (digital TV) with HDTV (high definition TV), but they're not the same thing. You can have HDTV with or without being digital, and you can have DTV with or without being high definition.

My guess is that the original quote in the article about a hi-def DVD was just due to a clueless reporter.

Re:misnomer

[qualidafial]

Leela: "No offense, Fry, but lately you've turned into a fat sack of crap."
Fry: "Sack?!"
Amy: "Yeah Bender, your beer belly's so big, your door won't even shut. And that doesn't even make sense."

About time

[g0rAngA]

All I've ever heard from anyone about Futurama is that is should have continued.

I've heard rumors for ages, but this one looks pretty solid.

Yay!

Re:About time

[ducomputergeek]

When the show first aired it seemed like it was always being preempted by the end of football games and I frankly never got into the series until it appeared on Adult Swim. Also I was in college at the time and time was some I did not have a lot of. But the show replaced the 10PM news in my apartment and the show is still funny.

Re:About time

[TheRaven64]

I'm still in two minds about this. The Futurama finale was absolutely first-rate, and a perfect place to end the series. Any new material will have a tough time not being a let down after it.

Yes, instead we have Jimmy Carter.

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, instead we have Jimmy Carter.

There will be a million unnecessary quotes, but...

[wizzahd]

"He'll be as strong and flexible as Gumby and Hercules combined!"

"Gumbercules?! I love that guy!!"

Yay

[Safiire Arrowny]

I'm happier than a snake in a sugar-cane field.

Big Deal

[ZiakII]

You can all bite my shiny metal ass.

Re:Big Deal

[LordBafford]

Hail Hail Robonia, a land I didn't make up!

I never really..

[daydr3am3r]

..understood as to why Futurama never really took off to the mainstream as Simpsons did. Especially with the declining quality of the latter and the pretty much consistent high quality of the former. Must be the sci-fi tag that works like a repellant: "Oooh I want gonna laugh you know, but can't, it's sci-fi fer christ's sakes!..."

Re:I never really..

[neglige]

"Oooh I want gonna laugh you know, but can't, it's sci-fi fer christ's sakes!..."

Ah, yes, but Firefly, Farscape and Futurama (ok, and sometimes Lexx) should have tought us otherwise by now. Star Trek also had its moments, although not constantly. Sci-Fi CAN be funny :)

Re:I never really..

[Zelos]

I'm a huge Futurama fan, but even I wouldn't compare it to the Simpsons - the earlier seasons of the Simpsons which caused it to "take off" are in a completely different comedy league from Futurama.

Futurama had its moments, but there's too much dead space between jokes for it to be as funny as the Simpsons.

Re:I never really..

[oohshiny]

understood as to why Futurama never really took off to the mainstream as Simpsons did

What fraction of Americans do you think are going to get "aleph-1-plex" or jokes about Hawking?

Re:I never really..

[Anonymous Coward]

Gee, I wonder what all those shows have in common...

Face it, science fiction is just not terribly mainstream right now. Strangely enough, elves and wizards are still quite popular with the mainstream audience. I think this has to do with an obsession with the past in our current culture.

Re:I never really..

[dakameleon]

Lack of instant broad family appeal. The Simpsons has a character everyone can identify with, but Futurama has quirky characters that aren't as broad in their reach. I for one say Futurama is far funnier, but then I land smack-bang in its target audience, so I would wouldn't I.

Re:I never really..

[cowboy76Spain]

Because it was a little too geeky. Many of the jokes involved references to sci-fi movies or series, or scientific / mathematical theory (for example this list (spanish)). Most people won't get what is about a 7-11 clerk in a box, but you know it is the shield from "Dune". Or that a aleph-sub-0 cinema would have a countable infinite number of rooms.

Also, many of the jokes are more subtle than those usual to the Simpsons, and probably people won't want to look at a cartoon and have to think harder to understand its humour.

That said, I am already waiting on it.

Re:I never really..

[VagaStorm]

I thought shows like lost, smallwile and CSI where pretty popular over there. They are not so wery futuristic, but sci-fi none the less.

Re:I never really..

[Anonymous Coward]

I didn't see this answer in the previous replies to your question.

Fox set up Futurama to run at 7PM EST / 6PM CST. This was on a Sunday. Fox had football running on Sundays. With the exception of the west coast, most of the country never saw the show. Many times they joined the show already in progress at approx 20 after, so no one could know what was going on. Too many football games went past their time slot.

Plus, there are those that attended church on Sunday nights, so they never saw an episode. While living with the parents, it was a requirement to attend church on Sunday nights. I never caught the show unless I was sick or after I had moved out. So I never got a chance to see the entire run until Adult Swim started showing it.

So for a few, other things were going on on Sunday nights. For many others they never got a chance to see the show due to Fox's use of a 7PM time slot on a day they had football scheduled until 7PM, but typically it ran until 7:20.

No promotion behind it. All I remember ever seeing commercials for was Simpsons and King of the Hill.

Re:I never really..

[00schneider]

I really can't understand either why shows like Futurama or Family Guy are considered unsuccessful and getting canceled. Are the networks expecting too much from these shows or are the makers demanding to much money for an episode? Many complain about Firefly and other shows I never even heard of not being continued. But unlike them Futurama and Family Guy aired in many countries around the world with good ratings. Almost worldwide known shows and the merchandising have to generate some money.

Re:I never really..

[kramulous]

Brilliant reference. Spent a while on it.

Re:I never really..

[Anonymous Coward]

Three things, two of which speak for themselves.

Number one: Lack of promotion.
Number two: The time slot.
Number three: Aside from Bender (mere fact of his unsubtle humor), Fry and Amy there's not many characters on the show that people can connect with the way they can connect with just about every Simpsons character.

Sure, it's great for geeks with the more subtle humor, the sci-fi references etc. However, I'm guessing it's a little bit harder for most people to look past the visual presentation and connect with a lobster-like-alien character or a horrible gelatinous blob character than it is for them to connect with a Ned Flanders or an Officer Lou.

Re:I never really..

[Don_dumb]

Besides the scheduling and other issues that have been mentioned I think the simple reason that Futurama struggled in comparison to The Simpsons is that The Simpsons doesn't involve any allegorical nature in its setting. We know that the Future really represents now (partly because Matt said so) but some people just can't get round that these aren't real things or people, like they can with The Simpsons. Many people have this problem with fantasy as well, they think it is for kids because it involves some imagination, some removal from the real world even if that removal is only superficial.
Many of the people I know who liked the Simpsons but hardly watched any Futurama (after the first ep), also never even considered seeing LOTR or any fantasy.

After rambling my point is that geeks generally get Sci-Fi/SF and fantasy because we have the ability to see something that is somehow removed from the world around us, it has its own Mythos (I hate that word). But a sizeable proportion of the populace are either unwilling or unable to enjoy something that has its own world or abstract setting. TV execs think that Americans wont even understand a program set outside America, let alone somewhere that doesn't exist, they may actually have a point when refering to the majority.

Re:I never really..

[Anonymous Coward]

Your link in English: http://usuarios.lycos.es/bbrp/mathematics.html

Re:I never really..

[Anonymous Coward]

Futurama had its moments, but there's too much dead space between jokes for it to be as funny as the Simpsons.

That "dead space between jokes" was where they put the more intellectual jokes, which obviously went straight over your head. the show is non-stop laughs

Re:I never really..

[ed]

Well I for one saw Firefly in the UK and it seemed popular enough.

I think I ended up buying 4 copies of the DVDs to distribute and I even orddered Serenity from the US to get it early

Re:I never really..

[EricWright]

It always amazed me that, whenever the football broadcast (and/or the post-game show) ran past 8pm, the Simpsons was shown in its entirety, but Futurama was always started "already in progress" or pre-empted completely.

While I adore the Simpsons (always have), in some ways, that show is indirectly responsible for FOX News and other atrocities like American Idol. The Simpsons was basically the only thing keeping FOX afloat in the early days... and now look what we have.

Re:I never really..

[Chris Mattern]

Or one of my favorites, the horse race with the quantum finish. Prof. Farnsworth complained that they'd changed the outcome by measuring it.

Chris Mattern

Re:I never really..

[Lord Ender]

To fully appreciate Futurama

• You need to have read Asimov and Heinlein
  
• You must have seen pretty much all of ST:TOS
  
• You must have a college-level understanding of physics ("no fair! you changed the outcome by measuring it")
  
• You must have some understanding of American political history (President Nixon, etc.)
  
• You must know a bit about digital technology ("Don't worry, Bender. There's no such thing as 2.")
  
• Tou must not take religion too seriously ("sweet zombie Jesus!")
  

This is all true for the majority of my friends (who I know from engineering school or my career in software). However, my girlfriend's friends and my family can only check off one or two items on that list. They'll get a few laughs, sure. But even though The Simpsons and Family Guy are mediocre by comparison, those two shows never leave the majority of people thinking "I don't get it..." Futurama is just a masterpiece with a small audience, so it has less earning power.

The good news is that with Video over IP finally becoming cheap, HTPCs starting to catch on, and the popularity of DVD sales and rentals; the cost of entry to the TV show market is plummeting. The future looks good for shows like Futurama :-)

Re:I never really..

[cmorgan47]

because fox scheduled it so that the second football game inevitably ran into the first half...then the post game....so you'd get about 5-10 minutes of futurama, followed by a rerun of "king of the hill." don't get me wrong, i'm all for 2 games on sunday, but schedule you're rerun to get preempted, not the new material

Re:I never really..

[LWATCDR]

Sorry that you where forced to go to church on Sunday night. I missed a lot of Futurama because I chose to go to church on Sunday night.
I do agree that the time slot sucked. Same thing for King of the Hill which I also like a lot more than the Simpsons. I would miss it because of church activities or because of some stupid football game.
Thank goodness for adult swim.

Re:I never really..

[hal2814]

I don't buy the you're-not-smart-enough-to-get-it argument. I can check off all of your points and never really cared for Futurama. I don't think the general dislike really has to do with the brainy jokes as much as it has to do with episode pacing and the main characters. It also had a weak first few episodes. Family Guy tosses in a lot of pop culture references that go straight over people's heads, but there are still plenty of people who enjoy the show. I know pop culture references aren't the same thing as scientific and political jokes but at the same time, there are probably more people who have taken college Physics than know who Gil Gerrard is. American Dad does the same thing with pop culture references but has a lot fewer fans. The problems isn't the jokes. The problem is the stories that hold the jokes together.

I did like a few Futurama episodes here and there but I would much rather be watching the Simpsons. And I did get it. Just like I got the Matrix sequels and I got the Doctor Who story Ghost Light. I'm not a fan of any though.

Re:I never really..

[LWATCDR]

I don't agree. My wife loves the show.
"You need to have read Asimov and Heinlein"
Okay I have read a lot of Asimov and a little of Heinlein. My wife has read none.
"You must have seen pretty much all of ST:TOS"
I think that is very very common.
" You must have a college-level understanding of physics ("no fair! you changed the outcome by measuring it")"
I would say that is high school physics but again my wife was a Poly sci major and took no physics.
"You must have some understanding of American political history (President Nixon, etc.)"
Okay knowing who Nixon was isn't exactly a deep understanding of political history.
"You must know a bit about digital technology ("Don't worry, Bender. There's no such thing as 2.")"
Maybe.
"You must not take religion too seriously ("sweet zombie Jesus!")"
This is a big one. I do go to church every Sunday and teach Sunday school as does my wife. We are both VERY religious and take it very seriously. Things like that just don't offend me. Why should would it offend someone that is secure in their faith. I get far more offended by the "free thinkers" on Slashdot that think that their lack of faith is proof of their intellectual superiority over anyone that does follow a religion.
I don't think that Futurama failed because it was too "smart" for the masses. What a great way to stroke your own ego to think that a show you really liked required you to be smarter than everyone else.
Futurama failed because of it's time slot and bad marketing. If they had put it on after the Simpsons and before King of the Hill and didn't bump it off the air for Football I think it would have been a hit.

Re:I never really..

[Homr Zodyssey]

Ah, yes, but Firefly, Farscape and Futurama (ok, and sometimes Lexx) should have tought us otherwise by now.

Don't forget the current crop of funny sci-fi shows. There's Eureka and Doctor Who. Stargate: Atlantis has its moments, too.

But this is not a new concept. Red Dwarf was pretty funny.

Re:I never really..

[ranton]

I don't think that Futurama failed because it was too "smart" for the masses. What a great way to stroke your own ego to think that a show you really liked required you to be smarter than everyone else.

Where did you read that in Lord Ender's post? He never mentioned anything about someone needing to be "smart" to understand Futurama. He made a number of assertions (right or wrong), but none of them mentioned having to be smart. You do not have to be smart to read Asimov or know who Nixon is. While it is true that many of the qualities he mentioned have a fairly strong correlation with being intelligent, he never said that it was necessary.

--

Re:I never really..

[TacNuke]

Speaking of the preemption by football, what if the announcer had instead said: "Sunday night football on FOX will not be seen tonight. Instead we bring you this episode of Futurama, followed by an hour of Star Trek:TNG" Say that to the non-geeky sport fan and watch the light come on as they perhaps finally understand why a person could be so upset about missing episodes of their favorite sci-fi show....

Re:I never really..

[Anonymous Coward]

Or it could just be that a lot of folks (such as myself) really thought that it genuinely sucked. I honestly never saw the appeal of it. I tried to like it, I really did. I probably watched 5 or 6 episodes over the course of a month early on, and I just never laughed. I maybe chuckled. Twice.

Believe it or not, another geek (read: NOT repelled by sci-fi) just didn't like the show.

Re:I never really..

[LWATCDR]

Take a look at the list of "intellectual requirements".
College level physics? Like I said I disagree with that one since I remember the uncertainty principle being taught in my high school physics and honors chemistry class.
An understanding of American Political History?
An understanding of digital technology?

You don't think that those requirements smack of intellectual elitism?
I will skip over the Star Trek requirement since I think everybody on the planet has seen all the original Star Treks.

Re:I never really..

[Anonymous Coward]

I didn't like it at first (but I also hated the Simpsons till season 3 or 4). I caught it on re-runs and realized it was a very funny show.

I think my biggest problem with much of popular entertainment is that it gets so built up and so many people gush over it that I build up an unreasonable expectation. I started enjoying movies and books and tv shows a lot more once I started completely ignoring hype and advertising.

Re:I never really..

[Lord Ender]

I don't agree. My wife loves the show.
"You need to have read Asimov and Heinlein"
Okay I have read a lot of Asimov and a little of Heinlein. My wife has read none.

Therefore, your wife does not "fully appreciate" the show, as I originally stated.

"You must have seen pretty much all of ST:TOS"
I think that is very very common.

It is certainly NOT very common for the under-30 crowd, who are a big market for animated comedy shows.

" You must have a college-level understanding of physics ("no fair! you changed the outcome by measuring it")"
I would say that is high school physics but again my wife was a Poly sci major and took no physics.

That was one example. There are many science jokes. If you only have HS physics, you won't appreciate them all.

"You must have some understanding of American political history (President Nixon, etc.)"
Okay knowing who Nixon was isn't exactly a deep understanding of political history.

He is the most prominent of the many historical political figures in the show. And, believe it or not, many of the under-30 demographic know little about even Nixon.

"You must know a bit about digital technology ("Don't worry, Bender. There's no such thing as 2.")"
Maybe.

Not maybe. There are many computer-relate jokes that would no doubt be lost on my (typical, average) parents.

"You must not take religion too seriously ("sweet zombie Jesus!")"
This is a big one.

At least you agree 100% on something I said. Family Guy and The Simpsons also require this for full appreciation. Most Evangelicals, born-agains, or whatever they want to call themselves, along with full-fledged catholics, would be offended by the observations that Jesus was a zombie, and that in 1000 years (when Futurama is set) their religions will most likely be about as popular as worshiping Thor or Zeus is today. Of course, it Western culture today, most people consider religion somewhere on the spectrum between "complete nonsense" and "gotta get married somewhere," so zombie jokes don't offend too much.

[some gripe about free-thinkers looking down on the religious]

Sorry, that's not going to change. People who think evidence is the foundation of knowledge will always look down on the faithful, who take pride in believing something despite a complete lack of (empirical) evidence. The faithful can, of course, look down on the scientifically-minded as being "the devil" or whatever.

I don't think that Futurama failed because it was too "smart" for the masses.

Nor do I. I simply said that knowledge in several distinct areas is required to fully appreciate the show. You are right that there are other things FOX could have done better. Perhaps Murdoch deliberately set it up to fail because he has a vested interest in keeping the world pacified by religion? FOX News certainly makes every attempt to stigmatize secular thinking. Who knows...

Re:I never really..

[crabpeople]

Well personally, I didnt start watching it till long after it went off the air. When it came out I remember thinking that groeing was abandoning the simpsons to do some other show and at the time felt betrayed. So I never watched it untill it came out on dvd rips. Its easily way better than the simpsons but at the time it just seemed like a simpsons rip off.

Re:I never really..

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

"Fox set up Futurama to run at 7PM EST / 6PM CST. This was on a Sunday. Fox had football running on Sundays. With the exception of the west coast, most of the country never saw the show. Many times they joined the show already in progress at approx 20 after, so no one could know what was going on. Too many football games went past their time slot."

It wasn't just football. When Episode I came out, Fox showed the original Star Wars at 5pm. It ended at 7pm. If they had just left the schedule where it was, Futurama would have come after Star Wars.... right? NO. They put two episodes of King of the Hill after it! Talk about baffling.

Re:I never really..

[jZnat]

Now that is an example of sciency humour that is also funny without knowing what he meant (crazy old coot or expert in quantum physics?). What I like about Futurama is that it was funny when I was younger, and now it's funnier when I understand more of the subtleties.

Re:I never really..

[Belial6]

Or my favorite. "It's a quantum finish!!!" "No fair! You change the results by measuring it!"

Re:I never really..

[Lord Ender]

If anyone here is exhibiting intellectual elitism, not to mention a hint of sophistry, it's you. It is quite possible to be smart having studied little physics and history (Nixon is history to younger generations). A brilliant investor or biologist may have little understanding of how digital technology works. Despite being brilliant, such a person would not realize the humor in many Futurama jokes.

My list was of items required to fully appreciate the show in question. YOU are the only one here who implied that it was a list of requirements for being intelligent.

Also, the way you dismiss my broad assertions by contending only the specific examples smacks of sophistry.

Re:I never really..

[Anonymous Coward]

A television network in the US, will never switch away from a football game ever again. Not since the Heidi bowl. They will switch to another football game, as they can switch back easily, but they will not switch from a football game to a movie or show.

Re:I never really..

[lmnfrs]

Yes, the popularity definitely relies on more than one aspect like pop culture or science jokes.

I can't remember his name now, but your post reminds me of an excellent example in Family Guy, where Peter references somebody (a writer I think?) then the scene cuts to him; he looks up at the camera and just says "You don't even know who I am."

Re:I never really..

[Altus]

you should go back and check out the first few episodes of the simpsons. I mean, im nostalgic about them but they really weren't that strong.

Re:I never really..

[Anonymous Coward]

Because every single time it was ever on it was pre-empted by fucking NFL football. Football is therefore the root of all evil and should be destroyed!

If you need me i'll be in the angry dome!

Re:I never really..

[LWATCDR]

"Sorry, that's not going to change. People who think evidence is the foundation of knowledge will always look down on the faithful, who take pride in believing something despite a complete lack of (empirical) evidence. The faithful can, of course, look down on the scientifically-minded as being "the devil" or whatever."

Except those very people are deluding themselves that they are rational in all things when some of their beliefs are nothing but a faith that they have some greater knowledge of right and wrong then the next person.

I will match my knowledge of science with any of the faithful atheists out there.

Re:I never really..

[Chris Burke]

I don't know about that. I like Futurama a lot (very stoked that more episodes are coming) and appreciate the really nerdy physics, math, and computer jokes, and the old sci-fi references. But ultimately, I still like the Simpsons more. My girlfriend loves Futurama, and she isn't a geek nor avid watcher of Star Trek nor reader of Heinlein, and she's Canadian to boot so her knowledge of U.S. political history is slightly worse than mine. I assure you, she gets more than a few laughs out of the show.

Re:I never really..

[Lord Ender]

I'm not sure what you mean by "faithful atheist." Most who consider themselves atheists do so out of scientific empiricism, which is the opposite of faith. In such cases, a "faithful atheist" is a contradiction in terms.

To say you don't (a...) believe there is any god (...theist) because there is no evidence is NOT in any way a demonstration of "faith."

The volume of scientific knowledge you have memorized has no basis on whether you believe evidence is the foundation of knowledge. I could memorize all stories of Greek mythology, but that doesn't mean I believe in Apollo exists.

Re:I never really..

[wed128]

I know it seems like a digital technology quote, but the "no such thing as 2" thing is actually an astronomy reference. It basically references the fact that in this infinite universe, it is possible for something to either not exist, be unique (only one of a given thing exists), or there are many. To have two of something would violate some level of logic.

Re:I never really..

[Some_Llama]

It's frustrating watching this show with my wife, as this joke demonstrates.. how do you explain what is so funny about measuring a quantum finish without destroying the joke? see I just did it!

Re:I never really..

[stummies]

you forgot - you must be prone to posting geeky lists on a geeky website frequented by geeks. ;)

Re:I never really..

[Lord Ender]

The episode wasn't about astronomy. The joke was specifically about a robot's dream. Robots think in binary, 0 or 1, hence the "2" joke. I think claiming it was a reference to astronomy is a bit of a stretch. Also, my understanding is that the universe is not infinite, but is actually expanding.

Re:I never really..

[LWATCDR]

You see one a human is so sure that that one bases their belief system entirely on scientific empiricism are most almost always just fooling themselves. What is worse they then elevate their option to that of scientific fact even if there is no basis.

A great example is when it comes to abortion rights. I happen to be technically pro choice in that I don't think that it should be illegal. My choice in the matter is based on some beliefs that I know not everyone shares and I must accept that as a fact. Would I be happy if no one ever choose to get an abortion again? Yes I would.
But when you convince yourself that your opinions/beliefs are totally based on scientific facts you remove that doubt. It doesn't matter if you are sure that you have scientific proof of God or if you are completely sure that your entire belief system is based on scientific empiricism. The real truth is that you and I and everyone have deep beliefs that are not biased on any scientific empiricism. Some of those beliefs seem to border on the universal. The concept that one should be free to make their own choices or that you should care for you offspring do seem almost hardwired. When you take away from yourself the doubt of I believe then you become less tolerant not more tolerant.
Your very statement that you look down on people of faith pretty much proves it. You think that you are intellectually superior to people like Donald Knuth and myself. And not I am not in the same league as Donald Knuth. I just know that he is a person of deep faith.
So yes you are acting like a "faithful athiest" you are sure that you are making judgments based only on facts. Yet the facts don't back you up.

Re:I never really..

[Lurker2288]

Without getting down into the epistemology of it, of course there has to be some kind of first principles on which other beliefs are based. It's like Descartes second meditation (I think): it's possible that I'm really asleep right now, with a demon just manipulating me to think I'm sitting at my computer, typing, but if I assume the demon, how can I come to any firm conclusions about what's real and what's not? I can only proceed on the basis that the things I recognize as 'facts' really are facts.

And why shouldn't I look down on someone who holds beliefs that are no more real to me than a child's game of make believe? You'd probably regard someone who thinks a TV is magic as ignorant; why should I believe any different of someone who invokes a supernatural entity to explain the rest of the world, given that my understanding of things doesn't require it?

Every society that's ever worshiped any deity believed they were worshipping the right guy, and in the right way. So what could be more ludicrous than to watch a church, or a synagogue, or a mosque full of people totally commited to the idea that _they_ finally, of all earth's people, have finally got it all figured out?

Re:I never really..

[LWATCDR]

"And why shouldn't I look down on someone who holds beliefs that are no more real to me than a child's game of make believe?"

Why should you look down on anyone? Especially when there is proof that there are people of faith that are in every measurable way your intellectual equal or superior. Would you look down on J.R. Tolken, C.S. Lewis, Donald Knuth, Oskar Schindler , Mother Teresa, Desmond Tutu, Bono, Orson Scott Card, and Martin Luther King?
Exactly how many Nobel prizes do you have, how lives have you saved, how many prizes for literature, now many peoples hearts have you touched that you feel comfortable to hold yourself above these people?

Re:I never really..

[Lord Ender]

Wrong premise again. You just claimed that empirically minded people have no doubts about anything. That's a straw-man, and it's the opposite of reality.

Sagan would say that skepticism is at the heart of the scientific method. A scientific thinker doesn't really "believe" anything, to use the layman's definition of the term. He has varying levels of confidence in any particular theory. If theory is consistent with all available evidence and every attempt to disprove the theory has failed, then he would he would have high confidence in it (aka "I believe the maximum speed of information transmission is bounded by c"). If there is no or little evidence to support a theory ("Native americans are descendants of ancient migratory jews? I don't believe that because there is no evidence. Find some and I will reconsider"), a scientific thinker might say he does not believe a thing.

In the first case, we have 99.5% confidence, and in the second case, we have 0.01% confidence. Religious people profess 100% confidence in their beliefs. To paraphrase George Lucas, Only the religious and the Sith deal in absolutes.

So I hope that clears up your confusion as to what scientific empiricism is. It seems your ideas about science and atheism were in several ways opposite to reality. Perhaps you learned about these concepts from someone who was hoping to discredit them?

Re:I never really..

[Lord Ender]

It is possible to be great at one thing and stupid at another thing. Ability is not a one-dimensional attribute. Knuth is probably the only great figure in the computer industry who is strongly religious. Quit naming names, it doesn't advance your point.

Re:I never really..

[jesterzog]

..understood as to why Futurama never really took off to the mainstream as Simpsons did. Especially with the declining quality of the latter and the pretty much consistent high quality of the former.

But Futurama only lasted for four seasons (or five, depending on how you split it). Staying consistent inside that time-frame is much easier, and The Simpsons has stayed consistent for that long on several occasions.

I stopped bothering to watch new Simpsons episodes ages ago, after I started to find it boring. The style I grew up with mostly existed between about seasons 2 and 10, when I think it was in full flight. After that, I haven't really connected with a lot of the episodes or found them especially funny.

I know some people, though, who still really enjoy The Simpsons. They're usually younger people, although a know a bunch of other people who'll just watch it for a laugh if it's on. Keep in mind that for anyone who's a teenager, The Simpsons has been going for as long as they've been alive. They probably only started watching it when they were about 7 or 8. Usually they mostly enjoy the more recent episodes that came at about the time when I stopped, and that's the style that The Simpsons means to them.

In later episodes, there aren't any serious attempts to develop the characters because they're all so well known, even if different viewers think they know them differently. Homer frequently steals the show by acting like an idiot without boundaries, and the main focus of the show is wondering just how outrageously stupid Homer can be. Other characters are mostly limited to regurgitating their associated cliche's, or alternatively doing things wildly out of character for a quick laugh. Personally I think it's lower quality, but people who are used to it just watch it for what it is, and enjoy it because it matches what they like.

Throw an older episode at many of these people (and I have), such as an episode where Homer leads a strike at work to get back the dental plan and pay for Lisa's braces, and they just don't get it. Homer's a bit lazy and has silly ideas, but he has limitations and isn't a total idiot. The other characters also have defining limitations to how they act, and there's still space to develop their characters. Many people used to the more recent episodes just find it drab and boring, though, and don't really understand what makes it so great.

Declining quality or not, The Simpsons adapts to match what's popular in the day that it's screening, and this is how it keeps an audience. Lately that's been things like reality TV and the audiences that go with it. Futurama wasn't around long enough to see if it would have gone down this track, and I really hope it doesn't after it comes back again. I like Futurama as it was when it was canned.

Re:I never really..

[jesterzog]

To fully appreciate Futurama...

I found that listening to the DVD commentary also works wonders. There were a heap of jokes in there that I never would have appreciated without hearing the writers and producers being unable to contain their laughter at their own jokes.

This is also true for older episodes of The Simpsons which had a lot of hidden jokes -- I guess a lot of the production staff just moved over and brought all their maths and Star Trek jokes with them.

Re:I never really..

[LWATCDR]

So why should you look down on people of faith? You made the statement as to why shouldn't you look down on people of faith. The answer is that you shouldn't look down on them because they may have a lot to teach you?.
Knuth the only great figure? How about Alan Ashton and Ray Noorda? BTW Knuth is is a great figure in Computer Science.
You have made one step forward. You shouldn't look down on people that don't share you beliefs because they may other things to teach you.

Re:I never really..

[LWATCDR]

"Wrong premise again. You just claimed that empirically minded people have no doubts about anything. That's a straw-man, and it's the opposite of reality."
No you are making a wrong premise.
My claim is those that claim that they are entirely empirically minded are deluding themselves. I know many people that are empirically minded. I am actually very empirically minded. Many years ago I took a lot of logic and philosophy courses and even had a paper published. But I also know that there is a part of my decsion making that is based just on faith and opinion. I have a certain basic view of the universe that is based on some unprovable assumptions that to me seem to be absolute truths.
Some of them are as simple as it is better to be kind than too be cruel.
I am not trying to convince you that you should believe in God. What I am trying to get you to do is to respect people of faith. Maybe to get you over you fantasy that your lack of faith makes you superior to people that are religious. I wouldn't try to teach you to become spiritual. I don't know if that can be taught and even if it could be I am not sure I have the skill to teach it. I am trying to teach you respect for others and tolerance.

Re:I never really..

[Lurker2288]

Well, speaking to you as a person of faith, you seem to lack the wit to notice you're talking to two people, so that's a start. Secondly, perhaps it's a bit strong to say 'look down on,' because certainly, there are plenty of professedly religious folks who have done impressive things by any standard. But that doesn't make their absurd beliefs any less absurd, and there have been as many awful things done by people of faith as there are great things. There are folks who think Osama bin Laden has done some pretty impressive things in the name of faith.

Really, how seriously do you expect to be taken when you embrace religion? How much credence would you give one of the Branch Davidians, or a Scientologist? The fact that your whacky club has been around 2,000 years may be impressive, but it doesn't make it any more credible than any other organization that promises to give the meaning of life to all the good little followers who line up to drink the Kool Aid.

Morals, kindness, generosity of spirit and wonder at nature are all excellent qualities for mankind to embrace. I look forward to the day when we can do it without needing ancient superstitions based on divine whim.

Re:I never really..

[Lurker2288]

"So why should you look down on people of faith?"

Well, first off, you, as a person of faith, fail to recognize you're talking to two separate people, so that's a start.

Secondly, as you've noted, there are many very impressive people who profess religious faith. This doesn't really change the fact that they're embracing a fairy tale, however. So, insofar as I can separate what they do from what they believe, I don't see a problem. And of course you shouldn't forget that there have been terrible things done by people of faith, as well as great things.

But really, why would you expect to be taken seriously when you openly admit to incredible beliefs? How seriously would you take someone who prayed to Mother Goose, or to Paris Hilton? The fact that your cult has been around for 2000 years (you mentioned Sunday mass, so I'm assuming some Christian denomination) is impressive, but it doesn't make you any more credible. I support your right to believe whatever you want, but if you're going to reject rationality in favor of myth and superstition, then don't expect to be taken seriously.

Love for one another, generosity of spirit, and awe in the face of nature are all admirable traits for mankind to embrace. I look forward to the day when we can do so without being driven to it with the threat of divine wrath.

Re:I never really..

[Anonymous Coward]

It was Benjamin Disraeli, the first (and so far only) British Prime Minister of Jewish decent.

Re:I never really..

[LWATCDR]

"And of course you shouldn't forget that there have been terrible things done by people of faith, as well as great things."
And equally terrible things have been by people lacking faith or at the least professed atheists.
Mao Zedong , Kim Il-sung, and Pol Pot come to mind.

Why do you think that I feel the need for you too take me seriously? I really don't care except that I am trying to teach tolerance and respect. I don't feel the need to convince you too share my faith. You must find your own answers. I am trying to teach you to respect others.
But you make a point. Part of my faith is a belief that I must share it with others. In this case I am trying to share the teaching that one should respect others.

I must apologize with getting you two confused but the statements from you two are so close in tone and content that it is like getting caught between two Jesuits.

Re:I never really..

[IceCreamGuy]

Heh, if only he'd read Heinlein

Re:I never really..

[IceCreamGuy]

You forgot "You must have a thorough understanding of theoretical computer science (P, NP books, 'Do you have an extra 'go to 10' line?')" I do disagree with your overall point, however. I think that even without knowledge of any of those things, it's still a witty show, the humor itself I feel is often complex and very satisfying, and the sci-fi is really great. The characters are deep and explored often, and the entire series has a cohesive plot that loops back on itself with elements even from the first episode hidden until mear the end of the last season. All in all a great show for almost anyone, but it just didn't take off like it should have.

Re:I never really..

[DerekLyons]

I never really understood as to why Futurama never really took off to the mainstream as Simpsons did.

Reading through the comments I see all the usual tinfoil hat arguments being dragged out. ("You had to be smart", "Poor scheduling", "No marketing", etc...) But for me, it came down to one very simple reason....
 
Futurma simply wasn't very funny.
 
Even though I hit the checklists (familiar with sci-fi, etc...) right down the line, I found it faintly repellent. I couldn't identify with the characters and the writing was flat at best. (They consistently tried to make up for the latter by hitting the viewer repeatedly about the head and shoulders - the cartoon equivalent of a pie-in-the-face.)

Re:I never really..

[DerekLyons]

American Dad does the same thing with pop culture references but has a lot fewer fans.

  American Dad has popularity problems simply because it's so poorly done. Wrapping a derivative (and repetitive) sitcom drama in broad political stereotypes results in a show that appeals only to particularly dim (and small) subset of the American viewing audience.

Re:I never really..

[Lord Ender]

No level of "respect," whatever that means, will change that fact that people who believe evidence is the basis of knowledge, think basing knowledge is a silly thing to do. This is an irreconcilable difference.

To think someone has some silly beliefs does NOT mean you can't respect that person for other attributes or accomplishments.

Re:I never really..

[LWATCDR]

Thank you that is exactly what I was saying.
Now replace the deminging and nasty word "silly" with "different" and you will be on your way to being a tolerant person.

"To think someone has some silly beliefs does NOT mean you can't respect that person for other attributes or accomplishments."

Re:I never really..

[voxel]

Because the target audience has a slightly higher IQ level. Basically Simpsons is more mainstream.

A friend of mine hates Futurama because he doesn't get the jokes, "No fair, you changed the outcome by observing it!" -- The professor on a quantum horse race.

People don't like to feel dumb when watching TV, they want predictability and nice simple jokes that everyone can get.

I for one think Futurama is great, and they should even bump up the jokes a bit more :-)

Re:I never really..

[tbannist]

What you don't seem to understand is that the athiests you've been talking to have chosen rationality and knowledge as moral goods. To them faith in a unprovable hypothesis is morally bad and thus why they look down upon those who believe in superstitions and religion.

The reason it's considered a moral bad is that in the area of logic and rationality an unprovable assumption invalidates all logic derived from it. The central problem therefore is that religion can be used to justify any action no matter how good or how bad, simply because you believe in it.

A few corrections

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, Futurama had four production seasons (hence the four box sets) that aired as five television seasons on FOX.

Also, AFAIK, The Simpsons isn't ending any time soon.

At last!

[Anonymous Coward]

Finally, a good show on TV.

Random celebratory quote:

"The Elders tell of a young ball much like you. First he bounced 3 meters in the air... Then he bounced 1.8 meters in the air. Then he bounced *4* meters in the air."

Re:At last!

[Altus]

Henry Kissinger: Mr. Ambassador, our people tell the same story.

Re:At last!

[qualidafial]

Henry Kissinger: Mr. Ambassador, we must put an end to the bloodshed. We've already seen too many body bags and ball sacks.

Wrong again idiot!

[guamman]

The DVD format does not come in high-def. At the very most, they are referring to 480P which might be termed enhanced-def at best.

Re:Wrong again idiot!

[Anonymous Coward]

But this is _H_D_ DVD. It's got better resolution than the real world.

Re:Wrong again idiot!

[thegrassyknowl]

Who gives a fuck about the definition of HD in resolution terms.

As long as it's good enough to see Amy's obscene tattoo it's high def enough for Futurama

Re:Wrong again idiot!

[guamman]

To the individuals that decided this post was trolling: Do you realize that "Wrong again idiot!" is a quote from a Futurama episode? It was supposed to be humorous.

Eggggselllent. . .

[noewun]

Oh, wait: wrong series.

Me too

[wamerocity]

I am seriously so glad they are bringing this show back. I remember when I completely stopped watching the Simpsons after I found out about this show in the second season, then I watched it nonstop. The character are just classic, and it's a lot grittier than the simpsons by far.

Favorite quotes:

Zapp: "Congratulations Leela. Now you're officially my woman. Kudos! I can't say I don't envy you."

Zapp: "Kiff, have the boy lay out my formal shorts." Kiff: "The Boy sir?" Zapp: "YOU Kiff, YOU lay out my formal shorts."

Dr. Zoidberg: "Love? Love is not known here. I am simply looking for a female swollen with eggs to accept my genetic material" Fry: "You and me both brother!"

Fry: "Oh! Why couldn't she be the OTHER type of Mermaid, which the fish part on top, and the lady part on the bottom!"

Re:Me too

[CrazyTalk]

Here's mine (from memory, may not be 100% accurate):

"God Lord! Thats over 150 atmospheres of pressure!

How many atmospheres can the ship withstand, professor?

Well it's a spacship. So anywhere between 0 and 1."

I think the number of people in the general population that would get that joke is one reason the series was canceled.

Re:Me too

[digitalhermit]

Nah, the reason the series was cancelled was not because so few people got that joke, but that of those that did, 90% of them thought, "That doesn't make any sense. Does he mean Earth atmosphere? Or Jovian? Or Martian?"

Re:Me too

[Anonymous Coward]

"Mr. Fry! Why is this hat filled with yoghurt?"

"Oh, yeah, I can explain that. You see, it used to be milk, and... well, time makes fools of us all."

----------------

"I know. I'm a whale biologist."

Re:Me too

[IndustrialComplex]

Nah, the reason the series was cancelled was not because so few people got that joke, but that of those that did, 90% of them thought, "That doesn't make any sense. Does he mean Earth atmosphere? Or Jovian? Or Martian?" Did you really just claim to be too nerdy for the jokes from Futurama? Is that overachieving or underachiving?

Re:Me too

[Chris Mattern]

Well, those who know that the "atmosphere" is indeed a standard meaure of pressure (equal to about 100 kiloPascals or 15 pounds per square inch) thought it made perfect sense. Yes, it is a standardization of Earth's atmospheric pressure at sea-level, but it's still a standard that is internationally defined and sees use.

Chris Mattern

Re:Me too

[proverbialcow]

Fry: Whatcha doing Bender? Building yourself a wife?
Bender: Part of one.

Re:Me too

[qualidafial]

"It's the only gum with the breath-freshening power of ham!"

Re:Me too

[QuantumPion]

Another one of my favorites:

Horse race announcer: It's a quantum finish! And the winner is... Harry Trotter!
Professor Farnsworth: No fair! You changed the outcome by measuring it!

Re:Me too

[Anonymous Coward]

If you're so scientifically illiterate to not be aware that the Atmosphere is a standard and defined unit of pressure (about 101 kPa), how could you possibly know enough to get that joke?

Re:Me too

[GungaDan]

and let us never forget... "are you jacking on in there?"

Re:Me too

[Altus]

and its right there with a simpler to understand joke that I have always loved:

Man: "And you, Sir? How can I horse you?"
Hermes: "I'll have a horse Coke."
Man: "Horse Pepsi okay?"
Hermes: "Nay."

Re:Me too

[Anonymous Coward]

No, I think the group you refer to are stupid clowns who don't understand that the atm is a unit referenced, specifically, to 101.325 Pascals.

Re:Me too

[Babbster]

I would categorize it as "malachievement."

Re:Me too

[qualidafial]

Bender: "And it pinkens your teeth while you chew!"

Re:Me too

[CrazyTalk]

That's awesome! Never heard that one.

Any differences in the releases?

[LarsWestergren]

One thing I have been wondering about is if the series will add or remove some material? I guess some people would complain if they first bought the movies, and then found additional material on the series DVD release. If so, I would probably buy both. Remember that it was the good DVD sales that brought Family Guy back.

Re:Any differences in the releases?

[AngryJim]

"Remember that it was the good DVD sales that brought Family Guy back."

Yeah and look how that turned out.

Re:Any differences in the releases?

[LarsWestergren]

>>"Remember that it was the good DVD sales that brought Family Guy back."
>Yeah and look how that turned out.

Ouch... yeah, point. I think Futurama season 4 was a slight step down in quality too. The jokes were telegraphed way ahead, and there were no new interesting characters introduced.

On the other hand, the redeeming qualities were that plots moved from just being satirical joke-vehicles to real story arcs with interesting sci-fi twists and developing characters, at least with regards to Fry&Leela and Kif&Amy. Dangerously close to being sentimental and sappy sometimes, but The Devil's Hands are Idle Playthings was a fantastic finishing episode.

Re:Any differences in the releases?

[AngryJim]

That was the one positive note for me personally, they really went out on a high note much like Arrested Development and Seinfeld, whereas shows like The Simpsons got stale a decade ago.

Re:Any differences in the releases?

[Altus]

The Devil's Hands are Idle Playthings was a fantastic finishing episode.


The Robot Devil: You cant just have your characters announce how they feel! That makes me feel angry!

Re:Any differences in the releases?

[Poromenos1]

At some point, Hedonism bot says "Ah, Fry, I would fain commission you write me an opera". That always bugs me, since it's "commission someone TO do something". Excellent episode otherwise, though.

Jambi, the chocolate icing!

Morbo is pleased, but sticky.

[rmoehring]

Morbo is pleased, but sticky.

Wohoo!

[miffo.swe]

Theese news made my day!

FINE!

[arcite]

Fine. I'll go build my own movie! With blackjack! And hookers! In fact, forget the movie and the blackjack! Ah, screw the whole thing.

Don't forget

[Dachannien]

Rumor has it that one or more of these DVDs will feature a very special full-length episode of Everybody Loves Hypno-Toad.

All glory to the Hypno-Toad!

Re:Don't forget

[Don_dumb]

How on earth did that mildly amuzing comment get +5 insightful? Way to waste mod points.

Re:Don't forget

[Dachannien]

Maybe because I was only kinda trying to be funny.

Re:Don't forget

[RiffRafff]

Indeed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypnotoad#Hypnotoad

Networks

[Enderandrew]

Will the networks ever learn? They never marketed the show properly, and that is why it failed, just like why Family Guy failed the first time around.

Often they bail very early on a show that could be successful (like Drive this year, or Firefly) before they ever give the show a chance to succeed. If you don't market a show, people don't know it exists, and they aren't going to watch it. The weird thing is that there is quite a bit of start-up cost in getting an animated show running with an animation shop. 16 episodes is more than a half-season slate. I don't know why they don't just bring it back as a mid-season replacement on Fox, see how it goes, and hopefully just bring the show back for good?

Re:Networks

[jellomizer]

Well adds cost money. And they rather focus it to show that they know everyone will like. Futurama and Family Guy have a target audience (people who understand and appreciate sarcasm), a large majority of the population are kina luke warm about those shows Family Guy re-found success was that it gathered the Shock Watch Crowd (They Cant do that On TV) and the Sarcasm loving fans. Futurama is a lot less shocking then Family Guy so it looses that segment.

Re:Networks

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't know why they don't just bring it back as a mid-season replacement on Fox, see how it goes, and hopefully just bring the show back for good?

Network TV time is expensive. Pressing DVDs is cheap.

Given that you've already produced the content, it's less risky to produce DVDs than trying to (re)launch a show on TV. Of course, if you're really risk-averse, you wouldn't make the content at all in the first place...

Re:Networks

[Enderandrew]

They have to fill the timeslot with something. My point is that if they are paying the cost to make the show in the first place, and animation is expensive, then why put it on Comedy Central?

Networks have more viewers than cable. They get more return on the investment if they air it on FOX as opposed to Comedy Central, not to mention now Fox suddenly saves themselves money since they don't have to pay for another show to fill that timeslot.

Either way, they can still sell the DVDs like they did with Family Guy. Their aired the episodes on Fox, and still sold the DVD of the "movie".

Re:Networks

[Anonymous Coward]

adds = ads

kina = kind of

then = than

looses = loses

Re:Networks

[mgblst]

Yes, I really liked this show, so it must be a great show. You do realise that everybody blames the networks/ Nielsen's rating systems whenever there show gets canceled. I mean, I know that a few guys at work watch it, and so do people on slashdot, so it must be popular.

The networks are actually experts at this, they have people who jobs it is to try to analyse all the data they have about a show, not just limited to ratings but to focus groups, interviews and online boards. But it is much easier to just attack them whenever your show gets canceled, rather than realise that you are in the minority. WHY? What is so bad about being in the minority, you are by already being on slashdot.

Re:Networks

[Enderandrew]

Ummm? The reason Family Guy was brought back was because it got HIGH ratings on Comedy Central and TBS, as well as HIGH DVD sales. It was canceled because it was poorly marketed, and no one saw it before it was initially canceled.

And take a show like Firefly. They only aired like 6 episodes total, in different time-slots, out of order, and never advertised the show. They aired a whopping 4 episodes of Drive, which got good reviews from pretty much every critic on the planet, and it was canceled.

I'm not a big fan of TV, and I was never a Whedon fan. I really hated Buffy and Angel, but Firefly was a damned good show. It sold like man on DVD to the point where they made a movie. Initial ratings aren't always indicative of the quality of the show. Jerry Springer was the highest rated show on the entire planet for a while, and so was Baywatch. And sometimes really good shows how poor ratings because no one knows anything about them. Even though Firefly sold well on DVD and was critically acclaimed, most people still haven't heard about the show.

That is poor advertising on the part of the network.

Jericho is another fine example. The network canceled it because of "poor ratings" and it had a huge fan-base who spent money out of pocket to take out an ad in Variety, and ship tons of peanuts to the network demanding the show be brought back. How were the ratings so poor with so many fans?

The Neilsen ratings often don't pick up on people who record shows with their DVR, and they also don't account for the people who watch the show on CBS.com so the ratings really didn't accurately reflect how large of a fan base the show actually had. If the networks were "experts" as you put it, they wouldn't lose so much money every year developing all these new shows that bomb. They wouldn't have canceled shows like Futurama, Firefly, Family Guy or Jericho in the first place when market demand for these shows was so high that they made more money after cancellation than before.

I know a guy (we're not close friends, but we have spoke on a few occasions) who wrote Grosse Point Blank. (Great friggin' movie) and he kept getting approached by the networks to do some TV work. He had some great stories. No one wanted to touch anything new, because it wasn't established and they had no way to determine if it would be successful or not. However they kept asking him to make "The Next Friends" show, because Friends was huge at the time. Every week when the new movies came out, whatever was big in the box office, they'd tell him to clone that.

Just because someone has money, that doesn't make them an expert. Far from it. As Kevin Smith said, "Hollywood is the only place where you fail upwards."

Re:Networks

[kannibal_klown]

Networks have more viewers than cable. They get more return on the investment if they air it on FOX as opposed to Comedy Central, not to mention now Fox suddenly saves themselves money since they don't have to pay for another show to fill that timeslot.

That is true, but you're not looking at the big picture. While US Network shows have bigger budgets and their audiences are 10x greater, they have downsides.

• They're more likely to cancel if the show isn't a major success, while Cable channels will let a show ride.
• Networks worry more about the FCC and morality groups, so unless you have a lot of weight behind you they tend to freak out when they find out you want to touch on a particular subject or make a particular joke.
• While Cable channels are pretty hands-off about the day-to-day, Networks are more pushy. This is partially because of fear of the FCC, but also for other reasons. Unless it's a major success they tend to try to tell the creative teams how to do their jobs.

A lot of shows that did well and lasted 3+ seasons (good or bad) on Cable would have gotten the axe on a Network before even the end of the first season. Likewise, said shows would not have been "the same" if they were on network.

Sure, Network shows get all of the attention, reach audiences an order-of-magnitude greater than cable, and tend to have bigger budgets but they have downsides.

Re:Networks

[dcollins]

As Kevin Smith said, "Hollywood is the only place where you fail upwards."

Ouch. Clearly spoken by someone who's only worked in Hollywood. As distressing and counter-intuitive as it may be in this culture, that's how it works in every industry that I've seen (notably software, computer games). The only place I haven't seen that happen severely is in my college teaching gigs.

Re:Networks

[rherbert]

Drive was a terrible show. I was hoping they'd go somewhere with it, but they just locked themselves into that stupid race.

Re:Networks

[barzok]

It wasn't just about marketing, Fox never gave the show a chance on the schedule. They put it on at 7 PM on Sundays, right where it would get preempted by NFL games November & December (Fox starts their seasons in November for a number of shows). If a game ran more than 5 minutes past 7, they'd stick with post-game coverage till 7:30, then go to King of the Hill.

A show can't build a fanbase, can't get ratings, can't sell ads, if it's not even on when it's scheduled to be.

I don't think Fox wanted it to survive in the first place. I'm amazed it lasted as long as it did on that network.

Re:Networks

[Gulthek]

[Family Guy] was canceled because it was poorly marketed, and no one saw it before it was initially canceled.

Then who bought the DVDs and watched it on Cartoon Network?

Re:Networks

[lixee]

The reason Family Guy was brought back was because it got HIGH ratings on Comedy Central and TBS, as well as HIGH DVD sales.

What kind of a fcsked up world do we live in? You have to be pretty much brainless to like that show. And I'm not trolling.

Re:Networks

[cmdr_tofu]

I agree with you completely! Every time I wanted to watch Futurama it was preempted by a football game. Eventually, the best
storytelling of our time was supplanted by King of the Hill. Honestly I'd rather have my splanctic ganglion tickled by mechanical midgets than watch that. Maybe I am weak and womanly like Kif, but the one about ressurecting Fry's dolemite-fast-fossilized dog actually made me cry.

"It will be one hell of a bowel movement..... he'll be lucky if he has any organs left!"

and another famous professor (mis)quote:

"To hell with not changing history mister I'm my own grandfather!"

Now time to get to work so you all bite my glorious golden ass!

Re:Networks

[Enderandrew]

Family Guy, Futurama, Firefly and Drive all seemed to get the same treatment from the same network. Should we be surprised?

Re:Networks

[everphilski]

ehehehhehehhee

Re:Networks

[Atriqus]

Personally, I'm glad it's no longer on FOX. Having it aired on comedy central ensures that it won't be randomly overrun by a football game.

Re:Networks

[Hatta]

I really hated Buffy and Angel, but Firefly was a damned good show.

Was it really? It was buffy in space. I still don't understand all the hype that show gets.

Re:Networks

[Anonymous Coward]

Tacking on "And I'm not trolling" to the end of a troll doesn't make it less of a troll.

Re:Networks

[nomadic]

You do realise that everybody blames the networks/ Nielsen's rating systems whenever there show gets canceled.

I believe in Futurama's case, Matt Groening blamed network executives who sabotaged the show out of spite, because he refused to allow them creative input into the show.

Re:Networks

[barzok]

Family Guy and Drive didn't get the crappiest timeslot known to man (Sunday 7 PM in the fall on an NFL network). Pretty sure Firefly didn't either.

All their schedules got shuffled around, which is the kiss of death for any show on any network. Fox even did it to the show that originally got the network noticed - Married w/ Children - once they started moving it all over the calendar, the ratings plummeted because no one knew when to tune in.

Re:Networks

[LMacG]

Firefly wasn't given the dreaded post-NFL slot, but it did get pre-empted by baseball regularly. The myriad other blunders made by Fox are well-chronicled elsewhere.

Re:Networks

[TheNumberless]

People who watched the reruns Adult Swim, where the show was actually marketed. It grew the overwhelming majority of its fanbase only after it was cancelled.

I don't understand the source of your confusion. And if you're nitpicking the hyperbolic "no one" in the OP, then you're kind of a jerk.

Re:Networks

[Anonymous Coward]

"As Kevin Smith said, 'Hollywood is the only place where you fail upwards.'"

Obviously he's never worked in Corporate America.

Re:Networks

[Gulthek]

I'll let you in on it, I'm not actually confused but pointing out that the show had a huge fanbase before it was cancelled. Lucky for us Family Guy fans, Fox got addicted to putting out everything on DVD and the bean counters noticed what hit the top of the charts.

Translations?

[cowboy76Spain]

I know maybe it is to soon to ask, but there is any information about possible translations to other languages (ok, to Spanish, I don't care if it is not translated to French or German). Being a DVD release it means it will reach a smaller public, and I fear that they don't think that it is worth to translate it from English.

Re:Translations?

[Da Fokka]

I hope not! There's nothing as annoying as downloading a movie to find out it's the french or spanish version. By the way, the very reason many spanish don't *speak* english while they can read and write it perfectly well is because they dub everything (badly, by the way). Watch the english version. It's way more enjoyable anyway.

Re:Translations?

[motank]

i'm sure the internet will get on it as soon as it leaks.

Re:Translations?

[puto]

I dunno, but I know when I lived in Colombia I watched Futurama, the Simpsons, and South Park in Spanish. Of course it was the Mexican translation, not the best, but funny hearing Bart say Vato and simon. I think the problem with the translation of the show is that they are so so rooted in US culture that much of the subtleness is lost. Puto

Futurama Movie Trailer!

[Anonymous Coward]

The trailer shown at the comic-con is online: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hEtZHOj4vHo

Cancelled by the 'Box Network'!

Re:Futurama Movie Trailer!

[Anonymous Coward]

Thank you very much! I posted that video and also a 30-minute video of the comic reading and Q&A at http://www.futurama-madhouse.com.ar/

Is "specialist" humour more "subtle"? IMHO, no.

[Dogtanian]

Also, many of the jokes are more subtle than those usual to the Simpsons, and probably people won't want to look at a cartoon and have to think harder to understand its humour. I'm not convinced; I think you've mistaken "specialist" humour that's more reliant upon knowledge of a particular area (including its pop-culture references) for genuine "subtlety".

The Simpsons *did* contain subtle humour in some areas. Whereas I feel Futurama's was very reliant upon parodying retro science fiction cliches and the old "aspects of present-day society given a futuristic twist" school of sci-fi comedy.

For my money, Futurama *never* felt like it would have the same universal appeal that The Simpsons managed so effectively. That's not to say that it was bad, but dakameleon put his (her?) finger on it very well when he said that The Simpsons had more characters people could identify with.

FWIW, I feel that The Simpsons actually has more creativity and freedom than Futurama. On first glance you'd expect the opposite, as being set in a fantasy future it has the freedom to do anything. In reality, it's quite tied by its retro sci-fi roots and reliance upon parody, both of which limit it creatively and in terms of audience appeal.

This probably sounds like I think Futurama sucks; I don't. It's all relative- but there are sound and legitimate reasons why it's not- and never will be- as well-loved as The Simpsons.

right and wrong

[fmobus]

Right-on. Translations always fuck up linguistic jokes. I really prefer watching comedy movies in original language.

As for dubbed movies being the cause of poor English skills, sorry, your argument is a fallacy. In Europe, most movies in cinema and television are dubbed (badly), yet most people speak proper English. In Latin America (at least in my homeland Brazil), only open-air channel will dub foreign movies, but their programming is mostly Brazilian shows and soap operas. Cable television and cinemas, in the other hand, 99% of the time, will present original sound content. Yet, our population English-speaking skills (or any other language, for that matter) sucks badly.

Y'know, maybe it's an educational problem. Or something related to these countries' population feeling that Americans are the root for all their problems.

Re:right and wrong

[Da Fokka]

Then maybe I have a different idea of 'proper english' than you. English pronunciation in the southern part of Europe is sometimes nearly incomprehensible, while it's much better in northern countries like Germany, the Netherlands and Germany. Coincidentally, in these countries all movies are subtitled (although the Germans sometimes dub television series). Of course, education also is an important factor. But exposure to native speakers by television or film surely is one of the reasons why many Dutch are near-fluent in English. Of course, it also helps nobody speaks Dutch :)

Re:right and wrong

[fmobus]

While I've never been to southern Europe, I live in Germany now and every single cinema I've seen was dubbed, and out of 30 TV channels I have access to, only in MTV and CNN you will hear English.

Believe me, problem in developing countries is education. Not a single English class (or any other discipline, actually) I had in school in Brazil was taken seriously, which is not the case in Germany (or Sweden, or Netherlands). If you want to learn in Brazil, you'll have to pay for private specific courses which, needless to say, is only possible for people of the so-called (by our dearest President Lula) "bourgeoisie".

Re:right and wrong

[Scott Wood]

English pronunciation in the southern part of Europe is sometimes nearly incomprehensible, while it's much better in northern countries like Germany, the Netherlands and Germany.

But what about Germany? :-)

It also probably helps that languages such as German and Dutch are more closely related to English than the Romance languages are, and have more of the same sounds (especially vowels).

Mmm!

[Poromenos1]

Mod me insightful! BZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ.

--HypnoToad

Great...

[knoll99]

Maybe Fox will prempt Futurama yet again by slipping some lousy NFL highlights video into the Futurama DVD jacket instead.

Terrific news about 16 new episodes though! Katay Sagal needs the work.

Kittens ...

[The Sith Lord]

... give Morbo gas.

How's the family Morbo?

[xgr3gx]

Numerous and belligerent! Sweet Guinea pig of Winnipeg! I'm so excited. Futurama is the best. I named my pet crayfish Dr. Zoidberg, and named my Roomba Bender.

Facing "The Gender Bender!!"

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm a real I'm a real toughie!

Tee-Hee ...

Best news ever.

Preview

[Nazlfrag]

Here's a sneak peek

Re:Preview

[bigstrat2003]

Nah, more like this: r33b.net

Re:Yay

[Anonymous Coward]

*Green* snake! Nothing worse than a misquote modded +5 funny.

Also bad time/hour.

[antdude]

Also, didn't FOX put it at 7:00 PM on Sundays for new episodes to get bad ratings? That was a bad spot for guys in east coast due to NFL games.

talk about coincidence

[steak]

just yesterday i was on imdb looking for some info and came across the futurama movies and i was wondering about scooty puff jr. suuuuuuuuuuuuuuucks!

High-Def cartoon?

[Joe Snipe]

Can anyone explain to me what the purpose is behind a HD cartoon?

Re:High-Def cartoon?

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

"Can anyone explain to me what the purpose is behind a HD cartoon?"

Well, Futurama did use a lot of gradients and obscene tatoos...

Re:High-Def cartoon?

[xgr3gx]

Ah yes, Amy's high def tatoo, only visible on a high def screen. Nice reference!

Re:High-Def cartoon?

[Anonymous Coward]

low def TV causes eye cancer

Re:High-Def cartoon?

[Gat0r30y]

Amy: I bet you can't even make out my high definition tattoo on that! Another favorite of mine: my sig.

I'll buy the DVDs

[recharged95]

And everyone can bite my shiny dollar.

On Adult Swim & Futurama

[Heffenfeffer]

They actually addressed this issue on Adult Swim via their text bumpers a while back. It was something along the lines of: "So Comedy Central bought another season of Futurama. Why not us? Money. They have it. We don't."

Only in theaters!

[Anonymous Coward]

For that, you have to take a camcorder to a Canadian theater.

informative links

[Floydius]

Gotfuturama and the interview they link, at RottenTomatoes. (minor spoilers there, if you can call them that)

You're both right!

[mr_matticus]

480p is considered part of the HDTV standard in the United States. EDTV is nothing more than a marketing term, and SDTV is 480i. EDTV is officially categorized to be part of the HDTV standard, since it requires more than a conventional television's capability (namely, progressive scan), whereas SDTV can work with any old CRT television assuming an appropriate STB.

It would also make some sense to include EDTV with SDTV in the US (since the resolution is more similar), but the whole point of creating a false "standard" in marketing lingo is to upsell--EDTV is supposed to be "better than" SDTV and it makes that distinction. They shy away from calling it "high definition" because of the aspect ratio and pixel size. However, enderandrew is correct that 480p is technically part of the HDTV standard in the US (just as 576p is 'technically' HDTV in Australia).

Fully?

[jgoemat]

So what if you can't fully appreciate it, you can still enjoy the show. My wife loves the show (we TiVo all the episodes and she'll watch ones she's seen 3-4 times already), and she only meets your last criteria (plus she's seen pretty much all of ST:TNS but not TOS I think). She won't touch an Asimov book (no matter how hard I throw them at her), didn't go to college and doesn't know much about computers or American political history. You don't really need any of those qualities to appreciate Futurama.

So ronery

[Anonymous Coward]

So ronery and sadry arone, you are.