The Simpsons Movie

girish writes "Eonline is reporting that, finally, after more than 10 years since Matt Groening said that a Simpsons film 'is way down the line', a movie based on The Simpsons is being made. It's still in its early stages and is being planned to be debuted in the summer or during Christmas time of 2006. The Simpsons has been on FOX for 15 seasons and averages 12.9 million viewers this season."

Comments

Finally, the end

[blorg]

I suspect that this film may mark the end of the Simpsons. I certainly hope so, and just hope that they go back to the roots and manage to make a fitting coda to what was one of the most important shows in television history, rather than just a mindless parade of celebrity voice-overs.

Re:Finally, the end

[rufo]

I recall reading several interviews a few years back with Matt Groening where he said that if they ever did a Simpsons movie it would be towards the end of the life of the series. I don't know if he's changed his mind since then, but something to mull over...

Teehouse of Horror

[tr0llb4rt0]

The only way it'd work is to do an extended Treehouse of Horror with 10-15 minute vingettes.

If they tried an extended episode then it'd be soooo full of padding and rehashing that you'd be better off at home with the dvd collection.

Re:I'm Scared

[ZaMoose]

The Simpsons: Hit and Run actually did quite well in the long format. It was fairly entertaining throughout.

I don't know if one successful Simpsons video game necessarily indicates a successful movie implementation, but it does demonstrate that with clever writing and good pacing, a Simpsons storyline can be carried out well past the 1/2 hr. mark.

But will it work?

[iantri]

I love the Simpsons. It's great.. but I don't really think there is enough material for a feature-length movie.

In a 1/2 hour comedy, like the Simpsons, the plotlines and characters tend to be simple, due to the necessity of telling a complete story in 24 minutes.

How can Groening translate the Simpsons formula to a 1 1/2 hour (or more) movie?

Re:Make it stop

[Laur]

I agree, I stopped watching the Simpsons about four or five years ago when they stopped being that funny. Know what, I STILL get all the Simpsons references people (on /. and elsewhere) make, because they're all from older episodes!

Simpsons should think about it

[ice lioness]

I like the Simpsons but I don't think their style would work for a movie-length feature. 1.5 hours of independent jokes and little storyline doesn't sound quite right. I think they should stay in their preferred length of 22 minutes. And I haven't seen too many TV shows made into movies that are any good. Except maybe Transformers the Movie. But I'm just a geeky girl.

End of the Simpsons?

[cyranoVR]

Ever noticed that with the sole of the exception of South Park: Bigger, Longer and Uncut - a television show usually peaks by jumping to the big screen. Decline and inevitable cancellation usually soon follow.

For example: X-Files, Beavis and Butthead Do America, Batman: Mask of the Phantasm

And don't forget all the children's shows:
Transformers the Movie, GI Joe the Movie, Masters of the Universe, Pokemon, Power Rangers, Ducktales(!), Rugrats...
(Ok, not all these shows were cancelled but someone could definitely make the case for "decline").

I feel like I'm forgetting someting...help me out here people...

Also, I Googled up this interesting article:
The Challenges of the Big Screen Cartoon

"El Viaje Misterioso de Nuestro Homer"

[blorg]

Homer's chilli-trip is one of the classics, 'cinematography' wise. My gf teaches art history, and used this episode in one of her classes, asking her students to recognise the different artists parodied.

Re:Fan reaction...

[TwistedGreen]

Note that it was a different audience saying why the Simpsons sucks for each time period. The Simpsons has changed now so that a different audience thinks it sucks: which includes me.

I think it has something to do with a show's tendency to want to increase its ratings by appealing an increasingly large audience, and thus a lower and lower common denominator.

I've noticed a palpable change in style from a coherent and intelligent storyline to a more schizophrenic twelve-episodes-in-one style, which I can't stand. But I'm sure it's more popular with the media impulse-trained L[ower]CD.

Reminds me of Christopher Guest movies

[ianscot]

Lots of Christopher Guest's fans have the same reaction to each new movie when it comes out. "It's okay, but not up to the standard he's set," you know?

I never saw "Waiting for Guffman" in the theater, but enjoyed it a little when I first saw it on VHS. Was it as funny as Spinal Tap? Seemed like it wasn't on that level. Next time around, it really grew on me. "Best in Show" I made a point of seeing in the dark box, and it was -- eh, okay, I guessed. Then about a year later someone had the DVD -- and hey, that's really funny, you know? "A Mighty Wind" we all agreed wasn't quite up to par with the earlier movies that we now thought were classics... But it's amazing how often someone throws out a line from it now, for a beneath-the-radar movie.

I'd definitely connect Christopher Guest's humor to the Simpsons', somehow. Not sure what it is, but they're just satisfying in the same way. And they grow on you.

Re:Fan reaction...

[rnelsonee]

You have a point about warming up to episodes when you re-watch them, but it's still safe to say the show has declined.

I always liked the show until Season 9, when it started to show bad storylines. Shows like Apu having octuplets continued to demonstrate that the writers were 'running out of ideas', but it still had respectible writing. But then it just got worse and worse. When Ian-Maxtone Graham took over as exec. producer, we saw many things concerning the show that ruined the reputation The Simpsons once had:

• The episodes have lost cohesiveness. Acts I, II, and III are rarely tied together anymore.
• Computer-aiding drawing. Hand animators only draw key poses, and computers interpolate the rest. The result is very clean, but I think it's too clean. The Simpsons lost it's look and feel.
• Other "look and feel" issues: The Simpsons' animators used to only use a limited palette of colors. We're talking one or two shades of light blue, and one or two shades of pink. Now, there's an overuse of colors. Classic examples include lighted/muted colors for background objects, and shadows everywhere - like the back of Lisa's hair - even when everyone's indoors!
• Too topical: The Simpsons relies on jokes taken from current events. Yes, they did this in early seasons, but nowhere near as much as they do now. The timeless quality the writers put into the show in the past is gone now.

Re:"prepare-for-disappointment department"?

[Fjord]

Yeah, but you can't count that. The reason why TV->movie conversions don't work is because we are used to getting a certain level of entertainment for free and we have to pay for a movie. We expect so much more because we are putting $6.50-$12 (depending on where you are) down to see it, and if it's just a long episode we feel gypped. A movie length episode that you can see for free on TV is like a bonus long episode.

plausibility

[sacrilicious]

I think it's pretty clear to everyone that the series has never been as good as it was during seasons 3-6.

"Me too", i.e. that's certainly their golden age as far as I'm concerned.

The thing that made the Simpsons great was its loving, hilarious-yet-almost-plausible depiction of a small town and all of its quirky inhabitants. It stopped doing that a long time ago and started sending the main characters on ludicrous adventures crammed full of celebrity cameos -- in a nutshell, situational humor rather than character-based humor.

I think you've stated the stylistic change accurately, and I agree that the quality (or at least my interest) flagged in tandem with that change. It's interesting to muse on Futurama in this light. I like Futurama a lot; I suppose that could be because it's plausible in the sense that it's so far in the future that nobody can really argue that such things won't come to pass. Another possibility is that through its outlandish characters and depictions of technology and culture, the show never tried for a premise of plausibility... so it never transitioned to less plausibility and therefor never fostered the resentment of an audience that had come to appreciate plausibility. Food for thought.