http://www.avclub.com/articles/fox-considering-tv-channel-that-plays-nothing-but,61862/
Well they've got enough episodes to fill more than a month.
Well they've got enough episodes to fill more than a month.
"The Simpson's" 24 hour channel?
- Thread starter Samurai8472
- Start date
Yeah, that's true. It seems that the ones shown in syndication may be only from certain years until they're old enough to be added to syndication. Or maybe it's a popularity factor. They maybe show only the more popular episodes, but I've seen some of the newer ones from time to time as part of syndication, so I have no idea.
Well, let's see... according to Wikipedia they currently have 486 half-hour episodes, plus a 90-minute movie that would probably fill a 2-hour block on a commercial network. So that's 245 hours of material -- just over 10 days' worth of content, nowhere near a month.
But let's say this hypothetical network, like many cable networks, broadcasts infomercials from, say, midnight to 8 AM, leaving 16 hours of programming per day. And let's assume that, like many cable networks, they repeat their programming within the day -- say that every episode scheduled for a particular day is run twice that day. Then they'd get through only 8 hours of content a day, and that would give them 30.6 days' worth of content. Now we've reached the one-month mark.
Maybe one thing they could do is show each episode uncut in a timeslot longer than 30 minutes. After all, if there's nothing on their network but The Simpsons, there wouldn't really be that much need to limit everything to starting and ending on the half-hour, so you could have the obligatory number of commercials for a modern syndicated rerun and yet still air the entire uncut episodes. So that might expand the time it would take to cover the whole series from 31-ish to maybe 36 days.
Still, that hardly seems like enough content to sustain a network. What else have we got? Maybe they could toss in The Tracy Ullmann Show, the series where The Simpsons originated as cartoon shorts, and which had Dan Castellaneta and Julie Kavner in its regular cast. Throw the whole series in and you've got another 39.5 hours of programming, or just under 5 more days' worth under the model spelled out above (a bit more if they run them uncut). They could also add the 23 episodes of The Critic, which was created by Simpsons producers and once crossed over with the show. There are also various specials pertaining to The Simpsons that could be rerun. And maybe new specials could be produced for the network.
Maybe they could stretch out and include other shows featuring Simpsons cast members -- Herman's Head for Hank Azaria and Yeardley Smith, maybe Rhoda for Julie Kavner, that sort of thing. Maybe toss in the occasional showing of This is Spinal Tap.
But let's say this hypothetical network, like many cable networks, broadcasts infomercials from, say, midnight to 8 AM, leaving 16 hours of programming per day. And let's assume that, like many cable networks, they repeat their programming within the day -- say that every episode scheduled for a particular day is run twice that day. Then they'd get through only 8 hours of content a day, and that would give them 30.6 days' worth of content. Now we've reached the one-month mark.
Maybe one thing they could do is show each episode uncut in a timeslot longer than 30 minutes. After all, if there's nothing on their network but The Simpsons, there wouldn't really be that much need to limit everything to starting and ending on the half-hour, so you could have the obligatory number of commercials for a modern syndicated rerun and yet still air the entire uncut episodes. So that might expand the time it would take to cover the whole series from 31-ish to maybe 36 days.
Still, that hardly seems like enough content to sustain a network. What else have we got? Maybe they could toss in The Tracy Ullmann Show, the series where The Simpsons originated as cartoon shorts, and which had Dan Castellaneta and Julie Kavner in its regular cast. Throw the whole series in and you've got another 39.5 hours of programming, or just under 5 more days' worth under the model spelled out above (a bit more if they run them uncut). They could also add the 23 episodes of The Critic, which was created by Simpsons producers and once crossed over with the show. There are also various specials pertaining to The Simpsons that could be rerun. And maybe new specials could be produced for the network.
Maybe they could stretch out and include other shows featuring Simpsons cast members -- Herman's Head for Hank Azaria and Yeardley Smith, maybe Rhoda for Julie Kavner, that sort of thing. Maybe toss in the occasional showing of This is Spinal Tap.
Sky 1 has been nicknamed The Simpsons Channel for years... (Same as how History is called The Hitler Channel - though it really has morphed into the 9/11 Channel over the past three years or so)
Add in another Groening project, Futurama, and it might be kind of interesting.
And kick it off with a Simpsons Meets Futurama original movie!
But don't adapt the graphic novel that Bongo did, because the Planet Express crew doesn't actually meet the Simpsons in that. Instead, they get sucked into a Simpsons comic book and they meet fictionalized versions of the characters. It was fun, don't get me wrong, but it was also a little disappointing because of that.
I might be the only one, but I actually really liked The Critic. Kind of wish they'd bring it back. Might be more accepted at this point.
It's clearly not enough programming even considering the length of the show. I have no idea what's considered sustainable, but I should think at least three months of material is a minimum. There's only so much time people can tolerate watching the same thing over and over.
They should make a "10 seasons and over" network. Have M*A*S*H, Law & Order + SVU, the CSI shows, Simpsons, Smallville, Family Guy... did X-Files go 10, or did it stop @ 9?
They could sort of include Trek, if they did 1 episode of each series 5 nights a week. Like, TOS Monday, TNG Tuesday, DS9 Wednesday, VGR Thursday, ENT Friday. Repeat.
Maybe have shows that almost hit 10 on weekends only -- Seinfeld, L&O Criminal Intent.
They could sort of include Trek, if they did 1 episode of each series 5 nights a week. Like, TOS Monday, TNG Tuesday, DS9 Wednesday, VGR Thursday, ENT Friday. Repeat.
Maybe have shows that almost hit 10 on weekends only -- Seinfeld, L&O Criminal Intent.
Isn't that what TBS, and TNN are?
But what else could they do? It's been established from the beginning that The Simpsons is fictional within the Futurama universe (e.g. the pile of Bart Simpson dolls on the Big Ball of Garbage) and Futurama is fictional within the Simpsons universe (e.g. Bart & Lisa going to Comic-Con and seeing Matt Groening, the creator of Futurama). So it wouldn't make sense to suddenly claim that the Simpsons had been real people in Futurama's past, any more than it would make sense to do a Star Trek story in which Tom Paris went back in time and met a real-life astronaut named Captain Proton and a real dictator named Dr. Chaotica. Such a tale might be kind of cool as an "imaginary story," but it couldn't work in-continuity.
Yeah, since we know the Simpsons adhere so strictly to realism and established continuity, that would never work.
Wow, Christopher, you certainly know how to throw a damp rag on a fun idea...
Why do you think such slavish devoted to the past trumps storytelling? There's a saying of Lois McMaster Bujold: "The author reserves the right to have a better idea." If Groening and his Futurama/Simpsons producers had an idea for a crossover, do you really think they would let past continuity get in the way of "a better idea"? It's like Munch talking about The X-Files in an episode of Homicide -- and then appearing in an episode of The X-Files. Or Richard Belzer appearing himself in an episode of Arrested Development, then appearing as Munch in a later episode.
The fact that Star Trek exists as a fiction within the Doctor Who universe (and vice versa if you count My Enemy My Ally) doesn't mean I don't want to see the Doctor on the bridge of the Enterprise (and I so hope IDW Publishing makes that happen). And just because the Simpsons and the Planet Express crew exist as fictions within the other's universe doesn't mean I wouldn't love to see a crossover that treats them both as real. Isn't the point of storytelling to be entertained? Sometimes a story is worth telling just because it's fun.
I mentioned it in the post that Christopher quoted from upthread.
My criticism of the comic is that it's not really a crossover. The Futurama characters get zapped into a Simpsons comic book, and then the characters from comics escape into the 31st century. So, it's not really the Simpsons that Fry and his friends meet in the story, it's fictionalized versions of the characters.
It's amusing, and I enjoyed it, but as a crossover it was a little lacking because of that.
It seems like a Star Trek network would be much more realistic. The shows, films, documentaries, talk shows, etc.
I did just think of something though. They could play the episodes with their DVD comentary sometimes. In fact that could work with a Star Trek channel as well.
I did just think of something though. They could play the episodes with their DVD comentary sometimes. In fact that could work with a Star Trek channel as well.
