Upcoming Episodes? What are those?

9/1 - PRE-EMPTED for the Fox Saturday Morning Fall preview (why don't
      they show it the day before the new schedule begins, like every
      other network?)

9/8 - Pre-empted in the Eastern and Central time zones for Week 1 of
      The NFL on Fox; the rest of the country will get "The Honking"
      (Bender is hit by a car, and turns into a killer car every
      night at midnight)

9/15 - PRE-EMPTED for "The Lost World: Jurassic Park"

Here's something to think about: Fox's Sunday 7:30 show, "Oliver Beane", won't be ready until January - so why don't they move Futurama until 7:30 until then?

I heard that they are.

Don Del Grande wrote:

AAARRRRGGGGHHHH! And they showed two , count them two (2) episodes of King of the Hill afterwards also. Why couldn't they just pre - empt one of the two episodes of King of the Hill instead? Is KOTH some sort of golden child to these people?

Because Fox hates Futurama. I don't know why. They just do. They don't want to move it to a decent timeslot because then somebody might actually be able to see the show. Thank you. I'm done ranting for now. I feel much better.

On Tue, 03 Sep 2002 01:28:48 GMT, Pocketwatch wrote:

I didn't even get that, as the local Fox station doesn't carry the Saturday morning slate. Phoenix showed a "Seinfeld" rerun and a syndicated "King of the Hill".

According to TV Guide, King of the Hill has the slot after the simpsons, followed by Malcolm and some new show. This season of Futurama is its last. In fact there are really no new shows. They are mostly left over from last season.

Mike

"Eagle61397" wrote in message news:[email]...

season.

No, really?

Eagle61397 wrote:

Goodness! I had no idea! For you see, I have been on Mars for the past decade, in a cave with my eyes shut, and my fingers in my ears.

Did you know that there are really no new Futurama episodes? And that season 5 is really comprised of left over shows from last season?

Just thought you should know.

I don't beleive it, man. I've seen it in this newsgroup and on web pages, but not anything official. C'mon, *prove* it.

Easily done: watch the credits at the end of each Futurama episode. You'll see that the last credit frame includes a number in the format #ACV##. That's called "production code". The first number indicates the production block (usually, each season has its own production block) and the last number is the episode number. If you watch the fourth season of Futurama, you'll notice there are only three 4ACV episodes in there; the rest of the episodes are 3ACV (created for the third season). Where are the other bunch of 4ACV episodes? Fox is holding those for a fifth season, which will be made out of all the 4ACV episodes that were supposedly produced for the fourth season. Since Fox has all those 4ACV episodes, they didn't order a new production block for the new season; and with no new episodes to produce, the production team had to go get a new job. Fox *might* pick the show up for a 6th season, but considering their treatment of the show, there's not a great chance of that happening.

"Leandro Pardini" wrote in message news:[email]... .....

And even if it did happen everyone has already moved on. New people would have to be brought in to make it. It would not be the same show.

On or about Mon, 09 Sep 2002 04:37:16 GMT, Michael Zaite made the sensational claim that:

Oh, what show would it be? I know what you're saying, but I honestly think it's a red herring. Writers come and go, visions change, etc. It's like topic drift, shows evolve and change. Look at the Simpsons, compare the latest season to the first. Is it the same show? As long as Matt and David are at the helm, Futurama will be Futurama. It might not be a seamless segue, but it would be the same show.

No, it's not. Both the first and most-recent seasons kind of sucked, but for totally different reasons. The second and third and fourth and fifth season rocked, though, and in many ways *was* a totally different show than the "homer does something stupid; hilarity ensues" show we we've got today.

On or about 9 Sep 2002 13:14:58 GMT, Matthew Miller made the sensational claim that:

This is sort of my point. Shows don't remain "the same show", whether or not there is a break in production.

"LooseChanj" wrote in message news:hm5f9.134624$[email]...

made the sensational claim that:

than

today.

But there is usually a logical evolution. Or at the least you get an Idea of when to abandon the sinking ship of no more ideas.

On Tue, 10 Sep 2002 06:04:22 GMT, "Michael Zaite" spewed forth:

Or you take the low road and make the male protaganist get a series of wacky jobs, or even worse, make the baby shoot gangsters with a sniper rifle.

Can you tell I'm bitter ?

"LooseChanj" wrote in message news:ewWe9.180855$[email]...

made the sensational claim that:

would

think

I don't like to. It makes my brain angry.

Don't you remember when Matt was quoted around last year somewhere (can't recall where) that he was tired of Futurama already? He's moving on.

Also again I must bring up the "new" Home Movies case.

In alt.tv.futurama, on the "Re: Upcoming Episodes? What are those?" thread, Matthew Miller wrote:

Is TV Guide official enough for you? This week's issue (Returning Favorites) says there's sixteen unaired episodes in the can. They also quote David Cohen as saying this is more episodes than aired in each of the last two seasons.

I just had a nasty thought. What if we get to the end of this season, and there are *still* unaired episodes. Do you think Fox will bother to air them, or will they just become "lost" episodes? I think I know what the answer will be.

I guess I wasn't obvious enough; the thread was a long string of cliches from this newsgroup and I thought I'd just chip in.

They spent half a million on each episode. They'll air 'em.

Matthew Miller schrieb:

If you spent half a million an Episode, wouldn't you promote the Show to get the Money back in advertising? I would. My Point is: it's FOX. Don't try logic, it just doesn't work with them.

--- Suppose you are a member of Congress. And now suppose you are an idiot. But I repeat myself. - Mark Twain

Some Wonderful Person wrote:

Did you know that the song at the end of "Leela's Homeworld" is "Baby Love Child" by "Pizzicato Five" ?

exatron wrote:

Were you humming loudly at the time?

Okay, <pulls out baseball bat.>

Obviously Einstein was never around lttle children.

On Thu, 05 Sep 2002 15:04:12 GMT, exatron wrote:

I tried that, but they just beamed it into my brain using gamma radiation.

Will somebody PLEASE tell me what the song at the end of Leela's Homeworld was?

--Larry

On or about Fri, 06 Sep 2002 20:16:23 GMT, Larry made the sensational claim that:

It's Robert Johnson's #30 song.

On Fri, 06 Sep 2002 23:41:43 GMT, LooseChanj wrote:

Robert Johnson never recorded a "#30". Do you mean "32-20"?

--Larry

On or about Sun, 08 Sep 2002 04:24:11 GMT, Larry made the sensational claim that:

No, I really meant to say Beethoven's 10th symphony.

On Sun, 08 Sep 2002 07:34:53 GMT, LooseChanj wrote:

Is that the one also know as the "Unbegun Symphony"? He was born too late to write the beginning and only the last movement actually exists.

--Larry

Larry wrote:

Actually, "Beethoven's 10th Symphony" does have one finished movement (and it's on CD!), although I don't think it was finished by Beethoven, but by somebody else who used what notes Beethoven had written when he died.

-- Don

I think I'll write to Pizzicatto Five and ask them to rename that damn song to "What's the Song at the End of Leela's Homeworld?" and rename themselves as "The Band that Plays the Song at the End of Leela's Homeworld". There, sorted! At least they'll become more popular!

Graham

Larry wrote:

Okay, That's it! Your going to detention for that one. For your punishment you must write "Baby Love Child" on the blackboard or your notebook 500 times. Then you must learn all the words to the song. Finally you must go on American Idol and sing this song there.