"The Simpsons (TV): USA Today reports that Fox is considering cancelling The Simpsons. The voice-cast has walked out in order to demand more money. Fox has enough episodes to bring it through January 2005. They're also considering re-casting the show."
http://www.darkhorizons.com/news04/040421e.php
This season is doing well (not good as the older seasons though). :(
wrote in message news:[email]...
I'd rather see it end than be recast. And this may sound sacrilegious, but I wouldn't be devastated if it came to an end. It has to end sometime, and the show's best days are behind it. They could do a few sweeps specials each year -- a Halloween one, plus a couple of others, and make them really good.
Well, I mean if they already completed about half of the 16th season, they can at least do the rest, to make up a season, and have it end then.
"Thisisme104" wrote in message news:[email]...
can
So long as they can keep their cost under control (read: keep the "voices" from getting too much money) "they" should keep it going indefinitely. Talented and smart folks WANT to be associated with the show.
While the "talent" is entitled to do what they think is best for their collective and individual futures, they have a lot more to lose than Fox. There would not even be a need to "match" the voices of the new "actors" with those of the old. After all, old episodes don't "sound" like new episodes. Folks change after 10 years.
I have a feeling that Fox isn't going to let the billions in revenue the Simpsons gives them dry up. They'll probably wait until the last minute to negotiate a deal. If they cancel the show, they cancel the show and probably they won't make a movie, which won't be too big of a loss IMHO. No matter who wins, the fans loose.
In alt.tv.simpsons, on the "Re: Simpsons to be canceled?" thread, John Gilmer wrote:
Yeah, but they may not want to be associated for the rest of their lives. Often the point of getting a "creative" job like voice actor is that you get to try new and intersting things. Playing the same role over and over again for 15 years can defeat the purpose of that. Maybe the attitude of the holdout actors is, "If they give me the raise, great. And if they don't, great. I'll just move on to the next role."
Benjamin Robinson wrote:
On the other hand, there's still room for some creativity on The Simpsons - I don't know how many of the lines are based on improvisations from the actors during table reads, or how much creativity it takes for the incidental characters, but also consider Dan Castellaneta's role as co-writer (of three episodes now). I'd love to see an episode written by another cast member - for some reason, Yeardley Smith and Harry Shearer spring to mind more than the others, but I'm sure they all have some fun ideas.
"Uniblab" wrote in message news:4086efc6$[email]...
money.
I
the
good.
I think I'd rather have Moe put a fork in my eye than hear the show with substitute voice actors. That said, it'd be a shame for the show to end this way. I think we'd all envisioned there'd be a big finale episode... and then a movie a bit later. All of that could be in jeopardy, and that's a damn shame.
"Dr Music" a �crit dans le message de news:cJIhc.189775$Pk3.80607@pd7tw1no...
cancelling
but
this
then
I am in full agreement with the above. I'm gonna curse the voice actors forever if they prevent the finale that everyone always wanted to see from airing.
This better not be another fake-out!
Space Mvsevm
Reach the Sky wrote:
What exactly would occur in the final episode?
"Michael J. Astrauskas" wrote in message news:UKRhc.28370$L75.15821@fed1read06...
from
They could do all the stuff they haven't already done!
"Michael J. Astrauskas" wrote in message news:UKRhc.28370$L75.15821@fed1read06...
from
We find out what Nibbler meant when he said Leela was "the other."
Oh, wait...
I really don't know what would be the best way to wrap up the show. I wouldn't want to see anything totally final, like the Simpsons dying or becoming filthy rich. And there really aren't any running plot threads that need to be tied up. The Skinner/Krabappel relationship was probably the main one up until Sunday.
I do think it might be appropriate for Bart and Lisa to watch the final Itchy & Scratchy during the episode. Or maybe not.
Maybe Maggie could speak in front of other people. And have a final showdown with Baby Gerald.
"Nathan" wrote in message news:1mUhc.13041$[email]...
actors
becoming filthy rich.
Like that would be final, LOL! How many times have they become filthy rich and then lost it all? But I know what you mean and you have a good point.
"Reach the Sky" wrote in message news:EkLhc.1504$[email]...
You don't see any fault with Fox here?
"pertifly" a �crit dans le message de news:[email]...
from
eh...the actors make enough money as it is.
I think Fox is just making threats. They are hoping to talk the actors down a few bucks, because lets face it, they know that they are the reason Fox is still on the air.
All Fox needed was for Married with Children to keep them on the air long enough for the Simpsons to roll around, then they started f**king with their time-slot and eventually cancelling it and blaming the whole thing on Ed O'Neil.
Either Fox is faking out, thinks that syndication of the later seasons will make them enough money til the next big series rolls around, or they think the next series with large potential is here. (Maybe Family Guy) "Reach the Sky" wrote in message news:dX1ic.22250$[email]...
"Reach the Sky" wrote in message news:dX1ic.22250$[email]...
Yes, but so does Fox, don't you think?
"Dr Music" wrote in news:cJIhc.189775$Pk3.80607@pd7tw1no:
Ow, my eye! I'm not supposed to get forks in it!
Jim
Well, they can keep making them for the overseas market, since those are dubbed by local actors anyway.
This is FOX we are talking about, so you have to consider how they would fill the hole in their schedule. Even if the shows best days are behind it, it still is far better than anything new FOX is likely to do. In fact, the show could get massively worse, and still be better than the crap that FOX puts on new now. And if FOX does come up with something good to replace The Simpsons...it won't last.
This season has been great!
Adramelech wrote:
you mean the guys in Korea? ;-)
I don't want to see the voices recast, and I think I'd rather see the show end than that. A point for and against the actors: For: Their salaries are drops in the bucket compared to what FOX has made throught merchandise and advertising from The Simpsons Against: You're not rich enough? Then put in your couple hours a week and do something else on the side.
That being said, if there is a final episode I want it to be an actual final episode, not something intended for midseason.
--They reveal the state Springfield is in (reminder: Birch Barlow said it's the 51st state, so they can make it up) --Maggie speaks (and says why she hasn't spoken earlier -- perhaps "better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt") --All unnamed characters get names (CBG, Sea Captain)
Message for the actors (who you KNOW are reading this): Don't walk out on your fans to make a point to FOX. If you must end the show, please respect the people who have watched for the past 15 years and end it right.
Rebecca
"SmartyRG" wrote :
The Sea Captain already got a name, didn't he ? Horatio McAllister, I think...
Oy! Listen to Arion's latest shpiel!
Lionel Hutz called him "Captain McAllister" in the ep where Homer was suing him over the all-you-can-eat restaurant.
SmartyRG wrote:
Uh... no, Birch Barlow declared himself to be the 51st state.
And as I've pointed out to morons like you, almost always ends up killing the show.
Matt Groening barely does squat for the show anymore, and most of the creative team sucks now.
You're full of it. In some ways, the actors are the only ones holding the show together.
Harry Shearer recently said in a radio interview that the new "young" Simpsons writers are constantly putting in out-of-character actions and dialogue these days, and often it's the _actors_ who put their foot down.
In alt.tv.simpsons, on the "Re: Simpsons to be canceled?" thread, Gyumaoh wrote:
The "old" writers would sometimes do that, too. Originally, Lisa was going to have a major-league crush for some hot stable boy in "Lisa's Pony (8F06)," but Yeardley Smith felt it was written to be too "adult" for an eight-year-old character. The writers relented.
(Now obviously, Lisa has had crushes since then. Either they were written in a more little-girl kind of way, or the writers learned how to ignore Yeardley.)
In alt.tv.simpsons, on the "Re: Simpsons to be canceled?" thread, I wrote:
Hey, I found the actual interview! This was originally posted by Raymond Chen:
AH: Do you enjoy the work?
YS: Very much. It's such a well-written show, you know.
And Lisa Simpson is truly one of my favorite, favorite characters.
AH: Do you ever talk to the writers because you are the voice?
Maybe Lisa could do this or do that...
YS: Yes, always. More than that, perhaps,
if they give you something that you really feel is incongruous
with the character. You know, something that doesn't quite fit.
There was a scene about a year ago when Lisa was having basically hot
flashes over this young stable boy.
AH: (laughs)
YS: And I really felt like, you know, when <I> was eight, it wasn't like
that.
You don't, it, my, I as an eight-year-old was not such a sexual being,
and so I said, ``You know, I really feel funny about this.''
I think... Lisa loves horses, and I think that she would admire that
more
about him than his physique.
AH: Hot flashes is kind of extreme.
YS: Well, but it was truly like, she was you know shuddering and
groaning, and I just thought, you know, this doesn't ring true with
me...[AH = Alan Havey, an interview for Comedy Central.]