New Futurama speculations (Spoilers ahoy)

[Reply #80 on:]

No, Leela is the type to hide her feelings most of the time.  Fry is the only person she trusts enough to drop the act.  She would think that mentioning Lars to Fry may hurt his feelings and decide it's not worth mentioning.

Besides, having to mention any of the movies would be a great disservice to the "new and improved" Futurama seeries.

I suppose you have a point there. I don't want a clumsy rehash of major movie plot-points; I just thought a brief mention of Lars would be nice for continuity's sake. But you're right; Leela might wind up sounding insensitive. Not that the writers have ever been bothered by that before...

I guess the never-mentioning-Lars-again thing only bothers me so much because his ghost (metaphorically speaking) plays a part in a lot of post-BBS fanfic. I don't know if shippers like myself attribute too much importance to Lars's existence, but that's certainly a possibility. I guess it's also possible that the writers wanted to let Lars's existence speak for itself; clearly it helped the ship to progress, but overtly explaining it in the series may be seen as unnecessary. Which, probably, it is; my desire for a call-back is kind of self-indulgent anyway.

I'm glad I'm not the only one who is hoping for a mention of Lars of some kind. I thought for sure there'd be at least a passing reference to him in Wild Green Yonder....

Here's another thought, if we see anymore flashbacks to Fry's 20th century life in the new season, will Fry 2's presence be incorporated? And will there be more scenes to make the retcons to JB and Fryish make more sense? I'd love for someone to ask Matt or David those questions.

Here's how the continuity could possibly be ironed out...

Have scenes of Fry 2 and Yancy bonding and getting closer to one another, which leads to him naming his first son for Fry. Which would be touching in and of itself, especially if we get a scene of Yancy learning that Fry was "lost at sea" in 2012

Have scenes of Seymour waiting for Fry as always, and attempting to play with him at times, but Fry turns him down because he was either in a hurry to get to work at the aquarium, or he was home and tired from working. And please let there be a scene inserted of Fry 2 at least considering checking to see if Seymour survived Bender's attack, maybe stopping and saying something about how he wishes he could have spent more time with him while he had the chance again...and in a way that would be the reverse of JB's revilation: Seymour died believing his master had moved on from him and didn't care about him anymore. But as we learn, Fry still very much did.

[Reply #81 on:]

Here's another thought, if we see anymore flashbacks to Fry's 20th century life in the new season, will Fry 2's presence be incorporated? And will there be more scenes to make the retcons to JB and Fryish make more sense? I'd love for someone to ask Matt or David those questions.

That's actually something I've been wondering since DXC mentioned in an interview that they are not done with Fry's past. I'm thinking they could do it one of two ways:

1.DXC specifically said Fry's past. By this I assume he doesn't mean Fry 2. The future Fry's past episodes could all take place before 12:30 A.M. on January 1st, 2000. After all, the events that happened afterwards in that timeline happened to Fry 2 so it wouldn't really make sense how they count as Fry 1's personal past.

2. Perhaps Fry 2 had a blog (NOOOOO!) and Fry 1 manages to find it. They could devote an episode to Fry 1 reading it and thus put your ideas into action.

About Lars: First of all, I always see Fry 2 and Lars as different characters. Fry 2 is the one in the past while Lars is the bald guy in the Year 3007. I know, weird. But that's how I see it.

That said, I don't care for Lars. Gorky's said it before but the movie didn't really devote any time to him. I couldn't get myself to care about him the same way I cared about Fry 1 and 2 (I must be one of the only people who enjoys the Leelu Story). He just wasn't developed enough for me. He didn't seem to show that much emotion or at least in a way I could accept. For me, It's equal parts of bad voice (sorry Billly), underdeveloped character, weak lines, and defused purpose (I've already said that him existing to prove to Leela that Fry could be the kind of man she wants doesn't sit well with me).

[Reply #82 on:]

I can't remember how much this was discussed into depth, but it doesn't matter right now since I can't remember the answers I received.

I don't think the time traveling had any affect on the original timeline- if Leonardo da Vinci never painted "The Last Supper", then how could Leela know of it's existence in the future? Then again, the time traveling did explain how Seymour was fossilized. I'd be pretty upset if "paradox-correcting" time travel altered natural free will.

It would be better for Futurama if "Bender's Big Score" was not canon. (I can go deep, but my foot is itcy.)

[Reply #83 on:]

Frida: I thought the entire point of a Paradox-Correcting Time Code is that it corrected Paradox's. It's essentially a wave of the hand to any problems that could arise. I don't like it but the writers didn't want anybody to get confused, I guess.

As for it's affecting the original timeline: I don't know how it works. On the one hand BBS goes out of it's way to canonize itself (Bender controls the ships that destroy the medieval theme park, Seymore is fast-fossilized by the blowback of Bender's Gun, Michelle ended up in the Year 3001 because of Lars).

On the other hand, how does the first run of the universe go? The original timeline has Yancy name his son after Fry since he misses him and Seymore spend all of New Years Eve looking for Fry and eventually die on the sidewalk at front of Panucci's. The new timeline doesn't tell us why Yancy named his son Philip (I guess we're supposed to assume him and Fry2 got really close) and of course since Fry showed up Seymore didn't spend his New Years Eve looking for him.

Does Fry showing up not change Philip Fry II? I was under the impression that he was successful through a mix of the Seven-Leaf Clover and the exaggeratedly heroic image he had of Fry.

Unlike previous Time-Travel episodes the cause-and-effect is far more confusing* (ironic since it was supposed to be simpler).

On canonizing the movies** (to ourselves): ITWGY and BG are definitely canon. The series will likely start with some reference to ITWGY and BG is necessary to explain the use of alternative fuels to Dark Matter. BBS will be canon if it's referenced in a future Fry's past episode (otherwise you can forger it). BWABB will probably not matter to canon since nothing of consequence happened in it (to future episodes). About the only references I could see to it are some of the minor things it introduced (like the color changing tie, Barb-O-Mite, and Deathball).

*That is if your care about making sense of the Timeline and don't just accept Paradox Correcting (especially since future Time Travel episodes can't use it).
**Obviously the writers are the final say (although discontinuity helps if you need it to enjoy the series: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Discontinuity)

[Reply #84 on:]

A FOX executive could be a villain in the show? ~•=/

[Reply #85 on:]

David Cohen was quoted in this article as saying something that gives me a bit of hope for the new episodes:

But after four epic feature-length films, "what we will try to do is go a little bit back to pure comedy, characters and sci-fi," Cohen said.

That, to me, is as close to an admission of the movies' faults as we'll ever get. I think DXC recognizes that, though at least one movie (ItWGY, in my opinion) evoked a sense of the original series, the DVDs were largely disappointing. This return to, specifically, the characters, makes me feel like this new season could be on-par with seasons 1-4.

[Reply #86 on:]

I think you said it best here, Gorky: http://www.peelified.com/index.php?topic=17869.msg1040314#msg1040314

We've brought back the series, twice. It's time they started treating us with some respect. Catering to fans isn't always the best thing to do. But ignoring them is hardly better. Light touch, as a certain sort-of God said.

[Reply #87 on:]

Man, some of you guys are being really hard on the writers.  I challenge anyone who complains about the quality of the movies to actually try and write something of length that has both a good plot and lots of humor.  And not just humor, but humor that appeals to everyone.  Its not easy folks, even if thats what you do for a living.

remember, 'lousy' futurama is only lousy because we have episodes like The Sting and Roswell to compare it to.  Try comparing the movies to other things that are on television.  Suddenly, they dont stink quite as bad...

[Reply #88 on:]

I enjoyed the movies on the whole. ITWGY was fantastic, BBS was very enjoyable and BG was certainly watch able.

BWABB was the only one that I'd say did suck.

[Reply #89 on:]

I agree, even the worst of the movies (BWABB in my opinion) was still good as far as most TV is concerned.

[Reply #90 on:]

David Cohen was quoted in this article as saying something that gives me a bit of hope for the new episodes:

But after four epic feature-length films, "what we will try to do is go a little bit back to pure comedy, characters and sci-fi," Cohen said.

That, to me, is as close to an admission of the movies' faults as we'll ever get. I think DXC recognizes that, though at least one movie (ItWGY, in my opinion) evoked a sense of the original series, the DVDs were largely disappointing. This return to, specifically, the characters, makes me feel like this new season could be on-par with seasons 1-4.

If that is true then great. Since Futurama's original run the episodes I've come back to most of all are the comedy focussed ones. They have the best replay value and are most fun to watch for me. Mainly Season 1, 2 and half of Season 3, with an occasional dip into Season 4. Plenty of sci-fi is also good. The love stories don't do much for me unless they're funny and not serious...

[Reply #91 on:]

Soylent Orange: I could compare a lousy steak at a supposedly five-star restaurant to a Taco Bell Steak Burrito and find the Steak better. That doesn't mean that Steak doesn't still suck.

As for that writers thing: That is so cliche. Don't use the "Well, could you do better?" bit on us. If we could we'd be the ones writing it. That doesn't change that we've seen them do better (as you've already posted examples of) and expect that kind of quality. If Futurama can't be at least close to the quality of episodes like that than what is the point of Resurrecting it?

We all love this series because it was consistently high-quality. When some episodes come out that aren't high-quality we have a right to complain. Criticism is necessary to build quality. If you think you're hot **** then you might not try as hard. We make sure the writers know exactly how we feel so they can get it right as many times as possible.

That doesn't mean we only berate them. ITWGY is universally praised as amazing and even the bad movies have admissions like "Well, this was kind of funny" or "that was pretty cool". What I mean is that we will let the writers know exactly how we feel so we can work together to craft a better Futurama (it's possible).

[Reply #92 on:]

Writing has already begun on the show; Groening said he was inspired by the "Star Trek" movie this summer enough that the updated "Futurama" may take a similar tact to explain the launch of this run.

No. Just...no. And again - hell no. Please God no. 

I realise that I am very much in the minority (according to this thread, anyway) when I say that I liked all the movies (each for a different reason), and yes I did joke about a NuTrek 'reboot' on another board, but no; heeeeeell no.

To be honest, I'm of the opinion that they should deal with the fallout from WGY for a little (not too long), maybe have them wander in uncharted space for a while, deal a little with Fry and Leela's new relationship a little, and then bring them back to Earth. If they want to emulate Trek, they could borrow some of movie 4, and have something so massive and horrible happen that them resolving it would make all their extra-legal shennanigans go away. But dear lord, no more Reset Button - not no way, not no how, even if they could make it mildly amusing by using the What If machine. I'm not paying good money for a box set if that's all they're going to do. I think there'd be a revolt if they tried that again. I'd sure as hell revolt, I tell you that much.

And at the risk of repeating myself, and repeating the words of Zombie-Jesus knows how many other people on this board and others, Fry and Leela in a relationship is not a limiting factor. (It might be, if you're a substandard writer, but not for a good one. They might be uber-nerds with doctorates coming out the wazoo, but there are a few of them that can do comedy fairly well.) There are a million and one things you can do; remember, they may openly love each other now, but Leela's still Leela, and Fry is still Fry - they didn't automatically turn into Mr. and Mrs. Cleaver the minute their lips locked.

C'mon folks; how about, just this once, we ensure that our various minor disappointments don't ruin the final product? (I realise this is the speculation thread, but it's getting a) really downbeat, and b) overly critical.)

If you don't think much of that idea, remember what happened to Doctor Who; it ended up so insular and limited that it died, and stayed dead, for 16 years. We don't want that to happen here.

And that's all I have to say on that for now.

[Reply #93 on:]

C'mon folks; how about, just this once, we ensure that our various minor disappointments don't ruin the final product? (I realise this is the speculation thread, but it's getting really a) downbeat, and b) overly critical.)

 
Exactly the point I was trying to get across.  Call me cliche if you want, but that doesn't stop me from being right.

This technically has some minor plot spoilers in it, so I'll post it here rather than the news thread: Wired article on upcoming episodes

Show spoiler

My guess: Bender and a human.  Leela and Amy is too obvious.

[Reply #94 on:]

Show spoiler

I'm thinking Fry-Leela-Bender 3-way.

[Reply #95 on:]

Show spoiler

Zapp Brannigan and Mom?

[Reply #96 on:]

Show spoiler

Hermes/Zoidberg.  Hermes hatred is just denial.

Methinks DXC may be lurking.  He knows how to get us geeks excited just by saying one thing and we're already speculation - a year before the new episodes are aired.

And I say "us geeks" in the most positive way possible.

[Reply #97 on:]

Show spoiler

I'm thinking Fry-Leela-Bender 3-way.

Show spoiler

Once a woman experiences "Bender's Uterus Wrench", she can't get enough.

[Reply #98 on:]

Methinks DXC may be lurking.  He knows how to get us geeks excited just by saying one thing and we're already speculation - a year before the new episodes are aired.

And I say "us geeks" in the most positive way possible.

So give a shout out!

David X. Cohen, more Erlang jokes, please.  When your characters run into a locked door, have one announce; "you know what, if it was programmed in Erlang, there wouldn't be any locks, because there aren't any locks in Erlang".

Hilarious.

Edit:  This is also why you should hire me as a writer; I'd gladly work for nothing.

[Reply #99 on:]

Show spoiler

Hermes/Zoidberg.  Hermes hatred is just denial.

That would be sublime.  

And I know Frida was joking, but my first semi-serious thought was:

Show spoiler

an Amy/Kif/Random Friend of Amy's three-way, as brought up by Amy in the name of "experimentation."

I think soylentOrange's theory is most likely, though.

[Reply #100 on:]

Show spoiler

Bender-Fry-Leela? Oh dear god. 

Amy-Kif-Somebody Else? Well, I'd almost say, 'That's typically Amy', but I dunno; you'd have thought she'd learnt that lesson after falling victim to Zapp - not that they necessarily have to acknowledge BWBB, and the fact that Amy isn't one to actually retain life lessons like that for too long...

Yikes.

Oh, and SO? Thank you, too. Nice to know I'm not alone.

[Reply #101 on:]

"Groening said he was inspired by the "Star Trek" movie this summer enough that the updated "Futurama" may take a similar tact to explain the launch of this run."

That probably doesn't mean what it seems to mean. It probably just implies some kind of time-travel arc that will allow us to revisit the day Fry and Leela met, as a reminder. That or he's just pulling our legs.
Besides which, MG only ever wrote the Pilot. How involved do we think he's going to be?

[Reply #102 on:]

"Groening said he was inspired by the "Star Trek" movie this summer enough that the updated "Futurama" may take a similar tact to explain the launch of this run."

That probably doesn't mean what it seems to mean. It probably just implies some kind of time-travel arc that will allow us to revisit the day Fry and Leela met, as a reminder. That or he's just pulling our legs.
Besides which, MG only ever wrote the Pilot. How involved do we think he's going to be?

My gathering, from the commentaries at least, is that his involvement is largely idea man and jokes.  For instance, in "A Taste of Freedom", the shot where they wait for the Decapodian warships was his idea.

So generally, he just overviews the stories and say, "what about a good joke here or there?"  And from the interviews with him and Cohen, he is very interested in certain plot story arcs, and stuff like Igner being the son of the professor was one of his - together with Cohen - ideas.  So basically, he makes the "overall story line" or "story arcs", but not specific episode and details, just jokes and some general points.

Also, Cohen did deny that Groening's comment about a possible reset was not going to happen.  He never mentioned whether it was a wrong interpretation of Groening's comment or whether he meant that originally and Cohen set him straight.

[Reply #103 on:]

Man, I could be a 'general ideas man'... that sounds like the easiest job in the world.

[Reply #104 on:]

Oh, and SO? Thank you, too. Nice to know I'm not alone.

For the record I completely agree with both of you.

[Reply #105 on:]

Man, I could be a 'general ideas man'... that sounds like the easiest job in the world.

Same job George Lucas had during the original trilogy.

[Reply #106 on:]

Speculation: Encountering poor economic conditions and possible repercussions from the events of WGY, Planet Express takes to illegal smuggling and theft in order to make a crust. For a time the series becomes a pastiche of Firefly/Serenity.

[Reply #107 on:]

Also, Cohen did deny that Groening's comment about a possible reset was not going to happen.  He never mentioned whether it was a wrong interpretation of Groening's comment or whether he meant that originally and Cohen set him straight.

He said they aren't going to re-cast the characters, not, not reset them.
and I doubt a sexual relationship would be that shocking unless it somehow involved Zoidberg.

[Reply #108 on:]

Also, Cohen did deny that Groening's comment about a possible reset was not going to happen.  He never mentioned whether it was a wrong interpretation of Groening's comment or whether he meant that originally and Cohen set him straight.

He said they aren't going to re-cast the characters, not, not reset them.

His re-cast joke was a joke referring to the new cast of Star Trek rather than an actual mention of whether it was actually considered.  I think the mere fact that he is willing to comment on the Groening comment means that he is concerned that people think they are going to use the reset button.

[Reply #109 on:]

Maybe because they are.

[Reply #110 on:]

As far as being overly-critical of the movies goes, I do think we can all agree that they were flawed. So was the original series, on an episode-by-episode basis. If I'm being perfectly honest: the movies were great, but not brilliant (although I agree with sO that it's hard to judge the quality of the movies fairly when we have episodes like "The Sting" and "Roswell that Ends Well" to compare them to). I enjoy ItWGY immensely; BBS and TBWaBB are on-par with what I'd consider an average episode of the series--a "Mother's Day" or a "Future Stock"; BG is hit-or-miss comedically, and it reuses a lot from the original series (particularly all the HAL Institute stuff, which struck me as pretty uninspired the second time around). But I'm glad we got them, and I think there are moments of excellence in each one--it's just that some movies were better than others. But I don't mean to knock them entirely: I'm more upset about the resets in BBS and, to an extent, TBWaBB than anything else. I mean, the characterization of Fry in TBWaBB is frustrating as hell. That's why I'm glad that DXC is interested in returning to the characters, specifically. Hopefully, the out-of-character moments will become few and far between (as they were in the series).

From the article sO posted:

Show spoiler

For now, Cohen’s more interested in getting down to business and cranking out “fast, good episodes.” The show will “explore the society of the future” rather than staging epic battles like the ones in the feature-length Futurama flicks, Cohen said

It sounds like they're interested in returning to a lot of the observational humor that made seasons one and two so neat. Plus, a more down-to-earth (by Futurama's standards) approach will really make these new episodes feel like the series, which had some great episodes that involved futuristic...stuff (for lack of a better term), but remained rooted on Earth ("A Fishful of Dollars", "Xmas Story", "Insane in the Mainframe", "Leela's Homeworld"). Now that I think of it, the only movie that wasn't epic in scope (if we are to take "epic" to mean "takes place all across the universe") is BBS--and even that strays from that concept at points.

Oh, and as for the "shocking sexual relationship": I think it's either a sarcastic description of the Fry/Leela hook-up, which seemed impossible for a long time...or something involving Zoidberg. I suppose it could be a Bender/human pairing, but they already kind of covered that territory in "I Dated a Robot." The Amy/Kif/random-third-person threesome would also be hilarious, just for Kif's reaction to it.

Also:

I'd gladly work for nothing.

Which is good, because we don't intend to pay.

C'mon, no one caught that? And you call yourselves dorks...

[Reply #111 on:]

And I know Frida was joking[...]

Show spoiler

I was actually being "kind-of" serious. All three of them were parents to Leelan Von Fry-Bot (I think that's his name) in the poorly Mike Kazaleh penciled Futurama Comic #32. If a child produced by all three of them could exist in official "Futurama" material, it makes it seem like all three of them have a very strong relationship.

[Reply #112 on:]

Seriously we just got our favorite show renewed...again. Can anyone identify a point in which you have been disappointed in Futurama? Even the episodes that aren't our favorites are better than most of the crap on T.V. We have hoped to bring the series back twice and our hope has been rewarded both times. I think we should feel safe in believing that our dedication will be rewarded. They have consistently put out a quality product and 2010 will be no different.

[Reply #113 on:]

Well said, old chap.

Even if storylines haven't always met individuals' standards, the product has always retained a high degree of quality.

[Reply #114 on:]

Thanks. I'm a big Simpsons and South Park fan but I don't think either of those series has the consistency from episode to episode that Futurama has.

[Reply #115 on:]

This technically has some minor plot spoilers in it, so I'll post it here rather than the news thread: Wired article on upcoming episodes

Show spoiler

My guess: Bender and a human.  Leela and Amy is too obvious.

Leaving all joking aside for my money it's

Show spoiler

Amy/Leela. AFAIK they've never had a gay/lesbian relationship on the show, well only as jokes in passing never central to the main characters. If the reaction to Erik Heifner's "L.A. Confidential" fan comic is anything to go it's likely to be be very controversial. A multiple partner relationship? Done it in BWaBB. Human/Robot - done it in IDaR. Gay/Lesbian - never been done.

"I love you Fry, but... I love Amy more!" Dun dun duuuun! Oh c'mon! You've got to admit it would be a good setback, if not an actual reset, of F/L.

[Reply #116 on:]

Chug... I hope so.
Though probably just a one-episode thing.
Perhaps that scene in Bender's Game was foreshadowing?

[Reply #117 on:]

Show spoiler

Good point! I'd forgotten that. Maybe Leela/Amy decide they've had latent feelings and want to... explore it further. Maybe it's been a long time secret...

[Reply #118 on:]

Amy dated Fry... shagged human Bender in that what-if? sequence... appeared to be the Professor's woman in one of the Parabox Universes... Kif... Brannigan...  She's the village bike, so why not?

[Reply #119 on:]

Yeah, why not, or maybe a little action for old Zoidberg!!?     Granted it wouldnt be as hot as Amy/Leela, but Zoidy doing a little mating season dance maybe too much for Amy to resist? Would be quite funny. Wait, i've disgusted myself