TRAILER: Sesame Street On HBO

IGN reports:

The 46th season of Sesame Street debuts on its notable new home, HBO, on January 16, and in anticipation, the channel has released a new trailer and show poster. Lots of celebrities join Big Bird, Elmo, and Cookie Monster in the new trailer—celebrities like Jon Hamm, Tina Fey, Pharrell, and Gwen Stefani. There’s even a Star Wars shoutout with Cookie Monster as Han Solo, and Chewbacca re-imagined as, well, a cookie.

  • Sam_Handwich

    sad … on a number of levels.

  • TuuxKabin

    no more free access?

    • New episodes will be available on PBS after a nine-month delay.

  • WebSlinger

    Here is the plan:

    The five-year deal allows HBO to widen its programming to include a long-running and prestigious children’s show, while Sesame Workshop will be able to produce twice as much content each year.

    The deal doesn’t mean “Sesame Street” has abandoned its PBS roots. The new episodes will be available to PBS and its member stations, free of charge, after a nine-month delay. which is not great

    Jeffrey D. Dunn, CEO of Sesame Workshop, said in a statement that the partnership with HBO provides the group with the “critical funding it needs to be able to continue production of ‘Sesame Street’ and secure its nonprofit mission of helping kids grow smarter, stronger and kinder.”

    • TuuxKabin

      oh. okay then.

    • Bj Lincoln

      You just answered all my questions. Thank you very much. I am glad the kids will still get to watch it for free. Thanks to HBO for making this happen! I loved SS when my son was growing up.

    • Lumpy Gaga

      Upvote for the clarification. Thanks.

      (Not because I like the situation.)

  • William

    I’d like to be educated by Jon Hamm.

    • WebSlinger

      I hear he “is” a huge dick…or maybe the word is “has”..

      • Michael Rush

        Isn’t that special ?

      • GanymedeRenard


      • fuzzybits


    • TuuxKabin

      what’s his connection to Sesame Street?

    • TuuxKabin

      Nevermind post below, I found out why you’d like to be educated by Jon Hamm. He could keep me after school!

    • sherman

      Now that it is on HBO I’m assuming it will have lots of foul language and nudity. Maybe that will include full frontal Jon.

      • William

        Ohh yes please!

      • DrWilmaBabyliv

        HBO has always had children’s programming, and never with foul language or nudity.

        • sherman

          HBO thanks you for defending their honor.

          • DrWilmaBabyliv

            I wish! : )

  • 2guysnamedjoe

    I always wished they’d presented a program like that for children.

    • David Walker

      There’s always “Avenue Q.”

  • Bluto

    HBO huh, perhaps Bert & Ernie can finally come out of the closet.

    • perversatile

      Malory on PBS…
      Malory: “It’s public television. They don’t pay anything! All they do is suck money in. They take our taxes…”

      Lana: “Or donations. Whatever.”

      Malory: “Of pre-tax dollars! From pot-taking, Bolshevik lesbian couples! Then PBS mixes it all in with their huge NEA grants, launders it in inner-city methadone clinics, and pumps it right back out to pro-abortion super-PACs!”

    • james_from_cambridge

      And I can’t wait for all the nudity, violence and foul language on the new Sesame Street. Maybe they can rename it Street of Thrones.

    • Dulce et Banana

      Or the season Ernie’s behavior drives Bert over the edge: He cuts Ernie to pieces of fluff with a pair of scissors, sews them back into pillows and flings them out the window.

      He stands trial for Muppetcide in the 3 episode arc. Judge Oscar presides, Kermit is the prosecuting attorney but his defence is Big Bird so he’s doomed of course.

    • Randolph Finder

      Nah. Bert and Ernie were created as a spoof of the Odd Couple, and largely remain that. In fact, I’m not sure they’ve done episodes with Ernie or Bert in any sort of romantic situation…

  • Ninja0980

    Such a shame it’s no longer on PBS… the decline of children’s programming continues.

    • David Walker

      It’s on PBS. It will continue to be on PBS. I worked at a PBS station when SS started and can assure you that SS went into re-runs in its second year and started editing old stuff and new by the third season. There’s nothing wrong with that. That the new shows will be on PBS 9 months after the HBO run is actually reassuring that PBS is still in the SS mix. I don’t disagree that the decline of children’s programming continues, but that’s not the issue.

      • William

        I was the target demographic when Sesame Street started.

        • David Walker

          Thanks. I needed that.

        • hudson11

          our grade 1 class would watch it in the library. it was a great treat.

      • CanuckDon

        And small kids have no problems with reruns. It wouldn’t matter if learning about the letter “A” came from one of today’s B-list celebrities or one of the members of the Dukes of Hazzard.

    • Circ09

      I disagree about a decline in children’s programming. There is more programming for 1-11 age demo than ever before. And most kids now have access to media from all over the world. I’m in the camp that says PBS as individual broadcast units across the US has no real value in our modern media mix. The money would be better spent transforming the PBS TV system to a more producer & funder role with maybe a single station/streaming distribution platform.

      • Phillip in L.A.

        thx for the thoughtful comment!

        like to see this informed & polite discussion–even where disagreement exists

      • DrWilmaBabyliv

        As someone who worked for PBS for years, I totally agree with you.PBS struggles with being a supposedly non-profit but semi-for-profit entity. I also agree with you that if anyone is looking for educational children’s programming there is more now than there’s ever been.

  • William

    Will Katy Perry be asked back? Concernstipated parents everywhere freaked when video of her cleavage was leaked. Honestly, Katy has nothing in comparison with Denyce Graves.



  • Circ09

    I’m amused by the number of people concerned that SS should remain “free”. The great majority of kids (even in low income households) has not watched SS for “free” since the rise of cable. Most people do not get their PBS access from free over-the-air antenna – especially not now that the switch has been made from analog to digital. I’m amazed at the number of people around today that don’t realize free over-the-air content is still even possible.

    And most kids I know today do not sit for appointment TV. They use phones/tablets to watch clips on youtube, SS’s own website, the BBC’s wonderful CBeebies app, Disney, paid streaming like Netflix and on and on…at their own convenience.

    TV station appointment viewing is dead to the majority of kids today. Adage recently cited a study that claimed parents are punishing their children by taking away their tablets and forcing them to watch TV!

    • Lumpy Gaga

      And most kids I know today do not sit for appointment TV. They use
      phones/tablets to watch clips on youtube, SS’s own website, the BBC’s
      wonderful CBeebies app, Disney, paid streaming like Netflix and on and
      on…at their own convenience.

      All stuffed to the gills with advertising, and all of it representing a premium being paid somewhere – ISP bills, mobile bills, hardware, HBO, etc.

      Free market solutions for the chil’ren!!

      • Circ09

        Free market solutions is all that is available if you don’t have/can’t have an antenna. That is nothing new.

        And have you watched PBS lately? Most of that lovely programming PBS pays to air from England – Downton Abbey, Call the Midwife, Poldark, Last Tango, etc…are all shredded to bits to make time for donation drives and adverts besides the cuts made for content. PBS editorial decisions completely mess with creator intent.

        • DrWilmaBabyliv

          PBS is also has their for-profit side (PBS Distribution). Unfortunately, the quality has gone way down though it’s still better than some options.

        • Lumpy Gaga

          If you don’t/can’t have an antenna, you can still get a limited basic/local-broadcast package from the local cable franchise after meeting a means test in many markets. Although the importance of local-broadcast is mostly lip service these days, it is, for the time being, still the law in a lot of places. And it has value.

          Here in Philly, thanks to all those pesky “burdensome” regulations and must-carry rules, local PBS broadcasters enable us to watch NHK, France24 and “Gay USA” all with a Digital Economy package. PBS is far from perfect, but throwing it overboard because tablets and Internet and streaming and HBO does not serve the public good.

          • Circ09

            I don’t believe in throwing it overboard. But it needs to be radically changed to better serve the public good. The entire system is allowed to continue existing on outdated
            thinking/technology, doesn’t support innovation and doesn’t keep up with
            the viewing practices of the majority of Americans.

            There is no need to keep running individual stations across the US, for example. It is not needed due to tech advances. They continue to exist mainly as a politically motivated process giving local stations editorial control over content. That might sound reasonable on its face but leads to decisions like Mid-West stations cutting scenes with gay couples in shows like Call the Midwife & Last Tango while The Coasts air those scenes. That kind of politically motivated hackery needs to stop.

            Also, streaming sites and torrenting are going to continue eating into their audience as their primary demo – older people – dies off and more people realize they are being screwed out of seeing complete episodes so seek out the content in other places. Their other large demo – little kids – increasingly are watching content in other ways and PBS is not keeping pace with that reality. Their streaming app can be a disaster to navigate for an adult let alone a child.

            My parents currently pay $10 a month for their local TV channels through Verizon Fios. It is well worth that to avoid the headaches with antenna because of the distance & terrain constraints in the area where they live. Add to that a Roku with a couple of streaming subs and they are happy TV viewers for much less a month than a cable package.

          • Lumpy Gaga

            There is no need to keep running individual stations across the US, for example. It is not needed due to tech advances.

            The fact is, broadcasting is more robust than multicasting. The only drawback to broadcast is that everyone was forced to make appointments. Technology then solved the time-shifting problem. But delivering must-see TV? Call me when they’ve figured out the relatively low-bandwidth problem of selling Adele tickets at 10 in the morning.

            I’m happy for your parents, but if they’re not currently usage-capped on their broadband account, it’s only a matter of time before they are. And the goldmine of just selling a data pipe not worrying about paying for content, and ever-increasing prices will make us miss cable TV.

            As for the problem of “local flavors” of PBS de-gaying stuff, eliminating local control would only mean that that LCD is what everyone across the country gets. If you don’t like what they’re doing in Bumfuck, Idaho, then all you have to do is make it one national feed. Bumfuck Idaho will then rule your life, too.

          • Circ09

            No, you can keep broadcasting, from the local antennas even, without the need for individual affiliate stations. All that is needed is the hire of a local broadcast engineer for upkeep. Local radio has been doing this for years and years and that is using very old tech. The difference is, that for radio, while it may have been a massive money saver it has destroyed a part of the local culture as syndicated networks have replaced locally produced content. But that would not be a major issue with the way our current PBS system is set up. They all show the same basic content already. The shows that are produced out of huge stations like Boston can still be funded through the national entity (it actually already is) if it is worth keeping around. The bottom line for me is that PBS is never going to be like the BBC in the UK mandated in their charter to produce so much local content per affiliate. It is time we stop pretending that PBS someday/somehow/someway will be. The changes in viewing culture and technology has allowed for a liberal re-think and re-structure before right-wing hands manage to kaput the PBS system entirely by pointing to the hugely wasteful money drain.

            Agreed that caps on broadband accounts are going to increase along with the price- at least until younger people with tech sense take over our government or the internet “pipes” are declared some form of new utility. But, as you say, there are already local laws in place to ensure that the under-privileged get to keep local broadcasting. I see no reason for that to change and no reason those laws cannot be tweaked a little to include a broader range of people using different distribution platforms.

            As far as editorial control, I would rather the entire country get the moral decisions made out of Bumfuckistan Idaho than the unaccountable hidden network of patchwork decisions made now. That way, other people in the USA begin to recognize the institutionalized bigotry that exists in places in this nation where they do not reside. It starts a national conversation that is needed. Social change that benefits the common good happens fastest that way.

  • Stev84