Phoenix101
Sophomore
@angryjoeshow
Posts: 605
Likes: 141
|
Post by Phoenix101 on Jul 27, 2017 16:45:17 GMT
I can't believe we're paying to see something we get on TV for free. If you ask me, everyone in this theater is a giant sucker! Especially YOU! - Homer Simpson Well. Here we are, folks. A decade later. The Simpsons Movie was quite possibly the most anticipated film of the 2007 summer season, right there with Spider-Man 3. The marketing was insane. There were 7-11's that became Kwik-E-Marts that sold Simpsons merchandise, Burger King did constant promotions for the film, there was a popular avatar site where you could make yourself into a Simpsons character that may have ended up on the actual show. It was huge. How could it not? The Simpsons themselves were celebrating their 20th anniversary as characters, as they made their first appearance on The Tracy Ullman Show as a bunch of shorts that later became the longest running cartoon of all time and one of the most influential shows ever made. The show was widely beloved during its so-called "golden age", which many fans say were seasons 1-8, before a dip in quality that ranges from "still good but not as good as before" to "cancel this crap!". So there was a lot riding on this film to impress the fans that have felt its declining nature. Did it succeed? Well, for me, as a huge Simpsons fan, not really. Don't get me wrong. It's good, but not as good as it should've been. They had all the best Simpsons writers working on it (excluding Conan O'Brien), the best director The Simpsons show ever had in Monsters Inc-helmer David Silverman, and a long time for them to make up a good excuse for the big screen. Yet, it felt like a long episode of the show. The marketing didn't reveal what was the plot for the film and I assumed that Homer finally did something to ruin the entire planet this time. I thought that was a big deal. Instead, the problems were limited to Springfield being nearly destroyed, again. There wasn't anything that warranted anything but a three-part season finale. Not even the subplots like Bart wanting Flanders as a father (very contrived), Lisa in love with Bono's son (who we never see again in the show), and Marge questioning her marriage to Homer (nothing new. She's left him many times). It doesn't help that a lot of the characters are absolutely wasted. Apparently, there have been an hour of deleted footage that will never see the light of day. Would've loved to see what got cut, like Sideshow Bob appearing throughout (it's a sin Bob wasn't the villain. Instead, we got a generic business-suit baddie). Of course, the most important part of The Simpsons has always been the humor, so how did it hold up? 50/50. Some of it works, like the opening line Homer gave that I provided, and there are some that try to hard, like frickin' Spider-Pig. A lot of the jokes are definitely made for 2007 and have certainly dated, like at one point, there's a "take that" at Fox for advertising their shows during their films, shows that have now been canceled. Not to mention the satire is way too obvious and not as cutting as others films of it's ilk, especially South Park: Bigger, Longer, and Uncut. It's kinda disappointing that they had so many years to think of the best jokes to use for the film and it's so scattershot. It's production values are great, I can't deny. It's nice to see a mainstream, 2D film during a time when there's only CG animated films. There's some obvious CG here and there but for the most part, it's gorgeously 2D and it makes use of the widescreen composition and coloring. Hans Zimmer does a great job with the score, giving each character a leitmotif, something not done in the actual show, and giving it that wacky feeling yet upgrading it to "blockbuster". His take on the theme is wonderful. The voice acting is as good as ever but major props to Dan Castellaneta. He's always done a great job as Homer but he's the best he's ever been here. The timing, the emotional parts, he excelled at them. Albert Brooks is always fun but he had nothing to work with as the antagonist (why wasn't it Sideshow Bo... letting it go. Letting it go). The others cameos were good, too. Overall, I didn't hate it. I just felt for such an anticipated event, they could've done a better job with the humor and plot. Give us something we haven't see before. If you're a fan, it's worth a watch but I don't know if I can recommend it for those who've never seen the show. It stands perfectly on its own, aside from some Easter eggs from the show, but I can't see it converting them to fans. It's a serviceable animated comedy. 3/5.
|
|
shawshanked
Sophomore
@shawshanked
Posts: 246
Likes: 66
|
Post by shawshanked on Jul 27, 2017 20:57:17 GMT
You kind of contradict yourself by saying that the movie reuses things (like Marge leaving Homer) yet you want Sideshow Bob to be the villain.
|
|
|
Post by Reggie_Stration on Jul 27, 2017 21:14:04 GMT
I can't help thinking how good the film could have been had it been made around that "golden era", say after season 7 or 8 when the show was at its peak for creativity and humour, and could do little wrong each and every episode. The writers would have had a field day for a film version I have no doubt. They would have given it the epicness, if you like, that it deserved; more celebrity voice cameos, more characters and better use of them, a bigger and better plot, and most of all a funnier script from writers that were in the zone.
Frankly, the idea of the government placing a dome over Springfield is fairly lightweight and underwhelming for a Simpsons film in my opinion, and is surpassed by single episode plots that would be more befitting of a film version, such as the meteor heading for Springfield, or even Homer crossing over to another dimension. And yes, as you say, the subplots didn't amount to much special either.
The writers dropped the ball with this one, but in many ways it was to be expected with the show well past its best at the time it was made, and felt like an extended episode of one of those new episodes in terms of quality, with the odd funny moments that you still get, rather than the consistently funny moments you used to get.
|
|
|
Post by Primemovermithrax Pejorative on Jul 27, 2017 21:59:20 GMT
Yeah I think they waited too long. Its not nearly as funny as it should be (ha Hillary is president) and WTF making Arnold Schwarzenegger president? It feels like 2 different episodes stuck together.
But I think it has the same problem that the first Star Trek movie had--you can do anything you want-so what do you do? Decisions decisions.
|
|
maxwellperfect
Junior Member
@maxwellperfect
Posts: 3,966
Likes: 1,684
|
Post by maxwellperfect on Jul 27, 2017 22:29:47 GMT
I enjoyed it while watching it but have never felt the desire to revisit it. Full length movies of 30 minute cartoons have never really cut it for me.
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Jul 27, 2017 22:44:25 GMT
I was and still am a big Simpsons fan so I loved the hell out of it when it came out. Years later, I'd give it a 7/10. It's a lot of fun but you're right, there was so much more they could have done. I'm surprised they didn't try to milk it for all its worth to make a film franchise or something.
|
|
|
Post by sdm3 on Jul 27, 2017 22:48:05 GMT
Not too bad, but the show was about 10 years past its prime (and it's STILL running).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 27, 2017 23:14:28 GMT
It was good. Surprised we haven't had another.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 27, 2017 23:15:48 GMT
Has it really been 10 years? I can still remember the day I see it in theaters pretty clearly. It was okay. Not the best Simpsons experience, but decent. My favorite Simpsons episode is still "Bad Man Homer".
|
|
DarkManX
Junior Member
@shadowrun
Posts: 2,266
Likes: 1,100
|
Post by DarkManX on Jul 27, 2017 23:32:15 GMT
I liked the movie a lot and still watch it. However, I will agree that more could have been done with it. I was especially surprised that they didn't have a ton of celebrity cameos considering that is one of the things the show is famous for.
|
|
|
Post by Matthew the Swordsman on Jul 27, 2017 23:52:05 GMT
I enjoyed it when I finally got around to watching it, but thought it was nothing special. I can't be bothered to re-watch it.
|
|
|
Post by twothousandonemark on Jul 28, 2017 0:06:42 GMT
Yeah, the movie was pretty meh. I've still got the special edition donut box & cd case soundtrack.
I was expecting much more high risk, high reward. Instead it got all melancholy, with the Homer-Marge split turning me right off. For a Simpsons movie, I wished it was on the scale of Who Shot Mr. Burns 1&2 & more. I didn't mind the dome premise, I wasn't expecting anything less than some giant stunt gag/idea for their first film.
As Homer once said 'Be more funny.'
B
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Jul 28, 2017 0:30:10 GMT
The thing is that The Simpsons had already done EVERTHING by that point, so the movie was going to suffer because of that.
But I still enjoy the movie and it's still better than many of the episodes that were made around that time imo.
|
|
|
Post by spooner5020 on Jul 28, 2017 2:19:29 GMT
Yeah I remembered being really excited to see this in theatres. I don't remember laughing much. I also remember that all of us that went to see it came out very disappointed.
|
|
Phoenix101
Sophomore
@angryjoeshow
Posts: 605
Likes: 141
|
Post by Phoenix101 on Jul 28, 2017 5:11:59 GMT
You kind of contradict yourself by saying that the movie reuses things (like Marge leaving Homer) yet you want Sideshow Bob to be the villain. Not exactly. Sure, Sideshow Bob is a recurring villain but I would've loved for his evil plan to be more successful and more larger in scale than just about Bart. Kinda like how Plankton in The SpongeBob Movie was a legit threat.
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Jul 28, 2017 5:19:10 GMT
You kind of contradict yourself by saying that the movie reuses things (like Marge leaving Homer) yet you want Sideshow Bob to be the villain. Not exactly. Sure, Sideshow Bob is a recurring villain but I would've loved for his evil plan to be more successful and more larger in scale than just about Bart. Kinda like how Plankton in The SpongeBob Movie was a legit threat. But the show had been reusing things for a while before the movie. Even the great seasons recycle jokes and plot elements sometimes.
|
|
Phoenix101
Sophomore
@angryjoeshow
Posts: 605
Likes: 141
|
Post by Phoenix101 on Jul 28, 2017 5:25:59 GMT
Not exactly. Sure, Sideshow Bob is a recurring villain but I would've loved for his evil plan to be more successful and more larger in scale than just about Bart. Kinda like how Plankton in The SpongeBob Movie was a legit threat. But the show had been reusing things for a while before the movie. Even the great seasons recycle jokes and plot elements sometimes. Sure. If it's done well, that matters, like a running gag, but none of the subplots were engaging. Maybe the wedding tape scene but that's all on the acting than execution. The villain wasn't funny nor threatening. Not Brooks' fault; the writers didn't invest on a good antagonist.
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Jul 28, 2017 5:31:45 GMT
But the show had been reusing things for a while before the movie. Even the great seasons recycle jokes and plot elements sometimes. Sure. If it's done well, that matters, like a running gag, but none of the subplots were engaging. Maybe the wedding tape scene but that's all on the acting than execution. The villain wasn't funny nor threatening. Not Brooks' fault; the writers didn't invest on a good antagonist. Eh, I enjoyed the subplots. I believe Marge leaving Homer was a referrence to that plotline from the show. That is what I think anyway.
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Jul 28, 2017 5:42:30 GMT
But the show had been reusing things for a while before the movie. Even the great seasons recycle jokes and plot elements sometimes. Sure. If it's done well, that matters, like a running gag, but none of the subplots were engaging. Maybe the wedding tape scene but that's all on the acting than execution. The villain wasn't funny nor threatening. Not Brooks' fault; the writers didn't invest on a good antagonist. As I said, the movie and the later seasons suffer from The Simpsons already using every imaginable joke, character moments and plot line imaginable. The movie worked for me largely as a reference to the show and I think the movie is funnier than it had any right to be.
|
|
Phoenix101
Sophomore
@angryjoeshow
Posts: 605
Likes: 141
|
Post by Phoenix101 on Jul 28, 2017 5:53:05 GMT
Sure. If it's done well, that matters, like a running gag, but none of the subplots were engaging. Maybe the wedding tape scene but that's all on the acting than execution. The villain wasn't funny nor threatening. Not Brooks' fault; the writers didn't invest on a good antagonist. As I said, the movie and the later seasons suffer from The Simpsons already using every imaginable joke, character moments and plot line imaginable. The movie worked for me largely as a reference to the show and I think the movie is funnier than it had any right to be. Which is why, as many have stated, this was ten years too late. I know I sound unpleasable but I'm sure they could've thought of different ways to approach this. This went though more than 100 script revisions.
|
|