xplosiveamensia

Poppler

|
|
 |
« on: 05-02-2005 00:15 »
|
|
(Hello! This is my first post here. Yay for once I can be an annoying newbie  !) Hello! I've been lurking here for awhile but this bugged me so much I finally had to register to get others takes on it. Tonight Family Guy was resurrected and in the first minute Peter started naming off all the non reality shows FOX had cancelled since they cancelled Family Guy. I was expecting to hear Futurama but I didnt! I even double checked online and nope he didnt say Futurama! Yes now there's a crazy newbie psycho fanatic conspiracy theory brewing in my mind. What do you guys think about this?
|
|
|
|
|
Nasty Pasty

DOOP Secretary

|
|
Welcome to PEEL dude. I hope you enjoy your stay!  On your idea, I watched the episode as well, and I came to the conclusion that he was naming off crappy shows that FOX created that only lasted 1 season or so. Futurama then, would not apply to that catagory.
|
|
|
|
|
|
xplosiveamensia

Poppler

|
|
Thanks  ! The list was (according to tvtome.com): Dark Angel Titus Undeclared Action That 80's Show Wonderfalls Fastlane Andy Richter Controls The Universe Skin Girls Club Cracking Up The Pits Firefly Get Real Freaky Links Wanda At Large Costello The Lone Gunman A Minute With Stan Hooper Normal Ohio Pasadena Harsh Realm Keen Eddy The Street American Embassy Cedric The Entertainer The Tick Louis and Greg The Bunny. *** Im almost certain a few of those lasted more then one season (not fully but almost  ) and as said not all were crappy...though some were LOL!
|
|
|
|
|
Futurama Nerd

Professor

|
|
 |
« Reply #4 on: 05-02-2005 00:25 »
« Last Edit on: 05-02-2005 00:25 »
|
|
Welcome to PEEL xplosiveamensia  Yay! Another girl  I agree with Nasty on the whole "only lasted 1 season" thing evidence has changed  , and I also agree with Venus, Wonderfalls was pretty good. edit: Yay, Dark Angel did last longer then 1 season. Hmm... ------------------ Fashion is a form of ugliness so intolerable that we have to alter it every six months".- Oscar Wilde
|
|
|
|
|
|
xplosiveamensia

Poppler

|
|
Didnt (Im going by memory here) Dark Angel, Titus, and Andy Richter all at least last 2 seasons? I swear Andy and Titus did for sure but eh Im to lazy to go research  !
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
JDB

Professor

|
|
I don't have anything to say here since I haven't seen the Episode but Welcome To PEEL, Xplosivemensia!
|
|
|
|
|
i_c_weiner

DOOP Secretary

|
|
I asked myself the same thing. The only thing that came to mind was: a) The writers are idiots and forgot.; or b) Might be a hint-hint from inside Fox that Futurama might be back.
Some of those shows didn't stink nor were short run. Titus and Andy Richter were pretty good. I saw the list as shows that have canceled since Family Guy either started or was canceled the first and second time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Beamer

DOOP Secretary

|
|
 |
« Reply #21 on: 05-02-2005 23:51 »
« Last Edit on: 05-02-2005 23:51 »
|
|
I often think of Family Guy and Futurama as being very close shows anyway. They both premiered at around about the same time, both were cancelled, then both enjoyed good Adult Swim ratings and DVD sales. Of course, with Family Guy renewed, it's now a different story, but I think this is the reason Futurama was not included in this list - since had it been included, it could be regarded as making a joke like that at Futurama's expense... Ah, I don't know. Still, I haven't seen the episode yet, but judging by reading the script to this scene, he only seems to be listing shows that have premiered SINCE Family Guy (although I may be wrong here due to my lack of knowledge about Fox shows)... Ehhh, nevermind. Screw this post, just re-read DoTheBartman's again. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Beamer

DOOP Secretary

|
|
I assume because they aired right after eachother on Adult Swim, and both shows helped eachother get ratings, I suppose.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nasty Pasty

DOOP Secretary

|
|
Originally posted by Eyedol7513: Bender_Waffles: Sorry for sounding naive, but how did Futurama partly help Family Guy regain popularity? It is because the two shows playing back to back draws in much more viewers then just one. I started watching Family Guy from watching Futurama, as did many of my friends.
|
|
|
|
|
GreyThinkyWhale

Professor

|
|
he only names pretty crappy shoes... (seeing as how I havn't heard of any - well all except one or two - of them).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DotheBartman

Liquid Emperor
 
|
|
 |
« Reply #35 on: 05-04-2005 00:22 »
« Last Edit on: 05-04-2005 00:22 »
|
|
Originally posted by jacoby: Thats a good episode.
But why would Peter's apearence there be an argument against them respecting each other? Remember, the plot of that segment involved Homer creating dumbed-down clones of himself. Thus, by inserting Peter in there, the implication is that Peter himself is merely a dumbed down clone of Homer Simpson (which is sort of true). This is backed up by numberous quotes from Simpsons writers and producers. Alot of them apparently hate FG and consider it a crass rip off. In fact, writer Matt Selman once said this in an interview: (Interviewer):What did you think of Futurama?
It was really good and really well-written. Family Guy was this horrible bizzaro version of The Simpsons, and Fox put all their support behind it. Whereas Futurama was this really funny, inspired show and they flush it down the toilet. The worst thing you can say at The Simpsons about a joke is that it is Family Guy. It means the joke just pointed out the obvious, and we can do better than just the obvious. Edit: Come to think of it, all of this may be partially why Futurama wasn't mentioned. Mcfarlane has been accused of many, many people (not just Simpsons staffers) of blatantly ripping off Groening's non-futuristic show. He's previously made a couple sort of swipes at The Simpsons in interviews (including one where he humorously didn't know he was already being recorded, and then when told his comments were on the record, backed off and started saying "oh, its one of the greatest shows ever....." ), but in a more recent one from a few months ago, claimed that he didn't want to bash The Simpsons on FG because it would "make us look like the biggest f*&#ing hypocrites in the world". Futurama, although not The Simpsons exactly, comes from a creator that McFarlane has been accused of ripping off, and it may very well be that he didn't want to look even worse by essentially attacking Groening's show.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Beamer

DOOP Secretary

|
|
I don't think The Simpsons staff have much respect for Family Guy at all - they're constantly making digs at it on the audio commentary, accusing Family Guy of stealing all their ideas (eg. claiming Stewie's voice is a rip-off of the voice of the prissy second grade acting kid from I Love Lisa, even if it was a non-serious comment).
Then again, The Simpsons staff accuse many others of stealing their ideas. Who was it who called Hank Hill "Homer with glasses?" Mike Reiss? I mean, come on, I can understand why the writers would be protective of their content, but calling Hank Hill a Homer Simpson rip-off? Homer's a fat, lazy, bumbling man who's easily distracted, has conversations with his own brain, has no shame and is incredibly stupid. Hank's a skinny Texan stick-in-the-mud who ALWAYS follows the rules, loves his job as a propane salesman, is fairly intelligent despite some of his stupid principles and is a strict father. Aside from their short tempers, I fail to see the resemblance there.
At the end of the day, while I can admit that The Simpsons paved the way for this formula and Family Guy DOES have some suspiciously similar ideas at times, the concept of the dysfunctional family and the fat, stupid father were both around LONG before The Simpsons did it... The two shows only get compared to eachother because they're both cartoons.
|
|
|
|
|
DotheBartman

Liquid Emperor
 
|
|
 |
« Reply #38 on: 05-04-2005 03:12 »
« Last Edit on: 05-04-2005 03:12 »
|
|
Originally posted by Beamer: Then again, The Simpsons staff accuse many others of stealing their ideas. Who was it who called Hank Hill "Homer with glasses?" Mike Reiss? I mean, come on, I can understand why the writers would be protective of their content, but calling Hank Hill a Homer Simpson rip-off? Homer's a fat, lazy, bumbling man who's easily distracted, has conversations with his own brain, has no shame and is incredibly stupid. Hank's a skinny Texan stick-in-the-mud who ALWAYS follows the rules, loves his job as a propane salesman, is fairly intelligent despite some of his stupid principles and is a strict father. Aside from their short tempers, I fail to see the resemblance there.
You're right there.....thankfully Reiss is the only one who's ever made that ridiculous claim. I know Groening and Jean both love King of the Hill. Also, I should note that FG (see below) is really the only other show they've accused of stealing their ideas, other then "Dinosaurs" many years ago (hey, don't have a stegosaurus man!). At the end of the day, while I can admit that The Simpsons paved the way for this formula and Family Guy DOES have some suspiciously similar ideas at times, the concept of the dysfunctional family and the fat, stupid father were both around LONG before The Simpsons did it... The two shows only get compared to eachother because they're both cartoons. In this case, though, I don't think its that simple....honestly, Peter is pretty reminiscent of Homer in a lot of ways, particularly basic characterization, and even the design to some degree. There are a lot of fat fathers on tv, but Family Guy has often copied The Simpsons too directly....particularly in the "cutaway gags" (a Simpsons innovation) and in the basic characterization of Peter. They haven't just ripped off Simpsons either; everything from "The Honeymooners" (by McFarlane's own admission) to obscure comic books have been plundered at some point (ever heard of "Jimmy Corrigan"? Yeah....the design of that character is almost exactly the same as Stewie.....its really uncanny, and too close to be a coincidence. Do a google search on it sometime).
|
|
|
|
|
Beamer

DOOP Secretary

|
|
 |
« Reply #39 on: 05-04-2005 03:49 »
« Last Edit on: 05-04-2005 03:49 »
|
|
No, I've never heard of Jimmy Corrigan before, but after looking into it a bit on Google as you suggested, I'm definitely with you on that one. Waaay to close to be a coincidence indeed...
However, the point I was trying to make is that even though the show is full of unoriginal content (whether they be rip-offs, references or just plain unintentional - I wouldn't mind betting it's all 3), it does have enough merits to be classed as a good show on its own, and the Simpsons staff seem to look down on it too much, accusing it of stealing so many of their ideas, even if Family Guy has ripped off some aspects of their basic formula. I mean, what, do they really think the Family Guy writers sit around watching Simpsons episodes, looking for stuff to steal?
Yes, I don't doubt that Family Guy has stolen its share of content, especially after seeing Jimmy Corrigan, but the show was never meant to be fully original. Hell, over 50% of the jokes in it are parodies or references to TV shows & movies... As for the characters, I think that Family Guy can pull off total stupidity better than The Simpsons (although I love Homer Simpson, his IQ seems to fluxuate so much in the show - whereas Peter Griffin's is more constant, he's ALWAYS a moron, even if it's not suitable to the situation he's in - unlike Homer, who can be somewhat smart when the writers need him to be).
At the end of the day, Family Guy wasn't going for originality or innovation - it just wanted to be a really funny show, which it is (although episodes do NOT hold up well in repeat viewings, unlike The Simpsons and Futurama). Although Season 3 was full of character development, it's obvious that the original intentions of Family Guy were just simply to pull off a hilarious show, and this is why I don't think the unoriginal aspects of Family Guy matter so much... I know I'm being really defensive of the show here, even though I agree with you that some of its content is stolen, but I'm just saying - people make the show out to be NOTHING but ripped off content, and it DOES have many merits of its own that the Simpsons staff and Family Guy haters alike always overlook when bashing the show.
|
|
|
|
|