TV

Anomaly Appraisal: Planet Simpson

1 Comment / Animation, Book /

Via: The Ontario Library Service

I’m currently just beginning a different book on the Simpsons (which I’ll post about in due course). So far I’ve read the first chapter or so, but it has already made me think back to the first book (and I mean real book here) I read on the show.

Nearly two years ago, I picked up Planet Simpson by Chris Turner and ate it up like it was ice-cream. Now I bought it simply because it was about the Simpsons and because it looked like it was of a slightly higher intelligence than the usual lot. However, I was in for a bit of a surprise.

Of course I was already familiar with how the Simpsons came about and I assume you are too, but if not, click here. What I found in this book was a much more substantial essay on how the Simpsons defined and were defined by, everyday life and the cultural changes occuring in the US at the start of the early 90s.

First off, it’s clear the Turner is a huge fan of the show. The book is full of quotes and cross-references that any fan worth their salt will immediately recognise. Secondly, what makes the book stand out, at least structurally, is that each character in the family has their own chapter, within which various other topics are mentioned and discussed. Turner does a very thorough job of detailing the complexities of each character and prodding me into seeing them in a slightly different light. For the record, Lisa is my favourite of the whole bunch.

Turner does an excellent job of analysing the connections between the Simpsons and the real world on which it is based. Pop-cultural references in the show itself, the characters themselves as a reflection of contemporary civilisation, the life of a worker in the radioactive ooze of an American corporation and the ability to see the lighter side of it all in the end are what attracted fans to the show. Turner looks into all of them all and then some.

The book is not a light read (440 pages and no pictures). While it is certainly interesting, don’t expect to read a pile of fluff. Turner knows how to write (unlike yours truly) and the ample peppering of quotes and references helps break things up and induces plenty of reruns inside your own head.

The nice thing about Planet Simpson is that it doesn’t try to prove a point. There’s no hidden agenda and I finished the book feeling that although my thoughts on the Simpsons hadn’t changed, I had a little more respect for the team behind it that put it all together and how they are (were?) the smartest people on television, and are likely to be for decades to come.

If you are looking for a deeper understanding of The Simpsons as it pertains to modern life, this book is definitely for you.

Anomaly Appraisal: Planet Simpson Read More »

Why Cleveland Brown Himself is the Only Great Thing About The Cleveland Show

Animation, FOX, The Cleveland Show, TV / 
49BYRNV6JAF3

We all know that the Animation Domination block on FOX has been on somewhat of a slide in recent years. The glory days with the Holy Trinity of The Simpsons, Family Guy and Futurama have long since passed and sadly attempts to improve the variety of the block (such as with Sit Down, Shut Up) have not ended well. Nowadays, we have The Simpsons and an hour and a half of Seth McFarlane for company on Sunday nights.

Last season it was the turn of Cleveland Brown, a side character in Family Guy, to strut his stuff in his own spin-off show. There was rampant speculation at the time on whether or not he was worthy of such an accolade. Yes, it’s true that on Family Guy, he plays a deathly boring character whose only reason for existing was to be the butt of jokes (as if he needed any worse luck when it came to bathtubs). However, with his own show, Cleveland has been forced to add a bit of depth to his character, although he does so at the expense of everyone else in show.

The key to any good show is the interaction between the characters. In most shows, said characters normally have personalities distinct enough that they bounce back and forth off each other. A great example is The Inrcredibles, where the family members constantly clash with each other as their different powers take flight.

In The Cleveland Show, you have the typical “nuclear” family; husband, wife & kids. So far so much the same as Seth’s other two shows. You have Cleveland’s biological son, a simpleton who never has much to say, his adopoted daughter who seems to exhibit some of the worst traits of being a teenager and his adopted son, who acts like a much brasher version of Stewie from Family Guy. Donna would seem to be a good match for Cleveland in terms of character, but she has yet to have near as much airtime has him.

As for Cleveland’s buddies, let’s just say they all have one defining trait and we’ll leave it at that.

Which leaves us with Cleveland himself. What has changed about him in his transition from side-characters to main protagonist? Well for one, he has a lot more screen time, so he has a heck of a lot more talking to do. Besides that, he is still somewhat hard to pin down. He’s a devoted husband and father, but he is not averse to getting them into obscure situations that involve, say, a shootout.

He displays a higher level of intelligence than previously, although that may be the result of actually being more involved with the show. He is an optimist at heart, always looking for the good in folks, although that does not preclude him from having negative opinions which he does dispense when it suits him.

As the centre of the show, he naturally gets involved in a lot more activities than his family, and he has some genuine funny moments. The fact that he even displays a lighter side (perhaps even a colourful one) is a significant indicator that he is the most developed character on the show.

Cleveland Brown is, however, not a decent enough reason on his own to watch The Cleveland Show. The girlfriend and I gave up at the second ad break last Sunday, simply because the effort required to stay up didn’t justify the awesomeness that is sleep. If you, however,  enjoy a show with only one half-decent character, The Cleveland Show will do the job.

Why Cleveland Brown Himself is the Only Great Thing About The Cleveland Show Read More »

Adventure Time Season 2 Starts This Monday?

3 Comments / Animation, Cartoon Network, Frederator, TV /

Apparently so, according to Eric Homan over on the Adventure Time Blog. It seems like we were discussing the premiere of season 1 just yesterday, although April does seem so far away when you think about it.

The show has proven to be immensely popular and successful. For starters, just look at the viewing figures, every single demographic is up for the Cartoon Network. Of course, they were so low to begin with, there wasn’t many other ways it could go, but that is not the point. The point is that Adventure Time is proof that content is king when it comes to consumers.

Besides the outstanding quality, there has been the enormous number of fans that have flocked to the show. Besides commenting on the show’s main blog, there has been what seems to be thousands of submittals to the Adventure Time Tumblelog as well.

How do we know that these aren’t just random pieces of fan-art? Take a look at some of the album covers fans recreated using characters from the show. Some are absolutely fantastic and are a sign of true dedication from fans.

Which leads us to this coming Monday, when season two will premiere. Why it is happening so soon I don’t know (heck, if Eric doesn’t know, there’s no way I can either). I doubt it is a case of striking while the iron is hot. Adventure Time seems to be holding up quite well in re-runs. I’d say the reason is that with the recent premiere of J. G. Quintel’s Regular Show, the network simply wants to keep the momentum up.

Nonetheless, I think we can safely look forward to even more wacky adventures with Finn and Jake. 🙂

Adventure Time Season 2 Starts This Monday? Read More »

The Flintstones: From the Stone Age of Television To Today

1 Comment / Animation, TV /

Via: The Cartoon Pictures.com

What can I say that hasn’t already been said over and over again and again? The Flintstones is a giant among giants. The mere fact that we are celebrating its 50th anniversary today is proof that the Flintstones has been enormously successful. The closest parallel in terms of popularity has been The Simpsons, a part-parody of today’s topic (remember this?) and who undoubtedly succeeded because of it.

We all know what made the show successful: strong, easily identifiable characters, its primetime slot on ABC, a few celebrity voices (that were perfect for the roles), the experience and expertise of William Hanna and Joe Barbera, it’s similarities to successful, live-action sitcoms (The Flinstones were directly based on The Honeymooners) and last but not least, the sheer novelty of being an animated show at a time when cartoons were already being driven into the kiddie domain.

Without going into my likes and dislikes of the show, it’s safe to say that The Flintstones are of the highest quality. It is a wonder how much better things would be if they had stretched the animation budget just a tiny little bit further, but, having said that, the limited animation look of the show plays second fiddle to the stone age design and the hilarious consequences of such.

It continues to defy its age. Think about any live-action show from the era, it’s clear that they belong to that particular time. The Flintstones could have been made 10 years ago (and in the case of The Jetsons, the late 80s) and it would still be considered innnovative.

The Flintstones is unlikely to be unseated from its perch anytime soon. The Simpsons still has another 30 years or so to play catch-up, but that show’s unprecedented 22 year run ensure it’s place in the history books as well. With the coming storm in the media market, we will never again see such TV shows, Indeed shows like The Flintstones and The Simpsons are already an extinct species.

The influence of Fred, Barney, Wilma Betty, Pebbles and Bam-Bam is still being felt in TV today. References abound, imitations exist, merchandise continues to sell, and people continue to watch a show that by all rights should be well past its sell by date.

The Flintstones is not a lesson in how to make a great TV show, rather, it is proof that animation can be superior to live-action in many respects and can be popular with kids and grown-ups alike. It is a historical anomaly that was an extremely lucky break for Hanna-Barbera who finally managed to gain a foothold in the maintream media and the public’s consciousness as a result.

The Flintstones: From the Stone Age of Television To Today Read More »

Thoughts on The Hub

Animation, TV /

There has been much talk and debate in recent times about the upcoming launch of the newest TV channel aimed at kids, that’s right, The Hub. Co-owned by Hasbro and Discovery Networks. Anyone over the age of 20 will immediately recognize there is more than one show of that classic 80s vintage, the toy line.

What has proven to be the most surprising developments of the channels launch has been the heated debate about the nature of the shows, namely that fact that the three in question: G. I. Joe, My Little Pony and Pound Puppies are all based on the existing Hasbro toy lines of the same name. This parallels a separate show based on the popular Sketchers line of shoes, which is currently being investigated by the FCC after a complaint by a campaign group.

The new network seems to have escaped this group’s attention for the moment although I suspect that it is because: a) it hasn’t launched yet and b) there were previous cartoon incarnations that have caused them to fly under the radar for the moment.

I have somewhat average hopes for the network, much will depend on the quality of the content. In times gone past you simply knocked a show together based on the toys and Bob’s your uncle. DIC became masters of the art before getting swallowed up by Cookie Jar. In this day and age, The Hub may find this audience a tougher nut to crack than in the past.

The reason, for one, is the quality of shows on other networks. The rampaging juggernaut that is SpongeBob Squarepants has single-handedly ruled that cartoon merchandising empire for more than a decade. Despite their storied past, any of the Hub’s shows are unlikely to overthrow the king.

As noted on Cartoon Brew, the network that may have to watch its back is Cartoon Network. While it is true that they are (somewhat) engaged in the true model of using creator-driven content, they also suffer from a severely deficient marketing strategy that has so-far yielded next to nothing for the vast majority of their shows. The sole exemption being Ben 10, which has been rather successful at hawking a line of toys and ancillary merchandise.

The network doesn’t launch for another bit, but I think I can safely say that with Lauren Faust in the driving seat, My Little Pony may well be making a big-time comeback.

Thoughts on The Hub Read More »

Negative Disney Publicity Circa. 1989

Animation, Disney, TV /

There’s a fantastic post over on Cartoon Brew today that details the pitch material sent out by Disney in 1989 or thereabouts to various TV stations around the country who they hoped would air their afternoon block of shows in syndication.

The pages posted are great to read some 20 years after the fact. The present perhaps the worst aspect of some marketing departments: pointing out all the bad aspects of your competitors in the hope that no-one don’t notice your own.

The papers are full of non-comparisons and desriptions so vague, they barely even make sense. Here’s a sample quote:

Warner Brothers has the dubious task of competing with Disney’s superior aniamtion.

Boasting that your shows are better is nothing new, in fact it goes all the way back to the beginnings of entertainment, when you had to convince the public that your show was better than that of the guy next door. The difference here is that there is hardly, nay, anything in the material posted that says exactly, why, Disney’s shows are better.

OK, maybe they do get better ratings because they’re on in the afternoons, but they are also new shows, not re-runs of classics. Perhaps they’re more expensive to broadcast. That’s my best guess. “Disney crushes Alvin”, that’s comparing apples to oranges. You can’t expect to get parity among the results between individual shows and entire blocks.

Frankly, the entire thing has a whiff of dishonesty about it, as if Disney has something to hide about its shows. Content speaks for itself and if your shows really are as good as you say they are, then you should point out how much better they are than all these other, great, shows. Of course, this would prove to be the case with Tiny Toons, wich Disney calls “a pale comparison to the Disney Afternoon”. Hindsight is always 20/20, and the quality of Tiny Toons was all that Warner Bros. needed to prove that they were actually ahead of the game.

It would be really intersting to see the pitch booklets from the subsequent years. Did they contain similar language or was Disney left stuck for words? Either way, we know how things turned out in the end of the afternoon cartoon battles of the 1990s.

Negative Disney Publicity Circa. 1989 Read More »

Anomaly Appraisal: Neighbors From Hell

Animation, TV /

Yes, this is a tad late but I would rather have to wait and watch it online than cough up for cable every month. There were a few somewhat scathing reviews put out in advance of the show’s premiere a few weeks ago, namely in Variety, where the reviewer pretty much shot it down before it even left the gate. Not here though, oh no. On this blog we believe in positive criticism and looking on the bright side of life and all that.

FIrst of all, the setting: a family of demons get sent to Texas to stop a giant drill from getting all the way to hell. So far so ordinary. The twist is that what the Hellmans see on the surface simply does not compare to what they do underneath. It’s far worse!

The first episode is so clearly a pilot episode. There is the standard introduction of characters, the monologue about why they are where they are and of course, a convenient plot that introduces the audience to the setting and ancillary characters. It’s a pilot, so there’s not point getting too worked up over the plot. Every show must have an introductory episode of some sort and the producers here clearly decided to do that straight out of the gate. Nothing wrong with that, but it does not provide the best platform on which to measure a series.

The music in the show is rather standard fare really. There is nothing remarkable about it except to say that yes, it does contain some heavy metal. If it didn’t, I would have a lot of questions about a show supposedly centred on a bunch of folks from hell.

The animation was done using Toon Boom software, which I posted about waaay back when. It certainly provides for a much higher standard of animation than flash although it stil falls short of true hand-drawn animation. That’s not a problem though. The animation is remarkably smooth and certainly does not suffer from the jerk, puppet-like movements that flash is so susceptible to.

The character design is pretty darn good actually. There are plenty of cable shows where nickel and diming has resulted in character designs that look like they only got one pass through the saw and skipped the finishing table altogether. The designs are split into two groups: The Hellmans and everyone else. The family seems to fit in despite the fact that they are green.

Each character is only a small bit stylized and whose design most certainly matches their character. Therefore we have the father with his jacket, the mother with a somewhat attractive red dress, the daughter in dressed prim and proper (although this belies her demeanour) and the son in a T-shirt.

Pazuzu is perhaps the most interesting, mainly because he doesn’t really look like a goblin, more of a wild-eyed boisterous dog. His wide eyes and huge grin suggest a character that really is Balthazar’s best friend.

The characters are your usual nuclear family. The oafish father Balthazar tries his best his best to do right for his family as well as his wife. He gets in trouble with the boss, he betrays his best friend (a goblin named Pazuzu) and has plenty of pop-culture references in his catapult. He’s a likeable fellow overall.

His wife, Tina, is a somewhat more interesting character. Despite being a housewife, she is easily superior to her husband. She is driven and more than capable of fulfilling her own ambitions.

The daughter, Mandy, has the coolest head in the family. She is not above using violence against her brother though and is especially skilled at getting people to do her bidding. The son, Josh is your standard teenage boy. He’s always up to mischief and getting himself into awkward situations. It is hinted that he has a temper a well.

Much remains to be seen as to whether the characters become as richly developed as their backgrounds suggest. A common problem I find with the likes of Family Guy and more recently The Simpsons, is that hardly any episodes are devoted to the kids and their development. For the most part, they are fill in characters that come and go as needed but are rarely seen to have their own lives with their own problems. Hopefully later in the season, we will see a few episodes where the kids get a chance to mature as characters.

A character of note is Satan, if only for his voice-actor, the very funny Steve Coogan. It’s fantastic to hear him again, especially as he is hardly ever seen outside the UK. For those that don’t know, Steve is one of the funniest comedians of the last 20 years and created one of the most memorable characters to grace TV screens in Alan Partridge. He adds an awful lot to the character of Satan which in turn made the show much more enjoyable (at least for me).

Overall, I liked the show. It’s not the most fantasic animated TV show ever made (because that is currently airing over on Comedy Central and is back to what it does best) although it deserves to succeed on tbs. Could the jokes be improved a wee bit? Sure. They stray dangerously close to the gratuitous at time, I mean c’mon, do we really need to see horses going at it? The allusion should be more that enough for the viewer to get the message. Humour like that suggests a lack of finesse and the easy way out. It may be good for a cheap laugh onec, but it does not stand up during repeated viewing (for the most part).

Neighbors From Hell is a show thatis trying to prove that animation can indeed be marketed to adults. It deserves to succeed in that regard. I recommend you watch it at least once.

Anomaly Appraisal: Neighbors From Hell Read More »

The Return of Futurama…Again

Animation, Futurama, TV /

What do I need to say that hasn’t already been said. Futurama is a show with more lives than a cat. Not only that, it is also, by far, my favourite animated TV show of all time. OK, I admit it, I tend to lean towards the geeky side of life, and I do tend to get some of the more intelligent jokes that the writers ever so craftily put into the show.

Tomorrow night (Friday) sees the third dawn for a TV show that under any normal circumstances would have been mothballed aeons ago and left at that. However, as we’re all well familiar with, just because a TV show has been cancelled does not mean it is as dead as you might think. Family Guy set the gold standard simply because fans went out and spent their hard earned money on the DVDs. Why did they do that? The show was damned funny, that’s why!

Futurama would follow a similar pattern, although as you may not be aware of, due to the arcane release “windows” that many (if not all) of the TV networks instigate, Futurama DVD boxsets were on sale in Europe months (if not years) before the US, where the show was still in the syndication “window” of its release.

Having said that, it was this system of syndication that may have helped save the show (and Family Guy too). Cartoon Network stepped up and began broadcasting episodes every night at 10 o’clock. It was strong ratings for these broadcasts that eventually resulted in a full-scale bidding war for the rights after [adult swim]’s deal expired.

Comedy Central was a winner and they immediately commissioned new episodes that were subsequently rounded up into 4 DVD movies before being broadcast. Strong sales of these movies (I do own all four) convinced the good people at Comedy Central that a proper series was needed.

Thus we come to today (or rather tomorrow) when the first of these new episodes will be broadcast. The show has come a long way since 1998 when it blasted onto the FOX network. Always the sister to The Simpsons, it was constantly pushed around the schedule, which in my opinion significantly contributed to the (supposedly) low ratings. A similar fate befell Family Guy until it’s return when it set up shop at a dedicated time. It has enjoyed good ratings ever since.

After the original cancellation (actually, the commentaries on the DVDs mention that the show was never actually “cancelled” in the traditional sense, it’s contract was simply never renewed), there was much talk about how it was a result of being a sci-fi show and how it didn’t match up to The Simpsons in terms of humour and so forth. Nothing could be further from the truth! In reality, Futurama has been able to maintain it’s high standard of quality jokes and storylines in stark contrast to the sharp fall the Simpsons has experiences of late.

With an order of 22 episodes, there will be plenty of new Futurama to come for quite a while. It’s fate after that is still uncertain, but I hope that this, the third attempt, will see Futurama be successful enough for a proper conclusion to the series. That’s all I have to say on the matter for now. I’ll post a review of the season thus far in a couple of weeks.

The Return of Futurama…Again Read More »

TV Cartoons in 3-D: It Would Be Awesome.

Animation, TV /

I’ve made my thoughts known on 3-D before, but that is in relation to movies, not TV. I’ve come to relize that three is a huge difference between the two. Whereas one is a waste of money, the other can be a tru benefit to audiences.

To begin with, 3-D in the movies is something that has been traditionally wheeled out to give people a reason to go to the cinema rather than stay at home on the couch. With the growth of HD TVs and home theatre setups that, when done right, can give a proper cinema a serious run for the money, Hollywood needed something that TV couldn’t offer. That was 3-D, a gimmick introduced in the 1950s that didn’t particularly work then and it doesn’t work now.

The reason? Higher ticket prices for one. Does the extra couple of bucks on top of a regular ticket price done justice by the added dimension? Not really, in my opinion, the market is still very much in the growth stage. That means we will continue to see growth in the market for the forseeable future but it will eventually level out. Don’t expect every screen in a cinema to be 3-D for at least 5 more years, and maybe longer.

So if 3-D doesn’t really work for cinema, why can it work for TV, specifically cartoons?

TV is the archetypical model for entertainment consumption. It’s 24 hours, 500+ channels (if you aren’t a tightwad like myself) and more hours of entertainment in a day than you could handle in a year. Since people watch so much TV, it makes much more sense from an economic standpoint to introduce 3-D technology in order to boost demand.

However, much the same as HD, it will take a long time for the technology to become widespread. Firstly, people who just dumped $1,000+ for a HD set are not about to go and buy a 3-D one soon. With about ~60% market penetration in the US, that’s a lot of people who probably aren’t in the market for a new TV in the next 5 years or so. Besides that, it has taken 13 years for HD to get to this point, so, at the dawn of 3-D, expect a similar timeline.

Enough beating about the bush, why could cartoons benefit the most? My one and only experience with 3-D cartoons (not CGI movies, BTW) was a 10 minute Spongebob Squarepants experience at Kings Dominion in Virginia a couple of years ago. It was fun and obviously geared up to throw as much 3-D at the audience as possible but it was tolerable for the most part.

Animation, and TV cartoons in particular, with their relatively simple lines would be ideal for 3-D. The technology is already there. I’m pretty sure ToonBoom can tweak their software to allow for dual camera positions of something like that. Seeing as their software already creates a virtual 3-D environment, this wouldn’t be too much of a stretch.

The best part? Imagine an anvil or something like that shooting our of the screen at you. Squash and stretch will never be the same again! Again, the nature of animation lends itself perfectly to 3-D compared to live-action. Personally, live-action faces an uphill struggle if only because to make things truly stand out, there is a reliance on SFX and the like.

The future is bright for cartoons at the dawn of the 3-D TV age. Only two things can upset the apple cart. Firstly, the fact that everything produced until this point is in 2-D and thus renders the new TVs useless. Secondly, people have a dislike for wearing the glasses. There are two camps, those that never wear glasses and hate wearing them and those of use that do use glasses and have a hard time putting 3-D glasses over out regular ones. Perhaps someday someone will come up with a solution, until then, cartoons will have to remain in 2-D.

TV Cartoons in 3-D: It Would Be Awesome. Read More »

Do Characters in Preschool Shows Need Character?

Opinion, PBS /

The emphatic answer is yes! Why wouldn’t you give your character, character? That’s how your audience relates to your show. Of course, preschool audiences are somewhat less demanding than older kids but that does not mean they do not perceive what they see on the screen any differently.

With the current regulations regulated to educational TV shows in the US, it would seem that some networks (PBS excepted) seem to throw the bare minimum at that sector of the market. Others fare slightly better. Disney for instance has Little Einsteins and its stable of Disney characters to boot because it’s never too early to familiarize children with your properties.

Someone once lamented that some of those shows basically educate kids, there is little or no attempt to try and create something richer. For example, some shows simply teach the kids their ABCs or 123s with perhaps a little plot mixed in for good measure. This is perhaps the minimum standard for a TV show and the vast majority of shows are much more than this.

However, what sets Little Einsteins apart from other shows? In terms of character, not very much. The kids are kids doing kid things and that is that. It’s a fine concept and it has worked quite well for Disney as well as PBS in the form of Barney the Dinosaur.

In stark contrast stands Sesame Street, the bastion of children’s television in the US. That show has some perhaps some of the greatest characters to ever grace a TV screen in the Muppets. Think about it. Every single one of them is different and has a distinct trait. Big Bird is big and tall but is very understanding and loved by all. Oscar the Grouch hates everyone but also has his sift spot, the Cookie Monster needs no introduction whatsoever, Elmo is actually 3 years old and the list goes on.

Each one of the Muppets has his or her own strengths and weaknesses that are played out every week on TV for the kids to see. They might not full understand it at the time, but they nonetheless interpret it and retain it. Why else would they market Oscar the Grouch T-shirts to people such as myself?

Another excellent series is WordGirl the PBS animated show about a super-heroine alien girl who lives on earth. The show aims to teach kids how to spell but also relies on a significant entertainment aspect that has proven popular with kids and adults alike.

The creators of preschool shows are in a special category of their own. Many of them have a deep passion for their chosen career and display a special talent for creativity that resonates with kids. Networks should allow such creators as much freedom as possible and be open to new ideas. Kids programming is a sensitive area of media that receives special attention from the government and parents groups alike, but that should not preclude the use of charters that are fun, complex and resonate with kids and adults.

Do Characters in Preschool Shows Need Character? Read More »

Napoleon Dynamite, Animated

Animation, FOX /

The original Napoleon Dyanamite was the sleeper movie of 2004. Besides being a pretty decent movie, it gave rise to a number of cultural phenomenons, namely “Vote for Pedro” T-shirts. In recent days, word has come through AWN that an animated series based on the film is in the works.

There are a number of curious aspects to this announcement. First of all, why now, more than 5 years after the fact? Surely it would have made more sense to strike while the iron is hot? Surely nothing indicates the dwindling public appetite more than the Napoleon Dynamite Festival, which was held for a few years after the film was released but was discontinued due to near non-existent attendance numbers, right?

The other question I’m asking myself is where will it be broadcast? As it turns out, FOX is the one who is hoping betting heavily that the series will take off. When it would be broadcast is another matter. Sunday is firmly the realm of Seth McFarlane and FOX has yet to find an animated hit for a weeknight outside of The Simpsons.

The overall idea could stand up as a series, but the characters will not. Back in 2004 they were fun for 90-odd minutes, but can you imagine them coming back every single week? Things could get very stale very quick. Past experience has shown us that even a show with a great plot, diverse characters and progressive animation can get tossed over the fence almost as soon as it hits the airwaves.

Personally, I wish the Hess brothers all the best with their endevours, just don’t expect me to be waiting with baited breath.

Napoleon Dynamite, Animated Read More »