"Futurama" Halloween Episode

I'm wondering if there's going to be a "Futurama" Halloween episode? That's would be something after watching the lasest Simpsons "THOH"!

I asked Bill Morrison this at comic con and he said the writers think it'll be a yearly Christmas special since The Simpsons do the Halloween specials. They wanted to do something different. There is deffinately a Christmas episode this year with no mention of a Halloween one yet.... But it is not etched in stone yet.

Nobby

Since the Christmas episodes will be yearly, does this mean that the characters will age? Will Farnsworth live on into his 150s? Will Fry ever reach his 30s?

Nobby N. Coburn wrote in message news:7pj0mu$[email]...

That's

grosse wrote ...

I doubt we'll see our PEC getting any older. The Simpsons have had several Halloween specials and haven't aged a day since the show debuted. Although, it's definitely evident that the writers and artists have grown up a bit in that time. :-)

• Leigh 13

[Hoping foolishly, yet fervently, that Someone Important At Fox reads this]

I HOPE NOT!

The _single_ best decision the producers / creators / writers of The Simpsons made was _not_ aging the characters. If the characters aged, we'd have wound up with the same trite crap and actor-vs-character failings that appear in -any- "family" series. Using adult voices, for children that never age, enables the kind of humor that makes The Simpsons work.... and is only possible with animation.... and thus should be capitalized on for Futurama as well!

[Hopefully, he adds:] I am sure that Mr. Groening, and his team, are aware of this, and will treat the future as they have treated the present...

[/foolish hoping]

That might also result in a plethora of confusion much wider than that of The Simpsons. I think it would probably be better to show a _gradual_ progression of time, as if 3 seasons=one year or something. Being permanently stuck in the year 3000 would mean that the whole business of how Fry arrived in the year 3000 would have to be written out, which would be insanely weird.

Jim Pearson wrote in message news:[email]...

ever

this]

On Fri, 20 Aug 1999 13:07:20 -0600, "grosse" wrote:

I think they could count the passing years, even at a 1 to 1 rate. But
that doesnt mean the characters would have to show any signs of it.
  Also, in The Simpsons, they DO occassionally "flash back" to earlier
times, such as Homer with hair, Lisa and Bart both as babies [several
times], as well as others.
    They sometimes change,[not neccessarily "age"] like when Homer
gained 63 lbs. to get on disability. The point is that all these
little aspects of reflection, or change, help to draw focus away from
the fact that the characters, generally speaking, dont age.
    After all, Homer has got to lose those last two hairs, eventually,
right?    I wouldn't count on it!

I just couldn't sit idly by and say nothing after "[email]" said:

Not only that, but I love the subtle references they make to it. Like the episode where Marge took Bart and Lisa to buy shoes. They are both walking around complaining that the shoes are way too big for them. Marge just says, "You'll grow into them. You're both way overdue for a growth spurt."

i don't think it should be that standardized.. sure, staying in the year 3000 would kind of be silly, but making a year happen every three years might get worse..

Aside from that, the idea of a yearly christmas episode is almost too cliche for the series. almost EVERY show does it. That's one of the things that made Simpsons better. they had a yearly halloween special, which no shows (that i'm aware of) mirror that idea. Of course, they can't copy themselves, either, and not many other holidays can be capitalized on in this way...

• Rando

A cute thingy: ----- Hello. I'm Leonard Nimoy. The following tale of Alien encounters is true. And by True, I mean false. It's all lies. But they're entertaining lies. And in the end, isn't that the real truth? The answer is: No. --- Leonard Nimoy, "The Springfield Files"

On Fri, 20 Aug 1999, grosse wrote:

In article , Rando Christensen wrote:

Lots of shows have, or have had Halloween Episodes. Don't know about the vignette format, that's another matter.

Groundhog's day!! Or Flag Day.

Jim Pearson wrote in message news:[email]...

But Mr Groening said (http://www.fox.com/futurama/chat_fr.htm) :

' "The Simpsons" are still on the air in 1000 years. The difference between "Futurama" and "The Simpsons" is that "The Simpsons" are fictional and "Futurama" is real. (Smile) '

So the characters *should* age, no?

between

That's a very good point. And after only 9 episodes I might believe it, except that usually after MG says that line "the Simpsons are fictional and Fr is real" he laughs and adds "that's the joke reason". Then he says the real reason.

That is his answer for many questions, including "why are the Simpsons characters yellow and Fr characters aren't?". Or, "will there be a cross-over episode?" Pretty much any question that compares the two shows in that way. I don't remember seeing him answer the question "Will Fr characters age?" or "Will time progress on Fr beyond the year 3000?". We should all keep that question in the back of our minds so that when one of us is in a chat session we can bring it up.

btw, in the case of the 2 questions in the previous paragraph, the real reason he says after the line "that's the joke reason", was that Fr is _not_ a spinoff show of the Simpsons.

Dave Sweatt FrCr http://futurama.simplenet.com

In article , [email] (Benjamin Robinson) wrote:

--> They sure are two independent entities. It's simplistic, and yet another insult to animation as a medium, to even _discuss_ whether they are related.... do people consider related, say, James L. Brook's multiple live action sitcoms? Or, all the Spelling crap?

--> ... and it's an insult to the -rest- of animation to think this is a Futurama vs. Simpsons issue. How many cartoon characters in -any- series age? I am sure there are some examples, but none come to mind immediately.

--> Absolutely. On a different level.

--> Moreso. On a different level.

--> For our time, not for family. Different sentimentality.

--> Great start, yet only time will tell.

--> Whoops. Sorry! Just did it myself, didn't I? ; )

--> Certainly not a spinoff. And clearly simplistic, and, again, an insult to animation, to think it is, just because it has Groenig's name on it. If he had produced live-action shows, would we be having this converstaion?

Jim

Jim Pearson wrote in message ...

That's less of a factor at Futurama than the Simpsons. Futurama is a workplace series rather than a family one, and there aren't any children. Fry going from 25 to 30, say, is much less of a change than Bart going from 10 to 15.

The tricky bit is more a matter of duration than age. If they want to keep Fry as someone who is innocent of future stuff, then they might not want him to end up having been in the future for five years.

Here's my take on the PEC's aging question. I think they should count pretty close to real time. That is, let each episode, some of which occur over a day or two, take place each week. However, I don't think there needs to be a "year jump" at the end of the season. So, in the beginning of the second season, Fry's been awayke about 10 weeks. This method would allow the characters to "remember" things from previous episodes, and still age at a slow enough rate.

Just my $0.02 on the topic.

-ed