Matt Groening 3rd Cartoon?

[Reply #40 on:]

I think The Critic was the closest we'll get to a third Matt G cartoon. Well, by that logic, Futurama would actually be the third cartoon :P

Yeah, so Matt didn't have a hand in it, but it was crafted by Al Jean who basically defined the last ten years of The Simpsons (for better or worse) plus we had the numerous crossovers.

[Reply #41 on:]

Yeah, so Matt didn't have a hand in it, but it was crafted by Al Jean who basically defined the last ten years of The Simpsons (for better or worse) plus we had the numerous crossovers.

Despite Matt Groening's protests?  That doesn't even sound close to a third cartoon by Groening, if he was against a crossover so much that he refused to appear on the credits in such episodes.

[Reply #42 on:]

I know what it is. I was just making a vague statement at how I.C. put Futurama on the same level of a random show of personal preference.

Well both were extremely critically acclaimed Fox sitcoms that were considered to have been cancelled before their times, I'd hardly call it random.

[Reply #43 on:]

After Futurama just returned I see no point in Groening running away someplace else. Also, I have no problem with Seth McFarlane, and I don't think he is a moneygreedy bastard as some seem to think, but he is running too fast, choosing quantity over quality. Maybe it's because he's interested in different things and find troubles staying on one project. Maybe it's because he wants loads of cash. I don't really care which it is, I still don't watch any of his shows regularly.

[Reply #44 on:]

Then why stick up for him, just some food for thought.

[Reply #45 on:]

I stick up for him because I don't see why people seem to hate him. If a show is bad, just don't watch it.

[Reply #46 on:]

If Matt does make a third show, it should be set in the past, so he's got three entirely different shows in different time periods, so he could do a lot with it, unlike Seth, who's shows are practically the same.

[Reply #47 on:]

I think it's hard making another sitcom set in the present, there are so many... but then again there has been quite a lot since the 80's :P

[Reply #48 on:]

http://www.tvsquad.com/2010/06/21/five-futurama-characters-spinoff/

Maybe a spin-off?

[Reply #49 on:]

I speculate that Matt Groening might be so tired and jaded by the TV development and production process that, now that Futurama has been resurrected, he probably won't want to endure another excrutiating ordeal like that anytime soon. It must have been unbearably frustrating to have a show of such spectacular quality, collaborating with creative professionals of such high calibre, and producing such a smart and funny show, all for naught because the brainless Fox Network executives didn't have faith in the show and were unwilling to support it.
I suspect it all stems from the fact that he argued with the Fox Network executives over whether they would have any creative input; he refused, and they supposedly conceded. I bet that Matt G's righteous act of principled defiance poisoned the well and thereafter the Fox executives did everything they could to make Futurama fail.
Even though CC seems to be supporting the much better than the Fox Network ever did, they're adhering to their cable TV business model, which is supposedly why they've chosen to break up the 26 new episodes into two broadcast seasons, and air them during the summer. I've heard that Futurama's staff aren't content with that, because they're nearly finished the last of those episodes, and unless CC orders another batch of episodes, they'll be shutting down again. Like I said, that has to be frustrating and taxing on production staff. I imagine that Matt G will be talking and negotiating with CC a lot over the next few months to convince them to order more episodes. Then he'll be involved in producing those episodes. So when will he have the time to develop another series?
I think that Futurama will have to be renewed for multiple seasons and the production staff will need to get a few more seasons under their belt before they've established the foundation the show needs, which will afford Matt Groening the opportunity to step away from it and possibly development a new series.

[Reply #50 on:]

The idea of spin-offs seems a little tacky. Sure the side characters are great in their own rights, but they're meant as that, and although they may serve a purpose for the particular episode(s) that they're in, there doesn't need to be more.

Some of the ideas presented in that article were just plain tacky, I think if there was ever going to be a spin-off series, it would need to be something along the lines of short stories, each focusing on a different character, but even then... it sounds tacky.

I think Matt G needs to stick with what he does best, which is Futurama. If they concentrate on that, and manage to get a few more seasons in... I'll be happier than a pig in shit.

[Reply #51 on:]

"The Scruffy Show!"

[Reply #52 on:]

If Futurama was to have a genuine spin-off, it would have to be "The Adventures of Zapp Brannigan", which would basically be a parody of Star Trek with Zapp Brannigan (aka William Shatner) as the captain of the Enterprise, and Kiff Kroeker as Spock. They mentioned that was the inspiration for Zapp Brannigan and Kiff, and that they considered having a show-within-the-show about Zapp Brannigan. That show would be a perfect spin-off.
However, a cartoon about a bumbling, ignoramus; we've never seen a show like that before, have we?

[Reply #53 on:]

I hate spin-offs. I would hate to see a Futurama spin-off show of any sort.

[Reply #54 on:]

I hate spin-offs. I would hate to see a Futurama spin-off show of any sort.

That's a little close-minded.

I admit that the majority of spin-offs are crap or money-motivated carbon copies of a successful series; however, some spin-offs have been good.

Considering how many creative staff have worked on Futurama over the years, and that the size of the staff had to be reduced because of Futurama's trimmed budget, there are probably enough of them that they could create a spin-off on par with Futurama. I'd imagine that Matt Groening and David X Cohen would have some involvement in any spin-off, so it could be very similar in style, theme, and quality, but it would involve different characters.

I'm certain that a Zapp Brannigan spin-off would work, because he's hilariously stupid; Kiff is his perfect foil; and Zapp has had large enough parts in many episodes to justify his own series.

[Reply #55 on:]

I think, personally, is that part of what makes Zapp so good is that we get enough of him, but not too much. He does annoy me at times, especially if I watch too many episodes including him in a row. His quirky one liners are only so good because they're not constant, IMO, and I like it that way.

However, if they ever did decide to go with a spin-off, Zapp would be the obvious choice, as he does have the biggest secondary role that actually has a purpose, being that they're a DOOP ship, so they fight and do law type things, which is automatic storylines.

[Reply #56 on:]

http://www.tvsquad.com/2010/06/21/five-futurama-characters-spinoff/

Maybe a spin-off?

No.  Hmm... no, not at all.  That would not serve those characters well.  Let me go down through their list to explain why.

Robot Santa:  He is only funny because he appears on Xmas episodes.  Ugh!  Imagine a whole show with him?  I'd kill myself.  Futurama is and should not be spun around a single character, so neither should a spin-off.

Lrrr and Ndnd:  Again, they are funny when on screen, and I probably would shout 'more, more!', but if I get what I want, I will probably be disappointed.  How much fun could you do with these characters alone?  I ASK YOU!

Hypnotoad:  Dudes, that 22-minute episode was a gimmick.  It was fun, but I am not feeling we should see more of it.

Morbo:  While I could probably see him doing a lot of fun and such, I'd think it'll ruin the character by being required to introduce too many traits on him.

Zoidberg:  No, just no.  As much as I love Zoidberg (favourite character of mine), his character would be ruined if a show revolved around him.  If the funny thing about Zoidberg is that he is constantly discarded and ignored by the others, how the fuck can he be the focus of a spin-off?

And so, most of you mention Zapp Brannigan.  And while I personally think this would be the best choice, I am still going with no.

It's pretty simple.  If the spin-off was simply a Star Trek parody or some such, it would only be funny for that many episodes.

You see, Futurama isn't one character focused.  It's focused on sci-fi parodies.  And that is one of its strengths.  If you make it focus entirely on a single character, it's going to be fucking awful.  It's going to be like Joey after Friends.  What the--?

[Reply #57 on:]

There's a surprisingly number of excellent spin-offs out there, they just tend to be shows that people forget are spin-offs. Like The Simpsons for example.

That said, I would hate them to make a Futurama spin-off.

[Reply #58 on:]

A little known fact that The Simpsons was actually a spin-off from the original Tracey Ullman show shorts.

[Reply #59 on:]

A little known fact that The Simpsons was actually a spin-off from the original Tracey Ullman show shorts.

I don't think that counts as a "spin-off", because it was the same show, just expanded from shorts to half-hour episodes. The Simpsons spin-offs would be like those shows from "The Simpsons Spin-Off Showcase".

I think that some people here are taking this too seriously. Futurama has just been resurrected. A spin-off is a proposterous fantasy right now. But the IDEA has potential. I can't imagine why any fan of Futurama would be so opposed to a spin-off.

[Reply #60 on:]

Because we know what makes Futurama so good.

[Reply #61 on:]

Because we know what makes Futurama so good.

You're missing the point. We're talking about an ideal scenario wherein a Futurama spin-off would be just as good as the original, and Matt Groening, David X Cohen, and the other writers, production staff, and animation studio somehow are able to divide their time equally between the two shows, without Futurama suffering in any way.

In that scenario, what Futurama spin-off would you want to watch?

The character I'm most interested in watching as a spin-off would be Zapp Brannigan. Personally, I can't think of another character on Futurama that is as funny and interesting, and has a viable premise for his own show.

[Reply #62 on:]

I'd like a spin-off about Universe 1. That way we'd basically get double the Futurama we get now.

[Reply #63 on:]

I'd like a spin-off about Universe 1. That way we'd basically get double the Futurama we get now.

That's a great idea!

Another possibility: A seasonal type of episode of Futurama -- similar to Anthology of Interest -- wherein either one or three stories are told about the alternate universes.

[Reply #64 on:]

I agree the ideal would be Zapp. But I can't imagine it being very good either.

[Reply #65 on:]

I really don't think Matt Groening would make a spin off, or any other show, unless it was completely different. I'm pretty sure a Zapp-based show would tire after a couple of episodes.

[Reply #66 on:]

I really don't think Matt Groening would make a spin off, or any other show, unless it was completely different. I'm pretty sure a Zapp-based show would tire after a couple of episodes.

I don't think he would either. He's not in need for money, and it seems to me he wants to focus on Futurama. The only way a spin-off would come (if not forced from the network) is if he really had a great idea.

I don't think a Zapp show would last for many episodes either, but at least it would be better than most other possible spin-offs.

[Reply #67 on:]

Spinoffs? No way. I find them lazy and uninteresting. I love Family Guy, but I despise the Cleveland show because of how much of a recycled piece of crap it is.

The only decent spinoff for me was Frasier. But that had a completely different formula to Cheers, and lended itself to a spinoff well.

I really don't think a Futurama spin-off would work. It's just a great show on it's own, period.

Spin-offs from adult cartoons? The idea sounds bad in my eyes.

If Matt ever will do a 3rd cartoon (which is unlikely, but no harm speculating), then I would prefer it if it's a brand new show, different to both The Simpsons and Futurama. Either a series of Life in Hell, or something completely different, that's what I'd vote for.

[Reply #68 on:]

I know what it is. I was just making a vague statement at how I.C. put Futurama on the same level of a random show of personal preference.

Arrested Development was a great show. Michael Serra was so adorable in it. The whole George Michael/Maeby thing was just fucking brilliant it had me sweating and uncomfortable until the very end.

@Jarvio Beavis and Butthead spun off Daria AND King of the Hill, both two reasonably successful shows.

On Topic:
I don't know what would be left for Matt Groening to cover... pretty much anything is cool with the Simpsons right now and anything that isn't spills into Futurama territory (time travel etc..)

He couldn't do a show about cavemen without it being constantly compared to The Flintstones and it doesn't help that when Futurama came out it was fruitlessly compared to The Jetsons. People just don't know how to handle new things, but its not our fault its completely human to try to draw parallel between the known and the unknown.

A new series would not be treated as well as Futurama. Wait until people are tired of Seth McFarlane's 4 shows to make any risks.

[Reply #69 on:]

I have a hard time picturing groening making another cartoon. The new season of futurama suffers a bit from the reduced budget it has compared to the original (as illustrated by the amount of goofs already spotted in just 3 episodes and the lack of the really visually stunning scenes that the original episodes often had), but it still gets to draw on the creative work done in it's first five seasons. I doubt groening would be eager to start a new series under the same kind of constraints, and given the current state of ad-funded television no network is going to be buying any new cartoon series at a million an episode any time soon.

[Reply #70 on:]

I deeply believe that Matt Groening wouldn't do any cartoon that lacked quality.

I think it's pretty obvious that he actually puts some thought into the production of his cartoons and as has been said before in this thread, I doubt he'd have the time to produce a 3rd cartoon or even think about it.

Still, I'd give it a shot if he decided to make one. He hasn't disappointed me so far.

[Reply #71 on:]

Family Guy was funny for a bit. It sucks now. The Cleveland Show sucks. American Dad! is actually pretty decent. I can't believe that he's making a fourth one. And FOX is considering canceling the Simpsons just for another Seth MacFarlane show. Ugh. I say they replace The Cleveland Show with a Matt Groening Show.