digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover and share the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Boycott Now: Fox to Air Family Guy Without Seth MacFarlane!

eonline.com — The overlords at Fox have announced plans to air an original Family Guy episode this Sunday and move forward on three more without the participation of mastermind Seth MacFarlane, who not only serves as show runner but supplies many of the key voices.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • planegray, on 11/15/2007, -7/+493BREAKING: U.S. invades Petoria
    • Araxen, on 11/15/2007, -4/+32WHAT THE DEUCE FOX!
      • djphatjive, on 11/16/2007, -9/+2Well what do you expect these companies to do? Sit around and do nothing!
        • GroundhogBoy, on 11/16/2007, -0/+5Um, how about solve the strike problems with some compromise. Do you really think that producers should be making money off the internet and DVD royalties and the writers shouldn't?
          • Wahoo06, on 11/16/2007, -6/+1Writers sign contracts knowing full well that this sort of thing could happen. If they don't want that, they have full control before signing the dotted line.
      • grrrrrrrrrrrrrr, on 11/16/2007, -8/+2more like, WHAT THE DOUCHE: FOX!
    • sethaldridge, on 11/15/2007, -9/+92NO NO, remember, South Park proved that the show is written by Manatees...the show is going to be fine...Manatees can't strike.
      • svenathon, on 11/16/2007, -0/+10Wasn't the whole point of the episodes that the manitees do strike, when you take away a ball?
    • trogdor282, on 11/15/2007, -8/+32But wait. Why is MacFarlane on strike? He doesn't write the show, manatees do!
      • tobsterius, on 11/15/2007, -0/+7he's probably a member of the WGA and doesn't want to cross the picket line.
    • falkonv7l, on 11/15/2007, -51/+20meh....I never found Family Guy that great anyway.
      • BurnTees, on 11/15/2007, -6/+19the new episodes haven't been nearly as good as the old ones.
        • crweaks23, on 11/15/2007, -4/+13Generally true, although the last couple of episodes were great.
          • mastershake329, on 11/15/2007, -13/+2The last two episodes were horrible! What are you talking about?
    • jrapp, on 11/15/2007, -1/+193Tom Tucker: "And now to our weatherman Ollie Williams for his take on the situation."
      Ollie Williams: "IT'S GONNA SUCK!!"
      Tom Tucker: "Thanks, Ollie."
      • dafragsta, on 11/15/2007, -10/+11Ollie Williams: ANYBODY WANT THIS DOG!?
        • flip360, on 11/15/2007, -1/+57Ollie Williams: "Did you check your TCP/IP Settings!?"
          Tom Tucker: " Yes Ollie."
          Ollie Williams: "Did you clear your cookies!?"
          Tom Tucker: "Yes Ollie."
          Ollie Williams: "You want this dog!?"
          Tom Tucker: "No Ollie."
          • Zalyster, on 11/15/2007, -0/+23Ollie Williams: "IT'S RAINING SIDEWAYS!"
            Tom Tucker: "Thanks, Ollie."
          • ZaZ2137, on 11/16/2007, -0/+3its not clear cookies, its did you enable cookies, common mistake
        • diktator279, on 11/16/2007, -1/+1"CHUNKY!"
    • KrazyOne, on 11/15/2007, -3/+3"They're messing with my shows!"
    • prettyha8, on 11/15/2007, -0/+16http://www.blaccuweather.com
    • Jones82, on 11/15/2007, -2/+36You know what really grinds my gears
      • mynameiscece, on 11/16/2007, -8/+1wasn't that a simpson's reference?
    • chrisclmsn, on 11/15/2007, -16/+7Who cares? Family Guy has really started to suck anyway. too much filler material.
      • zwaldowski, on 11/15/2007, -2/+3It's not an anime.
      • fxu1989, on 11/16/2007, -2/+2lol what an idiot.

        How can you say filler when it doesn't a constructive plot episode after episode -_-

        weeabo.
    • keyme, on 11/15/2007, -0/+1Oh yeah? You and what army?
    • Robbothehood, on 11/16/2007, -3/+3The great thing about cartoons is you can change the voices and no one can tell the diddly-ifference!
  • ephrils1, on 11/15/2007, -16/+272BREAKING: Fox loses viewers!
    oh wait....
    • Hobbes24, on 11/15/2007, -3/+66BREAKING: Fox no longer has the reputation of being a classy, respectable network...oh wait...
      • defectDS, on 11/15/2007, -4/+44Breaki... oh wait...
      • sgtbutterscotch, on 11/16/2007, -5/+2I like how I think you mean it in one way, but Family Guy in itself, is not a very classy show. If you thought of a classy network would you really think they would air Family Guy?
      • AnimZero, on 11/16/2007, -3/+2When did it have that reputation, Hobbes24? :P
    • AtomicTank, on 11/15/2007, -11/+27Family Guy used to be awesome, now its just random jokes and shock value. Example: Stewie used to be a maniacal genius and over time they turned him into just a funny talking baby who grows up to be a loser. Doing this will just sink the ship faster, imho. More Futurama, please.
      • Wrathernaut, on 11/16/2007, -0/+2Good news everyone! 12 Days, if everything goes as scheduled.
    • bballbackus, on 11/15/2007, -6/+4Fox had viewers?
    • dillibob, on 11/16/2007, -0/+4maybe he should go over to adult swim full time, because they are the ones who revived the series in the 1st place
    • randysouth, on 11/16/2007, -0/+6These new episodes will be lamer than Joe Swanson's legs.
  • WiseWeasel, on 11/15/2007, -9/+335Could Fox *possibly* do anything more to crap on Seth MacFarlane? Cancel his show for two years and now this? With friends like them, who needs enemies?
    • capiCrimm, on 11/15/2007, -4/+21are you sure Fox isn't just protecting him from The Terrorists?
    • ethanpack, on 11/15/2007, -1/+16I suppose Rupert Murdoch could have some goons hold MacFarlane down and physically crap on him. That or air a new Fox reality show called "Who Wants To Crap On Seth MacFarlane?"
      • dafragsta, on 11/15/2007, -1/+3Shee-it. He could just call up his buddy George and make him disappear. I mean, it almost happened once. Seth MacFarlane was a drink or two less away from making his flight on September 11th, and it was one of the planes that hit the world trade center.
      • Wrathernaut, on 11/16/2007, -0/+2I think World Scariest MacFarlane Firings is more like it.
    • StatusWoe, on 11/15/2007, -9/+24There must be something here I don't get. Fox doesn't appear to be asking him to write for the show, just approve it as a producer. It's a writers strike, not a producers strike. If he won't write for the show during the strike that's all well and good ( and I support that, striking is important for fair negotiations sometimes) however, he isn't on strike as a producer and should be doing his job.

      It appears that everyone in the Industry is taking this opportunity to "support the writers" by not doing their jobs,, if you aren't a writer or in a guild associated with the writers guild and legaly doing it as an act of solidarity then you are just ignoring your job.
      • TubaTechno, on 11/15/2007, -6/+14Reason and logic on Digg: like a tiny row boat in the midst of the great ocean.
        • insllvn, on 11/15/2007, -1/+16While reason and logic may be hard to find on digg, it seems it is harder to find someone who has the common decency to RTFA. The episodes are NOT done. MacFarlane is refusing to do the voices in the episodes that are partially or nearly complete. He can't finish them because, as a writer, he is on strike.
          • netant, on 11/15/2007, -6/+2As a writer, he's on strike. He's not supposed to write.
            If he still has time on his Producer's contract, he's obliged to fulfill his contract terms.
            Frankly, I really resent the idea that just because the writers go on strike, now everyone else with a contractual obligations to meet, should break them, take the fines, just so the writers get better paid. Ridiculous. If the ***** networks have legal grounds to sue, I hope they chase down every wildcatter.
        • xtc46, on 11/15/2007, -8/+4@insllvn

          as a writer he is on strike, he could do other jobs aside from writing (like voicing and producing) but most people would say "look a writer is working" and the backlash would be big. I see why he isn't doing it, but I am pretty much against strikes of all kinds. One of the great things about employment is if you dont like your pay, you can get another job. If i was ever the boss of a company and the employee's went on strike, they would all be fired and i would hire people who wanted to get paid to do work.
          • solonGFX, on 11/15/2007, -2/+2... yeaaaah it doesn't work like that.
          • solonGFX, on 11/15/2007, -0/+2... yeaaaah it doesn't work like that.
          • withoutamartyr, on 11/16/2007, -0/+1Take some economy classes, you'll understand.
          • oneoverzero, on 11/16/2007, -0/+1Your username explains your comment.
      • drlha, on 11/15/2007, -0/+11He's a writer on the show so he's on strike. He can't split himself into 1/2 person striking an 1/2 a person as a producer still working on his show. Many other producer/showrunner types are also refusing to cross picket lines, e.g. Heroes' Tim Kring.
      • anachronaut, on 11/15/2007, -0/+12From IMDb:
        "Series Writing credits: Seth MacFarlane (105 episodes, 1999-2007)
        He's definitely more than just a producer for the show, as he's had writing credits on every episode that has existed so far.

        The problem here is not that they're asking him to produce, it's that they're asking him to produce episodes which had scab writers working on them. That would basically equate to him crossing the picket line, as he is striking as a writer. It's fairly easy to understand his position.

        And as sleazy as Fox is, this whole incident should come as a surprise to no one.
        • netant, on 11/15/2007, -0/+7Presuming its scab writers that is helping to complete those episodes, I can definitely understand why a producer would not cross the picket line in that instance.
      • Leathersoup, on 11/15/2007, -1/+2Basically as a Producer he's respecting his writer's wish to strike.
    • lydon, on 11/15/2007, -0/+4I don't know for sure, but I would think that he at least in some way participates in the writing on the show and is probably a member of the WGA.
    • tcasey22, on 11/15/2007, -7/+2He sucks anyways, admitted to stealing jokes the Simpsons creators threw out. They're doing him a favor.
      • WiseWeasel, on 11/15/2007, -2/+5That was supposed to be a joke, smart guy...
  • sockpuppets, on 11/15/2007, -18/+533Starring Bill O'Reilly as Stewie, Ann Coulter as Meg and special guest star Rupert Murdoch as Herbert, the creepy old pedophile.

    I'm in!
    • RichLatherX23, on 11/15/2007, -3/+55Hell, I'd still watch that for the sheer "interstate car wreck" value.
    • lazersailer, on 11/15/2007, -3/+26I would think Bill O'Reilly would star as the creepy pedophile. More his line of work.
      • JonnyTrombone, on 11/16/2007, -1/+1If you never read a Bill O'Reilly book, you'll have no idea how true this is. The man is a mega pervert.
    • HypocriteDigg, on 11/15/2007, -1/+14I would say Dick Cheney as Stewie, George Bush as Chris, and Bill O'Reilly as the old pedophile.
    • TantrooM, on 11/15/2007, -2/+2O'Reilly (as pedophile): Chris, get over here, I has a falafel.

      But I do like O'Reilly being Stewie better though, because it would be truly ironic... seeing as Keith Olbermann uses Stewie during his "Factor Fiction" segment to mock him.

      Then again any of those voices on such a (what they would call) 'liberal and demorale' show would be ironic.
      • ShinRaTDR, on 11/16/2007, -0/+5"I has a falafel"
        He's a pedophile, not a lolcat.
  • JoeRandom, on 11/15/2007, -6/+144Still, MacFarlane—who also said he won't voice Family patriarch Peter Griffin, Brian the dog, and evil baby genius Stewie until the strike is over—implored Fox to scuttle the idea.

    They will be excellent episodes wont they.
    • thatsmyaibo, on 11/15/2007, -1/+35http://youtube.com/watch?v=thWnRMQaxms

      It will be like this...
      • lazersailer, on 11/15/2007, -0/+33:30 is exactly what could happen.
      • mynameiscece, on 11/16/2007, -0/+1that was awesome. it would suck if it happened in real life, but that clip was freakin hilarious
    • dpl_, on 11/15/2007, -1/+19The voice acting for these episodes has already been recorded actually:

      "As for the voices on the show, a source close to the production of Family Guy confirmed to TV.com that there won't be any Seth MacFarlane impersonators voicing Peter or any of the other characters. The voice work was recorded by the original actors many moons ago."

      http://www.tv.com/story/10455.html
      • drlha, on 11/15/2007, -0/+5Indeed, after all voice tracks are usually produced before animation begins, so that makes sense.
        • centran, on 11/15/2007, -0/+3don't the actors do "touch up" work after the animation though?
    • blackbeardtron, on 11/15/2007, -1/+63I like how Seth referred to this as "a colossal dick move."
    • op12, on 11/15/2007, -0/+11Seth also mentions how he's not currently under a long-term contract with Fox. Fox has a lot more to lose than he does right now, which is a good thing.

      MacFarlane also has another bit of leverage over 20th: He's been in "final talks" over a new deal with the studio for more than a year. He's been working under an interim agreement, but he says he doesn't have a signed long-term contract with the studio.

      "I'm technically in breach of nothing," he said.

      http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117975944.html?c ...
    • joegibes, on 11/15/2007, -0/+14Isn't Brian's voice his normal voice?
    • nphase, on 11/15/2007, -1/+5I'll watch it, only because I'm curious as to how bad it'll sound.
    • viewdrix, on 11/15/2007, -0/+1If people read the article, they'd realize that since the three episodes were "close to completion, but hadn't undergone a final pass yet," he has done the voices. He just hasn't had input on the final animation and/or edit.

      That's why they're only doing three. If they wanted to replace him as a voice actor, they could make more. It's not like they've only written three scripts, animated shows write months in advance as the animation takes a long time. It's just that these three episodes are near completion.
  • pedrovoltaire, on 11/15/2007, -143/+60family guy isn't funny... it's just one random interchangeable joke after another.
    • logicalnoise, on 11/15/2007, -32/+27pedrovoltaire isn't cool......he's just one random interchangeable comment after another.
      • pedrovoltaire, on 11/15/2007, -55/+5that's not true. my comments are neither random nor interchangeable. you're right about me not being cool. i'm hot.
        • dyranios2, on 11/15/2007, -2/+29"that's not true. my comments are neither random nor interchangeable."
          Should have stopped here
        • cababika799, on 11/15/2007, -3/+26Yeah, now you're gay on top of everything else.
          • browwiw, on 11/15/2007, -0/+17On top of a big pile of naked dudes.
        • browwiw, on 11/15/2007, -0/+16Hot for *****, that is.
          • themonkielives, on 11/16/2007, -5/+1OOHHH! SNAP DAWG!! You like owned him and *****. Homosexual insults are the most clever and creative insults ever, way to go! FAG!
        • Fracture98, on 11/15/2007, -0/+1Mate, Pedrovoltaire would be "hot" if you put 4 million volts through him!
          • pedrovoltaire, on 11/16/2007, -3/+1i eat 4 million volts for breakfast.
    • floridiot2, on 11/15/2007, -8/+48That's why it's funny.
    • bagelpirate, on 11/15/2007, -5/+22They may be random and interchangeable, but they are still jokes.
    • logicalnoise, on 11/15/2007, -4/+39also whats the matter with that? Stream of conciousness writing has been around for years. hell Monty Python is regarded as one of the best comedies ever(me included) on television and I dare youn to make sense of any episode.
      • terracottapai, on 11/15/2007, -4/+22Please don't compare Family Guy to Monty Python.
        They both have their merits but Python is LEAGUES ahead of Family Guy, especially in terms of form.
        Family Guy is just a basic framework of a story with a bunch of "you mean like the time I..." whereas Python is a true stream of consciousness format.
        • logicalnoise, on 11/15/2007, -3/+5I don't hold family guy in the same league but i mean how is "that's like this one time...." different from "and now for something completly different"?
          • terracottapai, on 11/15/2007, -0/+4"And now for something completely different" is used probably 20 times in the entire series, whereas Family Guy uses their device a dozen or more times in each show.
            That said, they aren't even the same device.
            "And now for something completely different" is almost always used as a transition, not as something to just go to some lame ass random joke and then pop back to the same scene.
            A new scene, a new concept, a new gag.
            With Family Guy, it's the same every time.
    • NJPENSO, on 11/15/2007, -14/+1Why are you getting dugg up?? That's not even the point goddammit....ugh, just forget it.
      • dasdef, on 11/15/2007, -2/+4then why did you click submit?
        • NJPENSO, on 11/15/2007, -3/+2To tell him and everyone else that it's not the point of the article.
    • marchaos, on 11/15/2007, -4/+24You stole that quote from Cartman, douchebag.
      • terracottapai, on 11/15/2007, -10/+2Pretty sure I was saying that before Cartman did..
      • pedrovoltaire, on 11/15/2007, -4/+2i was intending that to be obvious.
      • pedrovoltaire, on 11/15/2007, -4/+1holy crap, you're hot by the way! want to be friends?
        • marchaos, on 11/15/2007, -0/+4I only like guys that love Family Guy. Somehow I don't think you will be able to fulFILL me.
          • pedrovoltaire, on 11/16/2007, -1/+1my email address is pedro_voltaire@yahoo.com

            you'd have to move to Atlanta though. I have a good job.
          • mikesbaker, on 11/16/2007, -1/+1oh ***** did you really post your email to digg? you tard - prepare for spam
          • thechilipeppers, on 05/03/2008, -0/+0 pedrovoltaire, this is digg blogs not e-harmony
    • merdiesel, on 11/15/2007, -1/+8Just yesterday you were saying how lame Fight Club was...
      I'm now convinced pedrovoltaire is a woman.
      • pedrovoltaire, on 11/15/2007, -9/+1another one while we're at it is Kill Bill... just awful. your avatar frightens me!
      • eaterofpies, on 11/16/2007, -1/+0that's an insult to women. i happen to be one, and also a fan of fight club.
    • DiggzDE, on 11/15/2007, -3/+1I didn't know manatees could go on strike.
    • HypocriteDigg, on 11/15/2007, -1/+1You you're an idiot who uses buzz words that the media tell you to use. I bet you've also used dirty hippie, smug, and other dumbass labels that make no sense.
      • sherbertbones, on 11/15/2007, -1/+1It's from South Park you idiot
    • sherbertbones, on 11/15/2007, -1/+1It could be one of the worst shows on television. I always laugh whenever they try to satirize a topical event and it ends up being either a fart joke or something macabre. They'll never have the eloquence, ingenuity or clever wit that the Simpsons possessed; it's just middle school humor.
    • Fl4sh, on 11/16/2007, -0/+2You probably started thinking this after that episode of South Park. MORON!
    • wiggsdannyboy, on 11/16/2007, -0/+1Southpark is the better show, but that doesn't mean Family Guy isn't good for a laugh. It's like the difference between Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter.
      And yes, I know: lame.
    • Anzat, on 11/16/2007, -0/+1I agree. I don't say this very often, but Eric Cartman was right. Family Guy is just boring. They don't use any sophisticated types of humor like situational irony. South Park and the Simpsons and Monty Python especially used that all the time. Family Guy just spits out random objects which are supposedly inherently funny, but really aren't without the right setup.
    • mikesbaker, on 11/16/2007, -0/+1did you see the 100th episode and the first half of its clip show - lots of their best clips are relevant to the story line - like the clip where Stewie is beating Badly over the money he owes him. get an original idea for once
  • Error601, on 11/15/2007, -79/+20You people really need to get out more. It's a freaking TV show. It's not important.
    • CaptainNoPants, on 11/15/2007, -4/+53neither is anything that you like or find interesting.
      • BESTenemy, on 11/15/2007, -22/+3How about making something instead of passively relying on media for entertainment. Get off your fat ass and do something productive for once in a lifetime.
        • insane11, on 11/15/2007, -0/+15Yes because everyone knows that the only people who watch family guy are people who sit around all day and don't work.
        • OMGWTFROFLMAOx2, on 11/15/2007, -1/+8Yeah, like post insulting comments on Digg. That always works for me.
    • jazzmann04, on 11/15/2007, -2/+10Ok Error, what do you suggest I do on a Sunday night at 9:00 when everything's closed anyways and I have class on Monday mornings?
      • ashmael, on 11/15/2007, -8/+10Study?
        • kent1146, on 11/15/2007, -4/+7If you're studying on Sunday night in college, you're wasting your money and missing the point of being in college. It's like buying a Ferrari to drive at exactly the speed limit.
      • skatastrophy, on 11/15/2007, -1/+12Masturbate.
      • abuelos84, on 11/15/2007, -3/+6take your bong and watch family guy.
      • FatherVic, on 11/15/2007, -1/+2find a suitable vehicle for Ellen Cleghorne...
      • hockey, on 11/15/2007, -1/+1Play some video games like the rest of us.
        Man what is this country coming too. People on digg would rather watch tv than GAME!!!??
        /head asplode
    • cwilson, on 11/15/2007, -2/+11Neither is Digg, but yet we are here.
    • pabloD, on 11/15/2007, -0/+1Actually, it's *very* important, considering the issues on the table. The way that networks deal with content on the internet now will set precedents that will last for a long time, not only affecting the livelihoods of the people who create these shows, but the way that we as the viewing public will get to enjoy them. More importantly, it will set a precedent over what is considered proper remuneration for intellectual property on the internet, which (as I assume you understand since you're on digg) will probably become the main, if not only method to disseminate and consume media. This will eventually affect many other sectors aside from mere entertainment.
  • logicalnoise, on 11/15/2007, -37/+5lame, I've been catching every new episode this season(overall the season has been me but still f'n hilarious at times). Time to change things up.
  • NYC83, on 11/15/2007, -37/+204so macfarlane strikes. the manatees can still push their idea balls around the tank. aside from the the voices, there probably won't be much of a difference considering how far family guy has fallen off from the pre-cancellation seasons
    • DrJack, on 11/15/2007, -2/+24No dice. The manatees won't cross the picket lines.
    • LordStandley, on 11/15/2007, -19/+15In reference to that episode and not really your post I just have to say, I love South Park as much as the next guy.
      But calling a Family Guy nothing more than throwing together ideas ranging from nouns, places and settings from manatee's is a little reductive in thinking about what the show has to offer.
      You could think of South Park the same way, or any show for that matter.

      "On the next episode of South Park: Stan, kenny and kyle try to find answers to a complex issue in the most recent news all while battling implausible objects, humor and Cartman saying racists things."

      Breaking the show down to its most reductive form is retarded. Family Guy's hook is the flashbacks, much like South Park has hooks in each of their shows. That's what makes it funny, seeing what flashback or crazy side gag is going to be next. The family Guy is still hilarious and I really question anyone who loved it before and doesn't love t now. Come on, it hasn't changed that much if any.
      • tomz17, on 11/15/2007, -2/+10I disagree, either the episode quality went down dramatically after the first three seasons, or the gags just started getting forced and old... (Probably combination of both). In either case, I find that I just don't enjoy it nearly as much as I once used to!
        • InitialDMP5, on 11/15/2007, -1/+3you were also younger and that style of cartoon/humor that family guy presented was new a fresh. I own all of the DVDs and when i watch the first few seasons It is lacking a lot of the polish that the newer post cancellation shows have. Not to mention the animation was horrible in those episodes. There really is not that much of a difference. I think you are just looking at those episodes with rose colored lenses. They are nostalgic and you remember the good times you had watching them.
        • anachronaut, on 11/15/2007, -0/+3I abso-*****-lutely HATED Family Guy the first few times I tried to watch it back when it first started airing. I mean, I loathed it with a burning, intense passion. Those episodes from the first season are seriously lacking, and they come off as trying way too hard. I didn't watch Family Guy again until the third season, when I found it to be a great deal funnier. Now I'm a big fan of the show, but I still don't find the early episodes to be very good.
      • meetthescott, on 11/16/2007, -2/+1Family Guy is so incredibly far below South Park that they should not be mentioned in the same sentence.
    • fatdog789, on 11/15/2007, -11/+7Lord is right. Manatees pushing balls around would produce higher quality crap than the FG they've been making.
      McFarlane striking is probably the best thing that can happen to the show's quality.
    • Myonosken, on 11/15/2007, -4/+3Things picked up this Season a bit.
    • trimsheenapple, on 11/15/2007, -4/+4Amen to that. It always brings a tear to my eye when I remember the first three seasons and how great they were. And it always brings rage to my eyes when someone says "It's just as good as it use to be blah blah blah".
      • Nanite, on 11/15/2007, -1/+7You go into a rage when people say they think Family Guy is still good? You must be a blast at parties.
      • handsomehellvis, on 11/16/2007, -2/+2family guy is better than its ever been, those first 3 seasons are weaksauce compared to the new ones.
    • brjndr, on 11/15/2007, -2/+5An assistant took a ball out of the tank just before the strike, so the manatees aren't working either.
  • meshman, on 11/15/2007, -78/+18Good, he can stand out there and rot till he's broke. What a hypocrite. He begs Fox to bring the show back and then stands out there biting the hand that feeds him. Here's hoping Fox cancels the damned thing and doesn't renew it.
    • cablemodemguy, on 11/15/2007, -31/+9I agree- Seth just lost respect by joining the whiners, I mean writers.
    • typicalusername, on 11/15/2007, -1/+36First, I'm no Family Guy nut. But, MacFarlane never begged for anything. He had a decent re-run contract with Cartoon Network, and after the DVD sales took off, they contacted him for renewal. There was no SERIOUS grass roots effort, it's all FOX realizing that their shows suck.
      • BoneheadFarker, on 11/15/2007, -1/+1Yeah, and Fox also seriously ***** with the show after they brought it back. I don't think MacFarlane had much say, because it was very different from when it started out. There was something original about the first 3 seasons. After it came back, there was a lot more the of 80's TV show rip offs, "This is like that time when..." jokes, and generally not much more then that. It became very predictable. I stopped watching mid-way through season 4. It just wasn't as funny or interesting anymore. Though I do want to check out the Star Wars episode...
    • moofer, on 11/15/2007, -1/+9Yeah - you're right. Screw integrity by supporting your brethren in the industry. Support the networks while your comrades and co-workers are out sticking up for what they believe is right and fair.

      BTW.. He didn't beg Fox to bring the show back. The fans did, then Fox went knocking on his door. Not the other way around. Douchebag.
    • Matt2k, on 11/15/2007, -0/+5> Good, he can stand out there and rot till he's broke. What a hypocrite. He begs Fox to bring the show back and then stands out there biting the hand that feeds him.

      Seth isn't striking for the money, he's doing it for his writers. Its an integrity thing. Don't be afraid to be a ***** man and stand up for yourself.
      Regardless, he makes FOX more money than they make him.
  • Wiini, on 11/15/2007, -43/+11Maybe they should take their 150k+ a year salary (Lower-paid experienced sitcom writer) and get back to work...
    • OUChevelleSS, on 11/15/2007, -6/+9That's not what they get paid.
      • Wiini, on 11/15/2007, -4/+3Then what do they get paid? Entry and Experienced, and retiring... what do they get paid?
    • natedouglas, on 11/15/2007, -1/+18Holy *****! Writers get salaries now! That is ***** awesome! *runs off to inform his wife that the tough times are over*
    • firechill, on 11/15/2007, -1/+8LOL i'm pretty sure Seth gets paid just a little more than that.
    • mrxenon15999, on 11/15/2007, -2/+11Actually, half of the WGA members makes $30,000 or less a year. It's only the top guys who make the big $$$.
    • Wiini, on 11/15/2007, -2/+2For all you posting on here telling me they don't make money... why don't you back up your claim?

      http://www.venturacountystar.com/news/2007/oct/30/ ...

      "$70,000 per season to start

      A newcomer to TV's writing ranks earns about $70,000 per season for full-time work on a show. Veteran writers who move up to a story-editor position would get at least a low six-figure salary, with a "written by" credit on an hourlong script paying an additional $30,000 plus residuals."
      • scrimaxinc, on 11/15/2007, -1/+4The "newcomer" you're describing is probably someone in their mid 30s that has been struggling for money, working long hours, and doing PA bitch work for 10 years to move up the ladder. Now that you dug up one fun fact, how about you go looking for statistics regarding how many people graduate college and move right into that $70,000 /year spot.
        • Wiini, on 11/15/2007, -3/+1Um... that's not how it works. the burden of proof lies on you, not me. Your "it's this way and you just don't know it" argument doesn't work here.
  • Birdoftruth, on 11/15/2007, -41/+14Why would I wanna boycott this? Family Guy sucks ever since they brought it back. Maybe it will be better without him.
  • typicalusername, on 11/15/2007, -6/+136Seriously... I'm glad MacFarlane called it by exactly what it was "a dick move".
  • stronglikedan, on 11/15/2007, -28/+6Why not give them a chance? Why not see what an episode is like without S.M.? Wouldn't that make more sense?
    Either it will be better than an S.M. episode and everyone will be happy (except S.M.), or it will be worse and we will have reason to boycott.
    I say let's wait and see instead of cutting off our noses to spite our faces. It's too soon to cry "boycott".
    • Shipley, on 11/15/2007, -0/+1As the creator, writer, and star voice of 3 of the characters, I don't need to wait. Everything I like about Family Guy is because of Seth MacFarlane. And since fans rallied behind this show by buying the DVDs and watching the re-runs on Adult Swim, fans need to stick behind the show and keep it on track. "Giving them a chance" is not the issue, since these episodes are already written and mostly done, the issue is Fox screwing the only show worth watching on their lousy network.
      • blackbeardtron, on 11/15/2007, -0/+1House is good, and American Dad (Seth's other show). But yeah, other than these, Fox sucks.
    • moofer, on 11/15/2007, -0/+1Uh... cause it's Seth's show?
  • hydroplane, on 11/15/2007, -37/+5babbabuey babbabuey babbabuey
    • MALONN, on 11/15/2007, -1/+2Howard Stern's penis babbabuey babbabuey!
  • AllYourBase3, on 11/15/2007, -49/+21Family Guy sucks.
    • hydrodev, on 11/15/2007, -2/+11You know What....You Suck!
    • ghunt, on 11/15/2007, -4/+1preach it brother.
    • t1m0j5, on 11/15/2007, -1/+2What you don't get the jokes? sorry baby.
      • AllYourBase3, on 11/15/2007, -2/+1jokes? jokes are supposed to be funny. "hey lois remember that time blah blah blah....flashes to scene of nightrider ***** optimus prime" HOW HILARIOUS
  • URnotheonly1, on 11/15/2007, -7/+23Yeah, Seth dose not own family guy anymore, he sold his rights to that
  • kushed, on 11/15/2007, -16/+16Too late, been boycotting fox and the advertisers for well over a year.
  • mhensh01, on 11/15/2007, -5/+41Manatees must not be in the WGA...
    • empeethree, on 11/15/2007, -0/+11they are in the H2O
    • demodawid, on 11/16/2007, -0/+5Do you think Seth MacFarlane is stupid? he took a ball with him.
    • asurroca, on 11/16/2007, -1/+1I think they are... but the studios still have AWESOME-O...
  • BohicaTwentyTwo, on 11/15/2007, -26/+11I for one welcome our new Fox overlords.
    • Corneileus, on 11/15/2007, -1/+3Simpson reference? On an article about Family Guy? Magnificent!
  • toxicityj, on 11/15/2007, -8/+18who cares. I'm content with the reruns I see on Adult Swim every night.
  • SavageBlackCat, on 11/15/2007, -17/+5The temp voice-overs are:

    Stewie will be Samuel L Jackson
    Quagmire will be PeeWee Herman
  • ashmon, on 11/15/2007, -18/+5Ok. This year, I officially won't watch any more Family Guy. Just like the other 30 years of my life.
    • browwiw, on 11/15/2007, -3/+4Replace "Family Guy" with "have sex with a woman" and that statement would make more sense.
      • FatherVic, on 11/15/2007, -4/+1wow. do you just imply that 30 yr olds who watch cartoons get laid more than others...?

        Do people who play "Magic: The Gathering" also stand a better chance of getting laid? 'cause you seem to be the expert on who can get laid.
        • browwiw, on 11/15/2007, -2/+3I didn't say you weren't getting laid. I just said you weren't getting laid by women.
  • litolist, on 11/15/2007, -7/+91Maybe they'll do what South Park did with Chef and piece sound clips together for the voices. That would ROCK!
    • natedouglas, on 11/15/2007, -2/+22"I wanna -- MAKE LOVE to ya; chillun!"
      • timusca, on 11/15/2007, -1/+7Actually, "I wanna make love to... your *****, children!"
    • halobender, on 11/15/2007, -3/+8That would only rock if SM was a Sceintologist.
    • 5urr3al5am, on 11/15/2007, -6/+1THAT would be awesome! I wounder if they could really pull it off?!
    • hollygolitely, on 11/15/2007, -11/+2Yeah, because Family Guy hasn't ripped off South Park enough. Might as well leave no doubt that FG is, was and will always be painfully unfunny derivative garbage.
  • monsterofNone, on 11/15/2007, -35/+5these will be the only episodes i'd be inclined to watch. seth macfarlane is an unfunny waste of flesh.
  • smackafiyah, on 11/15/2007, -5/+36Heh heh, alllllllrrriiiiiiiiight.........no no its NOT ALRIGHT!
    • blackmage439, on 11/15/2007, -0/+11Hey Quagmire, isn't there supposed to be an "O" in country?
  • vonfook, on 11/15/2007, -3/+14[gasp] who's gonna rip on Meg? This is terrible.
    • FatherVic, on 11/15/2007, -3/+3Rosie O'donnell

      She is fat, ugly, lesbian, and no one cares what she says anyway.
    • girldrinkdrunk, on 11/15/2007, -0/+0[gasp] who's gonna rip on Meg?

      Thpht!
    • firechill, on 11/15/2007, -1/+11Who's meg? :|
  • chillmandan, on 11/15/2007, -41/+21Last time I checked, Family Guy wasn't funny. South Park pretty much debunked every joke they ever do.
    • hydrodev, on 11/15/2007, -2/+5South park did not "debunk" every joke they do. They actually support family guy. watch the episode again.. TURDS!
      P.S. South park is gospel. TURDS!
      • 5urr3al5am, on 11/15/2007, -5/+3just because one character says "I like FG", doesn't mean that they supported it. They also said that FG shows are created completely by chance and therefor lack any sort of comedic value.. might as well throw chips in the air and base a show on how they land on the floor... to an 'artist' thats one of the worst insults ever... TURD!
    • Ghstfce, on 11/15/2007, -2/+4This coming from someone who enjoys gay and fart jokes. Everyone has their own opinions I guess. There are those that like Family guy, those that like the Simpsons and their recycled jokes, and some that like South Park. One person may like all three or none at all. Doesn't make any other better than the rest.
    • MalDON, on 11/15/2007, -4/+3I can't stand South Park.
    • dhVyse, on 11/15/2007, -6/+5I'm sorry, but South Park will NEVER be as funny as family guy.

      It's all about wit, not about how vulgar you can be or how many people you can piss off.
      • SeriouslyButNo, on 11/15/2007, -3/+4FAMILY GUY ABOUT WIT!?! HAHAHAHAH!
        • dhVyse, on 11/15/2007, -2/+2Family guy is FAR more witty then Southpark KTHX GG.
          • jmpeagle, on 11/15/2007, -0/+2troll
          • DarkDragon, on 11/16/2007, -0/+1How so? SP creates a plot line with jokes centered around a particular subject and all build on the plot line; FG jokes all have the form "Thats just like that time my uncle (NAME) Griffin did (something)"
    • banmaster, on 11/15/2007, -6/+3Just like EVERY joke in South park has allready been done by The Simpsons!
      • Btzarro, on 11/15/2007, -1/+1nononono,Its every joke the simpsons has done has been on family guy
        All that Fg is making you retarded.
    • bjs3171, on 11/15/2007, -0/+3it's a different style of humor, that's all. South Park is very topical in their subject matter, and try to offend as many people as possible, while Family Guy is absurdist and non-sequitor. and they try to piss off as many people as possible. I love both of them.
    • defectDS, on 11/15/2007, -0/+1You must not have caught the whole irony of that episode(s). A tank of manatees with little subject balls? They pulled a family guy all on their own!
    • draebor, on 11/15/2007, -3/+1Yeah, quit hatin' on Family Guy... even rtards need a show they can understand.
      • amoirae, on 11/16/2007, -0/+2You're thinking of King of the Hill.
    • bolognium, on 11/15/2007, -0/+3I didn't know jokes could be debunked..
  • Ub3rg33k, on 11/15/2007, -5/+52How the hell is this even going to be possible? He does half the main characters.
    • InitialDMP5, on 11/15/2007, -0/+1and most of the other voices are writers on the show as well. I think the only two that don't write are Seth Green and Mila Kunis. Seth Green does write for Roboto Chicken so he is already on strike. Mila (Megs voice) is the only person that could do voices, but I don't think she would cross the picket lines. Besides she can strike with them. She has her money from That 70's Show and her other ventures.
      • Vapor17, on 11/15/2007, -1/+1Why could she strike with them, is she a writer for That 70's show?
    • madfrogurt, on 11/16/2007, -0/+1He said the episodes were "near completion," meaning the voice work was completed and probably the sound mix and final edits were needed. The final step is the OK by Seth, which Fox might be skipping. The quality of the episode probably won't be any different from anything this season.
  • firechill, on 11/15/2007, -3/+22How could they do the show without Seth's voices. No family guy fan would ever buy that.. what a shame.
    • merdiesel, on 11/15/2007, -2/+5I'm not going to watch it on Fox, but I definitely will be downloading it.. It's going to be hilarious to hear what hacks they get to do the voice overs.
    • Btzarro, on 11/15/2007, -9/+2'Family guy fans' - They prefer to be called 13 year olds.
  • thebrokenlight, on 11/15/2007, -2/+101This does not sparkle.
    • Damian91, on 11/15/2007, -1/+13Lets burn it down....down to the ground.
    • useraccess, on 11/15/2007, -0/+3Nor does it please!
    • CaptainNoPants, on 11/15/2007, -3/+1I duno how I feel about last nights episode. It had its moments, but overall it was pretty weak IMO. This season as a whole still rocks.
      • DewCrew88, on 11/16/2007, -0/+0last nights episode was *****, they went back to the original episode designs
  • seanhive, on 11/15/2007, -5/+17LOL, ***** that *****. Though it seems pointless to say you're "boycotting" the show, you can be sure I won't watch it. Which I guess is the point anyway.

    Seth McFarlane IS Family Guy.
    • rasbill, on 11/15/2007, -2/+2Seth McFarlane: What's this? This is the same toy surprise I got last time! I can't work under these conditions. And without me there is no family guy. I am family guy!

      Fox: where back from making the new family guy episode
  • Hetman, on 11/15/2007, -19/+10Here is the thing. Seth did not have to go on strike. The rules of the strike said that animators were not affected. He made this choice himself. If this new episode is good I could care less who wrote it.
    • draven_b4u, on 11/15/2007, -0/+11he did because he is the principal writer.. as well, this will affect him because of one of the disputes the writers are having is with DVD sales. think about how many family guy DVD's have been sold over the years. also he is speaking up about a cause he feels stongly about.. if he didn't and went back to work... a lot of people would call him a hypocrite . i for one support the guy.
    • ghunt, on 11/15/2007, -6/+4He went on strike to support other writers, Maybe he will learn how to make a funny show while he's picketing.
  • CroMag, on 11/15/2007, -25/+4This is newsworthy.

    Who cares about this except assholes?
    • hydrodev, on 11/15/2007, -0/+8You took the time to comment....*****.
      • KrazyOne, on 11/15/2007, -0/+4Amen to that. If you don't care, then leave.
    • TheLoneHoot, on 11/15/2007, -0/+5check out his comment history - no surprises. I get the feeling he stays holed up in a cabin with a bible, a pig, and posters of Bill Orally. Takes trips to the library to troll Digg on the intertubenets.
  • UltraMegaFilms, on 11/15/2007, -21/+8Now that MacFarlane isn't involved, maybe this show will pull it's head out of it's own ass and start being funny...
  • LordRedSnake, on 11/15/2007, -20/+7Who really cares? The show has been lame since it came back anyway. Big disappointment.
  • Quicksilver4648, on 11/15/2007, -14/+8Don't I boycott fox all the time, I haven't watching anything on their networks in a loooooooong time. Who honestly puts prime time programming on a Sunday at 8 and 9 P.M. when their is school the next day, half of their audience is busy doing other stuff.
    • choopie911, on 11/15/2007, -0/+15Because most of their viewers arent 8 years old and dont have to be in bed before 9pm... 8/9pm isn't exactly late.
    • jwaycuilis, on 11/15/2007, -0/+3"Who honestly puts prime time programming on a Sunday"?
      Did you ever wonder why the Superbowl is Sunday night? Sunday night is the primest of the prime times.
      Most of the flagship network shows are on Sunday night.
    • MikeXpop, on 11/15/2007, -0/+2Because Family Guy's main audience is the 18-34 set, not the 12-18 set. No network puts big draws on Friday and Saturday nights (when there isn't work or school), because so much of their audience is out-of-home for the weekend. CBS's big night is Monday, NBC's is Thursday, ABC's is Wednesday, and FOX's is Sunday.
    • nodatax0, on 11/15/2007, -0/+1Prime time programming on Sunday nights (7-11pm) is a major audience draw. In fact, Sunday night is one of the MOST POPULAR nights for primetime programming. People are home because they have work on Monday morning...and what better way to spend your evening after eating dinner then with good ol' television. Why do you think Fox has kept the Simpson's in the 8P time period for so many years?
  • eric513, on 11/15/2007, -20/+3Good, i'm glad. That guy is about the most annoying muther effer on the face of this planet (with an ego about that size too)...
  • chijim70, on 11/15/2007, -9/+16Seths talent is the main reason I watch the show... without him it is nothing.
  • draven_b4u, on 11/15/2007, -1/+19just what we need another Fake Fred (for those of you baffled... Fred Flintstone reference)

    also, remember what happened to Ren and Stimpy when their creator Jim K left??? Crappy animation, different voices and horrible wannabe scripts.
    • ghunt, on 11/15/2007, -2/+1I love Ren and Stimpy, but the animation was always crappy.
    • banmaster, on 11/15/2007, -0/+6It got way worse (and less violent) after KJ got the shaft!
    • Synn, on 11/15/2007, -0/+4Actually, I believe John K. was fired from Ren and Stimpy.
    • InitialDMP5, on 11/15/2007, -0/+4this is just like when Jim Henson died, now we've got wrong sounding muppets!
      • amoirae, on 11/16/2007, -1/+1Or when Mel Blanc died and Bugs Bunny started sounding weird.
  • DasCrackbaby, on 11/15/2007, -5/+15I can find a lot more reasons to boycott FOX other than a damn cartoon.
    • TheLoneHoot, on 11/15/2007, -2/+4True, but this is yet another reason they suck beyond their "news" programming.
    • samcrut, on 11/15/2007, -0/+2Fox is generally OK. Fox NEWS is Satan's pulpit. There's a difference.
  • nesstheking1, on 11/15/2007, -11/+5Personally I'm already boycotting the show, have been since it came back...
  • deaddogdays, on 11/15/2007, -11/+8If/When the writers do get a raise, where will the money come from? My best guess is that it will be translated to (a) more frequent or longer commercials, (b) Increased prices of DVDs, or (c) a more tedious, consumer laced internet viewing experience; I really doubt it will come out of the coffers of the network.

    Every one of these options are foul to me. Personally, i bet there are tons of great writers would are dying for their shot to write for a cable/network tv show. Cutting out on their job mid-season and hurting the viewers is not the answer to this situation. Look what a similar strike did for hockey. I can't help be feel the need to stand behind the network this time.
    • mrxenon15999, on 11/15/2007, -0/+6or (d) the studios give the writers a cut of the profits. Fact is, no other business gets away with the kind of accounting practices that entertainment gets away with. It's structured so that very few projects make an official profit. That is why no one wants cut of the profits, it's basically accepting nothing. Creative accounting has helped create this problem - that's why ppl in jewels and designer gowns and tuxes are claiming poverty when it comes time to divy up the spoils.
    • cbrunet, on 11/15/2007, -1/+6It appears my friend that you do no understand what the writers are asking for. They are looking to be paid residuals on "new media", AKA, the Internet. They want to be paid exactly what they are paid from DVD sales. Is that so much to ask? The thing is is that the Internet is going to be the ONLY source of shows in say 10 years, so why wouldn't they want to secure that? Imagine in 10-15 years that the television doesn't exist anymore, and everyone is not only on broadband, but Fibre, so everything is distributed online. Its exactly like television, but because its over the internet, the powers that be can avoid paying anyone anything for their work.
      • Defuser, on 11/15/2007, -0/+0It appears, my friend, that you're talking out of your ass. Read the Screen Writers of America's "Basic Minimum Agreement". Notice that they're ALREADY BEING PAID for Internet sales and downloads. The strike is NOT about Internet Residuals, because THEY'RE ALREADY GETTING PAID FOR THAT. What they're striking over is their desire to be paid EVERY TIME a show is re-broadcast via digital media. What does that mean, you ask? Let's say you missed "Lost" on Monday, and want to watch it via streaming video on Tuesday. Even though the writers were already paid for Monday's showing, they want to be RE-paid for Tuesday's streaming video.
        • themonkielives, on 11/16/2007, -0/+0And if fox re-broadcast it on Tuesday after the original monday airing they'd get paid for that currently, why should it be any different because your viewing it on the internet?
    • GnomeSerial, on 11/15/2007, -2/+3You made some really good points then stupid fell out. They had to leave it was a UNION. Do you even know why there striking because they don't get a ***** penny from your precious iTunes store. Oh wait, i bet you pirate you the show and won't agree with the 5 dollar increase that will most likely happen. bc its to much to ask for your 8 cents instead of 4 cents. GOD DAMN IT THEY WROTE THE GOD DAMNED *****!
      • DryMaltExtract, on 11/15/2007, -2/+3Yeah? I'm a programmer, I work for a salary, they work for a salary. Long after I find a new job the company I work for will still be using my *****. I WROTE IT (for them) I WANT RESIDUALS!
      • guru42101, on 11/15/2007, -0/+0Big difference is the fact that you get paid a salary. Most writers don't get paid a salary. They are paid based on how well the items they write perform. It would be similar to the company you write software saying "We'll give you 5k for this piece of software you spent 6 months working on and for every user we sell it to we'll give you $0.10" Now the problem is that the verbiage that they're pushing in the contact states that the 10 cents is only per shrink wrapped box and doesn't cover OEM, downloads, or future releases including minor revisions (v1.01+).
    • banmaster, on 11/15/2007, -1/+0Well where does the money go from the new-media content systems like ad-supported web-episodes that the media conglomerates are now pushing?
      The creators of the content sure as hell don't get any residuals from this sort of content, even though advertising is being sold.
      Its NOT the viewers that are hurting, its the writers who are being totally ripped off by the networks and media companies, the same companies who are repackaging content, adding advertisements, and making additional money from the content without passing a single dime on to the creators.
    • deaddogdays, on 11/15/2007, -4/+0I think you guys are taking my comment the wrong way. I think they should be compensated for their work, but the fact stands that any compensation they receive will negatively effect the consumer. In my line of work, providing the consumer with the best possible product is the goal. I'm sure the entertainment business has horrible accounting practices and that I'm completely uneducated about them; but much like any other industry the overhead is translated directly to the consumer. Depending on the scenario, I might not mind the changed (IE - 1 extra commercials per two hours), but given the option (or chance to speak my opinion about it) I will speak out against it.
      • aftk2, on 11/15/2007, -0/+1Actually, whether that increase in price gets put onto the consumer or the producer depends on exactly how elastic the demand for the show good is. Increase in costs for producing/acquiring fuel? Costs get passed on directly the consumer, because the consumer clearly needs fuel enough to pay outlandish prices. Therefore the demand for fuel is inelastic.

        But a TV show?
    • onebadoman, on 11/15/2007, -0/+2deaddogdays...this isn't a "raise" for the writer's in the same sense that you would get a raise for flipping burgers, it's an increase in their residuals for DVD's and getting paid more than NOTHING (which is currently what they get) on new media (this means episodes available for viewing on the internet). As of right now writers get no residuals for episodes shown on network websites. Despite the fact that they are simply reruns on demand through the internet...the writer doesn't see one cent of the advertising revenue generated by online episode viewing. The fact is the money doesn't come out of anyone's pocket other than the millionaire executives and producers who are reaping the profit of online media without giving any share of it to the writers. The money comes from the profit. If you want to complain about something...complain about the executives and producers who want to keep their average 20 million dollar salary while the average writer makes 200,000 a year...and while 200,000 may seem like a decent salary...these writer's mostly live in LA and NY because that's where the work is...and a 200,000 salary is like a 60,000 salary in the average town. Get the facts straight before you criticize even one tidbit of this writer's strike.
      • DamnMan, on 11/15/2007, -0/+1200k is not like 60k "in an average town" the cost of living in LA or NY over some place like say, Denver is not 200% more expensive. But that's not even the guys point.
        Sure all the profits from "new media" are going into the pockets of the execs and producers without a dime to the writers. However you have to be one of the most naive people in the world to honestly believe said producers and execs would pay out of their pockets when they CAN just add more commercials or charge an extra dollar on iTunes. Its not a matter of where the money SHOULD come from. its a matter of where we know the money WILL come from. Our own pockets.

        The writers are getting the shaft sure, but the point is still valid that we will ultimately end up getting screwed over it. Not that the writers are to blame, but they are going to be the catalyst.
  • ghunt, on 11/15/2007, -18/+5Seth McFarlane blows
  • maxsunset, on 11/15/2007, -10/+2Weak sauce.
  • r00tus3r, on 11/15/2007, -3/+2What's that, act as normal you say? Can do!
    • deaddogdays, on 11/15/2007, -0/+0So you (and everyone else who replied) believe that there are executes who stockpile gross amounts of show revenue for their own personal wealth (not to further the survival of the network in a competitive environment) and that these self-profiting executives are going to increase the amount of money that writers receive (whether you call it a raise or not) while decreasing the amount they receive? I don't see it happening... Anyway you look at it, it's coming from the consumer's pocket or the amount of service the consumer receives. This is the limit to the scope of my comment.

      I think we are disagreeing the the ideology of the whole thing. I see the whole picture as a consumer. Sure, I understand that people are being compensated unfairly. To me there is no great injustice, in the grand scheme of things currently going on in the world. If you don't like the terms you're working under, acquire a new job with the stipulations that you require and abandon your current one. I really resent the approach that was used.
  • whatthefu, on 11/15/2007, -3/+47Is anyone else interested to see just HOW THE ***** they do the voices and delivery?
    • eatsushi, on 11/15/2007, -2/+4I might watch it just for that, b/c I don't know how it'll be Family Guy without the character voices.
      • musicbear, on 11/16/2007, -0/+1ummm yes it will... the voices are already done... as been said... oh about .... 1000 times in the comments already... does no one actually read anything they want to comment on?
    • bjs3171, on 11/15/2007, -3/+1they're clearly old un-aired episodes.
      • davewashere, on 11/15/2007, -0/+1How many un-aired episodes do they have? Also, those un-aired episodes would be with Seth MacFarlane, since he would have been the guy who wrote much of the material and did most of the voices. I don't think they'd be saying they were doing the show without MacFarlane if they were just airing an un-aired episode. How exactly woud they be without MacFarlane in that case? They don't need him to push the magic button that broadcasts the show to your television set.
    • banmaster, on 11/15/2007, -2/+2Probably like how they did that South Park episode after Issac Hayes threw a hissy fit and quit coz his precious Scientology was exposed for the crock of cult worshiping ***** that it was.
      (In case you didn't know, they just cherry picked words and phrases from previous episodes and reused them to make Chief into a pedophile).
      • dafragsta, on 11/15/2007, -0/+1Same when the actress who played Tony's mom died on The Sopranos.
    • tavisjohn, on 11/15/2007, -1/+3They could always try to do the Silent trick,like M*A*S*H did...
    • dijital, on 11/15/2007, -0/+12Did anybody actually read the article? The next three shows are basically done, with the exception of a 'final pass'. They're not using other voices or voice actors. And it IS a colossal dick move.
      • InitialDMP5, on 11/15/2007, -0/+3exactly, how an animated series works is like this. Step 1 write the shooting script. Step 2. Record the voices. Step 3. Animate story boards to the recorded voices. Step 4. Send keyframe animation to Korea for the in betweens and color. Step 5. Review the episode and re- record voices if necessary. So these episodes are at Step 5, which would be the "final pass" So they are technically done, just lacking that final stamp of approval by the writers. And I think they deserve that as it is their work and their names going out there.
    • blackbeardtron, on 11/15/2007, -1/+4Look at some of the comments above. They aren't doing voice work. The work they're doing is just finishing up some post production work for episodes that are nearly complete. The voice acting was done months ago.
    • Punisher2K, on 11/15/2007, -1/+2It will be like new Fred who sounded nothing like old Fred. Godam Flintstones all over again.
      • TylerDurden0, on 11/16/2007, -0/+1The character Meg was changed from the first two seasons as well.
  • nicko68, on 11/15/2007, -18/+25It's like that time when the show used to be funny...
  • Nibble, on 11/15/2007, -0/+0http://duggmirror.com/
  • veriix, on 11/15/2007, -4/+4Man, they must have seen the last 15 seconds of the 100th episode "special" (and by special, I mean clip show...which isn't special at all)
    • whatchokesbegin, on 11/15/2007, -0/+3You do know, the clip show wasn't the 100th episode, right? It was after the clip show.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 175 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.