When I heard on the radio that The Simpsons voices had gone out on strike, I thought -- unlike the SMH -- "Now, THAT headline writes itself!" ... then I googled....
MSNBC -- D'OH....
Simpsons stars on strike for more D'ohVoices of characters stop working to force contract settlement
The actors who provide the voices for "The Simpsons," including Dan Castellaneta (Homer), Julie Kavner (Marge), Yeardley Smith (Lisa) and Nancy Cartwright (Bart), are seeking $360,000 per episode.
Ottawa Radio -- D'OH....
Simpsons Cast Look For More D'oh!The actors who provide the voices for the cartoon characters on the long-running TV show "The Simpsons" have stopped work in a bid to force a settlement of lengthy contract renewal talks.
The Sun -- D'OH....
Simpsons want more doh!A MASSIVE row has erupted over the new series of The Simpsons, it emerged today.
The actors who give the voices to the classic TV cartoon’s stars are staging a pay revolt.
The six actors, who between them play Homer, Marge, Bart, Lisa and the rest of the cast, have reportedly asked for a pay increase to about £4.25million a year - a leap from the £1.5million they get now.
Washington Post -- D'OH....
Simpsons Stars Strike for More D'ohLOS ANGELES - The actors who provide the voices for the cartoon characters on the long-running TV show "The Simpsons" have stopped work in a bid to force a settlement of lengthy contract renewal talks, Daily Variety reported in its Thursday edition.
Slightly different, Variety -- D'OH....
Oh no, here they d'oh! AgainThe actors behind Homer, Bart, Marge, Lisa and the rest of "The Simpsons" characters have gone silent. The hit Fox animated laffer's collective voices have not shown up for two table reads in the past few weeks, holding up production on the show's 2004-05 season.
It reminds me of the time the Simpsons grew Tomacco and decided to justifiably rip off the tobacco companies who wanted the patent.
From the Simpsons Archive.....
*****
Exec: Meet the Laramie cigarette team. This is Mindy, J. P., and Emil.
Mindy: Homer, we're in a bit of a pickle. Kids are crazy about tobacco, but the politicians won't let us sell it to them.
Homer: Those dirty, rotten --
Mindy: Tell me about it. But there's no law against selling kids tomacco. That little "m" is worth a lot of money to us -- and to you.
Homer: How much?
Exec: Well, let's say a hundred ...
Homer: [gasps]
Exec: ... and fifty ...
Homer: [gasps louder]
Exec: ... million dollars.
Homer: [excited] One hundred and ... [calmly] May I speak to my family for a moment? [the Simpsons crowd into the limousine's small bathroom] Did you see the Emil's looking at Mindy? I think something's going on there.
Marge: Shouldn't we be talking about the $150 million offer?
Homer: Oh yeah, let's take it.
Lisa: Dad, it's a tobacco company. They make billions off the suffering and death of others.
Bart: She's right, Dad. They can afford a lot more.
Lisa: No --
Marge: I'm with Lisa. Let's take them to the cleaners.
Posted by: chris88 | 02 April 2004 at 11:35
CEE -- Aren't they making millions already?
TT -- Shouldn't we be talking about the wide spread proliferation of D'oh headlines?
CEE -- Oh yeah. That too.
Posted by: Tony.T | 02 April 2004 at 13:44
D'oh!
Posted by: chris88 | 02 April 2004 at 13:48
They oughta be careful.
It's a lot easier to replace a voice than it is an actor. And think of the hundreds of talented people who would do that job at a fraction of the current salaries.
It would be funny if they sacked the lot of 'em!
As Mel Blanc went into semi retirement, there was at least a couple of "licensed" Bugs Bunny actors who were allowed to perform the voice. And a fine job they did, too. So it's not like there hasn't been a precedent in the cartoon world.
Plus, if you watch some of the first few seasons’ episodes, the voices AND the characters sounded and looked different. Smithers was black, for Chrissakes! So it’s not like the public can’t handle a slight tweaking of the cast either.
Posted by: Big Ramifications | 02 April 2004 at 14:10
Workin' beautifully, Chris.
"It's a lot easier to replace a voice than it is an actor"
Not sure about that Big. Remember Roseanne? Becky became Bicky. Or something. Come to think of it, it's happened in lots of shows about the time that show "Jumped The Shark". Dammit! Now I can't think of any. Ahhh, got one, Dick York for Dick Sargeant on Bewitched. And I'm pretty sure Ron Howard on Happy Days replaced by Muhammad Ali? No?
However, The Simmo's so big -- a phenomenon in fact -- I'm not sure they'd get away with it. And the Warners cartoons stopped being good/funny about 1955. Well before they subbed out Mel's voice. As an aside, I'm pretty sure one of those voices belonged to an Aussie.
PS: I hate Roadrunner, Speedy Gonzalez and Daffy went from a funny loser to a total loser. Although F. Leghorn Esq. almost more than made up for it.
Early Daffy's my hero, by the way.
Posted by: Tony.T | 02 April 2004 at 15:02
That's what I'm saying.
You don't need to replace a familiar head (like Becky / Bicky or Dick York / Dick Sargeant), you are just changing a person who is doing a silly voice in a sound studio. The cartoon head will remain the same.
My bet is that if they held auditions, the producers could easily find people talented enough to take their jobs.
(My mate does such a perfect Barney Gumble and Chief Wiggum that it's scary!)
Posted by: Big Ramifications | 02 April 2004 at 16:53
And it's not like the producers haven't played "hardball" before:
>>> As Fox's long-running animated hit "The Simpsons" gets set to kill off a character during February sweeps, the actress who voiced the role of Maude Flanders is saying her character's rumored demise is a case of death-by-corporate-greed.......
>>> ......"I was part of the backbone of 'The Simpsons,' and I didn't think [the requested raise] was exorbitant," Roswell said. "I wasn't asking for what the other cast members make. I was just trying to recoup all the costs I had in travel. If they'd flown me in, I'd still be working."
http://www.snpp.com/other/articles/actordisputes.html
Posted by: Big Ramifications | 02 April 2004 at 17:06
I'm with Tony. At this stage in its life, I don't know if it could handle much in the way of major cast changes. Sacking everyone would be fun, yes, but it'd be disastrous for the producers, who'd have to recast with actors capable of the range of voices the current cast provides—most of them do more than one voice on the show, so replacing, e.g., Nancy Cartwright would necessitate hiring someone able to do Bart, Nelson and Ralph among others (unless you hired more voice actors, which I can't see happening)—and capable of imitating the existing voices well enough that audiences wouldn't be able to tell the difference. And just because you can't see them doesn't mean they're not actors. Any dickhead can do a silly voice... can they act, though?
Early Daffy is my favourite period of WB as well. He was never as much fun when he (and Sylvester) simply became the implacable force of conservatism for Speedy Gonzales to oppose.
Posted by: James Russell | 03 April 2004 at 00:03
With studio technology, they could pretty much get any vocal timbre and pitch they want, provided the accent was OK. It's the sort of thing they do to get Kylie Minogue and her ilk singing in tune. Given that each actor wants as much per episode as it costs to produce an entire musical album, it's probably quite economical to go this way, especially if they outsource to India. The existing actors each have at least one other cast member who can do each of their characters (except, I think, Bart or Lisa, going from memory), so it's not like their skills are that unique. But a cast change would certainly annoy the Comic Store Guys among the show's fans.
Posted by: Clem Snide | 03 April 2004 at 01:10
Power to the voices!!!
Those millions who have watched it over the years would pick a voice change a mile off.
It would be like Don Adams voice being changed to Lee Marvin's.
A thought - If I ever become a Porno actor can I use the stage name "Big Ramifications"? Its got prono written all over it.
Andre Hairpie. (just wanted to type it - sorry).
Posted by: Burty | 03 April 2004 at 10:07
Yep James, Clem. Probably not likely on a number of fronts.
But definitely doable.
Posted by: Big Ramifications | 03 April 2004 at 10:10
Christ i certainly would not complain of earning $200,000 dolls for voiceovers on a cartoon. I'm pretty good with voices, can throw my voice and impersonate groucho marx.
These porn stars, on the other hand earn more than this and the best in their field are in demand and fly off in a moments notice to "shoot" flicks all over the world. One guy recently stated " i landed in Paris, was driven to a hotel, fucked and went home!!And got a bloody fortune doing it with a smile on my face" Some people do'nt know when they are well off.
Posted by: Brett Pee | 03 April 2004 at 22:54
Male porn stars get paid sweet shit all. Still, you can't complain about the work.
Posted by: Yobbo | 04 April 2004 at 04:11
Big, I don't think the voice is that easy to change. There's always that little something that resonates with the listener and is often missing for speaker to speaker, no matter how mechanically accurate the reproduction.
Which, I think, ties in nicely with James's comment....
"Any dickhead can do a silly voice... can they act, though".
Precisely. To capture the essence, as opposed to mechanical duplication, is not as easy as it sounds.
Which leads to Clem's point -- although judging by his last sentence, Clem probably didn't intend it....
"With studio technology, they could pretty much get any vocal timbre and pitch they want, provided the accent was OK. It's the sort of thing they do to get Kylie Minogue and her ilk singing in tune."
Again precisely. The original voices probably can, on the surface, be clinically reproduced -- in Clem's case, electronically -- but the nuance is lost. And Kylie is a good example, an ideal example of manufactured pop. Contary to popular recent spin, Kylie is still just Kylie. A by the numbers musical reproducer with truckloads of come-fuck-me thrown in.
Exactly in the same way that pop music reproduces earlier songs but (mostly) without the original subtlties and even "mistakes that work".
Replicated singing -- and replicated voiceover dubbing -- is just doing it by numbers, but most times you lose the spontenaiety and resonance of the original. And ultimately the emotion.
As I often say, creating an extremely well made pop song is, in most cases, no different to building an extremely well made kit-home.
By the way Clem. If they subbed out to India, they'd have plenty of takers for ONE voice at least.
Are you sure "BIG" Ramifications would be appropriate, Burty? But you're right though, no matter how accurately they reproduced the voice, the fans would notice and probably not accept it. It's not as if the show's not nearing it's end anyway. Why drag it out with a bunch of substitutes.
I'm with Yobbo, Brett. Porno blokes (mostly) get paid "fuck all". It's the chicks that "pull the big bucks".
PS: James, I reckon the latter WB's were, in the most, very ordinary. And also lacking the adult component of the earlier cartoons. And also the vital ingredient of Carl Stalling's music. I still regularly watch the earlier ones, but the latter ones I ignore. I also still love Crusader Rabbit and to a lesser extent Rocky and Bullwinkle. As for the recent WB incarnations aimed totally at the kiddies. Fuck them.
Posted by: Tony.T | 04 April 2004 at 13:00