Immediately bring the Simpsons into 2004 by letting the characters age to what their real age would be at this point.
Homer and Marge would become middle aged, Bart would be 27, Lisa 25, Maggie 17. Now you can hire new voice actors for the roles, and the focus could shift to the present day, and whatever the kids grew up to become.
It would be a way to reinvent the series, inject some badly needed new life into it, and provide a graceful way to retire it in a few years. It's going to happen anyway - either it will fizzle out or be retired.
And if Moe's voice was only heard through the cell phone, then someone else could do the voice easily and get away with it. Hank should have stayed married to Helen Hunt. That clown!
My point is, if they were under contract to work, then basically they can't strike( there is a different term for it I think and its not legal). So although ridiculus if they wanted to age the character and get new voice talent it should not be a problem.
"Michael J. Astrauskas" wrote in message news:9Jhcc.1542123$[email]...
"donutbandit" wrote in message news:c4r768$8ho$[email]...
Maggie
life
going
-------- No. Continuity would be even more damaged. People would be asking, "Why is Bart 10 in 1987, 10 in 2000, and 27 in 2004?" This would mean Lisa would have to have been born in 1979, which wouldn't work because of the 1984 Olympics being on when she was born. After this many years, making that drastic a change to the series would end it for sure, very fast. One thing I have found about long-time popular classics is that the ratings plummet when there is an attempt to change. Therefore, when ratings are good, tampering with the mix can only lead to trouble. Here are a couple examples out of Canada:
- Societe Radio-Canada (French equivalent of the CBC) had a news anchor for many years who was very popular with the viewers, and gave the program good ratings (at least in Quebec). SRC removed this anchor around 1998, because he was older and they wanted to give the show a younger look, despite there being no problems with the show's ratings. Ratings plummeted, and this past month the old-time anchor was brought back.
- A television station in Southern Ontario was once a private affiliate of the CBC, and it was a very successful business in its market, with high profits and high ratings. In 1988, the station broke its ties with the CBC. Soon the station was almost bankrupt, because suddenly it had no source of programming from a network, and it had to fill up its schedule with junk and filler. By 1992 the station was failing miserably, and it had to be sold to another company. Today the station is owned by CHUM, and it is much more successful than it was 13 years ago.
Therefore, The Simpsons should stay as is. Changing what works, even if it is a little unpopular at the moment, leads to big-time problems. SRC tampered with their newscast that worked fine, and it lost a lot of ratings. The TV station in Southern Ontario tampered with an excellent programming schedule which included high-rated news/information programming and other programming provided by the CBC (don't forget they have NHL games), and within months they were plummeting towards bankruptcy. The Simpsons is doomed if such a change took place.
Been there, done that, ate the sandwich - ever hear of something called "All Grown Up!"? (Nickelodeon, Saturday nights at 8:00 - it's "Rugrats, nine years later")
It might make a good scene in the movie, if they ever really do get around to it.
Try watching an episode besides "Tommy Foolery" and then tell me that. (AGU has probably the ugliest animated characters since...well, since the Simpsons from the Tracey Ullman days. And yes, I've seen Duckman.)
If the Simpsons went to live under the sea they could use different voice actors and say the voices were distorted by the sea! But, it's not gonna happen! <insert humorous follow up here>.
"If you're lookin' for me, You'd better check under the sea. Cuz that's where you'll find me, Underneath the Sealab. Underneath the water. Sealab. At the bottom of the sea."
No, no, no!!! The correct rejoinder comes from http://www.snpp.com/episodes/2F06.html, as usual.
Homer: [fearfully] Marge? Kids? Everything's going to be just fine.
No go upstairs, and pack your bags...we're going to start a new
life...under the sea.
[calypso music starts]
[Homer dances with fish as Lisa plays a seahorse saxophone,
Marge a squid harp, and Bart the xylophone clams]
Homer: [eats a dancing fish, sings]
Under the sea, under the sea,
[eats a couple more fish]
There'll be no accusations, just friendly crustaceans
Under the sea!
[eats a line of seahorses, grabs an escaping one]
[eats a live crab as though it were a shrimp]
[eats a pair of dancing fish, then a snail who tries to
escape]
[stands there with fish skeletons floating about]
Marge: Homer, that's your solution to everything: to move under the
sea.
It's not going to happen!
Homer: Not with _that_ attitude!
Could this be the solution to the Fox labor dispute? It was always Homer's solution to everything.