ah man!

i had chili and cheese, i had my tostitos, i had my cream soda..all ready for some futurama enjoyment and instead i get true lies. i think fox has a personal vendetta against their own shows or something.

Jeremy Styron wrote:

I would say it's more self preservation. Since in some markets it would be going up against the Academy Awards. Only the East coast would not conflict with the Oscars. Just wait until next week for new episodes.

In article ,

Self-indulgent tripe. These people already get paid millions to be in these movies, and have thousands of adoring fans. Then they need to be given awards for what they do too? Why don't they give out awards to people who transplant hearts, discover new technology, deliver mail, operate small business, and so on?

Paul

Paul Tomko wrote in message ...

They do, actually. They don't have TV shows to present them, though. The Nobel prizes are still considered to be a pretty big deal.

"Dweeb" wrote in message news:99okhm$lih$[email]...

Don't give 'em any ideas. I think it'll be time to move to a small south pacific island the day they have a Nobel show.

In article ,

But *they* do. Nobels, huge research grants, trophies from the Small Business Association, etc. Just not all of them are on TV with a full orchestra and women in sparkly dresses...

90% of the awards throughout the night go to people who either don't have legions of fans or aren't collecting multi-million dollar salaries. Besides some of the top actors, people aren't lining up to get autographs from writers, cinematographers, editors, visual effects artists, composers, etc. Money isn't the point of the awards show, it's a chance for people in the industry to provide recognition to each other for the quality of their work.

It also works as a way to counter the money-dominated point-of-view of the studios, by giving exposure to good films that aren't receiving big marketing campaigns. Titles like Pollock, Almost Famous, You Can Count On Me, The Contender, Shadow of the Vampire, etc. which have not been widely seen all got exposed to a large audience based on what the industry thinks of their quality, not what the studios think of their marketability. Now they might be put in more theaters and the ticket sales and rentals might spike up. Anybody who is a fan of movies should support any effort that supports quality.

Every industry, business, school, etc. is welcome to provide their own awards, and most of them do in some form or another. If they want to try to sell their awards ceremony as a broadcast to the television networks, they're welcome to.

To bring this back to topic, an animation awards show might be just the thing that could help Futurama get more recognition. Being a fan of Futurama I would certainly not complain if they put one of those out. You can see without that type of thing Futurama is an example of the kind of quality show that suffers when no one else but the marketing department can give it mass exposure. Well, the Emmys could, but of course everyone always wishes more awards would go to the right people.

In article ,

Not when they figure everybody in the world will be tuning in to the Oscars on another network. This is what TV Guide is for...

Some of us were watching the end of the Lakers-Kings game on NBC.

Dave (who didn't watch a second of the award coverage)

Me, neither! We saw Sheep in the Big City on Cartoon Network, and then I downloaded some stuff until it was time for the Blackadder special on PBS!

(Usually now Sheep is opposite Futurama--boo!)

On 26 Mar 2001 16:15:01 GMT, [email] (Janet F Caires-Lesgold) wrote:

When they start televising the "Razzies", then I'll watch an awards show.

This year, Battlefield Earth" had a huge sweep; Worst Movie, Worst Actor, Worst on Screen Couple, and I think Worst Screenplay.

--Larry

I don't get it. I've seen the movie and it wasn't that bad. Certainly not so bad that it deserves the universal scorn it's received.

It's like the XFL. Regardless of whether the criticisms are warranted (and most really aren't) it's become the "in" thing to rip it apart.

"Dave" wrote in message news:[email]...

Yeah, but did you read the book? The movie was a pale shadow. So I think a certain amount of it is sour grapes.

I never read the book. I love written SF, but I'm not all that keen on Hubbard. In fact, I'd guess that has a lot to do with the negative backlash over the film. There were plenty of anti-Scientology folks out there with an easy target in front of them. To me, it would seem that poor old John Travolta got caught in the crossfire. *Any* big name star would have probably gotten the same bad reviews.

BTW, I had heard once that Scientology was simply the end result of a wager Hubbard had made with another SF writer over whether or not he could invent a new religion and get people to accept it and join it. Any idea if this is true?

"Dave" wrote in message news:[email]...

Trust me then, the movie was a blasphemy to the book. It wasn't an adaptation, it was an abstract. It was a screenplay written off of Cliff Notes. That's why it got the review slam it did.

I've heard that story, but it really smells like urban legend to me. Without knowing any more about L. Ron other than reading Battlefield Earth and Dianetics, I can say they're consistent as to heroic attributes. Which is to say the protagonist of B.E. is exactly the sort of hero you'd expect from someone who wrote Dianetics. I suspect this would hold true with L. Ron's other fictional works as well. It would seem then that Scientology is at least based on LRH's personal philosophy. And let's face it, starting a religion is a lot of work. I'd tend to think it was for the money and power (a la Joe Smith of Mormon fame) rather than a bar bet.

http://www.urbanlegends.com/religion/hubbard_heinlein_bet.html

On Wed, 28 Mar 2001 09:04:11 -0500, Dave wrote:

The story I heard was back int he late 50's, Hubbard and another writer were out drinking and moaning about how little money SciFi writers made. Hubbard then made a comment like "If you want to make real money, start a religion".

--Larry

"Larry F" wrote in message news:[email]...

Orwell made it first.

ya think they wanted a long movie to hook ya so you whouldn't switch over after little 30 minute shows

they should know that every comercial break is an opportunity for surfin

On Mon, 26 Mar 2001 02:15:32 +0100, "Jeremy Styron" wrote:

Ahhhh 100 Tacos for $100 - this should provide me sustenance for my Dr. Who marathon! ;o)