|Page 9 of 77:||               |
|Index||770 reviews in total|
To be honest, I've been a huge fan of the Simpsons since first watching
it at the age of 6, and am always an avid fan of the classic seasons (1
to 8) and seasons 9 to 12 at a stretch. But since 2002, the show's
fallen flat and failed to produce even a fraction of the humour or
originality from it's heyday. I dreaded the release of this movie,
knowing it would really only be one aimed at the younger audience that
never got the opportunity to start with the classic episodes.
In the few months before its release, we were promised a new storyline and fresh, new, original jokes. However, it took 11 writers (one being the show's creator Matt Groening) to produce an overlong episode of the series as it is today, with the culmination of sad homophobic jokes and the same 8 sub-story lines that have been used since the classic era, but with extremely stale jokes.
The story (or small shred of what should be a storyline) consists of Homer taking in an obscure animal as a pet (overused subplot #1), single-handedly causing an environmental cock-up that has the rest of the townspeople baying for the family's blood (overused subplot #2) and forcing the family to flee Springfield (OSP #3).
During all of this, Bart disowns Homer for being a negligent parent (OSP #4), Lisa experiences first love for the 217th time (OSP #5), Marge and Homer fall out to an extent where they threaten to divorce each other (OSP #6), so it's up to Homer to try and patch up the family's differences after having an apparition telling him to go back to Springfield and sort out the mess (OSP #7).
If you're still awake by the end credits, make sure you catch Maggie's (10th) first word (OSP #8), that is if you haven't already lost the will to live after the extremely unfunny jokes and soul-destroying cameo scenes from rock band Green Day and actor Tom Hanks.
Avoid this movie at all costs. Alternatively, If you want to watch it for the only witty joke in 8 miserable years of pro-Bush humour, fast forward your borrowed DVD or online video to the final 5 minutes which involves Homer literally being.... I won't give it away for those who haven't seen the movie already or avoided it up to now. Other than that, it truly is one to avoid and a total waste of money, proof that Groening should have pulled the plug on the series at the turn of the millennium.
If anyone gave this movie a 10/10, shame on them.
If you have a look at some of the more positive comments, you'll see that people say this movie is 'hilarious'... however this is clearly untrue.
Watch the movie, and name one funny part of the movie (okay, maybe the spider pig skit is sadly the most funny part of this film (hence its promotion in advertisement and trailers)). Is there one person on this earth who finds repetitive slapstick (Homer repetitively sticking his hand into a lake which is 'electrified'???) and predictable 'childish' humor funny (Moe turns off lights at the bar, and his clothes are stripped from him???)? Unfortunately, there are many people who laugh at this crap... Hahahahahah...NOT!!!!!! Is it just me, or was this humor targeted to satisfy complete retards? Simpsons used to be smart - there characters were well though out, the humor was ironic, ingenious and satirical. Today however, the Simpson's is all about lame stupidity (including the producers who created it!). Once again, the humor is soooo predictable. One such success of cartoons like Family Guy, is that they break down stereotypes and predictability - this is what makes it so smart and hilarious.
I was a bit skeptical before seeing the Simpson's movie (after seeing the newer (more lame) seasons of the Simpsons).... unfortunately i was right.
What started out as a revolutionary TV series has turned into just
"another show". When the Simpsons first started, it was funny, new, and
fresh. The producers continued along that path until the show reached
its 15th or so season and the show lost most of its luster and shine.
Jokes were bled dry and nothing new was added.
Until, the producers decided to go the obvious route, to make a movie of the long-running show to try to revive its fanbase. Long story short: it was a failure. The show relied too heavily on the familiar, overused, and sometimes not even funny, jokes. But when in doubt, the producers had the characters throw in a phrase/quip/joke/comeback that was either yelled, involved swearing, or both.
The main reason this movie was a bomb because everyone is used to the Simpsons being 30 minutes long. Since the movie was a little less than triple the length, it was about an hour too long.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
The Simpsons has often capitalized on its medium, and when it was first
aired on The Tracy Ullman Show and shortly thereafter in a regular
television spot, its uniqueness as a cartoon adult sitcom allowed such
tags as "D'oh!" and "Don't have a cow!" to actually be considered
subversive. If those lines no longer make you dizzy with laughter, then
this movie will leave you disappointed.
This is because The Simpsons Movie blandly reheats almost twenty years of this family's dysfunction--Homer's loutish carelessness reacts unfavorably with (pick one or more) Marge's anxieties, Bart's need for a father, Lisa's hodge-podge of social causes, and Maggie's no-longer-cute-and-now-just-plain-annoying highly advanced reasoning and fine motor skills--and somehow feels the great urge to commit to an 84-minute rehearsal of its basic themes. The television show is actually poorer for the advent of this movie, since the latter brought into sharper relief the basic flaw in a show that once claimed to be different from the rest of the trash on TV (Matt Groening's words) by positing an animated universe in which anything could happen.
If "anything" can happen in this universe, why are we being served the same threadbare stock situations or character-driven plots of the early 90s? How is the sappy reuniting of Homer and Marge after a period when their marriage is put under pressure by buffoonery at all different from any other sitcom? What does the movie offer that we couldn't get from watching an episode on television, or even the two-part "Who Shot Mr. Burns?" (a much more successful "movie")? More money for its producers? The truth is that "unlimited possibilities" cannot be conveyed by any one kind of medium, for in order to make it intelligible, we have to add the content that necessarily limits it. A cartoon world is still a world, after all, and if "random" or "zany" has come to be expected, it becomes a norm, and hence very much self-limiting.
Sadly, by regurgitating and then flogging all of the show's underlying premises, The Simpsons Movie took some of the shine off the nostalgia I've always felt for Springfield.
well... considering the script was supposedly 10 years in the making, I
was incredibly excited about seeing it. I have seen the trailers and it
looked pretty amusing. Unfortunately I was sorely disappointed with the
yes it did have a few laugh out loud moments in it which is why i ranked it a five, but it was nothing how I anticipated it to be.
the storyline was just weird. that was the only way to put it. I mean what the hell? Unfortunaly the best bits were in the trailers.
i was happy to finally see the film but i do think that they should just stick to the television program.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
The Simpsons is one of the legit hit phenomena of the last 20 years.
Ever since it's conception in 1989, it's wowed, dazzled and amused
audiences with its perfect blend of comedy, satire and sharp
America's favourite dysfunctional family have become so ingrained in modern pop-culture that I wondered how long it would be before they emerged onto the big screen. And although creator Matt Groening first hit on the idea of a Simpsons movie way back in 1992, it took a further 15 years for the finished result to fully emerge. And the big question surely on everyone's lips is...was it worth the wait?
I'm afraid not. In spite of all the hype surrounding it, the 11 writers who wrote the screenplay, its lengthy production process and mass expectations, The Simpsons Movie comes up short in far too many areas.
I must admit that in recent years, I do feel The Simpsons has lost a fair bit of its sparkle. There was a time when I tuned into the show with almost religious fervour. Nowadays I only dip in every now and again to give it a casual glance.
The first ten seasons were pure televised brilliance. Consistently entertaining. Sharp satire. Witty as hell. But then after Season 11, it suddenly began to lose focus, and become increasingly more tired and formulaic. And that's a problem that infects The Simpsons Movie too.
The film has a plot that really wouldn't have looked out of place in the TV show. Homer adopts a pet pig that he names Spider-Pig (and then later Harry Plopper. Funnier names crossed my mind, Harry Trotter, e.g.). When he puts the pig's waste in a silo and dumps it into Springfield Lake, it pollutes the water so badly it starts churning out mutant squirrels.
The EPA declare Springfield an environmental hazard and encase the town in a massive glass dome. When the people realise Homer's responsible for all this, he escapes with the family and hides out in Alaska. But when the EPA decide to nuke Springfield, Homer realises he must return to clean up the mess he's made.
As I sat through The Simpsons Movie, I laughed aloud exactly five times. A sad reduction of the comic edge The Simpsons once had. The TV show certainly opens up onto the big screen with confidence. There is one dazzling moment where the camera glides through an entire lynch mob made up of just about every character from the show. Bart gets a bit of full frontal nudity (only a bit, mind you!), and Marge even gets a cuss-word that would have been too extreme for the TV format.
But for every laugh-aloud moment scattered throughout the film, you have to wonder why you're not laughing the rest of the time. I first began to get a sinking feeling about the film within the first five minutes when Grampa Simpson has something like a psychic fit while at church. He rolls around the floor muttering portents and predicting doom. I get the impression this scene was intended as an hysterical set-piece, but it falls curiously flat. I didn't laugh once. In fact if anything, the scene feels cringeworthy rather than funny.
And the rest of the film settles into the same kind of scattershot humour. There are many, many sight gags. Too many to recall. But where some of them hit the mark, others go far off it. I liked the scene where Homer discovers Alaska is not the way he envisioned it. So he remedies the situation by putting up a picture of it over the windscreen of his car, and he says, "There, that's better!"
And one wonderful scene halfway through makes the film worth seeing for this one moment alone. Marge wants to go back to Springfield, and when Homer refuses, she packs up the kids and leaves without him. Marge leaves a videotape for him, saying she's reached the end of her tether with him. She can't just look the other way anymore, and turn a blind eye to his selfishness. And to prove she means what she says, she taped this message over they're wedding video.
Its a surprisingly tender scene. The one moment where the film forgets about trying to be funny and instead makes a strong, dramatic statement. But the cap on the scene is Homer is so devastated, that when the scene fades out it follows up with a cue-card saying, To Be Continued...Immediately. An absolutely delightful moment inspired in its creativity. I laughed for several minutes.
I also liked Homer's M.C. Escher inspired dream sequence that compels him to do the right thing. I just wish the rest of the film had some of the same inspiration. Things come to a satisfying dramatic conclusion, but the comedy just doesn't come fast enough.
Subplots like Lisa getting a crush on an Irish boy, and Bart seeing Ned Flanders as a potential father figure feel underdeveloped. They don't really go anywhere. And there is disappointingly little of Simpson favourites Mr Burns and Principal Skinner.
The Simpsons feels a bit stretched at feature length too. There's a nice self-mocking cameo appearance from Tom Hanks, but the film isn't all that it should have been. Its easy to say that's because The Simpsons works best as a TV show instead of a film. But the sad truth is, The Simpsons ran its course a long time ago. The film is just as empty as the show has become.
Where it once cornered the market of primetime animation, The Simpsons now seems decidedly tame when held up against the no-holds barred material of South Park. The Simpsons is a spent force. You'll probably disagree with that today, but in time, you'll come to see that I'm right.
Unless you're a huge Simpson's fan you're better off seeing Stardust.
We went and watched it even though we're not big Simpsons fans and
found the movie mediocre at best. I'm not sure how it made 70+ mil on
its opening weekend it really is nothing more then a long version of
one of the less good later season shows.
The only things that I found funny were when they were mocking the fact that it was just a stupid show and we could "get it for free". The commercials and other things were entertaining although South Park obviously did the TV show within a TV show making a movie joke long before Simpsons did.
Taking the last 9 or so years of Simpsons episodes into account, this film was never going to be brilliant. As it happens, it's not even particularly good. The problem is the writing has become stale and the gags are predictable. M.Groening may like to comment on the current episodes being 'the funniest ever' but in reality, what would he know? The most intelligent and innovative writing can be collated for episodes falling between 1993 and 1997; after that, with the exception of an occasional bulls eye, they've been on a steady decline - even referring to the humourless episodes with the Leprechaun Jockeys or the Homer-raping Panda disturbs me. There are moments here but to sit through a 1hr 26 mins episode of The Simpsons which isn't that great, seems unnecessary. Instead, grab a Duff, sit on your sofa and watch just about any four episodes from the early 90's. Far more enjoyable and much better value.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
I went to see a midnight showing of the movie after I got off work. My
good friend and long time Simpsons fan who also works with me came
along. As the movie started, I noticed the goosebumps on my arms, the
hairs on my body standing on end, and the anticipation in the air. I
loved the opening; not what I expected, but pleasing. Sadly, the first
scene and maybe the first ten or twenty minutes delivered to me and the
rest just left me asking "Wait... The early season writers wrote this?"
Yeah, I admit it, I am on of The Simpson "fans" that regularly says to
my friends.. "Yeah man, I like the early episodes, but after awhile,
they just lost the heart, you know? Episodes like 'Secrets of a
Successful Marriage' and 'One fish, Two fish, Blow fish, Blue fish'
actually made me relate and feel like I wasn't just watching a cartoon
As common as it is today to hear that or similar statements from fans, it couldn't be further from the truth.
The movie was...bad; easy, cheap laughs for the most part. Hardly any of the witty, smart aspects were there at all. There were a few gags here and there that delivered, but never at any time did I think it could compare what-so-ever to the old episodes, unbelievably written by most of the writers that worked on the movie.
What annoyed and angered me more than anything was the horrible attempted political commentary (E.P.A. as a villain?), and Green Day, of course. What I love about the simpsons is the simpson univerese itself. Of course, there were always guest stars from time to time, but it always felt like "The Simpson Universe-anytown U.S.A" to me. It felt like the episodes could be shuffled around, and not one would affect the other. The writers developed each character so well that it hardly seemed like a cartoon. The "good" Simpsons are timeless. That's the word: Timeless...
...but horrible current political commentary and a Greenday appearance make it painfully clear exactly when this movie came out. If the political commentary was clever or sharp in any way, it MIGHT have worked. Instead, you have your random, cheap laugh, Family Guy-like humor that has unfortunately polluted comedy on screen to the point where it's rare to find something that actually makes your soul giggle and feel like it was worth it (Like the old Simpson seasons).
Why was Burns not the villain? Can someone please explain this to me? It is "THE Simposns movie" for God's sake. The man had one scene. Sorry, I know that this is immature and just plain horrible to say, being that every fan would want to make the movie his/her own way, but c'mon. Team Mr.Burns up with Sideshow Bob! Make us feel like we're in Springfield! Anyways, I'm getting off track. Back to my review: What I love most about the old episodes is, in fact, the heart and moral quality. The movie spent most of its time with bad political humor, Homer acting not quite like himself, and a Bart who we just don't recognize on screen. Bart hates Flanders. We all know this. Bart thinks Homer is an idiot, but he loves him. The whole Bart/Flanders story was awful and just...painful to watch. I don't even need to address Homer trying to win Marge back because we've all seen it a billion times before and this was by far the most predictable unimagined way to tell the classic story that we all love: Homer makes mistake. Marge is mad at Homer. Homer dosen't know what to do. Homer makes everything okay somehow. Homer gets Marge back.
(By the way, in the scene where Homer watches the video Marge left him in the cabin, does Julie Cavner's voice sound a little off? Is it just me?) Oh yeah, and if Homer is messing up , where are Patty and Selma to voice their opinion? Where was Skinner? Where was Poochy? Kidding.
It felt like a stretched-out, recent episode that wasn't quite as bad as other episodes, but definitely not even remotely worthy of the big screen. For Christ's sake, if you're going to make a movie that triggers to the "New Simpson fans," at least give us Gill. Poor Gill.
WORST. MOVIE. EVER.
In Springfield, Lisa convinces the locals to clean up the polluted Lake
Springfield after the sinking of the stage of the Green Day in a
concert of rock and roll. Meanwhile, Homer saves a pig from being
killed in Krusty Burger and adopts it, calling the animal Spider Pig.
After two days, Spider Pig fills up a silo with its excrement and Homer
dumps the silo in the lake, polluting it. The angry population forces
the Simpsons to move to Alaska. Meanwhile the stupid president Arnold
Schwarzenegger is induced by his adviser from EPA to put a dome over
Springfield to hold the population and destroy the city. When Marge
sees the new in the television, she tells Homer that they must return
to Springfield to save their town and friends, but Homer is not
convinced if people of Springfield deserve their support.
"The Simpsons Movie" is a funny, acid, bitter and ironic story, actually a movie with many layers, but never naive. For a kid, there is an ecological message in addition to the jokes, but for adults there are many witty critics to politicians, corporations and to the behavior of the paranoid society. I am not a follower of the TV series, but I liked this clever movie. My vote is seven.
Title (Brazil): "Os Simpsons - O Filme" ("The Simpsons The Movie")
|Page 9 of 77:||               |
|Plot summary||Plot synopsis||Ratings|
|Awards||External reviews||Parents Guide|
|Official site||Plot keywords||Main details|
|Your user reviews||Your vote history|