Futurama may be resurrected by Fox

[Ian]

Lets hope this comes true..

http://www.comingsoon.net/news/tvnews.php?id=12567

Variety reports that talks have begun at 20th Century Fox TV to revive the animated series Futurama, which takes place in the next millennium.

The studio is in early discussions to put Futurama back in production and create a limited number of episodes of the Emmy Award-winning series -- although it's too soon to tell where those episodes might end up, adds the trade.

[dolphinius_rex]

Woohoo!! Bender rules!

[cfitz]

I would be happy to see some new episodes of Futurama. Family Guy, however, I can do without.

cfitz

[dolphinius_rex]

I would be happy to see some new episodes of Futurama. Family Guy, however, I can do without.

cfitz

I loved the old Family Guy... but the new eps suck compared to the old ones

[Ian]

Some of the new ones are a little over the top but I like em. Any show that can include Star Wars and Transformers in the same episode is okay with me.

[cfitz]

Some of the new ones are a little over the top but I like em.

That's what turned me on it. It seems like they have substituted intelligent barbs with sophomoric "gross-out" jokes selected solely to shock. To me that isn't funny. It just shows a lack of imagination.

cfitz

[Ian]

You see the Simpsons episode from a few weeks ago when they were in Europe picking up a car for Mr. Burns? They were looking in the book of criminals and under "Plagarismo" there a picture of Peter. Then they had "Plagarismo Di Plagarismo" and had a picture of Stan from American Dad. That cracked me up. Good humor.. but not gross.

[dolphinius_rex]

You see the Simpsons episode from a few weeks ago when they were in Europe picking up a car for Mr. Burns? They were looking in the book of criminals and under "Plagarismo" there a picture of Peter. Then they had "Plagarismo Di Plagarismo" and had a picture of Stan from American Dad. That cracked me up. Good humor.. but not gross.

Yeah, that was a good part in an otherwise fairly lame episode. They need to retire Sideshow Bob... or actually, they should have LEFT him retired when they said they gave him the chair.

[smartin4]

BRING BACK BENDER!!!!!!!

[Ian]

Its going directly to DVD...

http://digg.com/movies/Futurama_to_return_in_DVD_form_

[dolphinius_rex]

Its going directly to DVD...

http://digg.com/movies/Futurama_to_return_in_DVD_form_

I can live with that... it worked for Family Guy

[smartin4]

Kinda disappointing, knowing the trouble Fox is having w/some of thier shjows being cancelled and all, they could use something that would bring the viewers back to them.

Oh well, guess we'll just have to wait foir the DVDs to be released.

[dolphinius_rex]

If the DVD movies do well though, we may see Fox give the green light to returning Futurama to TV.

[Morpheus]

Well it's a start. I have Futrama seasons 1 to 4 on DVD so if there doing 4 movies direct to DVD that's great. Hopefully it would be picked up for at least another season on tv.

I watch Family Guy but I don't particularly like it that much. The baby, Stewie is the best character on the show and the dog Brian is the second best character. The rest of the show is crap. They do stuff and I look at the screen and say "is that suppose to be funny?" or "what the hell is that?". It's gotten to the point where I just want to watch the Stewie and Brian scenes and speed search the rest of the show.

I watched just one episode of American Dad and I couldn't stand it. I watched part of another episode and that's it. I'm staying far way from American Dad.

I still watch the Simpsons, but it feels like it's going stale. Most of the episodes are average with the occassional good episode. I alwyas look forward to the Halloween episodes. Futurama is still the best. Sometimes when I change the channels to see what's on, I watch parts or whole episodes of Futurama and I always get a laugh. It's much better than the Simpsons.

[cfitz]

I think Futurama suffered from Fox football syndrome. They put it in a time slot that, while theoretically good, in practice always got stomped on by late-running football games. Thus, it would constantly be pre-empted at the last minute or cut in the middle so that you would only see the second half. I'm sure this led some people to give up tuning in. After all, why take the trouble to watch when most of the time it is going to be pre-empted or gutted anyway?

I don't know why they constantly underestimate how long sports broadcasts, in general, will last. You can pretty much guarantee that every broadcast of a live sporting event will go at least half an hour longer than scheduled, and often a full hour longer.

cfitz

[Morpheus]

I think Futurama suffered from Fox football syndrome.

Speaking about the "fox football syndrome", I timered the 2-hour premiere of 24 last Sunday night and when I went to watch it the next day, Fox had a football game that went into overtime so I lost the last 13 mintues of 24. I was not happy about it.

This is the latest that this is happen. Everytime it does happen the show that I want to watch is aired already in progress (so you miss the beginning), or they don't air the show at all (so you miss the whole thing), or all the other programming is shifted over so you miss the beginning and/or ending. I really, really hate this.

If a network gives a sports game 3 or 4 hours to play - say they start it at 4:30PM and it is so suppose to finish at 8:00PM (when the other shows play from 8:00 to 11:00PM) and when it gets to 8:00PM and the game has not finished yet - then the networks should cut the game and go on with the original scheduling. I have seen this happened only once back in the late 80's with a first-run episode of Star Trek: The Next Generation - the sports game was cut at precisely 7:00PM on a Saturday night so that Star Trek could air. This is what should happen but it doesn't. Sports fans have always gotten their way and us non-sports fans have always gotten screwed over because of it. [Sorry, for the rant, but I had that inside me for years and needed to get it out.]

[MediumRare]

I'm afraid that this dates me, but I was at university when the (in)famous Heidi game wasn't completely broadcast.

Any broadcaster who remembers that one won't ever dream of prematurely stopping coverage.

G

[cfitz]

I'm afraid that this dates me, but I was at university when the (in)famous Heidi game wasn't completely broadcast.

Any broadcaster who remembers that one won't ever dream of prematurely stopping coverage.

That was before my time, but I have heard of that incident. And although I am not a sports fan, I do believe that once a sporting event has started, it should be broadcast to its completion. It isn't fair to the sports fans to have a game interrupted just as it is building to its exciting conclusion.

In my opinion, the solution is to allocate a sufficient and realistic amount of time for the sports broadcast when the programming schedule is originally planned. Then schedule another half-hour or hour of fluff filler material at the end of the game to accommodate games that go long. Something like Gilligan's Island reruns. Or better yet, just include an after-game report. Sports announcers can easily stretch a five-minute game summary into a full hour of stultifying detail that, despite my dislike for it, sports fans would actually enjoy.

However, this will never happen. Why? Because of money, of course. The broadcasters won't throw away good advertising slot dollars on Gilligan's Island re-runs when they can essentially double their audience by running the games consistently late. The sports fans continue watching the game, of course, and the other viewers who tuned in for the regularly scheduled program will watch the game too, hoping that their show will be aired in its entirety.

Anyway, that is the short-term gain. In the long term, the broadcasters end up alienating the fans of the regularly scheduled show and inadvertently kill that show (e.g. Futurama). But, like most humans, broadcast executives have a hard time looking past the short term to see long-term consequences.

cfitz

[smartin4]

I may be wrong, but i believe that it is in at least the NFL contracts that the networks sign that says they must broadcast the entire game. The exception seems to be the early game on a double header day, where they have been known to cut short a game that is running long so they can show the 2nd game

[cfitz]

I may be wrong, but i believe that it is in at least the NFL contracts that the networks sign that says they must broadcast the entire game.

The link that MediumRare provided confirms your recollection:

The reaction to the Heidi Game resulted in the AFL, and most other sports leagues, demanding that networks thereafter televise all games to their conclusion. NFL contracts with the networks now require games to be shown in a team's market area to the conclusion, regardless of the score.

Again, although I personally don't care much for televised sports, I do agree that once a game starts they should broadcast until it completes. It is only fair to the fans who invested their time in watching the game from the start. I just wish they would make more realistic schedules.

Now, in direct contradiction to my repeated disavowal of any interest in sports broadcasts, I must admit that I did tune in to watch the end of the Pittsburgh Steeler's football games this week and last week. Last week nearly killed me; this week was a bit easier to watch. Go Steelers! (It's just a childhood memory thing: My grandmother was an avid fan, and I would watch with her when I visited during football season.)

cfitz

[Ian]

I don't mind the games so much. It's the extra 30 minutes worth of highlights they gotta play at the end. Not to mention, you gotta listen to idiots like Madden give their 2 cents worth.