| Original message ([an error occurred while processing this directive] Views )[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
Replies:
|
| dr baghead 2627th Post
 
Platinum Carpet V.I.P- Board Master
    
    
    
    
     
|  "Re(3):Response and Futurama question"
, posted Sat 22 Nov 11:05
quote:
I'm talking Adult Swim time. I would hope that if there were new episodes they'd just put them on Adult Swim.
That's an impossiblity. Both Futurama and Family Guy were created with Network budgets (around $1 mil. an episode if I'm not mistaken) and both would suffer greatly if they had to run on a cable budget. (something like $300,000 an episode I believe, I could be a little off though.)
If on Adult Swim only they'd have to drop the quality of animation, writing, potential voice guest, musical accompaniment, etc. to compensate the loose of $700,000.
I know Home Movies made the jump from Network to Cable, but Soup 2 Nuts was used to working in that limitation... it's sort of like a rags-to-riches-to-rags story, a "I had it and I lost" tale, you just go back to what you did before "success" and are happy. But for Family Guy and Futarama it's like one of those wacky TV shows where the rich girl is set to live with her farm cousin and hijinx ensues! They don't have money, standards drop, wacky!
um, I'm not sure if I actually made my point of not, but yeah...
Devil May Cry:the movie - A ViewAskew Production?
Click the tag to see that Dante and more at Baghead's not-so-good custom figures page!
|
| DarkZero 492th Post
Gold Customer
| "Re(4):Response and Futurama question" , posted Sat 22 Nov 13:25
quote:
I'm talking Adult Swim time. I would hope that if there were new episodes they'd just put them on Adult Swim.
That's an impossiblity. Both Futurama and Family Guy were created with Network budgets (around $1 mil. an episode if I'm not mistaken) and both would suffer greatly if they had to run on a cable budget. (something like $300,000 an episode I believe, I could be a little off though.)
If on Adult Swim only they'd have to drop the quality of animation, writing, potential voice guest, musical accompaniment, etc. to compensate the loose of $700,000.
This argument would make sense if A) the entertainment reporters at USA Today and most of the other articles that have covered the story viewed it as a very real possibility, and B) Big O Season 2's animation was downgraded and recycled, rather than upgraded and chock full of brand new stuff. In the original season of Big O, even though it was being financed by WoWoW, they didn't have enough money to go for flashy attacks like Big O's new "exploding armor" move (the two dozen or so spiked chains flying out of the armor in the season premiere). In the second season, they did, and it was mostly financed by Cartoon Network, because it certainly wasn't a hit in Japan.
Cartoon Network makes a lot of really cheap stuff, but they also have a decent budget for original shows. Also, if Family Guy's DVD sales are what's convincing Fox to make new episodes, wouldn't the DVD sales still be a consideration when they make new episodes? If they give the show its original budget, put it on Cartoon Network, and then make DVD sets afterward, they'll still make a fine profit.
And it's not as if expensive shows aren't made for cable. Farscape went four years with a budget of something like $2.4m per episode, Stargate SG-1 isn't much cheaper, and I doubt that Witchblade or The Dead Zone were/are very cheap. And none of those are selling as many DVD sets as The Family Guy.
|
| Dr Baghead 2628th Post
Platinum Carpet V.I.P- Board Master
| "Re(5):Response and Futurama question" , posted Sat 22 Nov 15:59
quote:
This argument would make sense if A) the entertainment reporters at USA Today and most of the other articles that have covered the story viewed it as a very real possibility, and B) Big O Season 2's animation was downgraded and recycled, rather than upgraded and chock full of brand new stuff. In the original season of Big O, even though it was being financed by WoWoW, they didn't have enough money to go for flashy attacks like Big O's new "exploding armor" move (the two dozen or so spiked chains flying out of the armor in the season premiere). In the second season, they did, and it was mostly financed by Cartoon Network, because it certainly wasn't a hit in Japan.
Cartoon Network makes a lot of really cheap stuff, but they also have a decent budget for original shows. Also, if Family Guy's DVD sales are what's convincing Fox to make new episodes, wouldn't the DVD sales still be a consideration when they make new episodes? If they give the show its original budget, put it on Cartoon Network, and then make DVD sets afterward, they'll still make a fine profit.
And it's not as if expensive shows aren't made for cable. Farscape went four years with a budget of something like $2.4m per episode, Stargate SG-1 isn't much cheaper, and I doubt that Witchblade or The Dead Zone were/are very cheap. And none of those are selling as many DVD sets as The Family Guy.
well in all fairness Big-O was never very well written, most of the money likely went to making it look pretty saving a bundle on writers. (it's not like it takes a team of writers working round the cloak to rip-off Batman and put him in a non-sensical anime plot.) and no syndicated show really has great writing either, that's why Freddie Prince Jr. is writing for Mutant X and not great plays to last through out the ages.
Also it's not like a pulled $300,000 out of my butt, Seth MacFarlane kept bringing that number up in an interview with IGN and the same is true with their interview with a Futarama producer.
Devil May Cry:the movie - A ViewAskew Production?
Click the tag to see that Dante and more at Baghead's not-so-good custom figures page!
|
| DarkZero 495th Post
Gold Customer
| "Re(6):Response and Futurama question" , posted Sun 23 Nov 01:47
quote:
well in all fairness Big-O was never very well written, most of the money likely went to making it look pretty saving a bundle on writers. (it's not like it takes a team of writers working round the cloak to rip-off Batman and put him in a non-sensical anime plot.) and no syndicated show really has great writing either, that's why Freddie Prince Jr. is writing for Mutant X and not great plays to last through out the ages.
Also it's not like a pulled $300,000 out of my butt, Seth MacFarlane kept bringing that number up in an interview with IGN and the same is true with their interview with a Futarama producer.
Big O was created, overseen, and partially written by Hajime Yatate. You may know that group from the writer/creator credits of such little known bargain bin anime failures as "Cowboy Bebop", "Mobile Suit Gundam", and "Vision of Escaflowne". Its primary writer was Chiaki Konaka, who apparently brought us something called "Hellsing", whatever that is. I guess it never really took off internationally, sort of like those other bargain bin shows. We can only hope that one day they'll come close to being paid as much as one of the writers of Johnny Bravo and Ace Ventura: Pet Detective: The Animated Series.
|
| Dr Baghead 2630th Post
Platinum Carpet V.I.P- Board Master
| "Re(7):Response and Futurama question" , posted Sun 23 Nov 22:07
quote:
Big O was created, overseen, and partially written by Hajime Yatate. You may know that group from the writer/creator credits of such little known bargain bin anime failures as "Cowboy Bebop", "Mobile Suit Gundam", and "Vision of Escaflowne".
Let's not forget Bob Kane, I believe he created the whole "Millionare Playboy with a badass car, cool Buttler, and unnessessary child helper who fight crime" storyline Big-O is based around. But hey! Batman's based on Zorro so I guess all great work needs to steal from someone.
I sort of like BeBop, but if Cowboy Bebop was well written, why isn't the movie among the 11 animated movies contendening for the final round of Oscar votes?
and nothing with big robots is well written.
quote:
Its primary writer was Chiaki Konaka, who apparently brought us something called "Hellsing", whatever that is. I guess it never really took off internationally, sort of like those other bargain bin shows.
I really hope you weren't saying that to make me go "OH MY GOD!!!!! HELLSING?!?! THE HELLSING!!! I'M TOTALLY WRONG IF THEY ALSO WROTE HELLSING!!!!!", I hate Hellsing... well maybe it's well writen compared to other vampire hunting shows Buffy and Angel, but I bet Universal's up coming "Van Helsing" is going to be better written that. (and let's not forget that movie is just an excuse to update Frankenstien, the Wolfman, and Dracula similar to how "the Mummy" updated the Mummy)
Popularity doesn't translate to good writting either, unless Austin Powers 3 is some literary masterpiece I missed out on.
quote:
We can only hope that one day they'll come close to being paid as much as one of the writers of Johnny Bravo and Ace Ventura: Pet Detective: The Animated Series.
I'm not going to defend Seth MacFarlane, it was probably him writting all those episode were Peter did horribly unfunny things like set Lois on fire then pour salt on her to put it out, then after doing a half-hour's worth of cruel hearted things to her he makes a canned appology and she instantly forgives him, which if he was just a kindhearted oaf like Homer instead of a vendictive psycho who puts himself in front of anyone else maybe we could see that as actually happening, but as it is it's forced and kind of sad.
final note, Johnny Bravo may not be high-art but it was funny. I like to pretend he's Wesker with memory lose!
Devil May Cry:the movie - A ViewAskew Production?
Click the tag to see that Dante and more at Baghead's not-so-good custom figures page!
|
| DarkZero 496th Post
Gold Customer
| "Re(8):Response and Futurama question" , posted Mon 24 Nov 04:19
I wasn't talking about the quality of those shows or any of the others you mentioned. You assumed that Big O cut financial corners on the writing staff and assumed (and I'm still not sure how, because writers are much cheaper than animation and special effects) that the show was made cheaply that way. You were wrong. They took veteran staff members from very popular shows, including some of the most popular anime ever, and retained them for the second season, all while upping the anime budget considerably. And most of this was apparently on Cartoon Network's dime with only a portion of it being financed by WoWoW, the channel that originally decided to cancel the show.
I have no idea how you made the leap from budgets, which you brought up and I replied to, to "I really hope you weren't saying that to make me go 'OH MY GOD!!!!! HELLSING?!?! THE HELLSING!!! I'M TOTALLY WRONG IF THEY ALSO WROTE HELLSING!!!!!', I hate Hellsing..."
quote:
Popularity doesn't translate to good writting either, unless Austin Powers 3 is some literary masterpiece I missed out on.
No, but it does, obviously, translate to money.
|
| DarkZero 497th Post
Gold Customer
| "Re(4):Re(10):Response and Futurama question" , posted Mon 24 Nov 11:33
quote:
Well, if Family Guy comes back, it will do so on Fox, not Cartoon Network.
20C Fox owns the rights to the show (ie: all new productions), CN only owns rights to syndication.
-F.
We're not saying that Fox HAS to air it on Cartoon Network. We're saying that they COULD air it on Cartoon Network, much like they did with Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Angel, two other Fox shows, which originally aired on The WB (a Turner network, just like Cartoon Network). They have no legal obligation to, but it's a reasonable option for them, especially if CN gives them the same deal they gave Bandai and pays most of the cost of the show while still (AFAIK) letting the production company take the DVD profits.
|
| Dr Baghead 2633th Post
Platinum Carpet V.I.P- Board Master
| "Re(9):Response and Futurama question" , posted Mon 24 Nov 16:59
quote:
I wasn't talking about the quality of those shows or any of the others you mentioned. You assumed that Big O cut financial corners on the writing staff and assumed (and I'm still not sure how, because writers are much cheaper than animation and special effects) that the show was made cheaply that way. You were wrong. They took veteran staff members from very popular shows, including some of the most popular anime ever, and retained them for the second season, all while upping the anime budget considerably. And most of this was apparently on Cartoon Network's dime with only a portion of it being financed by WoWoW, the channel that originally decided to cancel the show.
I have no idea how you made the leap from budgets, which you brought up and I replied to, to "I really hope you weren't saying that to make me go 'OH MY GOD!!!!! HELLSING?!?! THE HELLSING!!! I'M TOTALLY WRONG IF THEY ALSO WROTE HELLSING!!!!!', I hate Hellsing..."
Admitly I didn't really pay attention to your last post. You seemed too busy throwing around names then actually proving any kind of point, I just attacked the names since it seemed easier then figuring out your point.
The numbers I gave for changes in budget, as well as Seth's reasoning for not doing the show for Cartoon Network came from an interview he gave to IGN.
You can read such here:
http://dvd.ign.com/articles/437/437930p1.html
David X. Cohen, of Futurama fame, gave an interview with similar reasoning as well. (he doesn't give actual numbers, but does confirm the show is too "high-budget" as far animation goes to really be considered for cable)
Located Here:
http://dvd.ign.com/articles/432/432838p1.html
There we are! Now then, I've supported my arguements with honest to goodness facts! Instead of guestimating that CN put forward bazillion dollars to make Big-O season 2, find it in writting! How much DID they spend? How much more did speical effects cost (and is it possible 'exploding armor' wasn't shown before not because of cost, but so Big-O would have some new attacks in Season 2?)? Is it possible Big-O really wasn't that high-budget to begin and was able to fit confortabley within a $300,000 limit even with all it's writers, animators, and composers?
Devil May Cry:the movie - A ViewAskew Production?
Click the tag to see that Dante and more at Baghead's not-so-good custom figures page!
|
| Krzyzewski Man
226th Post
Frequent Customer
| "Re(5):Re(10):Response and Futurama question" , posted Mon 24 Nov 21:29
quote:
What is this world coming to when Baghead is the voice of reason?
That is a good question, shame on all of you for agreeing with an idiot who's got nothing better to do then flame Batman-In-An-Ugly-Robot!
Precisely. As an academic and wearer of  , this sickens me to the depths of my soul.
Particularly a certain sideways comment made about Buffy and Angel. Dr. Baghead, what exactly makes you dislike the writing on a show which was critically acclaimed to such a degree, not just for production and acting but for the writing as well, particularly the superlative dialogue?
And good gracious, what's this sudden anti-giant robot influx?  Iggy, I hold you personally responsible for this ridiculous parade of elitism. I take this witch-hunt like I would take a frying pan being wielded on the head of my child. But I am not angry enough to go to war with you again. Mostly because you never actually bothered to fight...
Spoiler (Highlight to view) -
LIKE A TRUE FRENCHMAN! I keed, I keed. Couldn't resist. Heh.
End of Spoiler
And no, I don't expect to rachet up the intelligence level of this thread any, so proceed with the usual death threats.
Aren't cysts neato?
CMFPIWSFAOMFG!!!!
|
| trufenix
67th Post
Occasional Customer
| "Re(5):Re(10):Response and Futurama question" , posted Tue 25 Nov 08:20
quote:
We're not saying that Fox HAS to air it on Cartoon Network. We're saying that they COULD air it on Cartoon Network, much like they did with Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Angel, two other Fox shows, which originally aired on The WB (a Turner network, just like Cartoon Network). They have no legal obligation to, but it's a reasonable option for them, especially if CN gives them the same deal they gave Bandai and pays most of the cost of the show while still (AFAIK) letting the production company take the DVD profits.
As usual, I have no idea what you're getting at, but Fox doesn't own Cartoon Network, or Buffy, or Angel.
As for FG, if Fox lets CN air new episodes of Family Guy, yet still owns the rights to the show, they don't actually get any money.
To show new episodes on any other channel of Family Guy without selling it off (WB sold Buffy to UPN), Fox would be paying all of the production costs yet not getting any of the viewers.
-F.
Resistance is flammable! No one can snuff my flames!
|
| Krzyzewski Man
244th Post
Frequent Customer
| "Re(9):Re(10):Response and Futurama question" , posted Wed 26 Nov 21:46
quote:
I'm not sure Athena would be very convinced if Chunli, after having been beaten in an extremely violent fashion in SvC, says "hey, that doesn't count!"
I'm not sure Athena, being a not-real person, would give a shit.
Also, it appears that the truth of Stewie's sexuality is a little clearer, at least after the viewing of tonight's Adult Swim episode. To summarize, Stewie finds himself in the girl cheerleader's locker room. Upon seeing the girls undressing, he utters approximately this line:
"Oh, it seems my wee-wee is undergoing rigor mortis."
So, we can gather two things. Stewie enjoys the nakedness of females, and, as he's no older than three, that is disgusting to no end. But, humorous.
Aren't cysts neato?
CMFPIWSFAOMFG!!!!
|
| Omar 299th Post
Copper Customer
| "CN" , posted Wed 26 Nov 22:56
quote:
More "Family Guy" is a good thing, but somehow, I doubt a new season after the last one will fully recapture the magic of how it was in the beginning. Think of it like how Batman The Animated series changed.
But like I said, I would welcome more Family Guy.
Yes, I feel the same too. (I did like both Batman series, but the first just a bit more.)
There's a really cool interview with Mike Lazzo of Cartoon Netowrk in IGN.
So I guess CN will have nothing to do with time slots or anything related to a new Familiy Guy..
***
IGNFF: Which was a huge shock. Both Futurama and Family Guy.
LAZZO: Well, we knew that those were shows that we wanted very much. We kept asking Fox, "When are you going to syndicate? When are you going to syndicate?" And eventually the came back and said, "Ok... now." But, you know, they're still airing Futuramas.
...
IGNFF: Even Family Guy – when you look at the success it's getting during Adult Swim – what are the odds of something like that going back into production? Or is there no real budget for that?
LAZZO: Well, it's a very, very complicated thing, and we actually are having conversations along those lines. It gets pretty complicated unless you can get a network partner, because they are just very expensive shows. For a cable network to pay production for a property that they do not own is crazy. It's less so for a network, because they get so much money from ads – but with cable we're just not there yet. So we're trying to figure out how that could actually happen.
IGNFF: What if there were a reduction to the time model we see in Sealab or Harvey Birdman – that sort of 11-minute episode?
LAZZO: First of all, because you are dealing with unions in L.A., it's very difficult to make this model work there. And it's not even the same show – if you're looking at a Futurama or a Family Guy, you're talking about writing staffs that are very often 10 or more people... much less just the animation itself... so very quickly you will, just in simple production, get to half-a-million dollars a half-hour. Compared to a Sealab or a Space Ghost, which is under $100,000 a half-hour. So just the economics of it are vastly different, and we can't theoretically charge more for these shows until they have a track records – so you've just got to figure out new ways to do it. But the best way to do that is find some partner. Unfortunately, most of the networks are a little gun-shy on animation right now. However, we may be able to make something happen, and we're trying real hard to do that because we know we need that.
IGNFF: How did the model work with producing more episodes of Home Movies? Was it just the way the production was done on it?
LAZZO: Yes. That's an inexpensive show. I mean, you can look at it and tell.
IGNFF: But to move away from squigglevision must have cost at least something...
LAZZO: Not really. By that time, they had figured out how to do Flash [animation] inexpensively, and Flash had grown up, so to speak, by that time. Secondly, we're not going to put money into the show unless we can actually own the show in the U.S. – instead of renting the show, so to speak. So the episodes that we've made, we can air forever. At that point, it becomes a part of our library, and you can actually start seeing money back. However, if we'd have paid full production and only had it for five years or so before we had to go back and pay more money, it wouldn't have been worth it. So in the case of Home Movies, we were able to make a deal because they were interested in continuing the show, and we were too. Fox doesn't have reason, at this point, to continue the production of the shows [Futurama & Family Guy]. They still have The Simpsons, they have King of the Hill...
http://sigx.yuriy.net/images/xGarlo.png [Image Attached]
|
|
|
that's nice looking. ^_^" -Daala(she was talking about me)
