Why exactly did this show not catch on? I mean, everyone I know who has seen it loves it. And everyone I've forced to watch the eps I have on tape think it's great. How can a show as clever and funny as this one not have a chance to succeed when a show like <shudder> Will and Grace or <shudder again> Dharma and Greg endure? Family Guy is/was one of the best shows on tv when you compare it to the crap that is being put on now. It's a shame it's going up against Survivor. It won't stand a chance unfortunately. As for Friends, ughhhh! How sick I am of Friends! It was fun to watch when it first started, but now it's just pathetic. It's the same jokes and story over and over. I'd rant some more, but i gotta go to work. If Fox does, in fact, let Family Guy go is there any chance of it being picked up by Comedy Central? I hope so.
A question about Family Guy popularity...
RDM1976 wrote in message ...
Fox put it in the Thursday death slot, cancelled it...the show got an emmy for voiceovers, so they uncancelled it...and now after a lot of time, effort, and money has gone into making a 3rd season, they put it in the Thursday death slot again.
There are a ton of fans out there...so they all better WATCH EVERY EPISODE this fall when it comes back on so there's even a chance for a 4th season..
Guy
It would only go to Comedy Central as reruns......you don't want 3 seasons of reruns...you want 10 seasons of new episodes. :) Pimp the show to everyone you know...tell them to pimp it!!!!
On Mon, 21 May 2001, Sweet Zombie Jesus wrote:
Unless they have Nielson boxes, what difference does it make whether they watch it or not?
shawn sunil rao wrote in message ...
In some respects that's true, but a good vibe of LOTS of people watching does matter.
On 22 May 2001 03:16:23 GMT, [email] (RDM1976) wrote:
I agree, Comedy Central would be a great place for this show if Fox doesn't want it anymore. Here's hoping...
The humor was too low brow, derivative and intentionally offensive? Don't know about the others, but that did it for me.
Outside of Usenet, I have yet to run into anyone who likes it. Or admits to liking it, anyway. When the general topic of conversation turns towards TV, Family Guy basically doesn't get mentioned.
Why must people always denigrate other shows while touting their own personal faves?
And toy poodles are vicious killers compared to girbils. Everything is relative.
The reason it's going up against Survivor and Friends is because FOX sees it simply as filler. No matter how many people watch it, or don't, it's still going to get better ratings than a test pattern would draw.
I agree. I lost interest when the monkey was booted and it turned into the "Ross pathetically pines for Rachel" show.
But, to their credit, they tend to avoid necrophilia and bestiality jokes. And despite the decline in quality, they do still get extremely good ratings.
There's always a chance. With so many extra networks, the rules about the number of episodes required for syndication have changed.
Dave (eagerly anticipating Survivor III.)
Whatever.
Leave your house.
Seems you'd be most qualified to answer that one
.>And toy poodles are vicious killers compared to girbils.
It's "gerbil." Come on, THAT one you should know.
Sorry, genius. May seem that way. So not the case.
Ooh... necrophilia!? Bestiality!? Hide under the tables!!!
Neilskee wrote:
Hey, someone asked. Why would *you* say it never caught on?
Huh? Oh, I get it. Like I must not get out if I don't know any Family Guy fans. No, it doesn't work like that. I work in an office, I come into contact with about a hundred people a day, never once has anyone ever asked, "Hey, did you see Family Guy the other night?" Seinfeld, sure when they were still making new episodes. Survivor, definitely, if you didn't watch Survivor, you missed out on all the conversation.Frasier now and then, Will and grace on occasion, Family Guy? Never.
I'm not touting anything.
Rats don't care for gErbils.
Right. The most obvious of reasons is not the correct one. Okay, genius, why do *you* think FOX is burying this show beneath the two most popular, highest rated shows the other networks have to offer all week? They couldn't have possibly put it in a worse position without calling ABC and pleading with them for another night of the Millionaire show.
"If nobody watches, who cares? If the rating are as crappy as they have been since the beginning, so what? It's going up against Survivor and Friends! We have the perfect excuse! Crash and burn, Family Guy!"
Maybe the network biggies just don't like the show either but they're forced to honor a contract or something. But that's just a wild guess.
In a prime time show? Come on.
Dave (can't wait to see the first Neilsens)
BTW, I don't care for your creative snipping style. You often lose context when you do that. Just a thought.
I would say it never caught on because it was punished for it's success by a lame-brained network executive named Doug Herzog. Look at the facts: In each of its first six airings, Family Guy built significantly on its Simpsons lead-in. It did so well, that the following fall Herzog prematurely moved it to Thursday night at 9, hardly thinking he was burying it, since it was paired with what he thought would be Fox's newest biggest hit: Action. In retroactive defense of his move, he pointed to the fact that the Simpsons was moved to Thursday night against the Cosby Show early in its history, however the Simpsons was moved at the beginning of season three, not after 6 episodes. Furthermore, Matt Groening was crying about Futurama not following the Simpsons on Sunday nights and Herzog gave in. (Meanwhile, Futurama tanked after the Simpsons and got banished to 7pm Sunday nights.) Guess what? Fox learned their lesson. Witness Malcolm in the Middle, which going into it's third season, still hasn't moved from it's post-Simpsons time slot. They aren't about to make the same mistake twice.
Funny, because even though the show has been off the air for over a year, I still overhear people talking about Family Guy and referring to it as the funniest show on television. Just two nights ago I had the pleasure of informing some Starbucks patrons that their beloved show would be back in the Fall. Does your office employ anyone under the age of 50?
Really? Because in your defense of your inane statements, you invoked Seinfeld AND Survivor. Sounds like touting to me.
First of all, you're ignoring the fact that Fox ordered an additional 13 episodes of the show last year. I'm not in showbiz, but it seems logical that if a network had no confidence in a show, it would hardly result in more episodes being ordered. Secondly, if you look at Fox's Thursday night you will also see Temptation Island II on it. Clearly, Fox is once again attempting to establish some kind of presence on Thursday, especially since this is the last year of Friends. If Family Guy can pull the same kind of amazing demographic numbers (#1 show with teenagers while it was on the air) on Thursday night, it will carve out a nice little niche for itself and survive for many years to come, as well as give Fox some regular programming to build on for the night.
So the reason that Fox ordered 13 more episodes of the show last year is just so it could watch it crash and burn? Come on, you must admit, you sound pretty silly.
Wa wa wa.
And I blame Satan. Next.
I don't believe you. Unless you're the one bringing up the subject anyway. This morning, I actually asked a few people about the show, I was looking to promote any sort of discussion. The responses started with "Family who?" and ran down from there. One person had heard of it but referred to it as "a lame cartoon." Of 7 randomly selected people, zero were fans of the show. Granted, you generally learn nothing from smal sample sizes, I have a very strong feeling further testing would bear out the similar results. I'll ask a few more during my smoke break and again during lunch, I'll let you know.
Mostly under 50. It's an IT office, computers and servers and such. We're all young folks here, 20's and 30's mostly. It's not exactly the Starbucks crowd, but by no means anything but average in the TV viewing department. The shows with the higher rating generally get talked about while the shows that nobody watches don't.
Inane? You're entitled to your opinion, however wrong.
I was merely giving examples of "water cooler" shows, shows that *do* get talked about the day after they air. I included several shows that fit the description but that I don't watch. Certainly nothing I wrote could be seen as touting, unless that's what you're looking for.
I don't know what sort of deal the show's producer made with the network. Maybe they loved him despite the crappiness of his show so they ordered episodes and then something went wrong with their relationship and the network decided to bury it.
They're so desperate, I can smell the fear from here.
For starters, viewers under 18 are worthless. The 18-49 demo is what they covet and, while the 18 and 19 year old might have watched, the 20-49's have not, thus the crappy ratings.
"Rose tint my world, keep me safe from trouble and pain."
I don't know who paid who, I never claimed to know what goes on behind closed network exec doors, I can only imagine it was a 'favor for a friend'. Or maybe those 13 eps were cheaper than some other filler they were considering, who knows. But as a fan, it's your duty to hope for the best. Good luck with that, hope you're not too disappointed, it's only a show, right?
SO I can safely assume you only snip the stuff you either agree with, or have no legit response to. That makes things easier to understand. Thanks.
Wow, never noticed this. If this is your idea of a har har, then it seems you're actually paying FG quite a compliment by disliking it. I view you in a whole new light, oh rat.
It's been there for about 6 years. Nobody ever comments on it except to say it made them laugh or to say it sucks as a lame way of insulting me personally. One moron even threatened to sue me, thus the disclaimer.
Now you're grasping at straws. Really insubstantial ones at that.
Same here. I never would have pegged you for a .sig flamer.
Dave (but I *did* expect you to snip the hell out of my last post, as is your style. At least you didn't disappoint in that respect.)
You have to help me on this one. See, I don't spend my entire day on a computer, so I'm not hip with your fancy lingo.
Neilskee wrote:
Sorry, I didn't realize you were a newbie. [1]
http://info.astrian.net/jargon/terms/f/flame.html
Dave (always happy to educate the ignorant masses)
chance
Dharma
Friends,
started,
over.
Family Guy
so.
If you're not a fan of the show, why are you trolling alt.tv.family-guy?
Surly wrote:
I wouldn't know, ya gotta ask Spectre about that.
On Tue, 29 May 2001 21:11:48 -0400, Dave wrote:
Well after reading all your posts, I hope your wrong Dave as I and others here really want the show to survive. At least we have another season to look forward to and then who knows.
Cheers
True. Nobody does know. We'll have to see what kind of ratings the show pulls in during that 13-episode burn-off before any real future assessment can be made.
Does anyone have the ratings from the first few seasons?
Dave (pretty sure they weren't good.)
No, not good at all. That's why the show got picked up for 13 more.
Neilskee wrote:
Enjoy the final 13.
Dave (the ratings *did* suck. Badly.)
Dave wrote in message ...
They sucked on Thursday because of Frasier and Smackdown...it was a stupid timeslot to try to nurture a show.....however, when the show was airing over the summer (with minimal advertising and constantly changing timeslots), the ratings were pretty good and CONSISTANT....the audience that had found it was coming back. Consistant ratings, Emmy for best voiceovers, and a stream of outraged fan mail all contributed to the show coming back for another season. Since the show's on Thursday again, it's going to be another uphill climb towards a fourth season, but Family Guy has LOYAL fans who have been waiting for the show to come back. As long as they come back and they all bring their friends with them, I think that perhaps even up against Survivor, the ratings will be pretty respectable......I do think Fox should put it on Wednesday since they're playing re-run comedy shows at 8pm anyway....but we'll see what happens.
I loved Family Guy when it came out and I've already collected all of the episodes. The problem that they are gonna have when it comes back and is up against Survivor and Friends is that people think that crap is real life and real danger that they're watching so no matter what happens, the viewer is still at home sitting on his/her ass munching Cheetos and wasting oxygen. Damn, some of these people really piss me off. They're the same ones that got the George Carlin show cancelled, I loved that show too. As far as friends is concerned, I couldn't give a damn about them cause Courtney Cox hasnt showed any skin in her entire career. None of them have that I can think of.
I've collected all of the Family Guy Episodes and I've created a two cd images so that they can be shared and everyone can enjoy the wacky antics of the Griffin family. Good Luck everybody and keep watching Fox for the return of Family Guy. If they keep that goddess Dark Angel on there I'll never change channels. Have a great weekend.
She might have been OK to look at a few years ago, but now that she's just a skeleton with skin, no thanks...
Hah! I guess you guys missed the full-on Penthouse-style naked PPV she did a few years back. That was hot.
...Sean.
On 22 May 2001 03:16:23 GMT, [email] (RDM1976) wrote:
All I can give yeah is theories, take them for what you will...
First up, can't help but think a lot of people have never watched it, just dismissing it off-hand as a Simpson's clone (which, lets face it, ANY show that's animated, comedy and centers on a family is gonna get that comparison..) plus it debuted when there was a lot of animated shows going around (Dilbert, Futurama, King of Hill, PJs etc, etc), perhaps giving people a feeling overkill at trying a new one.
Second, the humor is often a bit "bent", sometimes just crazily surreal, which I think is great, but that's never been the type of humor "mainstream" audiences seem to enjoy. (Which, in my opinion is why another show Sifl and Olly, never really caught on.) Plus some of jokes require (gasp!) thought to get, and knowing certain references, again, mainstream audiences (at least from my knowledge of what's popular) tend prefer watered down stuff fluff humor, explaining the popularity Friends...
(see my comments on mainstream audiences..)
The same principle applies to the popularity of "pop horror" shows like Charmed, Buffy, Angel, etc, as opposed to well-written and genuinely creepy shows like Brimstone and American Gothic (both of which were great shows but tragicly canceled)
-kolt
On Sun, 03 Jun 2001 06:09:49 GMT, [email] (Kolten) wrote:
Will and Grace has some pretty witty in-joke humour on it actually. I don't think mainstream audiences really go for it. I've never liked Friends but I love Will and Grace.
--- To send email replace "antispam" with "sprint"