Talk:The Beast with a Billion Backs

From what this says, i don't think I want to see this movie.
 * First of all, use signature for your writings, so we can see it is you; --~ . Secondly, why did you write that without telling us why?  It is as if you want us to ask that question. --SvipTalk 06:26, 18 January 2008 (PST)

After release...
When the film is released, I am thinking about keeping the sneak peak somehow in the article. And I think more than just a mention in the trivia section. Maybe a section in additional info or the miscellany of The Beast with a Billion Backs - which we will create as soon as it is released. --SvipTalk 04:37, 28 January 2008 (PST)
 * Yep, needs to be kept somewhere. Also linked from the special features of BBS. - Quolnok 19:37, 28 January 2008 (PST)

If i'm not mistaken, doesn't The Grand Midwife Appear in the movie as well? Watch the video provided here.--Dr. Zoidberg 17:01, 17 February 2008 (PST)
 * You are absolutely right, I better add her. Actually I was going to, but I sort of forgot her name. :s --SvipTalk 04:20, 18 February 2008 (PST)

March 18?
I know I am the one who wrote it into the article. But I am having doubts it will even be plausible. I mean, last time we knew about the release of at least two months before it was released. And we had its box art quite early as well. And why? Because give one to two months for production, at which point they must have decided on a box art - obviously! But I have seen no box art. I have seen no official statement about the release date. And only IMDb says March 18, 2008. Even Wikipedia have dropped the date on the grounds that IMDb does not suffice. Shall we keep it till it is confirmed it is not true? Or just get rid of it now? --SvipTalk 12:20, 9 February 2008 (PST)
 * In all fairness, wikipedia is run by a dumbass, and his dumbass sub-admins. I do agree that it seems suspicious, but as long as it is specifically noted as a rumor I don't see a problem with keeping it. You have to remember that there was more hype and anticipation surrounding Bender's Big Score also, given that it was the first Futurama seen in quite some time. So they may simply not be seeing a reason to release any box art yet.
 * As a matter of fact, there was temp box art for Bender's Big Score way more than 6 months before its release. By that same token, we'd have to remove the May release date as well.Anarchy Balsac 12:47, 9 February 2008 (PST)
 * The May date is "somewhat" confirmation, since it is said by David X. Cohen, as you can see from the article, we even link to the interview where he states this information. The May date is merely an interpretation of what he says.  Perhaps "Around May" instead?  Also, it doesn't matter who runs Wikipedia, cause it is hardly always the sysops who decides on the issues.  There are simply too many articles for that. --SvipTalk 14:59, 9 February 2008 (PST)
 * Mark them both rumoured, then we're covered for both dates and everything in between... I doubt it would be March, there'd have been confirmation by now. Besides, BBS is coming out in March for AU and still has no date for EU. - Quolnok 18:19, 9 February 2008 (PST)
 * It's sometimes jimbo the dumbass wales himself who makes the decisions, so you're right. My point about wikipedia is only that you can't rely on them as a source, not that they are never right. I can send you a boat load of links substantiating this if you want. Anyways I'm not sure about the March date myself, but in all fairness, they've said nothing at all about this since BBS was released 3 and a half months ago. They're long overdue for any update whatsoever, so just because they haven't spoken on it doesn't mean it isn't when it'll be released.Anarchy Balsac 18:25, 9 February 2008 (PST)
 * I am still wondering where the rumour came into existence though. There aren't even any sources on the rumour, but apparently, if you check the history on Wikipedia's article, you can see a lot of people have tried to add it, but has been removed again on grounds I said before.  Also, can you stop talking bad about Wikipedia?  This is not a Wikipedia hate machine, leave your opinions on Wikipedia out of this, cause it is just not worth it.  --SvipTalk 00:12, 12 February 2008 (PST)
 * You brought up wikipedia, and thus, as such, the credibility thereof(of which it has zero) is entirely relevant. Again, I do have sources on this, I can post said links to prove I'm not lying, do you wish me to? As far as the rumor, I'm not sure, but at this point there's no real reason to believe or disbelieve it.Anarchy Balsac 05:27, 12 February 2008 (PST)

Appearance at retailers!
Good news, everyone. Play.com have the Beast with a Billion Backs on their site now. Since Play.com is a British site, this may suggest a worldwide release perhaps or at least an earlier official remark on Region 2 release? However, I could not find anything on amazon.com. Anyone found it elsewhere? And before you look, no boxart yet. --SvipTalk 04:17, 17 February 2008 (PST)
 * Uhm, apparently, they also have added Bender's Game (see further down on the same page). I am signing up for the notification, regardless.  I suggest most of you sign up for Google Alerts and get an alert for each time "the beast with a billion backs" is mentioned.  That is what I do, Google Alerts rock! --SvipTalk 04:19, 17 February 2008 (PST)

Carbon neutrality
I'm all for saving the planet and everything, and I see that this DVD also has a "Green" logo (different from the previous one, but I assume it conveys the same message), but am I the only one who wishes they could find a way to do it without using horribly crappy DVD cases? I mean, the hologram or whatever on the last one was cool, but beyond that, the case sucked. It's flimsy and fragile and it's getting crushed on my shelf between real DVD cases. Isn't the real test of carbon neutrality to make things of the same quality while reducing the energy (and thus carbon) required to create them? I know plastics are derived from crude oil, but they can get that from recycling, or maybe find a more eco-friendly plant to create the DVD's in or something. Why does quality have to suffer?! ... ... ... Okay, I'm done ranting. --76.25.219.42 12:07, 27 March 2008 (PDT)