Futurama   Planet Express Employee Lounge
The Futurama Message Board

Design and Support by Can't get enough Futurama
Help Search Futurama chat Login Register

PEEL - The Futurama Message Board    It's got a TV!    Dental plan (The Simpsons) « previous next »
Author Topic: Dental plan (The Simpsons)  (Read 12405 times)
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 Print
tyraniak

Urban Legend
***
« Reply #160 on: 04-16-2015 05:07 »

It's still insanely hard as an adult, Bart's nightmare was pretty good
JoshTheater

Space Pope
****
« Reply #161 on: 04-16-2015 05:27 »

Hit & Run is a legitimately great game and easily the best Simpsons game. I highly recommend any Simpsons fan who hasn't played it yet check it out.
cyber_turnip

Urban Legend
***
« Reply #162 on: 04-16-2015 12:30 »

I loved Bart's Nightmare and The Simpsons Wrestling as a kid as well as the Treehouse of Horror game that they made. I think it was called something weird like Night of the Living but I can't really remember.
That said, they all got by on how children don't know shit about quality.

Hit and Run is the only game I think is objectively great and not more of a guilty pleasure. I agree that it's a must-play for any fan of the show. It's far better than seasons 13+. In fact, even if you just sat and watched someone else playing the game, I think the content would be far better than seasons 13+. Oh, and the gameplay is actually not too bad, too, which is where most Simpsons games fail.
JoshTheater

Space Pope
****
« Reply #163 on: 04-17-2015 05:41 »
« Last Edit on: 04-17-2015 05:44 »

The worst Simpsons game I've tried was The Simpsons Skateboarding, which I don't think I've seen anybody mention in here yet. Absolutely dreadful controls.

This is probably the most experience I have with any Simpsons games from older consoles:
Tachyon

DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #164 on: 04-17-2015 06:13 »


Cover image looks like 80% Bart and 20% Slurms MacKenzie tongue

 
tyraniak

Urban Legend
***
« Reply #165 on: 05-04-2015 23:27 »

http://www.ew.com/article/2015/05/04/simpsons-renewed-for-two-seasons

I was kind of hoping they'd pull the plug this time
Scrappylive

Liquid Emperor
**
« Reply #166 on: 05-05-2015 02:24 »


Hooray!!!

...

Right...?
Beamer

DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #167 on: 05-05-2015 02:49 »

As was I. It really did look like they were actually going to put the show out of its misery for a while there. hmpf

Anyway, here are my thoughts on some of the recent episodes since the show's return.

Peeping Mom: I actually thought this one was pretty good by current standards. Bart's bulldozer incident was still totally stupid and had no apparent motivation, and the episode's story definitely borrowed a few pages from Marge Be Not Proud (which is one of my favourite episodes of the show), but overall, it actually worked. And there were a few genuine laughs to be had, too (on top of an adorable sub-plot). Not bad. Not bad at all!

The Kids Are All Fight: I'm happy they at least avoided the mistakes made in That 90's Show here, by not actually setting the flashbacks in any discernible time. There weren't really any laughs here, and Marge's "Oh, that's where I used to grow weed" line was nothing short of character assassination, but other than that, this episode was alright. Nothing memorable at all, but nothing particularly cringe-worthy (aside from the bit I mentioned before, and an abundance of callbacks to things from previous flashback episodes - "Hello Joe" being another offender). Overall, the episode was decent, but unnecessary, though I guess the latter describes pretty much every Simpsons episode at this point.

Let's Go Fly a Coot: This was disappointing. Especially given that the show essentially tried to cram four plots into a single episode, and all of them actually had the potential to make a pretty decent A-plot (or at least B-plot) in their own right. But instead, we get this sloppy, disjointed 20 minutes of television devoid of any structure. One line I really did love, though: “In the Air Force, when we showed up late people died. When we showed up on time, other people died.”
SolidSnake

Professor
*
« Reply #168 on: 05-05-2015 04:07 »

Man, yesterday's episode was probably one of the worst eps of the show I've seen.

Yes, even worse than that god-awful Skinner one from last year.

This show turns more into a Family Guy ripoff every day.

Like, I counted 3 suicide attempts in the first act of this episode. I thought the new writers of this show knew better than to do retarded stuff like that. And, it honestly feels like everything was just used for a cheap laugh. There was also just so much wasted potential, and they pretty much shat all over continuity yet again. I haven't watched a new episode since Simpsorama, and this is just disappointing. Horrible. 3/10 would be my ranking.
Beamer

DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #169 on: 05-05-2015 04:27 »

Wow, I didn't think it was that bad. I mean, its potential was largely wasted, but there were still some good ideas in there - Homer trying to sabotage the children's birthday industry had its moments, as did Grampa giving Bart romantic advice, and the nice little twist they put on the "making a romantic declaration at the airport just before the other person boards their plane" trope. I can't actually recall any jokes that particularly irked me, either, the episode's main fault was just having a very messy structure, in my opinion.
cyber_turnip

Urban Legend
***
« Reply #170 on: 05-05-2015 11:48 »

I think they'll probably get to season 30, now.

And, honestly, I thought the most recent episode was pretty inoffensive as far as the show goes these days. A lot of the subplots were incredibly dull and uninspired but I thought a lot of the humour worked on a light level and, usually, most of the humour is like so bad that it can counter good jokes and undo them.
Box Incorporated

Bending Unit
***
« Reply #171 on: 05-14-2015 07:40 »
« Last Edit on: 05-14-2015 07:47 »

WOAH!


Harry Shearer Twitter: https://twitter.com/theharryshearer/status/598707703020658688

from James L.  Brooks' lawyer: "show will go on,  Harry will not be part of it, wish him the best.". (1/2)

This because I wanted what we've always had: the freedom to do other work.  
Of course, I wish him the very best. (2/2)



Could possibly be him just being hardball for more money, but if not, damn.

Can't imagine how the hell they're gonna recast Flanders, Skinners, Burns, Smithers, Lovejoy, Brockman, ect. (unless they wanna kill/retire all of those vital characters which the show can't possibly survive without).

Preying to God Matt replaces them all... First he'll start with the Shearer characters, then one by one, consume them all, mmm (with Mike Scully as Flanders of course).
Beamer

DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #172 on: 05-14-2015 09:16 »
« Last Edit on: 05-14-2015 09:19 »

Damnit Box, I just came here to post that! tongue

Yeah, this is a pretty huge blow. I mean, the fact that they haven't recast any (major) roles in the show to date was one of its last remaining points of integrity. If Shearer really has left and they really do continue without him, the show is even more doomed than I ever could've imagined.

Granted, it's not exactly a tragedy at this point, but given that I've grown up with the show and I honestly don't know a world where new Simpsons episodes aren't still coming out, the day the show ends will still be immensely saddening to me.
Unit42

Bending Unit
***
« Reply #173 on: 05-14-2015 09:59 »

Yup, Harry's out.  It's been confirmed through many news outlets.
Beamer

DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #174 on: 05-14-2015 10:11 »

"Confirmed" as in "every source is referring to the same 2 tweets?" tongue
Quantum Neutrino Field

Liquid Emperor
**
« Reply #175 on: 05-14-2015 12:08 »

Our love has had to endure bad writing and apathy, and now this? Stop testing our love!

There can't be anyone apart from a lawyer thinking this is good idea.
cyber_turnip

Urban Legend
***
« Reply #176 on: 05-14-2015 14:00 »

I can't see them re-casting. I think they'll just let the characters become silent background types.

They have Chalmers, so the loss of Skinner shouldn't be too big a blow in terms of what storylines they can do. Maybe they'll just steer clear of the school in general, now.

I think that, should they ever get round to making a real finale, they'll probably get Harry Shearer back as a guest-star. And should they ever make some more movies, I imagine he'll be back, too - I mean, it's obviously just a money issue based on comments Shearer has made over the years and how it seems that the cast have probably had to take another pay cut this time round.
Monster_Robot_Maniac

Liquid Emperor
**
« Reply #177 on: 05-14-2015 15:42 »

I personally imagine they're gonna recast the characters with sound-alikes, simply because they can't really afford to lose Shearer's more popular characters like Mr. Burns and Ned. Plus, should they really sound similar, only mega-fans would notice.

I have a feeling this is making the death of the Simpsons more of a realistic thing - which I'm frankly glad about. I barely watch anything new from the show, but from what I have, it's plain to see that the show is far past it's expiration date.

Beamer

DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #178 on: 05-14-2015 17:18 »

Well, the news has been confirmed, as have the plans to begin recasting his characters. It's official: The Simpsons may very well outlive its cast. frown
Scrappylive

Liquid Emperor
**
« Reply #179 on: 05-14-2015 18:24 »

cry
Box Incorporated

Bending Unit
***
« Reply #180 on: 05-14-2015 20:20 »

And should they ever make some more movies, I imagine he'll be back, too - I mean, it's obviously just a money issue based on comments Shearer has made over the years and how it seems that the cast have probably had to take another pay cut this time round.

He's still contracted with Fox for 2 more Simpsons Movies should they ever get made during his life time, so I'd imagine the crew would definitely want him back for that, new cast or not.
cyber_turnip

Urban Legend
***
« Reply #181 on: 05-14-2015 22:00 »

And, once again, The Simpsons accurately predicts its own downfall.
Beamer

DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #182 on: 05-15-2015 02:13 »

Haha, that moment actually sprung to mind when I realised he voiced Flanders. tongue

Also, in another update on this weird situation, James L. Brooks is apparently still trying work things out with Harry Shearer.
totalnerd undercanada

DOOP Ubersecretary
**
« Reply #183 on: 05-15-2015 08:28 »
« Last Edit on: 05-15-2015 08:30 by totalnerduk »

I remember finding Bart vs. The Space Mutants insanely hard as a kid.

Space Mutants was fun, but the best video game the Simpsons franchise has spawned was Krusty's Super Funhouse. That both kept me entertained and frustrated for hours.
tyraniak

Urban Legend
***
« Reply #184 on: 05-15-2015 14:50 »

I hope this will lead to a more competent dr nick
Scrappylive

Liquid Emperor
**
« Reply #185 on: 05-15-2015 21:16 »

It would probably take the better part of an hour for me to research on my slow internet connection. Nay, some websites just won't load at all. So can anybody tell me what exactly is going on here with Mr. Harry Shearer?

Harry Shearer's quotes make it seem as though he's leaving because, if he were to stay, he wouldn't be free to continue his other projects (theatre and TV in the UK).

Al Jean's quotes suggest that Harry Shearer is leaving because he wouldn't accept the salary in his contract.

The two stories here seem incongruent. So, as the all-wise Beck once said, what's the dealy-o?
Monster_Robot_Maniac

Liquid Emperor
**
« Reply #186 on: 05-15-2015 22:19 »
« Last Edit on: 05-15-2015 22:25 »

I don't know for sure, but I think the true reason he's leaving is because of the salary issue - it's the fact that he now can leave that gives him more free time for further projects.

On a different note; After rereading the last page or two, it certainly seems like Simpsons has been facing a lot of... issues lately. I wonder if it's finally beginning to lose it's worth to FOX?
Scrappylive

Liquid Emperor
**
« Reply #187 on: 05-15-2015 22:28 »

One of the quotes I read had him saying something to the effect of:

Quote from: Harry Shearer Paraphraser
What I want is what we've always had: The freedom to do other work. I have a TV show in the UK and I've been starring in London theatre for a few years. Nope, not gonna stop.

Thereby giving the impression that his new contract would bar him from his other work that he's already doing... which seems... absurd.

Then again, when whatsherface quit the show forever ago, it was because she wanted extra money to help cover her travelling expenses between work (Los Angeles) and home (Arizona or something) since she had to support her family in that other state... or something.

Perhaps this is something similar: money representing the ability to do something else.

I really have no idea...
cyber_turnip

Urban Legend
***
« Reply #188 on: 05-16-2015 00:34 »

It ought to be pretty doable for him to record his dialogue in the UK, if that's what he wants to do.

Fox have a voice-over place that they frequently use for the likes of Patrick Stewart on Family Guy/American Dad, so he could easily just go and sit there a few hours a week and literally phone it in to match how he's been figuratively phoning it in for the past 15 years or so.

I'd be very surprised if they weren't willing to let him do that at this point in the show's life, so I imagine it's just an excuse and it's really about money combined with a lack of passion (who can blame him? The show is awful now).
Cudry

Bending Unit
***
« Reply #189 on: 05-16-2015 00:50 »

he's been figuratively phoning it in for the past 15 years or so.

Literally too.
Scrappylive

Liquid Emperor
**
« Reply #190 on: 05-16-2015 06:10 »

Apparently Al Jean is as confused by this whole thing as I am.

Quote from: Al Jean via The Hollywood Reporter
I'm a little baffled. The other five [voice stars] signed on May 1 and we offered him the same contract everybody else got offered, but he didn't sign so we started reading like we were going to and [were] waiting to see if he wanted to come back or not. Then about a week ago TMZ somehow got ahold of a story that [an unnamed voice actor from the cast] wasn't returning. Then last night Harry tweeted something to the extent that he was leaving the show — implying he wasn't wanted — which isn't true. We made him an offer and we're once more saying, "Do you want to come back like everybody else and work hard and care about the show? Great." He said he wanted to do other projects, which makes no sense because we've always let the cast do all the other projects they want — they have great free time. So I don't really know what he's up to [or] what he's thinking. I hope he comes back. The other misinformation that has been spread is that it would jeopardize these two seasons we're doing up until 625 episodes. That's for sure a pickup from the network, and everybody else is pay-or-play — so we'll make those episodes. If he chooses not to come back, we'll recast. We will not kill his characters; that's one way to go. I'm sure there will be plusses and minuses with that and, at the moment, I'm hoping he comes back. But if he doesn't in a reasonable time, we'll have to do the other options.

Quote from: Al Jean via The Hollywood Reporter
The new episodes featuring his characters that haven't been recorded by him don't air until November. So I would say we have the summer to figure it out.

Quote from: Al Jean via The Hollywood Reporter
If Harry is reading this, is there something you would like to say specifically to him?

Please call [executive producer] Jim Brooks and tell him what you want. And if you don't want to do this show, tell him, but explain what's on your mind. Will the show go on without him? It will.

Quote from: Al Jean via The Hollywood Reporter
Why didn't he want to [do voiceover work for the Simpsons ride at Universal Studios]? Did he explain?

Part of the same mystery.

Quote from: Al Jean via The Hollywood Reporter
I want to stress that we'd really like him to come back. We're not forcing him out. I'm genuinely confused by what he's saying, and I hope he calls Jim.
Beamer

DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #191 on: 05-16-2015 06:12 »

he's been figuratively phoning it in for the past 15 years or so.

Literally too.

You realise CT made the exact same comment in the very sentence you quoted, right? tongue

...he could easily just go and sit there a few hours a week and literally phone it in to match how he's been figuratively phoning it in for the past 15 years or so.

Anyway, here are some more updates on the story, though it's mainly a case of "who said what" right now and no one's version quite adds up. hmpf

EDIT: Damnit, looks like Scrappy beat me to the punch there.

At any rate, it seems they're still in the process of trying to get Shearer back rather than immediately moving on to recasting, and seeing as ending the series now is apparently out of the question, I hope they're able to get Shearer back on board.
totalnerd undercanada

DOOP Ubersecretary
**
« Reply #192 on: 05-16-2015 19:07 »

...seeing as ending the series now is apparently out of the question...

I don't think that's quite the case. What we're seeing is that it'll take a few more nails in the coffin before the corpse stops twitching. But this is one more nail than was previously in there.

If the series starts to suffer, fans will get uppity, and merchandise sales (the engine that drives the show at the moment) could flag. Which will prompt a re-evaluation of whether or not to keep milking the cash cow, or simply find something else to start sucking the life and soul out of.

With all of that said, I'm sure it'll limp along for a few years yet, with or without Shearer.
Beamer

DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #193 on: 05-16-2015 21:10 »

Too true, sadly. I honestly don't understand why Fox keep renewing the show at this point. They have so many damn episodes in the can at this point that Fox will continue to make money off the show for decades to come, thanks to reruns, international syndication, online streaming, etc. It's not like they need to keep making new episodes - they could've pulled the plug 10+ years ago and it'd still function as a huge cash cow for Fox.

Having said that, there are a couple of other points you raised which I'd like to muse on a bit further...

...seeing as ending the series now is apparently out of the question...

I don't think that's quite the case.

I used the word apparently specifically in reference to Al Jean's quotes - he's made it very clear that he's determined for the show to go on for as long as humanly possible. Granted, "the show runner wants to keep going" is never a guarantee of renewal, but seeing as Fox seem to have the same mindset, it's clear that nobody working behind the scenes has any intention of putting the show out of its misery for now.

If the series starts to suffer, fans will get uppity, and merchandise sales (the engine that drives the show at the moment) could flag. Which will prompt a re-evaluation of whether or not to keep milking the cash cow, or simply find something else to start sucking the life and soul out of.

In terms of the fanbase getting uppity, most hardcore fans and critic alike acknowledge the show has a "golden age," and while the specific seasons/episodes may change, pretty much all cite the end of this "golden age" as being over 10 years ago. Now, obviously, if Shearer does leave the show, it'll serve as yet another landmark moment in the show's downward spiral, and I think it could go as far as to destroy the goodwill of many people who still enjoy and defend the show. Hell, they could get the most dead-on impressionists to take over Shearer's characters (I'm sure someone like Billy West could easily take over a number of his parts with minimal discernible differences), and still the show's reputation would suffer from the mere fact that there's been a cast change at all - regardless of whether or not it's noticeable. And yet still, in spite of all this, I doubt many would cite this as the show's "jumping the shark" moment. For most Simpsons fans, it'll just be one of many, many instances of irreversible damage being done to the show.

Ratings have also been in decline for a few years now, with multiple episodes from the past two seasons pulling less than 3 million viewers on their initial broadcast... For comparison purposes, the show would frequently clear 20 million during the height of its popularity, and was still averaging 7-8 million just five years ago. Now, it's also worth noting that fewer people are watching tv shows via traditional broadcast these days, so pretty much all tv shows have suffered from a decline in ratings as of late (particularly with more youth-oriented networks like Fox), but not to the same extent The Simpsons has. It's also worth noting that the 12 day Simpsons marathon on FXX that happened earlier this year actually received HUGE ratings - as many as 25 million at one point, and this is a cable network too, so fewer people in the US have access to it than they do to Fox... For the record, I actually imagine the show's ratings might improve for a few episodes if Shearer is replaced, purely out of morbid curiosity on the viewers' parts. tongue

As for the merchandise, I'm fairly certain sales have been at a steady level for the bulk of the show's run. Obviously, they'll never be as high as they were in the early 90s when The Simpsons first took the world by storm (though I believe it did spike again with the release of the movie), but this is another element of the franchise that will likely continue to profit Fox for years after the series ends. Even the most elitist fans - the ones who dismiss everything beyond season 8 or 9 as garbage and who haven't watched the show in years - still own and/or buy Simpsons merchandise, be it as a novelty or a token of nostalgia. Hell, personally speaking, I've procured 3 new pieces of Simpsons merchandise in the past year alone. Not to mention more recent stunts like the Simpsons lego set and the Springfield exhibit at Universal Studios, which generated enormous publicity in the media. Ultimately, I don't imagine even the most significant decline in quality or change affecting merchandise too much. But I'm making this assumption based entirely on the fact that it hasn't been the case thus far, in spite of all the damage done to the show since the "golden age" ended (which, in my opinion, is season 9).

On that note, I looked up the figures (admittedly, the previous paragraph was largely speculation on my part, so I wanted to be sure I wasn't making a complete ass of myself here), and surprisingly, the show actually makes the majority of its money from advertisers during primetime tv broadcasts as opposed to merchandising - though the margin is quite thin. Here are some findings from the beginning of 2014, which cited the total revenue from the former as $5.35 billion, and the latter as $4.6 billion. I'm actually quite shocked at how low the revenue from syndication is in comparison ($1.1 billion), as I'd have thought that would be a major money maker for Fox, given how many damn countries the show airs in.

Though I guess that answers my question as to why Fox keep renewing it. tongue

With all of that said, I'm sure it'll limp along for a few years yet, with or without Shearer.

This is a definite - the producers recently signed a new contract with Fox which guarantees that another two seasons' worth of episodes will be made. And it sounds like that's going ahead regardless of any complications with the cast, which is what fans once theorised would be the show's ultimate demise - a vital cast member quitting the show or dying. But then again, the creators actually seem to show respect to the characters of deceased actors, so maybe that's what it's going to take to finally end The Simpsons. hmpf
totalnerd undercanada

DOOP Ubersecretary
**
« Reply #194 on: 05-16-2015 22:34 »

In terms of the fanbase getting uppity... ...the most elitist fans - the ones who dismiss everything beyond season 8 or 9 as garbage and who haven't watched the show in years - still own and/or buy Simpsons merchandise, be it as a novelty or a token of nostalgia.

Nah. Not me, nor any of the people I know personally who used to love it but fell out of that over the last decade. I think that the bulk of the merchandise is currently being bought by the people who maybe weren't fans ten years ago for one reason or another, but who are currently very excited by all things Simpsons...

I've procured 3 new pieces of Simpsons merchandise in the past year alone. Not to mention more recent stunts like the Simpsons lego set and the Springfield exhibit at Universal Studios, which generated enormous publicity in the media.

Uh. Okay. You got me there. I bought a few of the Lego figures, and I went on the Simpsons ride when I went to Universal. I guess I'm as much a part of the problem as anybody else, despite not watching the show anymore (although I did watch the Futurama crossover).

Ultimately, I don't imagine even the most significant decline in quality or change affecting merchandise too much.

Whilst you may be right to some extent, I think that if there's a steep enough decline (or there's a general perception of a steep decline), then people will stop buying Simpsons merchandise at the current rate of consumption. They're already competing with more now than they have been in the past. Which brings me to this:

As for the merchandise, I'm fairly certain sales have been at a steady level for the bulk of the show's run.

Sales of TV merchandise in general tend to run in cycles according to the show in question's competition level. When they began, The Simpsons were at the top of the field, and had little competition for the disposable income of the public. Now, they've got things like South Park, Adventure Time, and the recent explosion in comic-book related properties to contend with in a way that they didn't ten or twelve years ago at the height of their power over consumers. There's a lot of crap out there that you don't need, but you want, and it's all competing for the money in your pocket.

The Simpsons, funnily enough, helped to revive both prime-time animation and the interest in animated shows of those who were no longer considered a target demographic of animation at the time (people over twelve). Which made fertile ground for things like South Park, Adventure Time, Rick & Morty, etc. and the associated opportunities for merchandise.

Anyway, since the actual gross value of this global pie hasn't undergone expansion at the same rate as that which it has become further divided between intellectual properties, this suggests that the volume of merchandise sales for individual entertainment properties has been shrinking for the last little while (these are general trends only, and I'm hesitant to stick actual dollar figures in here since I'm coming across wildly varying information).

I'd say that merchandising in terms of volume is in slow decline for The Simpsons, even as they become more popular. Licensing and merchandising may very well be more profitable now for the parent company (Fox) though.

But the point is, it might not take as much uppitiness as you're thinking from fans to upset the sales of merchandise to the degree that would be necessary to affect sales thereby and drive down the profit derived from the show. Even if it's only by a tiny amount, that could be another one of the nails in the show's coffin, as it starts to be seen by the studio execs as in decline.

Of course, this is as much speculation as your own thoughts on merchandising and the fanbase.

...so maybe [the death of a core cast's voice actor is] what it's going to take to finally end The Simpsons.

Dan Castellaneta and Nancy Cartwright are 57 and Julie Kavner is 64. It could be thirty or forty years before any of the Simpson family die of natural causes. If anything kills it, I think that a fall in advertising revenue when more and more people quit watching broadcast television is a more likely suspect than the grim reaper.

Although, I suppose Death taking a personal hand in things can't be ruled out if he ever becomes one of those dissatisfied fans.
cyber_turnip

Urban Legend
***
« Reply #195 on: 05-17-2015 01:28 »

I find it odd that they keep renewing the show when they could end it and just make a movie every few years instead. The movies would serve to keep interest in the show alive, so merchandising would probably do better than it does currently...

But I guess movies are probably something that Fox wants but aren't willing to take the gamble of ending the show to push the creators into a position where they're more likely to pitch one... if that makes sense.
tyraniak

Urban Legend
***
« Reply #196 on: 05-17-2015 03:42 »

I think they really shit the bed when they decided to go past 25 seasons, considering they just lost marcia Wallace at the tail end of that year and there's still a very good chance they won't make it to 30, so if they happen to end it at 28 or 29 it seems like a pretty pointless season number
Monster_Robot_Maniac

Liquid Emperor
**
« Reply #197 on: 06-11-2015 00:25 »

Some new Simpsons news; http://variety.com/2015/tv/news/simpsons-movie-al-jean-interview-1201514127/?cmpid=social_publicity_smpsns_20150610_47259686&adbid=10152967198953697&adbpl=fb&adbpr=29534858696

Quote
What’s ahead this season?

Al Jean: In the premiere, it’s discovered after all the years Homer has narcolepsy and it’s an incredible strain on the marriage. Homer and Marge legally separate, and Homer falls in love with his pharmacist, who’s voiced by Lena Dunham. We’ll have cameos from the other women from “Girls.” We have an episode coming up where Lisa befriends a homeless woman who turns out to be an incredible singer. The woman’s voiced by Kate McKinnon, but the singing is done by Natalie Maines. In another episode, Spider Pig makes his return. Sideshow Bob appears in a segment, and we finally see him do something he’s wanted to do for 25 years. And we have an episode based on the film “Boyhood.” It’s a flashback/flashforward about Bart. We go to various points in his life and his life to come which I think came out really well.

What is this, the fifteenth time Homer and Marge have 'separated'? Seriously, how many times are they going to fall back on that storyline? At least the boyhood thing sounds kind of interesting, though we've seen Bart's past/future a bunch of times before...

Quote
Will you ever do another movie?

The movie was such a time-intensive operation, it pulled a lot away from the show. I would rather end the show whenever that happens before doing another movie. It’s unlikely there’ll be another “Simpsons” feature while the show is being produced.

So, seems like there won't be another movie in the near future. I guess one released a while after the show's end wouldn't be all the terrible of a plan, though, assuming different people were brought in to work on it.
Scrappylive

Liquid Emperor
**
« Reply #198 on: 06-11-2015 02:07 »

What is this, the fifteenth time Homer and Marge have 'separated'? Seriously, how many times are they going to fall back on that storyline?

My sentiments exactly. A pop news article on the matter showed up in my news feed. The article title was something to the effect of "After 25 years of a happy and blissful marriage, Homer and Marge split up." To which I thought "So? I can't count the number of times they've either split or nearly split in those 'happy and blissful' 25 years." They nearly split up in the first season and they did split up in the movie. Speaking of which...


So, seems like there won't be another movie in the near future.

Drag. The movie was actually really good. I'd like to see a repeat of that success sometime during my lifetime.

* Scrappy shrugs.


assuming different people were brought in to work on it.

If only they did that now. tongue

People always offer the excuse that it must be really hard to create over 500 episodes of the same TV show. That may be an excuse for the repetition of plotlines (which, despite my earlier comment, doesn't really bother me that much), but that's no excuse for the low quality and general lack of funny. I'm not a comedy writer or anything, but I can't imagine that having to repeat story elements precludes the show from being funny. Having unfunny writers precludes the show from being funny.
Box Incorporated

Bending Unit
***
« Reply #199 on: 06-11-2015 08:22 »

I like how all the media sites act like the divorce is gonna be permanent/last through the Season.

Would be slightly more interesting than getting another 5 shitty marriage crisis plots like the last couple Seasons, but I highly doubt the divorce will bring anything different than we've seen them act before in the 30 other instances they broke up/fought/fell for someone else.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF | SMF © 2006, Simple Machines | some icons from famfamfam
Legal Notice & Disclaimer: "Futurama" TM and copyright FOX, its related entities and the Curiosity Company. All rights reserved. Any reproduction, duplication or distribution of these materials in any form is expressly prohibited. As a fan site, this Futurama forum, its operators, and any content on the site relating to "Futurama" are not explicitely authorized by Fox or the Curiosity Company.
Page created in 0.277 seconds with 17 queries.