Simpsons Movie

Starring: Dan Castellaneta, Julie Kavner, Yeardley Smith, Nancy Cartwright, Hank Azaria

Directed by: David Silverman

RS: 2.5of 4 Stars Average User Rating: 3of 4 Stars

2007 20th Century Fox Comedy

Look, there's no way you can go wrong spending ninety minutes at the multiplex with animated characters who have raised the bar sky-high on quality TV. Created by Matt Groening and produced by James L. Brooks, who could be buried alive in their justly won Emmys, The Simpsons is TV for the time capsule. For two decades and counting, this dysfunctional Springfield family, drawn in yellow and dripping with comic irreverence, kept us in whoo-hoo euphoria.

So why did I leave the film version feeling entertained but frustrated? Expectations are part of the problem. How do you please rabid fans, me included, who pore over the past 400 episodes like holy writ? As for new audiences who never bothered to watch the show and wouldn't know Krusty the Clown from Apu, frankly I don't give a damn.

The larger problem relates to wrapping the movie in a veil of secrecy that rivaled the last Harry Potter book. I mean, does Homer die? Does Marge kill him? If The Simpsons Movie were allowed to just sneak up on us like another episode to be enjoyed in a new format, nirvana might have been achieved. Hey, it worked with the film version of South Park.

But this movie had to be touted as an event. No early screenings. No leaks. And so you watch it panting. What do you get? Without giving too much away, it's an Al Gore movie with jokes. Director David Silverman, a Simpsons veteran, aims satirical darts at politics, religion, celebrity causes and related pomposities. The pollution in Springfield lake--a dumping ground for the frequent dumps taken by Homer's pet pig--points to a global problem. Simpson daughter Lisa aptly calls it "An Irritating Truth."

The core TV characters are all on hand--Homer (voiced for the ages by Dan Castellaneta), wife Marge (the irreplaceable whine of Julie Kavner), son Bart (bratty Nancy Cartwright), daughter Lisa (smarty-pants Yeardley Smith) and baby Maggie (she doesn't speak)--but other favorites merely make cameos. Any real Simpsons devotee knows Springfield is teeming with great personalities. The man-crush Smithers has on Mr. Burns deserves a movie of its own.

Am I being unfair? You bet. No movie could encapsulate the Simpsons world. But this one feels incomplete, an underachiever still searching for a real reason to exist beyond enriching a fat franchise. Homer even jokes that it takes a sucker to pay for a show you can get for free on TV. D'oh! That hurts.

PETER TRAVERS

(Posted: Jul 27, 2007)

Your Turn

Give us your review of
Simpsons Movie

Review 1 of 15

2of 4 Stars

D'oh! What a let down. I wanted more.

Sep 13, 2008 18:17:30

Review 2 of 15

1of 4 Stars

10 years ago, I loved The Simpsons: before the deaths of Troy McClure and Lionel Hutz, and before Groening lost his way. Watching the show since then, I imagine it is a similar experience to that of watching the bloated spectacle of Elvis Presley in concert in 1977. I had slight hopes that the reason the show stopped being funny was because Groening and co. were stowing away jokes for a movie, to go out on a high. Boy was I wrong. Listening to the audio commentary, Matt Groening and his cohorts describe how they came up with the idea of having Ralph Wiggum emerge from inside the 20th Century Fox logo as well as for him to sing the 20th Century Fox theme tune. They describe it not just as a “joke” but also as “a very funny shot”—it was at this point that I lost all faith in The Simpsons and the once unfailingly sharp comedic talents of its writers.

This is a movie for young children (a point confirmed when I heard only them laughing at the cinema). Seeing Homer get hurt elicited much mirth among the kids and I wouldn’t mind it so much if The Simpsons had always been aimed towards a younger crowd (i.e. ages 10 and below), but the fact is that The Simpsons used to mean something to minors and seniors alike. It has lost its edge and failed to deliver on its promise. By this I mean that all our favourite characters make only brief cameo appearances, Barney is still alcohol-free and Rainier Wolfcastle has been replaced by President Schwarzenegger!!? 10 years ago, when The Simpsons were on top of the world, there was a documentary in which Matt Groening insisted that all episodes be character-driven. Watching that documentary again in 2008, I couldn’t help but see the irony: now, all episodes of The Simpsons are designed to be wacky, colourful, OTT—an over-indulgence of the senses.

“With this movie, for better or worse, everything done is crucial. Everything is either setting up a joke, paying off a joke or giving you information you have to have...nobody ever says “what a nice day” or “pass the salt”.”

With this movie, the creators of The Simpsons could have used a few more “what a nice day(s)” and “pass the salt(s)”. Instead, they have made something which is both highly melodramatic and hideously anti-climactic. The audience feels no sympathy whatsoever for any of the characters: if I was Homer I’d disown Bart (the latter rejecting the former just like The Simpsons Movie denies The Simpsons’ loyal following) and even the bedrock of the series—Marge and Homer’s relationship—is shaken to the core. Who are these people we thought we knew so well? Where is the magic which infused episodes like Dancin’ Homer, Homer at the Bat, Mr. Plow, Duffless, Homer Goes to College or Whacking Day (to name but a few)? It’s hard to believe that these episodes were made over 15 years ago.

Where South Park, Family Guy and even Recess: School’s Out succeeded was in not compromising an inch to either the MPAA’s rating system or to the pressures of a wider audience. We waited 18 years to see Homer, Lenny and Carl grace the big screen and yet the movie Groening made was for people who haven’t seen The Simpsons before!

May 6, 2008 15:30:37

Review 3 of 15

3of 4 Stars

For some reason, I often find that I am biased against things before I've even given them a chance. I was biased against the Simpsons solely because they seemed a little too silly to me. But after watching the movie - which looked entertaining enough that I decided forget that the Simpsons were ridiculous - I decided that the Simpson's were something very funny. I hadn't laughed that hard at something onscreen...well, ever, as far as I can remember. Much of it was highly entertaining, although it could definitely be seen that it was stretching the plot a bit.

It's pretty clear that an avid viewer wouldn't be as thrilled because they are expecting the same as the episodes, but won't be getting it because television and movies are built differently. On the other hand, someone who doesn't know the show at all could definitely just sit down and enjoy it without any other ideas about what they might see.

I've noticed that some other reviewers have seen the episodes and weren't as pleased with the movie as I was. Honestly though, the humor was very refreshing to the trite stuff we usually find on television. There were a number of jokes in the movie that simply wouldn't be found many other places. Without giving much away, I will say that my favorite joke is the church/bar one.

It really did flip my bias - if the Simpsons happens to be playing on the television, there's no question I'll watch it.

Nov 4, 2007 18:27:03

Review 4 of 15

1of 4 Stars

The Simpsons are legendary entertainment phenomenon that has been running on television for almost 2 decades. As a loyal viewer for most of its existence, I can say that some of the Simpsons TV episodes are better than others. This movie was like a bad episode ... a really long bad episode. There were some great gags and lots of reasons to laugh, but beyond the first half hour or so the movie started taking itself too seriously. There were less "spider-pig" moments and more scenes about Lisa being preachy about some thing or other.

One subplot entailing a love interest for Lisa seemed completely unnecessary and killed the momentum of the movie every scene in which it was featured. For anyone who's seen the show, you probably have seen several episodes in which Lisa falls in love with some goody-two-shoes environmental activist boy. How many times can we watch Lisa fall in love? It's a plot device that's been overdone in the TV series, and it wasn't that great device to begin with.
In the end, most of the sub-plots didn't seem fully resolved, or resolved poorly. It was very unsatisfying to see these story-lines devlop and culminate only to be shuffled together to get on with the movie's "climax".
All things considered, since every Simpson's fan will probably see this regardless of the opinions of reviewers. Die-hard fans will probably find some reasons to like this movie, but the more casual Simpsons watchers will likely find it tepid. For those new to the Simpsons franchise altogether, you're better off buying or renting a DVD pack of the TV series than watching this movie.

Aug 27, 2007 11:37:28

Review 5 of 15

1of 4 Stars

While Travers is correct in mentioning just how much The Simpsons have affected our culture throughout its 18-plus years, the film's ultimate flaw is that it fails to remind fans why they fell for the show in the first place. The film looses its momentum after about thirty minutes in; at which time the movie trails off on random subplots (the family itself, Homer's character flaws, the fate of Springfield)-- all of which are not the least bit funny, nor do they leave any emotional impact on the audience. It's sad to think that Homer is the one who is constantly ripped on by the other characters within the film, when it's quite obvious (especially in first thirty minutes) that he alone generates both the heart as well as the laughs that has made the show hilarious and popular, as well as profound and personal. Why waste your money on a film that goes absolutely nowhere, when you can be entertained (for free—as Homer points out) on your TV set at home.

Aug 24, 2007 09:03:17

Review 6 of 15

4of 4 Stars

2 words........spider pig !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Aug 22, 2007 09:37:40

Review 7 of 15

1of 4 Stars

I agree: there's no way a movie can fairly represent the complex Universe that is "The Simpsons". But this film fails at every possible level when it comes to represent (and supposedly enhance) the show's essence. I mean, Homer giving Springfield the finger? Pre-adolescent genitalia? I couldn't believe how low they went this time to get a few laughs. They keep complaining about "Family Guy" stealing from them, but "The Simpsons" is more an more like it with every year that passes.
Also, the writers showed their lack of balls by not depicting the real US president: they made Schwarzenegger the Head of State, and drew him like McBane. Boo-hoo for you!
Too much (lousy) physical humor, stories that don't go anywhere (that pig) and a total disrespect to the characters (Bart actually getting along with Ned Flanders; Lisa talking nonsense as a stupid teenager with a crush) made this movie a failure. The writing is just plain bad.
If you're a fan of those old seasons ('89 to '97, maybe) and you absolutely hate the last nine or ten years of the show, you'll know what I'm talking about.

Aug 14, 2007 07:28:30

Review 8 of 15

3of 4 Stars

this was pretty good. i didn't expect much, because i really don't enjoy the series that much, but they actually did a pretty good job with this. It's funny and lighthearted, while being only slightly grating by the end.

Aug 7, 2007 13:32:32

Previous Next