<< The Higher Common Sense | Front Page | Well, it's not exactly Harry Potter, but ... >>
Wednesday, July 25, 2007
Have the Simpsons jumped the Shark?
We Robertses are off on our holidays tomorrow. To France, since you ask. So there’ll be no more posting from me for a fortnight or more. But today, in between packing and converting money to Euros, we treated ourselves to a cinema outing, and went to see an advance preview of the Simpsons movie.
It’s very good, and often funny, but I left the cinema feeling a vague dissatisfaction. Not that I experienced Simpsons fatigue, exactly; on that score I’d say that Peter Bradshaw, in the Guardian, has it about right:
The Simpsons are finally, triumphantly, here, after much whingeing and whispering that we’ve all got Simpsons fatigue and that the movie was only going to be a feature-length version of the TV show. To which I can only say “only?” It’s only going to be superbly funny and well-written all the way through? With a creative IQ that easily outpaces 99% of everything else Hollywood churns out? And as for Simpsons fatigue, I was too busy laughing to notice any.
Laughing, yes I did that. But after so many episodes, all so very densely packed with gags and slapstick, there’s a danger that all the permutations have been permed, and mutated. Onscreen the gags. though often funny, are all pretty-much variants of older gags. Perhaps this was made worse by the fact that the trailers had already released some of the movie’s best moments into the wider world: Homer putting the hammer in his eye; Homer smashed by the wrecking ball; naked skateboarding Bart; spider pig. Spoilers of course deflate the potency of those moments in situ. Spider pig is pretty hilarious, actually; but when it came on screen most of the cinema we were in sang along with Homer, which suggests that the flush has been a little busted. It may have something to do with the natural shelf life of a show like this. That shelf-life might be nearing its end.
Or maybe my disatisfaction has to do with the fact that my personal favourite Simpsons character (Professor Frink, of course) gets only one underpowered cameo moment. Indeed, some of the best characters are reduced to fleeting cameos: Krusty, Doctor Nick (‘hayllo everyabody!’), the Sea Captain, Comic Book Guy – and some are omitted altogether. Where’s Principal Skinner? Superintendent Chalmers? Mrs Krabappel? Patty? Selma? The villain of the piece was a thoroughly underwhelming new character, who gets oodles of not very funny screen time; and the sublime Monty Burns is hardly up there at all. Why couldn’t Burns be the villain of the piece? That would have been in all ways better. The plot, too, creaks in places. Homer falling in love with the pig is splendid; dumping a silo of pig poo in Lake Springfield is excellent; but the government dropping an enormous transparent dome over the town is a little too weird even for a show that trades in creative weirdness (not to be too stupidly literal minded, but why didn’t any of the inhabitants try tunnelling out?) And the Simpsons moving to Alaska nonplussed me.
Still, I laughed a lot. It just hasn’t stuck in my head the way the best Simpsons episodes do. And I’m not sure that its ninety-minutes produced as many quotable moments as a typical third- or fourth-series twenty-two-minuter. Mind you, I was originally going to title this post ‘Have the Simpsons jumped the Bart?’, which is neither funny nor particularly comprehensible. So what do I know.
Comments
Principal Skinner isn’t in the movie?!/!*&5$3?!????? Huh?
I agree, I firmly agree. I think we can all agree these moments and characters defined the show.
BEST BAND CAMEOS ON THE SIMPSONS
http://www.blender.com/guide/articles.aspx?ID=2757&src=tst30
MOST OBSCURE CHARACTERS OF THE SIMPSONS
http://www.maximonline.com/Entertainment/TheMostObscureSimpsonsCharacters/slideshow/3103/200.aspx?src=tst31
I agree with this: “Onscreen the gags. though often funny, are all pretty-much variants of older gags.”
The Simpsons are recycling themselves, which for me has translated into disregarding most of the new episodes. What I find most interesting about this is that other cartoons are able to recycle the Simpson’s gags rather successfully without feeling old or as you say overly “permed, and mutated.”
I think the Simpsons should end now. They can’t recycle other current cartoons, it would be to obvious, and as already stated, they can’t recycle their own gags.
(Excitedly anticipating Futurama’s return)
"(not to be too stupidly literal minded, but why didn’t any of the inhabitants try tunnelling out?)”
I believe any attempt to tunnel out of the dome by any other inhabitants would have made the sink hole, inadvertently created by Homer’s negligence to his handy man duties, blasé.
As for taking refuge in Alaska, I thought it usual behavior for “Groeninian” irony. Most wanted or unwanted villains, rebel rousers, and/or Homeric like morons would usually flee South to escape persecution. Thus, it is a fitting humorous gesture to have Homer flee North.
The naked skateboarding Bart was funny but was it necessary to show his genitals? A coworker was disappointed. It really bothered him that he took his young son to see it. I am wondering what everybody else thinks.
Re: Tejano. Most male members of the human species have balls and a penis. So what’s the problem?
And, sorry, dear readers, I really have to admit here and now that I have always found Homer Simpson is just an unnerving and dumb pain in the neck. Pleaaase! Could somebody explain to me what is supposed to be funny about him???
Bor-ing
Bor-ing
Bor-ing
I’m sure I must have laughed sometime, at something, but mostly I remember the end-credit rendition of the Spider Pig theme. Very clever.
Yes, we got to see Bart’s doodle, but it was framed.
The Disney animal getting the marital bed all prettied up was clever, as was the animal’s voyeristic interest in and horror of it.