Page 2 of 7

Posted: Mon Nov 13, 2006 6:38 pm
by colinr0380
Antoine Doinel wrote:New trailer
I like the way that it looks like Homer has made his own "Stop" sign to get the truck in the right position for the wrecking ball and misspelled it as "Sop"!

Posted: Mon Nov 13, 2006 8:38 pm
by portnoy
Curiously, the computer animation in that little segment at the beginning is significantly more aesthetically pleasing than anything Blue Sky has ever produced for Fox - who did they outsource that to?

Posted: Mon Nov 13, 2006 10:43 pm
by flyonthewall2983
The Simpsons crew has old friends working/or who have worked for Pixar (Silverman, Bird, Reardon, etc, etc). Who knows.

Posted: Mon Nov 20, 2006 6:24 pm
by Antoine Doinel
flyonthewall2983 wrote:The Simpsons crew has old friends working/or who have worked for Pixar (Silverman, Bird, Reardon, etc, etc). Who knows.
It was more than likely Fox's animation arm, Blue Sky Studios who did the Ice Age movies and Robots.

Posted: Tue Feb 20, 2007 5:53 am
by Antoine Doinel
Another trailer

Posted: Tue Feb 20, 2007 1:22 pm
by domino harvey
wow the animation looks really great

Posted: Tue Feb 20, 2007 3:08 pm
by davebert
Yeah the animation does look really good, and its interesting to see just how many storylines from episodes they've used bits of--a lot of it seems vaguely familiar (but hilarious). I am happy to say that far from being an embarassment, this looks like my most anticipated summer movie.

Posted: Tue Feb 20, 2007 3:36 pm
by Antoine Doinel
Though this was definitely better than the preceding trailers, and had a couple of nice gags, I'm still uncertain if they can hold it together for a ninety minute movie.

Posted: Tue Feb 20, 2007 3:37 pm
by Lino
They said the same exact thing about Snow White.

Posted: Tue Feb 20, 2007 4:12 pm
by domino harvey
I laughed a lot in the trailer and I for one am so sick of people talking shit about this movie

Posted: Tue Feb 20, 2007 4:36 pm
by Antoine Doinel
Lino wrote:They said the same exact thing about Snow White.
I'm only bringing up the length of the film because the current episodes can barely contain my interest, let alone elicit wall to wall laughter, with it's twenty four minute run time. I'm not "talking shit" about the movie, just keeping my expectations reigned in.

Posted: Tue Feb 20, 2007 4:56 pm
by Napoleon
Antoine Doinel wrote:I'm only bringing up the length of the film because the current episodes can barely contain my interest, let alone elicit wall to wall laughter, with it's twenty four minute run time.
Hasn't this (film vs. current state of tv show) been raised and addressed by someone before?

I never get my hopes up about any film, but it has always been rumoured that in the early seasons they 'saved' a lot of potentially good jokes for the long gestating film.

Posted: Tue Feb 20, 2007 5:13 pm
by Antoine Doinel
Napoleon wrote:
Antoine Doinel wrote:I'm only bringing up the length of the film because the current episodes can barely contain my interest, let alone elicit wall to wall laughter, with it's twenty four minute run time.
I never get my hopes up about any film, but it has always been rumoured that in the early seasons they 'saved' a lot of potentially good jokes for the long gestating film.
It must be a nice thought, but I somehow doubt that the team of writers - who if it's anything like writing for any other comedy show struggle to get their best material squeezed into any given episode - secretly stockpiled the best jokes for last. According to wikipedia the script only started being written in 2001.

Posted: Tue Feb 20, 2007 5:33 pm
by Andre Jurieu
Antoine Doinel wrote:
Napoleon wrote: ... but it has always been rumoured that in the early seasons they 'saved' a lot of potentially good jokes for the long gestating film.
It must be a nice thought, but I somehow doubt that the team of writers - who if it's anything like writing for any other comedy show struggle to get their best material squeezed into any given episode - secretly stockpiled the best jokes for last...
On the Simpsons DVDs, the writers constantly mention that they have a stockpile of old-unused jokes that they frequently return to when working on new episodes. Maybe it's not their "best jokes" that they have been specifically saving for the film, but they have mentioned that they do often return to that material and try to incorporate it into shows they are working on. It's not inconceivable that some of the material might have worked itself into the film.

Also, Wikipedia might be referencing the date when the staff officially commenced working on the movie script. The ideas and jokes could be pulled from anywhere really. It's not like writers (especially not comedy writers) make certain that all their material is brand new and original. I'm sure they will borrow and repeat stuff they've used in the past.

Hell, 30 Rock blatantly ripped off a Simpsons joke a couple weeks ago.

Posted: Tue Feb 20, 2007 5:41 pm
by Matt
Andre Jurieu wrote:Hell, 30 Rock blatantly ripped off a Simpsons joke a couple weeks ago.
They were taking a break from blatantly ripping off Arrested Development.

Posted: Tue Feb 20, 2007 7:30 pm
by Andre Jurieu
Matt wrote:
Andre Jurieu wrote:Hell, 30 Rock blatantly ripped off a Simpsons joke a couple weeks ago.
They were taking a break from blatantly ripping off Arrested Development.
Well, if you're going to blatantly rip-off someone, you should obviously rip-off from the very best.

Posted: Tue Feb 20, 2007 8:31 pm
by tryavna
davebert wrote:a lot of it seems vaguely familiar (but hilarious)
Antoine Doinel wrote:had a couple of nice gags
domino harvey wrote:I laughed a lot in the trailer
Am I missing something? To me, it seemed like the same old unfunny attempts at "outrageous" humor that's been characterizing the show itself for at least the past five years.

Posted: Wed Feb 21, 2007 12:17 am
by davebert
The show has, in my opinion, dragged itself back to relevance over the past few years, and if theyve switched to a format thats a bit more outrageous in situation they at least squeeze a few great jokes into each episode, which is much more than can be said for the seasons of Family Guy post-return (FG vs. Simpsons on Sunday nights was never very flattering to FG in my opinion, if only because the popular DVDs rarely had to run right after where they got alot of their gags from). It's good enough that I no longer pray for the show's graceful bowout asap, vs. outright cancellation, that I did oh... 7 years ago. But that's mostly because a lot of the new writers have spent formative years watching classic Simpsons, and I think they have a great sense of the tradition.

Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 9:19 pm
by Cobalt60
So, last nights Simpsons was, of course, a piece of shit as the whole season has been. We are in the midst of the absolute worst season ever. However, there was a Bunuel reference in last nights episode and even a scene of Lisa watching Un Chien Andalou's famous razor across the eye sequance. Pointless and tacked on but a little cool none the less.

Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 10:44 pm
by montgomery
I agree that this season is terrible. Over the past 3 seasons, I've heard a lot of critics claim that Simpsons are on the rebound, but it seems to just get worse and worse. Having never missed an episode, I watch it to keep up the only ritual I've ever had, but god, it's getting hard. I can't imagine the film will be anything other than occasionally amusing at best, though I will continue to hope for the best. The trailer certainly did not look promising.

Posted: Wed Mar 07, 2007 1:54 am
by jbeall
When the film comes out, I'll catch a matinee, but I'm not getting my expectations up.

Seasons 3-7 (or so) of the Simpsons were phenomenal; far and away the best television show, live or animated. But I think it jumped the shark when they started squeezing in really random celebrity spots not in service of the plot, but just because they were The Simpsons and everybody wanted to do a voice spot.

I own seasons 2-8 on dvd, but season 8 was already going downhill, and I just got season 9 on netflix and decided that it wasn't worth spending money on. <sigh>

Posted: Wed Mar 07, 2007 2:51 am
by denti alligator
jbeall wrote:When the film comes out, I'll catch a matinee, but I'm not getting my expectations up.

Seasons 3-7 (or so) of the Simpsons were phenomenal; far and away the best television show, live or animated. But I think it jumped the shark when they started squeezing in really random celebrity spots not in service of the plot, but just because they were The Simpsons and everybody wanted to do a voice spot.

I own seasons 2-8 on dvd, but season 8 was already going downhill, and I just got season 9 on netflix and decided that it wasn't worth spending money on. <sigh>
I think the Simpsons-went-downhill scenario is a myth. Sure, season 9 has a couple of weak episodes, but each of these still has great moments. All of the episodes I've seen from season 10-17 were hilarious. I just don't understand why everyone (and I mean EVERYONE) thinks the show took a nosedive. What, exactly, changed? I sometimes think the only reason most fans think the post-9th-season episodes are sub-par is because that's all anyone ever says about them. It's a myth. Watch the episodes and enjoy them. There's lots to enjoy.

Posted: Wed Mar 07, 2007 3:00 am
by Antoine Doinel
No, there is a reason the Simpsons took a nosedive from (approximately) season 10 onward. And it's quite simple. Homer's "stupidity" went from being naive and ignorant to indulgent. As the stories became more Homer-centric, his low IQ became something his character embraced rather than something that emerged and caused laughs depending on the situation. The humor became over-the-top, obvious and forced, creating "what-stupid-thing-will-Homer-do-next" vibe instead of the more subtle and more suprising humor of the first nine years.

I find the humor of the later seasons is overall much stupider, dialed down and the very kind of thing the show made fun of in the earlier seasons.

In my opinion, the best Simpsons episode is the one with Frank Grimes. It is the writers working at their best, with humor that is both absurd yet firmly anchored in the characters world. It had so many great touches (Homer with a signed picture of Lenny on his desk; "I live above a bowling alley and below another bowling alley"; Bart owning a factory he bought for a $1) and took it to it's logical, highly orginal conclusion. To find evidence of show much the show's writing took a swandive you don't have to look any further than the Frank Grimes Jr. "sequel" episode in which the bastard son tries to get revenge on Homer. It lacked everything the parent episode had.

Posted: Wed Mar 07, 2007 3:25 am
by denti alligator
Antoine Doinel wrote:No, there is a reason the Simpsons took a nosedive from (approximately) season 10 onward. And it's quite simple. Homer's "stupidity" went from being naive and ignorant to indulgent. As the stories became more Homer-centric, his low IQ became something his character embraced rather than something that emerged and caused laughs depending on the situation. The humor became over-the-top, obvious and forced, creating "what-stupid-thing-will-Homer-do-next" vibe instead of the more subtle and more suprising humor of the first nine years.
I simply don't see this shift, nor do I see what difference it would really make for what the show does well, if this shift were indeed noticeable.

Homer's low IQ has from the very start been central to the show. I really don't think seasons 1-9 could be called "subtle," in any way, so any apparent shift away from being "subtle" wouldn't make much of a difference.

That said, I'm looking forward to revisiting the later seasons as they become available on DVD. The episode you point to is, importantly, one from season 9.

Posted: Wed Mar 07, 2007 3:41 am
by Antoine Doinel
denti alligator wrote:
Antoine Doinel wrote:No, there is a reason the Simpsons took a nosedive from (approximately) season 10 onward. And it's quite simple. Homer's "stupidity" went from being naive and ignorant to indulgent. As the stories became more Homer-centric, his low IQ became something his character embraced rather than something that emerged and caused laughs depending on the situation. The humor became over-the-top, obvious and forced, creating "what-stupid-thing-will-Homer-do-next" vibe instead of the more subtle and more suprising humor of the first nine years.
I simply don't see this shift, nor do I see what difference it would really make for what the show does well, if this shift were indeed noticeable.

Homer's low IQ has from the very start been central to the show. I really don't think seasons 1-9 could be called "subtle," in any way, so any apparent shift away from being "subtle" wouldn't make much of a difference.

That said, I'm looking forward to revisiting the later seasons as they become available on DVD. The episode you point to is, importantly, one from season 9.
I think season 10 was the last sort-of consistent season, but if you look at 11 which opened with a guest spot from The Who, it really took a bad turn.

I guess I can't describe adequately describe the shift from 1-10, and from 11-onward but I'm a pretty big Simpsons fan and it's definitely there. The humor in the later episodes is caked on rather than letting it - and the stories - develop organically. I can't even watch the later episodes in syndication as they are just moronic - even for the Simpsons.