GENERAL DISCUSSIONS

Fox does it again - Areested Development in trouble

POSTED BY: HANS
UPDATED: Friday, February 11, 2005 21:11
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 4537
PAGE 1 of 1

Friday, February 11, 2005 6:31 AM

HANS


If Firefly was one of the most brilliant Sci-Fi shows in a long time, Arrested Development is one of the best sitcoms in years. Now, despite the fact that the show has received much critical acclaim and won a pile of emmys, it is hovering at the edge of cancellation. The show's orignal 22-episode commitment for this season was reduced to 18 earlier this week. Then, yesterday (Feb. 10) one of its stars, David Cross, said that production has "shut down".

What he meant by that I'm not sure, but the show has never had huge viewer numbers, despite its accolades. What is true is that the show is brilliant. If you like your comedy with an edge (in the Larry Sanders/Curb Your Enthusiasm style) you'd love this show. It's one of those shows that's hard to get into - a lot of the humour is in-joke references to what happened in previous episodes - but once you've seen a few it really begins to click. The first season is on DVD, and is a must-watch.

Someone at Fox has enough vision to greenlight these shows (Firefly, Wonderfalls, AD), but then they turn into cowards and don't allow them to develop a fan base, or refuse to allow them to continue if they don't get reality-tv level viewership numbers...

More on this (plus links to Save AD petitions) can be found on CHUD at chud.com/thud/1498

Hans


NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, February 11, 2005 6:49 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


I've come to this conclusion about t.v. in our time.

1. Some shows are simply too good for t.v.

2. There is nothing that is too BAD that it can't be put on t.v.

Since t.v. is so much a numbers game ( ratings ), it's undeststandable that because some shows are just so well written and put together, they don't appeal to the lowest common denominator. There are, quite bluntly, too many stupid and tasteless slobs out there watching t.v. , which means they're watching the commercials, which means they're buying products. The goal isn't to provide quality programming, but to get as many butts in front of the t.v. as possible.

Ever sit down and actually WATCH 'The Simple Life' with Paris and Nichole? Please, somebody nuke this planet right now! "Reality Shows" ? Are you KIDDING me ? We send man to the moon, probes to other planets and beyond our solar system, replace organs in bodies, build skyscrapers on computers .....and THIS is how we're suppose to entertain ourselves ?



" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, February 11, 2005 7:14 AM

SNEAKER98


To be perfectly honest, I never got into arrested development. I just couldn't get over the shoddy camera work.

Yes, yes, I know. The shakey-cam was a style. But there's a difference: firefly did it properly, arrested development did not. Not in my opinion, anywho.

"I do the job... and then I get paid. Go run your little world."
-Malcolm Reynolds

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, February 11, 2005 7:16 AM

MYNAMEISJONAS


It makes me sad when people try to make themselves feel smarter then other people, based on what television shows they whatch.

People go to school and university to learn things and become smarter. They whatch tv to be entertained, maybey they enjoy whatching paris hilton be a stupid whore, who are you to say that makes them dumb?.

They should whatch television shows based purely on how much enjoyment they get out of it, not on what the critics say. I mean i can tell the office is an amazingly well written show, but that doesn't mean i enjoy whatching it.

If you want to make yourself feel smart go and study advanced mathematics, don't whatch tv.

Oh and about fox, they might cancel alot of shows, but they also make alot of very good ones that no other network would like, family guy, futurama, firefly, arrested development, The simpsons, none of these shows would be made on other networks.

So while your cursing fox for canceling your favourite shows, you might also consider thanking them for giving you hundreds of hours of enjoyment you wouldn't of gotten on other networks.







NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, February 11, 2005 7:39 AM

BEATLE


It will be a real shame if this show does not return. I've laughed more while watching this show than at anything else I've seen on TV.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, February 11, 2005 8:01 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by MynameisJonas:
It makes me sad when people try to make themselves feel smarter then other people, based on what television shows they whatch.

People go to school and university to learn things and become smarter. They whatch tv to be entertained, maybey they enjoy whatching paris hilton be a stupid whore, who are you to say that makes them dumb?.

They should whatch television shows based purely on how much enjoyment they get out of it, not on what the critics say. I mean i can tell the office is an amazingly well written show, but that doesn't mean i enjoy whatching it.

If you want to make yourself feel smart go and study advanced mathematics, don't whatch tv.

Oh and about fox, they might cancel alot of shows, but they also make alot of very good ones that no other network would like, family guy, futurama, firefly, arrested development, The simpsons, none of these shows would be made on other networks.

So while your cursing fox for canceling your favourite shows, you might also consider thanking them for giving you hundreds of hours of enjoyment you wouldn't of gotten on other networks.



Gee, sounds like I struck a nerve, eh? Who am I to have an opinion? I'm sorry, is there a line I have to stand in so I can get my 'experss your thoughts' license? It's not so much that I detest such shows as 'The Simple Life','Whose your Daddy, or 'Wife Swap'. I think they do wonders for society. Really. But what I have issue with is that there are so MANY of these fine, quality shows on, while the likes of Wonderfalls, Firefly, John Doe,etc... are so casually and quickly dismissed.
Quote:

If you want to make yourself feel smart go and study advanced mathematics, don't whatch tv.
I would, but I'm not smart enough to study that stuff. It seems I'm smart enough to know that I don't know all that much,but I'm still not such a dullard as to accept that I can't do better. You're probably right. I should just eat my chips, gulp down my beer and grin as I watch the pretty people make complete asses of themselves.... " Boy howdy! Dem purty girls is WHORES! Yuk yuk yuk! Lookie thar!! "

You wouldn't be any relation to Rubert Murdoch, would ya ?

j/k

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, February 11, 2005 8:03 AM

HANS


Quote:

Originally posted by MynameisJonas:
It makes me sad when people try to make themselves feel smarter then other people, based on what television shows they whatch.




Touch a nerve, did I? :)

I have no problem if people have guilty pleasures - shows that are not high brow but can be enjoyed just for their own sakes. I've had plenty of guilty pleasures myself over the years.

But to lament the fact that there are few intelligent shows on TV does not mean that I'm "trying to make myself feel smarter than other people". It simply means that, as other posters have mentioned, TV is aimed squarely at the lowest common denominator. When a network puts on an idiotic show like "The Simple Life" they cast a wide net. They can be sure that there's not one person in the audience who won't get the forced humour, crassness, and appeal to our basest instincts.

What is truly rare is TV that makes you think, with complex storylines, that does not lead the viewer around by the nose like a dumb animal but challenges their perceptions. If it is elitist to want to not only be entertained but also challenged, then I'm proud to be an elitist.

Firefly is a perfect example of challenging TV. For many new viewers the mixture of a western and sci-fi setting was confusing. It didn't fit their simple perceptions of the narrow categories those genres should look like. Fans of the show know better. Instead of saying "Cowboy hats in space?", scratching our heads, and turning the channel, we gave the show a chance. It turned out to be a genre-busting show that was just a little too different for many of the viewing public.

And yes, Fox has had some good shows in the past (though I would not include Family Guy in that list). Does that mean they get a free pass when they cancel great shows like Firefly and (I think) Arrested Development?

Hans

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, February 11, 2005 8:11 AM

SNIPER


Fox.

Stupid network...

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, February 11, 2005 8:18 AM

MYNAMEISJONAS


Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:
[ Who am I to have an opinion? I'm sorry, is there a line I have to stand in so I can get my 'experss your thoughts' license?
. "



I diddn't say you couldn't have a opinion, i just don't like it when people call other people stupid because they have a different taste in art.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, February 11, 2005 8:27 AM

MYNAMEISJONAS


Quote:

Originally posted by Hans:

What is truly rare is TV that makes you think, with complex storylines, that does not lead the viewer around by the nose like a dumb animal but challenges thier perceptions. If it is elitist to want to not only be entertained but also challenged, then I'm proud to be an elitist.
Hans



since when did firefly "challenge our perceptions"?, the stories were mostly the same stuff you have seen a thousand times but with a slight twist.

The thing that made it stand out, was its witty dialogue and interesting characters. It never addresed social issues, or made us think of things in a different way like star trek did.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, February 11, 2005 8:31 AM

HANS


Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Gee, sounds like I struck a nerve, eh?



AURaptor, it sounds like you and I are speaking from the same script... :)

Hans


NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, February 11, 2005 8:35 AM

HANS


Quote:

Originally posted by MynameisJonas:

since when did firefly "challenge our perceptions"?, the stories were mostly the same stuff you have seen a thousand times but with a slight twist.



Did you read my post? When I called Firefly challenging, I was talking about the mixing of genres (western and sci-fi). I thought that was quite clear...

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, February 11, 2005 8:35 AM

MYNAMEISJONAS


Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:

"



Are you coming on to me?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, February 11, 2005 8:39 AM

MYNAMEISJONAS


What the hell is challenging about sci fi with cowboys?. I think most people diddn't like the western element, because it was unrealistic and hardly anybody likes western.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, February 11, 2005 8:47 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by MynameisJonas:
Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:

"



Are you coming on to me?



Am I Sly ? Nope. I tend towards womenfolk. Just didn't want my post to be misinterpreted is all.

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, February 11, 2005 8:50 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by MynameisJonas:
What the hell is challenging about sci fi with cowboys?. I think most people diddn't like the western element, because it was unrealistic and hardly anybody likes western.



This from someone whose member profile has " hello i like watching firefly and WALKER TEXAS RANGER" for a personal quote.

Right.

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, February 11, 2005 10:06 AM

DUCESTECUM


I think this child (Jonas) may be all of hmmmm, say 15? and please spell watch correctly next time, it's w-a-t-c-h not whatch.

And I'm thinking that in this case my signature may be appropo, HA!

"And I'm thinking you weren't burdened with an over-abundance of schooling." Mal - Train Job

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, February 11, 2005 10:26 AM

MANOFSTEEL25


Major bummer. I LOVE Arrested Development. Probably the best new show I've discovered since..well..Firefly. At least it got a decent run of two year if doe sindeed get cancelled. Wow. Man Fox never seems to understand....

-Bob

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, February 11, 2005 10:31 AM

SEVENPERCENT


Quote:

Originally posted by MynameisJonas:

because they have a different taste in art.



I'm sorry- Did you just call the Simple Life, the Swan, and My Boyfriend is a Midget (or whatever it was) art? Did I miss something, or wake up on drugs, or maybe I'm having a psychadelic experience caused by too much MSG in my noodles-

There is no way you can possibly call the reality shows we get forcefed to us by Fox, art-

You also may be on record as one of the few defenders of that particular network to ever grace us here on FFF - It's a rarity, but I'm with AURaptor on this one- Anyone that can watch the Simple Life and not think tv is sliding to Hell on a fast sled pulled by morons, take a look in the mirror, because you are the lowest common denominator -

------------------------------------------
He looked bigger when I couldn't see him.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, February 11, 2005 11:19 AM

OLDFAN45


Quote:

Originally posted by SevenPercent:
Quote:

Originally posted by MynameisJonas:

because they have a different taste in art.



I'm sorry- Did you just call the Simple Life, the Swan, and My Boyfriend is a Midget (or whatever it was) art? Did I miss something, or wake up on drugs, or maybe I'm having a psychadelic experience caused by too much MSG in my noodles-

There is no way you can possibly call the reality shows we get forcefed to us by Fox, art-

You also may be on record as one of the few defenders of that particular network to ever grace us here on FFF - It's a rarity, but I'm with AURaptor on this one- Anyone that can watch the Simple Life and not think tv is sliding to Hell on a fast sled pulled by morons, take a look in the mirror, because you are the lowest common denominator -

------------------------------------------
He looked bigger when I couldn't see him.



Joss have mercy on my soul, but I wade in:
Yes, all that crap you named can be called art because someone created it. You don't like it, I don't like it, maybe even the young'un doesn't like it, but it's still art. I hate Jeff Koons's crap like that creepy statue of Michael Jackson with the damn chimp, but it's art. I hate LORD OF THE RINGS inexpressibly, dull tedious boring pretentious crap that it is, but it's art of a very high order.

Back to taste: No one can argue YOUR taste isn't good, they can just say they disagree with it. My parents bought a color set in 1954, when it cost $1099 and a brand-new Ford cost $1300; the programs that were on in that time were more or less highbrow by today's standards (of course there were exceptions, there always are to every rule including this one) because TV was the realm of poeple who could afford to park a Ford in their living rooms and let it sit. Not much over 5 million households had TV then...which is about how many people watch ARRESTED DEVELOPMENT now.

Smart people with money. Gotta love 'em.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, February 11, 2005 1:35 PM

TMURRIE


Yay, another show I love has the possibility of being cancelled! go fox go fox go fox

/saw it coming

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, February 11, 2005 3:55 PM

EBONEZER


WHAT!? Oh my god, if they cancel arrested development, I'm gonna hafta kill someone, simple as that.

I just got the first season on DVD and I watched the first two disks in one sitting, and I still got the third to watch.

Thats such a fabulous show. Like, OMG good.

If fox cancels this show, i swear to god i'm gonna cry.

-----------------------------------

Four out of five gynecologists recommend calling Ebo a girl.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, February 11, 2005 4:19 PM

AX


A discussion about art--fun, if slippery. In my opinion--that is to say this is based on my connotation of the word, not on any explicit definition written down in a book--art implies something more than simply that something was created. I don't know exactly what it is that makes something art. But I do suspect that the people behind makeing "Simple Life" would laugh right in your face if you ever tried to tell them it was art. It may be entertaining, depending on what you find entertaining, but it doesn't strive to do anymore than that.

I guess what Art is, to me at least, is something that does more than what everyone else is doing. I admit that this is a poor definition and yet I can't think of any better way of saying it. A normal book might simply seek to keep the readers attention--a good deal of popular fiction is based on nothing more. But a book I'd consider art must do more. It must have layers, layers that go ever deeper into people, the world, circumstances, society, etc. The same applies, to me at least, when dealing with Movies and TV. "Simple Life" has only a single layer--two rich girls getting into trouble. But "Firefly" does more than this--it has layers delving into who people are, what thier place in society is, thier hopes, fears, and dreams. It has a layer looking at the world(the coming importance of asian culture for instance), and at society. It has layers asking about the role of government and the growth in power of corporations. It asks about the gap between the rich and the poor. It asks about science, and whether we will take it too far. These are the things "Firefly" poses, and a lot of them are only in the backgroud--12 episodes and most of this stuff was only just established. I really wonder where it would have gone. Clearly from this list (and I'm sure more could be added to it) "Firefly" had more going for it in terms of intellegence and challange than simply the fact that it mixed genres.

Lol, I still don't think I've done justice to Art. What about paintings? What makes one painting simply good, and another Art? I imagine the same thing involving layers applies, and yet it isn't really that simple. What about cave paintings--insanely simple, and yet many would (rightfully I think) consider them to be art. Nevermind. I can't answer this question. I don't suppose anyone can. But I'm still not going to call "Simple Life" art.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, February 11, 2005 9:11 PM

OLDFAN45


But I'm still not going to call "Simple Life" art.

Taste is, as I said, inarguable. I happen to share yours in this matter. "What is art?" is always a fun issue, but waaaaaay more complex than would be interesting in this fan-driven 'verse. Think I'm channelling my college self.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

FFF.NET SOCIAL