The Simpsons Movie

Wibble

In Gadus Speramus
Staff
Joined
Jun 15, 2000
Messages
92,762
Location
Centreback
If the film is as good as the trailer then it will be brilliant.

Homer (leafing through the bible): This book has no answers.

========================================

Marge: Why are there pig footmarks on the ceiling?
Homer (holding pig up): Spider pig, spider pig, does whatever a spider pig does".

========================================

President Schwarzenegger (on being offered five written briefs): I came to leaaad, not to reaaaad.
 
I stopped watching The Simpsons a while ago because I didn't like the new episodes.

I have to admit though, the trailer had me laughing alot. I hope it is like the trailer.
 
I thought it went a bit crap (but still watchable) a few years ago but I have enjoyed thew last couple of series.

The spider pig bit had me in stitches for some reason.
 
Same as.

Up until that point, I found it funny but I still didn't care to see it or not.

But when you thought the trailer was going to end and you see him doing the spider pig bit, that was just brilliant.

That and the Transformers trailer, those were the good ones.
 
Looking forward to seeing this one, every trailer has amused so far..
 
Transformers and The Simpsons are out on the same day in England i think.

So its out the door from one into the door to the other.
 
Simpsons has been shit the last 5 years. I will watch the film properly tho.
 
I used to love the Simpsons

Now I don't even find it funny
 
If McCool doesn't think it's going to be any good then I'm sure it'll be a massive hit...
 
Fingers crossed because I will have to see it or my son will divorce us.
 
Good Guardian piece repeated in the press here on Monday which sums up the Simpsons for me:


THE SIMPSONS UNDER FIRE

Springfield, Vermont, has been named official home of The Simpsons. It has just been announced that The Simpsons Movie will get its world premiere there on July 21.

The Vermont venue beat 13 other identically-named towns in the United States in the competition to host the event, having had to prove how similar they were to the fictional Springfield inhabited by America’s No 1 animated family. Vermont citizens clinched the prize with their own video, in which a Homer lookalike gets pursued through the streets by a giant runaway pink doughnut. Having a nuclear plant nearby no doubt helped the town’s bid.

It’s the kind of stunt that would fit perfectly into the show. Which is precisely the problem, The Simpsons of today revels in big, stupid antics, one-note gags and obvious plot twists. The Simpsons of yesteryear, however, was a different beast — one that would have found no room for over-sized pastries pursuing characters along sidewalks. That’s why it’s hard to greet the arrival of the movie with whoops of excitement.

If it’s anything like the current TV show, this will be one of the greatest misfires in spin-off history.

You can almost hear the panic in the voice of The Simpsons’ creator Matt Groening. The film will be “deliberately imperfect”. It contains “everything we couldn’t show on television”.

His co-producer, Al Jean, has even boasted that “if you’ve never heard of The Simpsons, you can enjoy the film”.

They know expectation is sky-high, even for something that’s been 15 years (yes, 15!) in the pipeline. So why the need to qualify the film with so many caveats and premature apologies?

Could it be that they know, deep down, The Simpsons is but a shade of what it used to be? Once, it was the greatest show on TV. Every episode was brimming with imagination, excitement and some of the sharpest one-liners to come out of America for decades. But above all, it was smart: The Simpsons knew how to parry crudity with intelligence blow for blow. It was intelligent, daring and exhilarating stuff.

For every burp gag came an arch popculture reference. For every time Homer fell down the stairs or Bart got strangled, we had a nifty TV parody or sly political dig. And it kept on coming, week after week.

An entire generation didn’t understand it. George Bush senior, then US President, even wished aloud that American families could be more like the Waltons than the Simpsons. A massive rift opened up between those who “got” The Simpsons and those who hated it. You chose your side carefully. Then it all changed.

EVOLVING BACKWARDS?

A new guard took over and ripped up the rules. Veterans of the show with pedigrees on venerated US comedy institutions like Saturday Night Live and The Tonight Show Jon Vitti, George Meyer, John Schwartzwelder either departed or went part-time.

In came writers who had cut their teeth on sappy teen comedies like Blossom and unsophisticated knockabouts like Beavis and Butt-Head. A looser, lazier sensibility took hold, given free rein by new executive producer Mike Scully. And the show became stupid.

You can even put a date on it: 1997, in the early episodes of the ninth series, where the head of Bart’s school, Principal Skinner, was suddenly, arbitrarily revealed to be an impostor, and his entire life to date had been a lie. A major character in a long-running series gets unmasked as a fraud? It was cheap, idle storytelling.

This was just the start. The show went on to jettison all interest in pretending
to have earthy, avuncular roots: The warm, good-natured centre that, when you scraped away the
multi-layered jokes and cerebral grandstanding, had been there from day one was obliterated.
No longer did we see the family bonding, caring for each other, showing emotion. Instead, it was anything goes.

Plots swung sickeningly from one cliche to another. Jokes arrived out of the blue for no reason. No attempt was made to cling to reality. Now, Homer would end up in new employment six or seven times a series. To date, he’s held 118 (and counting) jobs — from missionary to garbage commissioner to grease salesman to fortune cookie writer, which wouldn’t be such a damning statistic had almost none of them been particularly funny.

True, a long-running series has to evolve. Nobody would expect Simpsons episodes to still be solely about Lisa getting a pony or Bart failing a school exam. But, in the second decade of its life, The Simpsons evolved into a dreadfully predictable monster.

With each new series came the same questions. Which foreign country will the family just happen to end up visiting this time? Which pop star will the family just happen to encounter while there? What unsubtle bit of physical violence will Homer be subjected to en route? Contract leprosy, perhaps; get raped by a panda; or maybe get his head trapped between two halves of a lowering drawbridge?

This was change all right, but change as an excuse for idiocy. It was desperately disheartening for those who cherished and loved the show’s early years. Watching Homer hold forth on the topless women he’d seen on holiday in Florida, or Marge accidentally getting breast implants, you wanted everything to be revealed as a huge wind-up, or a cunning satire on trashy TV. But there was no hidden agenda. What you saw was what you got: A base, repetitive, unfunny cartoon.

THE MOVIE COMES TOO LATE

And now, off the back of such a catastrophic decline, the movie has arrived. Is it too much to hope that it will, despite everything, turn out to be confoundingly brilliant?

The omens don’t look good. The trailers have majored in physical violence, including
Homer getting repeatedly battered by a wrecking ball. And the publicity machine has been grinding away, humiliating into submission anyone who dares doubt the staying power of a show that’s clocked up 400 episodes.

One thing’s for sure: It’s not the momentous occasion it would have been had the film come out when first planned. It’s too late for that now. — THE GUARDIAN


It's not been funny for years and I can't see the movie being up to much.
 
It's not been funny for a while, but no doubt people will go to see it.

It'll probably turn out to be the biggest grossing film ever.
 
Good Guardian piece repeated in the press here on Monday which sums up the Simpsons for me:


THE SIMPSONS UNDER FIRE

Springfield, Vermont, has been named official home of The Simpsons. It has just been announced that The Simpsons Movie will get its world premiere there on July 21.

The Vermont venue beat 13 other identically-named towns in the United States in the competition to host the event, having had to prove how similar they were to the fictional Springfield inhabited by America’s No 1 animated family. Vermont citizens clinched the prize with their own video, in which a Homer lookalike gets pursued through the streets by a giant runaway pink doughnut. Having a nuclear plant nearby no doubt helped the town’s bid.

It’s the kind of stunt that would fit perfectly into the show. Which is precisely the problem, The Simpsons of today revels in big, stupid antics, one-note gags and obvious plot twists. The Simpsons of yesteryear, however, was a different beast — one that would have found no room for over-sized pastries pursuing characters along sidewalks. That’s why it’s hard to greet the arrival of the movie with whoops of excitement.

If it’s anything like the current TV show, this will be one of the greatest misfires in spin-off history.

You can almost hear the panic in the voice of The Simpsons’ creator Matt Groening. The film will be “deliberately imperfect”. It contains “everything we couldn’t show on television”.

His co-producer, Al Jean, has even boasted that “if you’ve never heard of The Simpsons, you can enjoy the film”.

They know expectation is sky-high, even for something that’s been 15 years (yes, 15!) in the pipeline. So why the need to qualify the film with so many caveats and premature apologies?

Could it be that they know, deep down, The Simpsons is but a shade of what it used to be? Once, it was the greatest show on TV. Every episode was brimming with imagination, excitement and some of the sharpest one-liners to come out of America for decades. But above all, it was smart: The Simpsons knew how to parry crudity with intelligence blow for blow. It was intelligent, daring and exhilarating stuff.

For every burp gag came an arch popculture reference. For every time Homer fell down the stairs or Bart got strangled, we had a nifty TV parody or sly political dig. And it kept on coming, week after week.

An entire generation didn’t understand it. George Bush senior, then US President, even wished aloud that American families could be more like the Waltons than the Simpsons. A massive rift opened up between those who “got” The Simpsons and those who hated it. You chose your side carefully. Then it all changed.

EVOLVING BACKWARDS?

A new guard took over and ripped up the rules. Veterans of the show with pedigrees on venerated US comedy institutions like Saturday Night Live and The Tonight Show Jon Vitti, George Meyer, John Schwartzwelder either departed or went part-time.

In came writers who had cut their teeth on sappy teen comedies like Blossom and unsophisticated knockabouts like Beavis and Butt-Head. A looser, lazier sensibility took hold, given free rein by new executive producer Mike Scully. And the show became stupid.

You can even put a date on it: 1997, in the early episodes of the ninth series, where the head of Bart’s school, Principal Skinner, was suddenly, arbitrarily revealed to be an impostor, and his entire life to date had been a lie. A major character in a long-running series gets unmasked as a fraud? It was cheap, idle storytelling.

This was just the start. The show went on to jettison all interest in pretending
to have earthy, avuncular roots: The warm, good-natured centre that, when you scraped away the
multi-layered jokes and cerebral grandstanding, had been there from day one was obliterated.
No longer did we see the family bonding, caring for each other, showing emotion. Instead, it was anything goes.

Plots swung sickeningly from one cliche to another. Jokes arrived out of the blue for no reason. No attempt was made to cling to reality. Now, Homer would end up in new employment six or seven times a series. To date, he’s held 118 (and counting) jobs — from missionary to garbage commissioner to grease salesman to fortune cookie writer, which wouldn’t be such a damning statistic had almost none of them been particularly funny.

True, a long-running series has to evolve. Nobody would expect Simpsons episodes to still be solely about Lisa getting a pony or Bart failing a school exam. But, in the second decade of its life, The Simpsons evolved into a dreadfully predictable monster.

With each new series came the same questions. Which foreign country will the family just happen to end up visiting this time? Which pop star will the family just happen to encounter while there? What unsubtle bit of physical violence will Homer be subjected to en route? Contract leprosy, perhaps; get raped by a panda; or maybe get his head trapped between two halves of a lowering drawbridge?

This was change all right, but change as an excuse for idiocy. It was desperately disheartening for those who cherished and loved the show’s early years. Watching Homer hold forth on the topless women he’d seen on holiday in Florida, or Marge accidentally getting breast implants, you wanted everything to be revealed as a huge wind-up, or a cunning satire on trashy TV. But there was no hidden agenda. What you saw was what you got: A base, repetitive, unfunny cartoon.

THE MOVIE COMES TOO LATE

And now, off the back of such a catastrophic decline, the movie has arrived. Is it too much to hope that it will, despite everything, turn out to be confoundingly brilliant?

The omens don’t look good. The trailers have majored in physical violence, including
Homer getting repeatedly battered by a wrecking ball. And the publicity machine has been grinding away, humiliating into submission anyone who dares doubt the staying power of a show that’s clocked up 400 episodes.

One thing’s for sure: It’s not the momentous occasion it would have been had the film come out when first planned. It’s too late for that now. — THE GUARDIAN


It's not been funny for years and I can't see the movie being up to much.

I really hope you didn't bother reading all that.

Its a cartoon.
 
I'm off to see it tonight, I'll let you all know whether it's actually good or not since your opinions are worth squat.
 
just seen it...

some very funny bits...

but overall... a bit dissapointing... all simpsons... hardy any smithers/burns... or principal skinner etc...
 
I saw an advanced screening of it last night. The first ever showing in the UK, apparently.

Good film. I'd give it 4/5. The first half is excellent; a couple of scenes in it are simply perfect, with so much effort going into such little screen time...but it's impossible to keep that going for a whole film. The end is a little silly but I'd definitely recommend seeing it, and you should definitely see it on the big screen rather than waiting for it to come out on dvd.

At the end of the day, it's pretty much like a really long episode. But it's a good episode, so there's nothing wrong with that
 
Good film. I'd give it 4/5. The first half is excellent; a couple of scenes in it are simply perfect, with so much effort going into such little screen time...but it's impossible to keep that going for a whole film. The end is a little silly but I'd definitely recommend seeing it, and you should definitely see it on the big screen rather than waiting for it to come out on dvd.

At the end of the day, it's pretty much like a really long episode. But it's a good episode, so there's nothing wrong with that

Yeah I would agree with that, the end was pretty anti climatic but didn't spoil what was a funny film.
 
It was good, lots of laughs although I agree they were doing better near the start. That's the way all these things seem to go... Anyway, good film, go see it.