You Ever Notice...and What's the Deal...

Sgt Floyd

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2006
Messages
27,875
Reaction score
2,542
Did they sell video game controllers on their own back then? I've been wondering that, I don't remember knowing about video game controllers being sold on their own as well as with systems until the N64 era. I don't remember seeing controllers sold on their own in stores, I feel like that's something that would have stuck out to me.
Sure they did! There were TONS AND TONS of alternate controllers available for consoles produced by third parties. And I'm talking going as far back as the atari. As far as first party controllers, I...actually dont remember this myself,, but I'm sure they did.

That training video was staged, but as I think about that scene with the mother who couldn't get the control to work, it is odd that she didn't think to try putting the controller in the other port.
You kinda explained the logic yourself there. it was staged. It's kinda the same thinking as why a character in a show would do something illogical when the writers wrote it that way for plot convenience.
 

minor muppetz

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2005
Messages
16,044
Reaction score
2,642
In the Family Guy episode "It's a Trap", when Carter is insulting Seth Green to make Chris angry, he asks if Seth Green was in anything successful. Chris mentions Buffy the Vampire Slayer, which Carter shoots down by saying that, despite what Entertainment Weekly said, it was not a success, but then Chris said that he was in the Austin Powers movies, citing that they grossed millions of dollars, and Carter then remarked, "Because of Seth Green??? Peopel actually said, 'Let's go see the new Austin Powers movie, Seth Green's in it'?"

But then couldn't he have just said that about Buffy? He had to remark that it was successful but when Austin Powers was brought up, he had to say that they didn't see it because of Seth Green? I doubt people saw Buffy the Vampire Slayer because of Seth Green.

Also, Carter didn't ask if anybody saw a movie because of Seth Green, he asked if he was in anything successful. That's two different things.
 

D'Snowth

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2003
Messages
40,651
Reaction score
12,811
Okay, so, like, why are grocery stores suddenly dropping certain items from their inventory? I have to say, it's actually a bit of a hassle to go all the way to Walmart just to get a certain flavor of cereal, chips, Hot Pockets, or what have you simply because the grocery store, for whatever reason, won't carry them anymore.
 

D'Snowth

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2003
Messages
40,651
Reaction score
12,811
How and why do certain YouTubers have their own pages on IMDb? I mean, it's been a long time since I had an IMDb account (kept getting hacked, and the last time it happened, IMDb wouldn't let me register another new account unless I paid for it, because it was their new security measure to keep trolls out), but IIRC, they had pretty strict guidelines for trying to start a new page for a show, movie, special, etc. I'm trying to wrap my mind around what kind of credentials YouTubers would have for getting pages for themselves and their videos since IMDb evidently allows this.
 

Drtooth

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2002
Messages
31,718
Reaction score
6,707
I had absolutely no idea the Artie Eposito thing was such a big deal. I'm actually very fascinated by this topic now for some reason.
The problem was the unknown. In hindsight, yeah...Steve came back as Kermit and this was either a case of Steve not wanting to fly all over the place for a TV appearance like that, or Disney trying something as sinister as getting a cheaper actor to replace him and seeing if anyone would notice.

But when all is said and done, I'm very disappointed that the fandom went after Artie. He was one of us, an MC member. Unlike most of us, he actually got to become a major puppeteer. While I can't support the not probably true thing about Disney trying to blackmail Steve to a cheaper pay grade, I find it appalling that we'd spit all over one of our own's dreams. Luckily, most rational tones taken with this put the blame on Disney instead of Artie.

I'm so glad that we've turned a corner with Erine being recast by Billy. More of us were open to that because A) it didn't come out of the blue in a substandard Muppet appearance on a weak reality show and B) we just wanted to see more Ernie when Steve became too unavailable for that one character.
 

Pig'sSaysAdios

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2015
Messages
6,506
Reaction score
4,646
But when all is said and done, I'm very disappointed that the fandom went after Artie. He was one of us, an MC member. Unlike most of us, he actually got to become a major puppeteer. While I can't support the not probably true thing about Disney trying to blackmail Steve to a cheaper pay grade, I find it appalling that we'd spit all over one of our own's dreams. Luckily, most rational tones taken with this put the blame on Disney instead of Artie.
That's basically how I feel. While it was a little scary that we didn't know why it happened, I still feel terrible for Artie. Everybody on this forum wants to work with the Muppets in some way or at least get to visit the set of a Muppet project. We expect our fellow Muppet fans to be happy for us when we get there. And Artie got the mother of all amazing Muppet jobs, playing freaking Kermit! We should've been patting him on the back like we were his parents saying, "Well, I don't exactly approve of what you did to get there, but i'm happy it all worked out and you were successful." Instead what we got was fans personally attacking their own just because Kermit's voice was a little off.

Sure, we as fans had the right to be angry and upset about the random unexplained recast, but most fans on this forum blew it waaaayy out of proportion. Going back and watching his performance as Kermit, it really wasn't bad. It was a little stiff compared to Steve's puppeteering, but that's to be expected, Artie was new at the role! People need to stop expecting every recast to be Matt Vogel right away, if you know what I mean.
 

MuppetSpot

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2012
Messages
2,727
Reaction score
1,679
Honestly Artie is a great puppeteer like when he did Homer for that Simpsons X-Mas special, though I think we were jerks to him and honestly if something happens to Steve we should get Artie, since he is a darn good replacement.
 

minor muppetz

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2005
Messages
16,044
Reaction score
2,642
The problem was the unknown. In hindsight, yeah...Steve came back as Kermit and this was either a case of Steve not wanting to fly all over the place for a TV appearance like that, or Disney trying something as sinister as getting a cheaper actor to replace him and seeing if anyone would notice.
One thing that struck me odd was that a year earlier, Steve Whitmire did an interview for Tough Pigs and said talked about how Disney considered alternate performers in 2005 and then quickly changed their minds, and yet they kind of changed their minds again in 2009. I've read that Steve was going to do the performance, but then Disney decided they wanted to test out having another Kermit performer.

It seems like we didn;t get like this when we first heard Matt Vogel as Big Bird for the first time (maybe we didn't immediately notice, or maybe it's because Spinney performed Big Bird in the next episode... And Vogel's earliest-known performance by Muppet Wiki had Spinney and Vogel alternating on Big Bird) or when John Tartaglia first performed Ernie on Play With me Sesame (though with that I think we got reassurance from somebody that it was only for that show). Those are instances where we weren't exactly expecting a performance change. When Billy Barkhurst replaced Steve as Ernie, it wasn't really a shock because we knew that Ernie hadn't done much in years. When Frank Oz's characters got recast it wasn't as much a shock because we knew he had a busy directing career.
 

minor muppetz

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2005
Messages
16,044
Reaction score
2,642
In Beauty and the Beast, The Beast makes Maurice a prisoner just because he "trespassed" into his castle. Then Belle showed up in search of him, yet the Beast didn't consider locking her up for trespassing. She only becomes his prisoner when she offers to be one in place of her father. But why did she have to do that? The Beast could have just locked them up together.
 
Top