“Family Guy” may come back – hope for “Firefly?”

According to this TV Shows on DVD article, The Family Guy has been selling so well on DVD that it may get resurrected as a TV series. When I read that this morning, I thought “Neat, but not Bureau 42 stuff.” It hit me later today; the network considering this action is the same network that cancelled Firefly, and all episodes of that show to date are being released on DVD on December 9. It seems reasonable to assume the same logic applies: strong DVD sales might bring the show back to life. I say to you: Do YOUR CHRISTMAS SHOPPING HERE!

14 replies on ““Family Guy” may come back – hope for “Firefly?””

  1. y42 says:

    /.
    Many people on dlashdot pointed that out too…

    We can only hope.

  2. GrimSean says:

    The Problem
    The Problem that I see with this is that Family Guy is a cartoon – no sets, therefore relatively cheap to produce. Firefly on the other hand, had all those very large sets and visual effects, so it might be slightly more difficult for it to be granted a reprieve.

    I’ll have my fingers crossed, however, as I purchase my set.

    • y42 says:

      Re: The Problem

      The Problem that I see with this is that Family Guy is a cartoon –
      no sets, therefore relatively cheap to produce.

      Cartoons are very expensive to produce (if you shoot for a minimum of
      quality). You have to pay an army of artists to draw every single one of
      the thousands and thousands of drawings. They have their inbetweening
      done by koreans working for cheaps, but its still costly.

      Not that firefly was cheap…you got what you paid for with that show : )

      • antihero says:

        Re: The Problem
        I don’t actually see the cheapness being the deciding factor… actually, I think it’s just easier. Instead of having to round up specific actors, rebuild all the sets (assuming they’ve even been struck, of course), etc, you can start drawing with voice talent that is, first off, probably fairly easy to get back to work, and secondly, easily replaced. It’s for these reasons that I think it’s much more likely that a cartoon could do this than a live show.

  3. Daemonik says:

    Direct to DVD
    I wonder if it’d be economically viable for Mutant Enemy to partner with Coke or some other outfits and release Firefly episodes directly to DVD. If enough people buy the DVD’s they can show confirmed advertising numbers rather than the guestimates that TV networks make.

    It’s a thought.

    • Timeshredder says:

      Re: It’s a thought

      I wonder if it’d be economically viable for Mutant Enemy to partner with Coke or some other outfits and release Firefly episodes directly to DVD. If enough people buy the DVD’s they can show confirmed advertising numbers rather than the guestimates that TV networks make.

      That’s an interesting, unlikely idea, which unfortunately suggests a lot of other far-fetched ways of making Firefly profitable enough that it will fly once more:

      1. Jayne sports a different “product placement” t-shirt each week.

      2.Each episode is simulcast with “Star Whores,” a “pay-per-view” feature that permits you to follow Inara as she entertains her clients.

      3. Special eps crossover with Enterprise, which remains, against all logic, profitable. It’s not as though B&B have been much bothered by continuity. Fans would place bets on the results of individual character conflicts.

      4. Run the new episodes in sequence.

      • Daemonik says:

        Re: It’s a thought

        I wonder if it’d be economically viable for Mutant Enemy to partner with Coke or some other outfits and release Firefly episodes directly to DVD. If enough people buy the DVD’s they can show confirmed advertising numbers rather than the guestimates that TV networks make.

        That’s an interesting, unlikely idea, which unfortunately suggests a lot of other far-fetched ways of making Firefly profitable enough that it will fly once more:

        1. Jayne sports a different “product placement” t-shirt each week.

        2.Each episode is simulcast with “Star Whores,” a “pay-per-view” feature that permits you to follow Inara as she entertains her clients.

        3. Special eps crossover with Enterprise, which remains, against all logic, profitable. It’s not as though B&B have been much bothered by continuity. Fans would place bets on the results of individual character conflicts.

        4. Run the new episodes in sequence.

        That’s a little disingenuous, Timeshredder. There’s no reason that a DVD couldn’t ‘lock in’ a 10 minute block of ads at the start of the disk, much like broadcast television plays 2 minutes of ads out of every 12. In fact, I think I’d like it better since once the ads are over the show could play uninterupted. Also, be realistic, television shows exist to get you to watch the ads, without which all television would be pay-per-view or government supported drek.

        As for #2, sex sells so why not loosen up the language and clothes SO LONG AS IT DOESN’T EFFECT THE STORY!!. Juding by Oz, Carnivale, Six Feet Under and other premium cable shows it can be done as an enhancement rather than a crutch (Enterprise).

        As regards #3, Enterprise is profitable because it’s a ‘name’ property and because of that name advertisers can be charged a high rate. Advertisers know that poeple will watch Enterprise, good or bad, because it’s Star Trek and as long as they don’t physically urinate on Rodenberry’s corpse on live TV, people will watch it.

        #4, see #3. Firefly was a risk, a new unknown commodity without a built-in audience. The premise was a stretch for the average viewer and like many shows that develop a cult following, it’s quirky aspects wouldn’t allow it to build an audience fast enough for the network to justify (under their terms) keeping it on the air. Personally, I think that the industry could do with less statistical analysis and show more patience in developing new properties, but then I don’t run a network.

        • Timeshredder says:

          Re: It’s a thought

          Seriously, I couldn’t see it happening because most people would skip the ads. It’s one thing to put movie-related commercials at the front of a DVD or video, and another to get sponsors to put ads that they know most people will never see as a key element of financing a show. Just my opinion.

          As for the rest– Yes, obviously, commercial television has to sell, sex can actually make sense in the context of a show, Trek has name recognition, and Fox might’ve done nicely with Firefly if they’d bothered to wait for the audience to build a little, and if they’d handled the original episodes intelligently. My handling of those particular topics here was intended as a joke.

        • Cymor says:

          Re: It’s a thought

          As regards #3, Enterprise is profitable because it’s a ‘name’ property and because of that name advertisers can be charged a high rate. Advertisers know that poeple will watch Enterprise, good or bad, because it’s Star Trek and as long as they don’t physically urinate on Rodenberry’s corpse on live TV, people will watch it.

          Urinating on Rodenberry’s corpse would probably be a better plot than most Enterprise episodes.

      • TwistyHat says:

        Re: It’s a thought

        That’s an interesting, unlikely idea,

        Never the less there have been talk (from the producers) about making a season of “24” straight to DVD to see if it would float.

        • y42 says:

          Re: It’s a thought

          That’s an interesting, unlikely idea,

          Never the less there have been talk (from the producers) about making a
          season of “24” straight to DVD to see if it would float.

          Someone is bound to try it…I just hope the quality won’t be “direct to
          video” quality when they do. Because you just know that they’ll blame
          the format and not the cheapness if they do and it fails.

          Ya know, I thought it was weird and cute in ST:TNG when they
          mentioned that television had died in the middle of the 21st
          century…now I think it is likely.

          • GrimSean says:

            Re: It’s a thought

            Ya know, I thought it was weird and cute in ST:TNG when they
            mentioned that television had died in the middle of the 21st
            century…now I think it is likely.

            I agree. There are very few shows that I still watch on TV, and half the time I’m at work so I just end up downloading them a day or so later.

            There’s also the fact that I only have a 13″ TV, versus my 21″ monitor (which is in the shop just now, but I will hopefully have back soon) so I would actually prefer the DVD collections to watch – it just looks that much better.

            • Timeshredder says:

              Re: It’s a thought

              Predictions that we’ll eventually just watch the shows we like online do not seem too far-fetched.

              • y42 says:

                Re: It’s a thought

                Predictions that we’ll eventually just watch the shows we like online
                do not seem too far-fetched.

                But would they still produce them if they don’t have total controll of the
                medium?

Comments are closed.