“There's a difference between finding a formula that works and pandering to the 18-49 demographic with the exact same thing over and over again. He has three shows, three identical formulas and has generated billion dollars of income. Now he turns to the big screen with a concept he's done in three previous projects -- featuring himself as the voice of Ted, which sounds exactly like Peter Griffin. MacFarlane's short-lived live action sitcom on FOX , The Winner, was actually pretty good and didn't feature his tired trademarks. I get it. He likes to make money. His "Cavalcade of Cartoon Comedy" was sponsored by Burger King and Priceline. While I may be in the minority, as evidenced by all these comments and ratings for new and syndicated episodes of Family Guy, isn't there more honor and artistic merit in doing something "different" than relying solely on a gimmick?”
cotter on Apr 10, 2012 at 12:43:32
“Stay in the minority, I'll repeat my comment You hit the mark, that demographic is too generous 15-17 maybe. When you attack the publics comedy staples for the past 15 years, they get angry. Honor and artistic mertit do not pay the bills”
BettyFox on Apr 10, 2012 at 10:49:20
“just to add to my last reply.. You can't center MacFarlane out for relying on gimmicks, when so many other artists rely on it as well... and only that....
With all that being said, it's not three shows, it's 2. The Cleveland Show got cancelled and another season of American Dad is up in the air....satisfied??”
BettyFox on Apr 10, 2012 at 10:46:40
“All valid points; however I could say the same thing of any prime time sitcom, animated or live action. The writers and creators of 'How I Met Your Mother' are pretty much the same group that wrote 'Friends,' and they're using the same formula again.
As for the "Cavalcade of Cartoon Comedy" being sponsored by Burger King and Priceline, you can't separate the advertising industry from the entertainment industry these days. I'm sure there's more behind it then just wanting to make money from placing a few Burger King and Priceline ads. It's just not that simple. As for Ted featuring his trademark 'gimmicks', this is Seth's first feature film. Of course he's going to stick with what works for his first go at it. He's testing the waters, gaining experience. A feature film is much different to produce than a prime time animated sitcom.
The point I was trying to make with my earlier comment was at least Seth MacFarlane ventures into other projects, outside comedy, to maintain his (artistic) integrity. He's a multifaceted individual with different artistic talents; some low brow others classy and timeless. Seth MacFarlane he tries to offer something different for everyone, while still satisfying his love for bathroom humour and all things liberal arts. His animated sitcoms is what "broke him into the scene" if I may, however he is just starting to branch out because of the connections, money and know how he's gained through his experiences with his animated sitcoms.”
“I saw her on Fallon a few nights ago and your review really wants me to check this book out. It seems like she pulled a Cheri O'Teri and kind of vanished after being on "SNL." I feel bad for her for getting 86'ed from "30 Rock," but I can't imagine anyone else BUT Jane Krakowski now.”
“You're right. Roger Ebert is still writing reviews because he's still salty over Beyond the Valley of the Dolls and hopes to impress the Orwell-esque "Guardians of Money" in giving him one more shot!”
BlackJAC on Apr 6, 2012 at 08:11:22
“And Blake Snyder, who's considered a screenwriting genius by everyone in the game, wrote Stop! Or My Mom Will Shoot!; what's your point apart from trying to justify the inability to turn your depth of knowledge into something palatable?”
“Because that's all Kim Kardashian is; an unfortunate genius who has built an empire by employing easily marketable tabloid fodder, broadly popular reality shows and an idolarty fetish and fascination of athletes.”
“Why did you put my name in quotes like you're implying that's not my real name?”
mat212 on Apr 5, 2012 at 15:56:40
“Who me? Fun?”
LikeaRollingStone on Apr 5, 2012 at 11:21:07
“Come on, Chris. We all know your real name is Steve MacFarlane, Seth's insanely jealous evil twin.
And when the networks failed to pick up your animated pilot for "Family Gal," with Kristin Chenoweth voicing the wise-cracking matriarch of a family-owned Texas dude ranch (with Dave Chappelle as a reality TV-show obsessed palomino named "Buster"), it's just never been the same with you and your brother.
Come on, admitting the truth will be the first step in patching things up.
(And for the record, I look at a Seth MacFarlane version of The Flintstones like I did a Russell Brand version of Arthur -- with dread and sadness)”
“But see, you're talking about all very talented and wonderful people...
I have stopped watching. I honestly though everyone stopped watching, like, in 2006. When Seth makes a project without a so-and-so that talks or contains songs, I'll come back. By all means, though, continue watching.”
“I acknowledge a lot of people enjoy his material. A lot of people enjoy Michael Bay movies, too. Your "not taunt" suggestion is puzzling because it can be applied to any writer or person who has ever written or said something negative about anyone or anything. I'm not bothered by his fame, I'm bothered by his repeated mediocrity. I also respect Justin Bieber. You should YouTube his Runaway Love remix with Kanye West.”
“But he's done this in every single one of his animated projects. He's not reinventing the wheel or even trying to evolve -- he's expounding upon a gimmick that has attained success for him over and over over again. It's boring.”
“Since this article was written, The Weinstein Company has decided to release "Bully" UNRATED to theaters this Friday. Why not just do this in the first place instead of fighting with the MPAA? I still think the best way to reach their target audience is to release it online for free instead of charging kids $10 for catharsis.”
“Denzel can keep doing action films and we will all go see them. All I'm suggesting is that he takes those $20 million paydays, saves them for a rainy day, and works on a project that is a little more ambitious. The Book of Eli was an interesting attempt at Denzel doing something different -- it was a different take on the action genre. I just wish he would return to Academy Award-caliber acting roles and films.”
“Gary Oldman has made some odd career choices since the 90's -- although he redeemed himself with his Oscar-nominated role in Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy. But the difference between Denzel's action flicks and Oldman's roles in Batman and Harry Potter is that the latter movies are billion dollar franchishes that get nearly universal praise. There was chatter that The Dark Knight and the last Harry Potter movie would be nominated for Best Picture -- the same can't be said for Safe House or Unstoppable.”
jaycg9 on Feb 14, 2012 at 15:57:02
“I would say that the Batman movies and the Potter franchise, contrasting with Denzel's films, are not Gary Oldman movies. One of the things that appeals to me about Oldman (as much as I enjoy Denzel) is that he's not a 'star,' but that does mean he probably wouldn't be able to land a top-billed role in a $150 million dollar blockbuster--to his credit, because that means he can still do small films like Tinker Tailor and get major respect for it. Also, let's not forget how awesome he was in The Fifth Element.
Washington, on the other hand, already has his two Oscars and probably feels that he has nothing to prove anymore. Safe House, Unstoppable, Deja Vu (which I actually enjoyed quite a bit) may not get the critical praise that Dark Knight or Tinker Tailor did, but he's the star.”
“That's a great comparison and I totally agree. Even before the "Ocean's" films, he was going only for action blockbusters. Let us not forget this is the same man who played Batman with a nipple suit of armor and went on to become agruably one of the greatest actors around. Aside from The American and Leatherheads, even Clooney's "smaller," but still critically lauded films, have went on to perform well at the box office. His name alone can sell a movie, just like Denzel, but Clooney opts for films with more merit.”
“What is Lifetime's motivation in rushing to release this movie, though? It seems way too premature. Drew Peterson, although obviously a buffoon, has not been proven guilty of any of these crimes. His lawyer is already claiming that this film could affect potential jurors. The filmmakers also didn't consult the families of Kathleen and Stacy about the story, which again, seems insensitive. Plus, with the massive amounts of cash that Lifetime will be generating from "Untouchable," why not donate proceeds to a fund for Kathleen and Stacy's children? Am I not justified in saying it's distasteful for a company to profit on someone else's tragedy when a conclusion hasn't been reached yet?
I guess I can't "enjoy" a movie like this because it's terribly structured and filled with cheese. A much more suitable way of delivering the story of Drew, Stacy and Kathleen would be a documentary. The second half of "Untouchable" attempts to do this but fails. It offers a "greatest hits" montage of all of Drew's antics -- if you wanted to see that, why not just look it up on YouTube?
Although it is typical of the "Lifetime genre," there's a difference between good, so-bad-it's-good and so-bad-it's-horrible. "Untouchable" falls in the latter. I thought last year's "The Craiglist's Killer" wasn't actually half bad.”
“I'm glad that someone else feels the same way, too. Sadly, it looks like Gary Oldman will lose his Oscar nomination to either Leonardo DiCaprio in "J. Edgar," or Michael Fassbender in "Shame." The Best Actor race is loaded this year, but it's shocking he's never been nominated for an Academy Award.”