Harry Shearer Returns To the Simpsons

jones_supa writes: Fans of The Simpsons will find this turn of events nothing short of excellent: seven weeks after saying he was done with Fox's endless animated comedy, Harry Shearer has agreed to rejoin the show. Shearer has now signed the same four-season contract as the other five primary voice actors. He previously tweeted, "I wanted what we've always had: the freedom to do other work." Executive producer Al Jean found that tweet confusing, saying, "Everybody on the show does lots of outside projects. He actually gets to record on the phone and do the [table] reads on the phone. So we've never kept him from doing that stuff."

Harry Shearer wanted more money

[Anonymous Coward]

News at 11.

Re:

[fustakrakich]

No, evidently phoning in his lines still didn't allow for enough free time for 'other projects'

Re:

[drinkypoo]

No, evidently phoning in his lines still didn't allow for enough free time for 'other projects'

Sigh. Because of the typical boring legal nature of these conflicts, we may well never know the whole story. Perhaps something else he wanted to do conflicted with The Simpsons in some way, and he's just gotten go-ahead to do it, in writing. But because E.P. Al Jean said you should be skeptical, you automatically are. He successfully framed the debate for you to be specifically over time.

Re:

[fustakrakich]

Hey, it's Hollywood. The whole story is as ad campaign. For all I know he's giving Quaaludes to Principal Skinner's mom to have his way with her.

Re:

[tehlinux]

You'd think he'd care more about the writers phoning it in than himself.

Re:Harry Shearer wanted more money

[Edis Krad]

Oh no, he'll only be able to buy five Ferraris this year instead of six.

Don't you mean an ivory backscratcher?

Re:

[cyberchondriac]

In short, he was just trolling to elicit a response, whereas the the parent most likely had a valid point. Harry Shearer comes across an an angry/whiny old man to me, I've seen him on Graham Norton. Anyway, we known for a fact that anonymous trolls are over this place, and love to stir up discord. I asked a few point blank last year, who admitted they troll, but they wouldn't explain exactly why they do it; but it seemed like there was more to it than just kicks for a 14 year old.

Re:

[jellomizer]

I guess you haven't listened to his NPR Radio show. Unless you are die hard hippy level, liberal, who hates all things about Nuclear Power, Fracking, Catholic, Olympics, George Bush Jr. and you really really really hate the Army Core of Engineers.
Sure between his mindless rantings that are based on one sided facts without any real context, the parody music is OK.

Normally I need to switch off the radio when he comes on the air. He twists his stuff worse then Fox news.

And he is the reason why I do not fund

Re:

[drinkypoo]

I guess you haven't listened to his NPR Radio show. Unless you are die hard hippy level, liberal, who hates all things about Nuclear Power, Fracking, Catholic, Olympics, George Bush Jr. and you really really really hate the Army Core of Engineers.

Sounds sensible to me. All of those things are cancers. You want to think of the ACE as the good guys, but they build stuff that furthers our war efforts, whether economic or actually blowing shit up. They are there not to make the world a better place, but to make certain people richer, and they compete with non-military labor.

Re:

[jellomizer]

Ohh Nooo a Military organization who's job is to support the military! OMG!!!!

The other things are not Cancers, however they mostly need oversight and controls. Like the rest of the world we have to have tradeoffs.
Sure sometimes countries get a bit over zealous in their bid to host the Olympics.
Nuclear Power and Fracking, isn't as Clean, Safe, and reliable as the industry says.
Yes the Catholic church isn't operated by a bunch of saints.
Is anyone really that stupid to think otherwise?
However they are not a

Re:

[MightyYar]

They are there not to make the world a better place

Like all tools, the military can be used for good and bad things. If you don't like what the military has done over the last few years, take it up with the guys in charge - but it doesn't necessarily follow that we need shittier tools.

Re:

[FacePlant]

Harry's beef with the ACE - at least according to his movie, "The Big Uneasy" - is that they aren't engineers any more, just project managers, it's about how badly they fucked up the New Orleans pumping system, and how they're politically untouchable.

I think his show is listenable sometimes, but does get unlistenable and unfunny at times too.

Re:

[Uberbah]

Things that are outright good:

Nuclear Power

It's the most expensive power source ever invented by man. Billions to develop, billions to construct, billions to maintain and insure, and thousands of years to store the waste. And that's aside from the risk of another Fukishima/Chernobyl.

Re:

[MightyYar]

His show doesn't bother me so much for his views, which are common (though I agree not very thoughtful - he just parrots tired old arguments). But his delivery is just awful. Long, awkward pauses followed by mouth-smacking into the microphone when he thinks he's said something profound. Nothing even remotely entertaining happens. I switch over to regular radio and listen to mattress commercials.

Re:

[viperidaenz]

Never listened to anything on NPR in my life.

Also never been to USA to have the opportunity.

Also not a fan of radio on the internet.

Re: Harry Shearer wanted more money

[bill_mcgonigle]

Lemme guess: your judgment is more significant than the judgement of millions of consumers sending their opinion information through price signals?
*I* happen to think he's very overrated, but then *my* opinion doesn't count for much. Certainly not more than millions of other people.

Re:

[Xenx]

Oh, it's quite easily explained. They even hinted at it. Millions of people watch the show, which brings in TONS of money for Fox. In exchange for that, the voice actors get paid lots of money. It's all pretty standard.

Re:

[gfxguy]

Give it up - anyone that won't accept a market based explanation of why people get the salaries they get is hopeless.

Re:

[gfxguy]

You're being pedantic about it; if Harry Shearer is bringing enough value to Fox for him to paid $300k an episode, then he "deserves" it the same way a star athlete, who generates millions of dollars for his team's franchise, "deserves" the exorbitant salaries they make.

"Deserves" is really otherwise a very subjective term - and just because you don't think someone "deserves" something doesn't mean they don't, so it's pointless to argue about it.

Re:

[jbrown.za]

The Simpsons franchise generates massive revenue and returns for Fox. This is in no small part because of the "relationship" that viewers from across the globe have developed with the Simpsons characters, which are highly reliant on the well known voices. Harry Shearer does some very distinct voices for characters like Mr. Burns and Ned Flanders. His services are therefore involved in far more than mere talking as you suggest. He adds an immense amount of value and deserves to be well compensated.

This is t

Re:

[Copid]

Perhaps you could explain how such a salary is justified? Without resorting to "well the Market says..."?

Becuse he's earning his employers shittons more than $6M per year by doing that work? Would the morally correct outcome be for him to cut his salary by, say, $3M so the owners of the company can pocket $3M more?

Re:

[viperidaenz]

There's also probably a million other people in the world who can do your job.

Re:

[Copid]

If you had gotten paid a larger chunk of that money, would it have been morally wrong somehow?

Are you sure you deserved your whole salary as a software developer? I bet you'd have done it for less than you were paid, so why did you take that money? What are you really worth, and how do you know?

Re:

[Copid]

So if your employer cut you back to that base requirement, you wouldn't consider leaving and using your time some other way? Or at least work fewer hours?

Imagine you had enough money to live your current standard of living forever without working any more. Would that change your base requirement? You have a set of choices with respect to what to do with your time. One option would be not to work at all and to spend time with friends and family and enriching hobbies. Assuming that was an option to yo

Re:

[Copid]

Let me step back a bit and rephrase my earlier question. There are two key price points: There's the upper limit, which is the amount of money you make for your employer. They wouldn't pay you a dollar more than that because they'd just be losing a dollar on the net, and they'd be indifferent between hiring you and not hiring you if it equals that amount because the net value to them is $0. Then there's the minimum amount you'd work for. You wouldn't work for less than that, by definition. So now the

Re:

[Anonymous Coward]

Obviously that's not going to happen. You know, what with Shearer crawling back to them with his tail between his legs.

Re:

[gfxguy]

He finally accepted the same contract as everyone else. When he realized Fox would do the show without him, suddenly $300k an episode for a few hours of voice work seemed worth not losing.

Re:

[Anonymous Coward]

Shearer was a greedy bastard but Fox isn't? Shearer threatens to walk for "creative freedom", Fox threatens to cancel the show because they "can't afford" what they were paying before. It's all negotiating tactics, Shearer simply had the leverage and the will to win the negotiation.

Fox will have to scrounge for that extra 150k per episode out of their 31 billion in revenue this year, but somehow I think they will survive.

Re:

[Kester1964]

Given the number of different voices he does for the various characters in the Simpsons I would say he is very underpaid then. If you get can $450,000 for doing one voice.

Here are a few he does: Ned Flanders, Charles Montgomery Burns, Waylon Smithers, Seymour Skinner, Dr. Hibbert, Lenny Leonard, Kent Brockman, Scratchy, Kang, Otto Mann, Rev. Lovejoy, Rainier Wolfcastle /P

Re:

[DrXym]

Not just Bugs, but Mickey Mouse (Goofy, Donald, Minnie, etc.) Shaggy & Scooby Doo, the muppets, Elmo, animated Batman / The Joker, King Julien / Puss in Boots etc.

Either the original actor dies, or wants to do other things, or is too expensive (especially for TV / videogame spinoffs), or takes the whole tickle-me-elmo a little too far. So sound-a-likes are hired.

Re:Harry Shearer wanted more money

[DrXym]

YouTube is filled with talented impressionists who can do these voices. I'm sure that if Shearer hadn't been persuaded (with $$$) to stay that Fox could easily have hired replacements whose voices were indistinguishable. It might have resulted in a fan backlash or rancour from the other actors but the voices would be the least of their troubles.

Re:

[Kester1964]

Yes, no one is irreplaceable, but I would like to think that Harry Shearer contributes to the personality of these characters even if the quality of the scripts are not as good as they used to be.

Re:

[MightyYar]

I think the scripts could be improved immensely with the money they now pay voice actors. The writing is the important part of that show, not the voices.

Re:

[Kester1964]

I miss the subtle movie references and social/political satire the writers imbued in the programs, as well as the classic lines as in the snake killing episode, "Gentlemen, start your whacking!" Both me and my kids laughed, although for entirely different reasons.

Re:

[MightyYar]

"Wacking Day" is one of the best things that ever happened on television. Also, gay steel mills.

Re:

[Kester1964]

"Hot stuff coming through!"

Re:

[Black LED]

My favourite reference is in the tomacco episode where Homer goes to a general store called "Sneed's Feed & Seed (Formerly Chuck's)".

Re:

[Uberbah]

YouTube is filled with talented impressionists who can do these voices.

Yeah. Just ask Vance and Coy Duke. Anyone can drive a Charger, anyone at all.

Or....not. You can find any old impression [youtube.com] on Youtube, but it's much harder to find an actual replacement of the real thing. And that's for just one voice....how about for the dozen+ that Harry does?

Re:

[gfxguy]

It's not about the quantity of voices, it's about how much air time each voice gets. All of those characters are secondary, and all of them combined usually do not amount to what Homer or Bart says in any given episode. Dan Castellaneta does just as many voices, including Homer, and took the $300k deal, because no matter how much money you have or make, you don't walk away from $300k for a day or two of voice work times 22 (or so) episodes a year.

Re:

[nospam007]

"News at 11."

Don't bother, the kids here are too young to get the joke.

Re:Harry Shearer wanted more money

[tlhIngan]

Actually, the truth isn't that.

His contract with Fox and the Simpsons states he's to get 5 weeks off guaranteed. He's always been allowed to pursue other projects on his on and off time, and he's actually fairly rich as it is (and old - so more money just means more inheritances).

What happened was last season, Shearer was on his contract-given break when Al Jean wanted him to do some quick voice work, and that was what broke the camel's back.

His wanting more time to pursue other things was probably a veiled attempt at explaining this - while he was free to do it during his contracted time, the Simpsons would always be first priority (so he would have to drop everything, do whatever The Simpsons wanted, then return back). So his options were limited and he really only 5 weeks where he could go and do other things where the Simpsons were not his priority.

So Al Jean wanting to impinge on that time (which to be honest, probably Jean thought it was a minor thing, like a one-liner or something and he'd be in and out in an hour) sent him over the edge to tell Fox to screw it.

And that's how it is - he's free to moonlight and provide talent all year, but when he's "on Simpsons time" he's required to put that first ahead of his other work he's pursuing. When he's off, he can do what the f*ck he wants, even the Simpsons can't stop him.

The layman version is - he gets 5 weeks of vacation a year. He got screwed because his boss wanted him to come in to do a quick something or other. He blew his top.

Re:

[mjm1231]

Wow, I can't believe two AC comments for this, and both modded down. People post openly their opinions on guns, abortion, and corporate taxation, but apparently saying the Simpsons is not good crosses a line.

Too bad. I agree with them 100%. I can probably quote nearly every line of dialogue from the first 7-10 seasons of the Simpsons. Everything after that (at least, as far as I have seen) is worse than average TV sitcom.

Re:Oh won't someone please think of the children?

[viperidaenz]

They're not forcing you to watch it.
It it's not watchable, don't watch it.

Re:

[Andrio]

This type of comment is always inevitable any time Simpsons gets mentioned in an online community.

No one denies that 3-9 was the golden age of the Simpsons. However 10-12 was the dark age of the simpsons. This was when Mike Scully ran the show; it had become very cartoony and "Family Guy"ish (maybe not so much with the cut-away gags, but in how it will compromise character integrity for the sake of a punch line). Around season 13 Al Jean rejoined the show as the showrunner, and the quality went back up. He

Nancy wanted him gone for ridiculing Scientology

[Anonymous Coward]

The OT VIII voice of Bart Simpson couldn't stand him exercising his free speech on his weekly radio "Le Show". Scientology often appears in his "Apologies of the week" segment whenever they're caught violating human rights.

Re:

[Anonymous Coward]

Not bad, a guy who's constantly ragging on Scientology hasn't been destroyed by the Scientology hate machine.

Re:

[gsslay]

How many millions do you need? If you've got that kind of money, it's amazing just how little you'd value another $1 million. There are things that are much more finite that become more important. Like your time. Or enjoying your life. Or doing work that means something to you.

He's very lucky to be in that situation. That's why he really doesn't need the gift horse anymore, and it may need him more than he needs it.

Re:

[gfxguy]

Then why didn't he walk away? He ended up coming back and taking the same deal they were offering (him and everyone else). I get he has his talk show which, I would presume in his mind, is actually worthwhile compared to doing the Simpsons, so if he just wants to keep busy and have a positive impact, he'd have quit the Simpsons and just done his show. For the record, at 20 episodes, you're talking about the difference between 6 and 9 million (he accepted the $300k an episode, down from $450k). Unless yo

Flogging a dead horse.

[GrahamCox]

Or milking it to death. Or maybe both.

Re:

[Anonymous Coward]

Or milking a dead horse?

Re:

[skam240]

Except this isn't exclusively a "tech" site. The old tag line, "News for Nerds, Stuff that matters" clearly defines this article as relavent.

Plus, stop whining because a specific article doesn't match your individual tastes.

Re:

[msobkow]

Mod parent up.

The amount of trash stories we're inundated with since Dice took over is slowly turning Slashdot into a generic infotainment website that has no more relevance to technology and science than Faux News.

What has generic politics from the US got to do with technology?

What has an over-the-hill cartoon got to do with technology?

What does the situation in Greece have to do with technology?

It's all turning into one grand flogging of clickbait instead of content, and I'm disgusted by it.

Re:

[the phantom]

Yeah, because Slashdot never, ever covered general [slashdot.org] politics [slashdot.org], popular [slashdot.org] culture [slashdot.org], or economic [slashdot.org] issues [slashdot.org] prior to the Dice takeover.

Re:

[skam240]

Once again, the site is "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters" not "All Tech, All the Time". I'm sure you would like the site to be all tech but I've been reading the site since the 90's and it has never been as such

In fact, a simple search of the site for "Simpsons" yields multiple articles speculating on a Simpson movie since at least 2000 (I didn't go back farther), an announcement about Simpsons season 1 being released on DVD and many more posts about the show. This latest article is completely in keeping

steeples fingers

[ihtoit]

Excellent.

Re:

[Applehu Akbar]

Now Shearer won't have to release the hounds.

I thought he just wanted out

[Zontar_Thing_From_Ve]

With all that talk about not being able to do other projects being debunked by the show's producers as soon as it first came out, I thought that maybe Shearer just wanted out of the job and he was afraid to admit it and have the fans nut out over it. In that scenario, claiming to not have time for other projects would be a good cover story as it can't be disproven and it would get him off the show. I really didn't think it was over money because it seemed illogical to me that he could realistically expect

Too bad

[ITRambo]

I was really looking forward to the first new episode where all of his voiced characters were caught in a nuclear/chemical smog that changed their voices. That might have been funny as hell.

Wait, he was literally phoning it in?

[MetalliQaZ]

My God, why would he even think about giving up a gig like that? I guess the network rightly called his bluff.

I just wish the voice of Bart Simpson wasn't giving all those millions to Scientology.

Re:

[gfxguy]

I don't understand why people keep repeating this... so what? My dad is 85 and still runs his own accounting business. Some people are perfectly capable at that age, some aren't; Shearer obviously is.

Typical

[p51d007]

Hold out til the last minute. I was done with that show YEARS ago. Funny and entertaining (in a morbid stupid way) for a couple years, then I was done with it. Same as South Park...I mean, how many times can you kill Kenny before it just becomes stupid/boring?