Jump to content
AimingforYoko

Simpsons In The Media: I'm Kent Brockman

Recommended Posts

Aw, he will be missed. Thanks for posting the vid and link! Another fave Nimoy/Simpsons scene is of the town gathering together to sing Good Morning Starshine in the Springfield Files episode and you see Leonard singing between Agent Scully (I think) and a Wookiee (I think).

 

I am not really sure but are you referring to this picture?

 

250px-Good_Morning_Starshine.png

 

Edit: he was in that episode but acted more like a narrator:

 

Edited by TVSpectator

Share this post


Link to post

I admit I stopped buying them because I had a vision of so many sets but I still got them from Netflix so I could listen to the commentaries.  Its just wrong to stop production. 

Share this post


Link to post

Damn it. Couldn't they at least get 18 and 19 out? It feels weird to have everything up to 17, skip 18 and have the movie, then skip 19 and have 20.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Lets be honest. The world could explode, and the Simpsons would still be renewed.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

 

 

10 Times The Simpsons Predicted the Future

http://www.oddee.com/item_99298.aspx?utm

 

That list wasn't bad (and I knew about them before reading it), but I found another list that has a few other theories, right here (your list really didn't mentioned about the donut shape universe but I didn't know about (although, didn't hear about 1,3,4,7,8,9,10,& 11 till I read the article and in my opinion some of them I don't fully agree with; like #9)  :

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/09/08/the-simpsons-inspired_n_5703461.html

 

 

 

Yes, two more seasons of the Simpsons!

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/09/08/the-simpsons-inspired_n_5703461.html

Share this post


Link to post

No more Ned Flanders, Principal Skinner, Mr. Burns, Kent Brockman, Rainer Wolfcastle, Smithers, Dr. Hibbert, Lenny...

I'm not part of the "Simpsons sucked after season 8" crowd at all, and I think they've had some really strong episodes the past few years, but I don't see how they'll stay interesting after this. Flanders and Skinner are two of my favorite characters.

Share this post


Link to post

No more Ned Flanders, Principal Skinner, Mr. Burns, Kent Brockman, Rainer Wolfcastle, Smithers, Dr. Hibbert, Lenny...

I'm not part of the "Simpsons sucked after season 8" crowd at all, and I think they've had some really strong episodes the past few years, but I don't see how they'll stay interesting after this. Flanders and Skinner are two of my favorite characters.

So I am wondering if they would recast or not? I mean so many other classic animated characters are no longer voiced by their original voice actors (Bugs Bunny, Mickey Mouse, Fred Flintstone etc). Sure in many cases the voice actors dies, but why would Ned Flanders be any different. Someone on another site I go to was wondering what Billy West's Flanders voice sounds like. 

 

Then again after 573 episodes Flanders, Skinner and Burns have probably said every word in the English language. How hard would it be to just edit/reuse old recording?

Share this post


Link to post
No more Ned Flanders, Principal Skinner, Mr. Burns, Kent Brockman, Rainer Wolfcastle, Smithers, Dr. Hibbert, Lenny...

I'm not part of the "Simpsons sucked after season 8" crowd at all, and I think they've had some really strong episodes the past few years, but I don't see how they'll stay interesting after this. Flanders and Skinner are two of my favorite characters.

 

That's going to be a tough hole to fill with just one person that do all those voices.  It wouldn't surprise me if they have to hire multiple people to replace him and will end up costing more money than Harry Shearer wanted.  Harry Shearer is really talented much like Dan Castellaneta and Hank Azaria (especially after you consider that Yeardley Smith does exactly one voice -- Lisa) that on a per character voice they are getting him pretty cheap.  Other notable characters Harry does are Otto the Bus Driver and Rev. Lovejoy.

 

The part I don't understand is that the company that produces the Simpsons makes ridiculous amounts of money from syndication, streaming and merchandising (especially from merchandising).  It's on umpteen times a day in reruns on various channels and has been translated into tons of languages in other countries, and yet this isn't the first time they've tried to strongarm the voice talent to work for less.

 

Sure the show isn't as popular as it once was, but even if the new shows only break even but when you include all the other revenue sources this show taps into it's going to continue making money for a long, long time well after its over.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

That's going to be a tough hole to fill with just one person that do all those voices. It wouldn't surprise me if they have to hire multiple people to replace him and will end up costing more money than Harry Shearer wanted. ... Other notable characters Harry does are Otto the Bus Driver and Rev. Lovejoy.

Good points -- plus, with a show this long-running, and his voices so well known, I don't think substitute voices would sit well with viewers. Frankly, I'm still not over Dick Sergeant as Darrin, and that happened before I was born!

Can't believe I forgot Otto and Rev. Lovejoy! Also pretty important characters.

Share this post


Link to post

When Phil Hartman died, they opted to simply not use the characters he voiced since they were mostly secondary characters -- though I really miss Lionel Hutz --  but there's no way they can do that with Harry's departure.

 

I found it Interesting that while reading other articles about Harry's departure one of the reasons cited that he didn't sign his new contract was over profit sharing and merchandising (because it is so darn lucrative for this show).

Share this post


Link to post

I think some of the characters can be recast. I also think they can do lots of good things with the show if they wanted to bring in a new voice actor and mess around a little bit with the basic make up of the town.  Maybe it's not terrible for the show to kill off Burns (and of course bury Smithers with him) for seasons 27 and 28.  Just ask Albert Brooks to be Hank Scorpio, the new plant owner for a half dozen episodes when needed, and I would be fine.

 

It surprises me 0.0% that it was Harry Shearer who bailed on the show before it was over.  But that's okay. He is who he is. And he entertained the hell out of me for 26 years. I hope that he finds what he is looking for now that he is free from this responsibility.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I think there will be a noticeable difference in how his characters sound.

There are lots of people out there who can do a good impression of how Harry Shearer delivered some lines as Mr. Burns, for example, but that doesn't mean that they'll be able to take new dialogue and make it sound just like Harry did. And it's unlikely they'll have his comic timing, or acting ability.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I think there will be a noticeable difference in how his characters sound.

There are lots of people out there who can do a good impression of how Harry Shearer delivered some lines as Mr. Burns, for example, but that doesn't mean that they'll be able to take new dialogue and make it sound just like Harry did. And it's unlikely they'll have his comic timing, or acting ability.

 

Exactly. You hit the nail on the head.

 

I'm probably not even bothering to watch any of the new episodes to be honest.

Share this post


Link to post

There are lots of people out there who can do a good impression of how Harry Shearer delivered some lines as Mr. Burns, for example, but that doesn't mean that they'll be able to take new dialogue and make it sound just like Harry did. And it's unlikely they'll have his comic timing, or acting ability.

I am not so sure about that. Of course there are probably 1000's of people out there who can say excellent and sound just like Burns. But forgetting about those people there are also a lot of truly talented voice actors out there, who like you sort of described are more than just impressionists. Last year I watched a documentary on Voice Actors on netflix, and I am sure there are a few people that appeared on that who could handle playing Mr. Burns or Flanders.

Share this post


Link to post
I am not so sure about that. Of course there are probably 1000's of people out there who can say excellent and sound just like Burns. But forgetting about those people there are also a lot of truly talented voice actors out there, who like you sort of described are more than just impressionists. Last year I watched a documentary on Voice Actors on netflix, and I am sure there are a few people that appeared on that who could handle playing Mr. Burns or Flanders.

 

That's the thing -- maybe a replacement voice actor could do one or two of the voices that Harry Shearer did, but I doubt they could do all of them.  So they're going to have to pay multiple actors to replace him.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

They've release the details of the deal that Harry turned down -- $14 million for 2 seasons works out to about a little under $320K per episode (based on a 22 episode season).  Which is basically the same that they were getting since 2011, which is still 30% less than what they were making per episode in 2010.

 

So in 2011 they made all the voice actors take a 30% pay cut and here it is 4 years later and no significant increase even though the show is still successful (and apparently profitable).

 

Just saw a post on Twitter that confirmed that Harry Shearer voices 23 characters on the Simpsons, some major, some minor, but that's a lot of shoes to fill.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Honestly, I think this is a sign that the show needs to be put out to pasture.  Harry Shearer voices too many characters.  Is it really worth recasting so many popular characters just to keep on a show that's been declining for years?

Share this post


Link to post

James L. Brooks has tweeted that they still want to work things out:

 

http://www.avclub.com/article/james-l-brooks-still-wants-work-things-out-harry-s-219437

 

One point made in I Know That Voice is that voice acting is not simply a matter of being able to mimic well-known catch phrases; these performers are truly acting all of their dialogue in character (and sometimes multiple characters) and it is not a matter of simply finding someone else who can 'sound' like them in one or two lines. They have to be able to completely embody the character they're playing, same as any 'regular' actor would have to do.

 

Hope it works out.

 

Exactly.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Once I heard Shearer was leaving, I knew they'd recast rather than get rid of so many major characters.  But the idea of killing off Mr. Burns and having Scorpio run the plant is really intriguing -- I like the idea of the workers having to deal with a "friendly," "cool" albeit evil boss.  And Mr. Smithers could spend his time hating Scorpio and trying ineffectively to ruin him.  Springfielders focusing on Scorpio's petty good deeds and ignoring is global crimes could also be fun.

 

The truth is, though, I can't imagine how this show is going to be without Shearer, and maybe it really is time to end it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

They've release the details of the deal that Harry turned down -- $14 million for 2 seasons works out to about a little under $320K per episode (based on a 22 episode season). Which is basically the same that they were getting since 2011, which is still 30% less than what they were making per episode in 2010.

So in 2011 they made all the voice actors take a 30% pay cut and here it is 4 years later and no significant increase even though the show is still successful (and apparently profitable).

And it is just so hard to make ends meet on $320,000 a week for 22 weeks of work.
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Just saw on EW that an upcoming episode next season will have Sideshow Bob actually succeed in killing Bart. Ten to one it will end up being a dream or end with the typical reset button so that it will never have happened.

Share this post


Link to post

Just saw on EW that an upcoming episode next season will have Sideshow Bob actually succeed in killing Bart. Ten to one it will end up being a dream or end with the typical reset button so that it will never have happened.

 

It's a Halloween episode. So there's bound to be a reset button.

Share this post


Link to post

I just found this article on CNN and I came here to see if anyone else is surprised to hear it. Although, speaking about the supposed leaked storyline, I am kind of hoping that they will make this something that will last all of season 27; just because it does sound interesting but I do hope they they keep Marge and Homer together at the end of the season:

(CNN)We already knew that it can be hard to make a marriage work in Hollywood, but it looks like it's also tough to keep things afloat in Springfield.

 

According to an executive producer for "The Simpsons," Homer and Marge will legally separate in the upcoming season.

The animated series is heading into its 27th season, and the show plans on keeping fans intrigued. Executive producer Al Jean told Variety that one of the plot points for the new season is Springfield's supercouple splitting and the appearance of a surprising other woman.

 

 

http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/10/entertainment/homer-marge-split-simpsons-feat/index.html

Share this post


Link to post

Wait, so they AREN'T going to just hit the reset button at the end of the episode like they always do?

Honestly, I'm so over the Homer/Marge episodes -- and Marge in general -- that all the internet freak outs over this is just making me roll my eyes.

Edited by Spartan Girl

Share this post


Link to post

Wait, so they AREN'T going to just hit the reset button at the end of the episode like they always do?

Honestly, I'm so over the Homer/Marge episodes -- and Marge in general -- that all the internet freak outs over this is just making me roll my eyes.

 

I am not sure if this is going to be something that will happen throughout Season 27 or in just one episode. Although, I feel that if they are bold enough to try this storyline, throughout Season 27, then that (in my opinion) will be something totally new. 

Share this post


Link to post

I mean--sure, try it out Al Jean et al. But for christ's sake, why do something like this now and not say ... in the 13th season or something.  christ.

Share this post


Link to post

I mean--sure, try it out Al Jean et al. But for christ's sake, why do something like this now and not say ... in the 13th season or something.  christ.

 

Maybe because they are now being judged, by FOX, on whether  they can get another season (or seasons) base on ratings? Or maybe now, they feel that they can be canned and are trying something that they may have wanted to do for some time now, or they just said, "why the hell not?"

Edited by TVSpectator
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

afaik, even with lower viewing numbers, they are still a very profitable franchise for Fox.

 

As far as I know, FOX did want to end this show because they didn't want to pay the voice actors any more money. So, my bet would be that they are going to try either do the things that they always wanted to do, but felt that it might ruin the show or they are just trying to get more viewers to prove to FOX that they do deserve to be on the air longer and to be paid more. 

Edited by TVSpectator

Share this post


Link to post

I'm intrigued by the idea of a split for Marge and Homer lasting more than one episode. Perhaps this is the kind of thing that could get viewers back out of curiosity? Who knows? The Simpsons has had quite a few great episodes this last season and some not so great ones. Hardly a bad show though considering what passes for comedy these days.

Edited by Aprilshowers

Share this post


Link to post

LMAO!  I knew it was going to be just a one-shot episode.  Perfect response, writers.  But seriously, enough with these stupid marriage crisis episodes.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

LMAO!  I knew it was going to be just a one-shot episode.  Perfect response, writers.  But seriously, enough with these stupid marriage crisis episodes.

 

Yeah, they do have a lot of those episodes but I was hoping for at least something that will be a season-long arch (which I guess for this show and for others like it, would be totally wrong of me to think that they would do it). 

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×