The Simpsons 5th Thread Spectacular!

[Reply #520 on:]

This is just a guess but I would think they may cut back on a few episodes next season to help finish the movie on time.  They may use a different animation studio but still the writers and cast will be short on time.

[Reply #521 on:]

1) I thought the script had already been written
2) Since when has VA on an animation taken a long time, its one of the first things they do.

[Reply #522 on:]

I'm sure doing the voices for a full movie will take awhile.  I was saying the cast will be short on time for making the episodes, not the movie.  If they are doing the voices right now that affects next season's episodes because they take like 9 months to finish. Same with the writers, yes they are probably done writing it but at the same time they are making next years shows now.

[Reply #523 on:]

The writing for the movie is mostly if not completely done.  I wouldn't worry about it.

And the recording takes almost no time.  Seriously, it's not an issue.  It's one of the accomadating jobs in the world and they can pretty much come in whenever they're available to record dialogue.  Even the voice track is probably either done or close to done now.  They're really not that pressed for time.  And thing I forget to mention earlier is that the nine months for each episode is from the inception of it, so if they've already got the script and at least a good portion of the recording done, they've got a good amount of time to animate it.

[Reply #524 on:]

There are enough staff members on The Simpsons to divide up between the show and the movie without affecting either one, I wouldn't worry about it. And even if there are less episodes this or next season, there'll still be, like, 6 or 7 hold-overs, so what's the big deal? It'd be about damn time we caught up on all them holdovers, anyway.

[Reply #525 on:]

Heres hoping the actors brush up there acting for the movie. There voices have been rather flat this season imo.

[Reply #526 on:]

Everyone, Prey for the simpson staff good luck!

[Reply #527 on:]

^That has to be one of the most unintionally funny mispellings ever.

First one to capture George Meyer wins!  Good luck everyone!

[Reply #528 on:]

 

Originally posted by DotheBartman:
^That has to be one of the most unintionally funny mispellings ever.

Pardon? Were you being sarcastic when you said "unintionally"?

[Reply #529 on:]

Haha, shit.  Looks like I picked the wrong week to stop sniffing glue....</Airplane!>

Thanks for pointing that out.  Lousy typos...

[Reply #530 on:]

Great movie, and no problem.

[Reply #531 on:]

Yeah, I wouldn't think there'd be any problems whatsoever. Hope tonight's episode is decent. They really haven't had good acting lately. I'm sure they're gettong worn out and tired of doing the same thing this long.

[Reply #532 on:]

Is tonight a new ep? I'll check it out.

"MacGyver/Jonathan "Jack" O'Neill (Richard Dean Anderson) visits Springfield and is kidnapped by Patty and Selma. Meanwhile, Homer is sent to India to train replacement employees for the power plant."

All I can say is....about damn time.

[Reply #533 on:]

Well, I give it a B-. Homer just wasn't Homer... The rest was actually better than some of the other ones in the season. I lived  Apu's  relative and how he sounded American

[Reply #534 on:]

I liked it up until the classic "Simpsons not trying to make fun of other people's culture but doing it anyway" song and dance at the end. That was almost unbareable to watch.

[Reply #535 on:]

I know... I said aloud, "Make it stop!" It was more like yelling, but you get the idea.

[Reply #536 on:]

it was good, but i hated that dance, like you mentioned

[Reply #537 on:]

yeah the dance was pretty lame, but the episode on a whole was good.  I loved richard dean anderson's guest appearance.  This season is shaping up to be a bit better than the last few.  Maybe the simpsons is coming out of the rut it's been in...  Here's hoping.

[Reply #538 on:]

some other simpson dances have been quite lame haven't they?

[Reply #539 on:]

Simpsons is never coming back. 17 years is enough.

[Reply #540 on:]

I hear Nancy Cartwright is one of them Scientologist things and had a joke pulled from an episode that made fun of scientologists, I wonder if the writers will take a leaf out of Southparks book and turn Bart into a child molestor.

Anyhoo I haven't seen an ep of the Simpsons in a while, hope the Movie will be decent, Twould be a shame after nearly 20 years for the Simpsons to bow out with a movie flop

[Reply #541 on:]

For everybody who is saying the dance was lame, It was supposed to be.  It was making fun of Bollywood, India's Hollywood in which most the movies have elaborate dancing and singing scenes that are randomly started.

[Reply #542 on:]

   

Originally posted by BenderNeedBooze:
some other simpson dances have been quite lame haven't they?

Yes, in Simpson Safari, when Bart got his lip disced and Lisa got those neck rings, I wanted to kill myself. It was horrible, I'd rather listen to Mort Goldman tell the story of the time kids shoved pinecones up his ass. Different show I know. But still.

   

Originally posted by DarrinPA:
For everybody who is saying the dance was lame, It was supposed to be.  It was making fun of Bollywood, India's Hollywood in which most the movies have elaborate dancing and singing scenes that are randomly started.

Yeah, but it's kind of a far way to go to make a joke. Jokes are supposed to be funny, not make you want to tear out your eyes and ears with a rusted pen knife.

 

Originally posted by iliketowankalot:
I hear Nancy Cartwright is one of them Scientologist things and had a joke pulled from an episode that made fun of scientologists, I wonder if the writers will take a leaf out of Southparks book and turn Bart into a child molestor.

God I hate oraganized religion.

And If Bart's a kid himself, can he really be a child molestor?

[Reply #543 on:]

Can a child get in trouble for looking up child porn? I've often asked myself this question, because I've only got 5 months to go.

*coughs*

Yeah! Go Simpsons! Or boo Simpsons! Take your pick!

[Reply #544 on:]

 

Originally posted by Spawn_3005:
   God I hate oraganized religion.

Hey, to be fair, I've only heard of a few instances of religions suing/pressuring/otherwise punishing cartoons for slandering them.  And most of those (Scientologists, Catholics) were directed at South Park for fairly good reason.  However, Scientologists do get really out of hand when it comes to people publicly questioning/mocking their beliefs.  There are plenty of other religions that put up with a lot of shit on primetime TV without complaining too loudly.  I mean, South Park has never been sued by the Mormons or any branch of Judaism and, well, have you watched that show?

[Reply #545 on:]

The Cartwright story isn't really confirmed...it was reported on a couple fairly small/rumor-millish sites and the info supposedly came from an "insider" who could very well just be some random guy with a lot of time on his hands or something.  Considering the recent controversy over South Park and Isaac Hayes, it wouldn't be that difficult to get another story about cartoons and Scientology on the web simply by looking up the fact that Cartwright is a scientologist (which is true), making some shit up, and pressing "send".  Not to say it couldn't be true of course, but until it's reported on a really reputable site (which it probably won't be), it should be taken with a grain of salt.  Simpsons Channel doesn't really count by the way, because they basically just report everything they get from other sources, and let the readers decide the validity of it.

[Reply #546 on:]

I recently had the pleasure of seeing 4 new episodes in a row, so here's my comments:

THE SEEMINGLY NEVER-ENDING STORY
You know, I'd heard bad things about this, but I actually quite enjoyed it. It was funny whenever it branched off into another storyline, the plots themselves were pretty unpredictable, and I love how they all came together at the end when the writers could've easily just built up more and more without paying anything off. Some jokes were iffy, but overall, great stuff.
B+

BART HAS TWO MOMMIES
Wow. I haven't wanted to punch Flanders this much since... ummm, last season? Anyway, annoying Flanders aside, this episode had some really nice moments. Rod and Todd were hilarious, and the storyline was interesting - even if Bart's sub-plot came in a little late. And the Homer/mill scene was the first time I've laughed at gratuitous Homer violence in a very long time. I don't know why, that just cracked me up. Terrific episode.
B

HOMER SIMPSON: THIS IS YOUR WIFE
A very highly-anticipated episode here, though in all honesty, if it wasn't for the writer and guest star, then I doubt many people would've been talking about it. Now, I haven't seen the british version of The Office (I saw about 15 minutes of the Christmas special, but that was it), so I think some of the references to that may have been lost on me, but seriously, this episode wasn't as good as everyone said it was. Granted, it had lots of funny moments - but the jokes were very much hit-or-miss, and the storyline was all over the place. For every good joke, there was a bad one, for every good scene there was a dull one, and the whole thing lacked structure or impact. They should've just cut that entire thing with Lenny at the start, and maybe then, they'd have had more time to develop the character relationships. It didn't really have a storyline, but was more-or-less just a bunch of stuff that happened. The whole thing just seemed like a huge mess to me - so much potential, but certainly could've done with a bit more rewriting. Still, lots of laughs, either way.
B

MILLION DOLLAR ABIE
Uh-oh. Where to begin? A completely fucking stupid and aimless storyline for one, along with many dud lines and scenes. I mean, why would Lisa be happy that Grampa released the bulls into the streets? Granted, he saved the bulls' lives, but he's just gone an endangered all of Springfield. And who bought Grampa becoming a bullfighter in the first place? This whole thing was a real shame, because it had a lot of potential, but the writers just took it in the completely wrong direction. Maybe if Grampa actually thought he was dead for the rest of the episode instead of that whole bullfighter storyline, they could've saved it, but no... And what was with Grampa stabbing the bull with the sword, and no sound effect playing? I can see why they'd want to tone it down, but given that the crowd cheers and Lisa looks sad after it happened, I really think they needed a sound there for impact. This entire episode felt like it belonged in Season 10-13 or something. However, I do have to say that there were still quite a few funny moments, and as stupid as the ending was, I still laughed my ass off at it, so it wasn't totally bad. I actually don't mind an episode like this occassionally, it was much worse in Seasons 11 & 12 when almost every episode was like this. At least there were still a few laughs, which is more than I can say about some earlier episodes this season.
C+

Overall, Season 17's certainly picked up in its second half, but I can't see it topping Season 16 at all now.

[Reply #547 on:]

I dont remember any of those episodes. Are they new ones in America that has just been shown? Or episodes from a year or two back?

Someone throw me a bone.

[Reply #548 on:]

They're new ones in America that have been shown the past month or two.

[Reply #549 on:]

 

Originally posted by DotheBartman:
The Cartwright story isn't really confirmed...it was reported on a couple fairly small/rumor-millish sites and the info supposedly came from an "insider" who could very well just be some random guy with a lot of time on his hands or something.  Considering the recent controversy over South Park and Isaac Hayes, it wouldn't be that difficult to get another story about cartoons and Scientology on the web simply by looking up the fact that Cartwright is a scientologist (which is true), making some shit up, and pressing "send".  Not to say it couldn't be true of course, but until it's reported on a really reputable site (which it probably won't be), it should be taken with a grain of salt.  Simpsons Channel doesn't really count by the way, because they basically just report everything they get from other sources, and let the readers decide the validity of it.

I think Nancy should be fired or forced to leave Scientology, as its a global money rakateering scheme.

[Reply #550 on:]

Oh yeah, that'll work.

[Reply #551 on:]

I'm more surprised that Nancy Cartwright is nearing 60 years old.

[Reply #552 on:]

Actually, she isn't...which is one of the things that seems suspicious about those articles (she was actually born in 1957, which wouldn't have even been that difficult for the article writers to look up).  Again, grain of salt, or preferably heaping bowl of salt.

[Reply #553 on:]

   

Originally posted by Nerd-o-rama:
I mean, South Park has never been sued by the Mormons or any branch of Judaism and, well, have you watched that show?

Of course, I love South Park! I think Scientologists are fair game because they're freaks. What South Park said on that episode was true, they have no reason to sue.

I had a question about that episode. Why was everyone in the end credits named "John Smith" or "Jane Smith"?

   

Originally posted by Yardstick2006:
I think Nancy should be fired or forced to leave Scientology, as its a global money rakateering scheme.

She does the voice of Bart Simpson, she's not going anywhere. And it's not against the law to be a scientologist, no matter how retarded it is. And I don't mean the word retard to be an insult to the mentally challenged, I myself am mentally challenged. Or so I've been told.

 

Originally posted by DotheBartman:
Actually, she isn't...which is one of the things that seems suspicious about those articles (she was actually born in 1957, which wouldn't have even been that difficult for the article writers to look up).  Again, grain of salt, or preferably heaping bowl of salt.

Hell, even I could have looked that up. Here let me do it right now.

I found this on TV.com, it's just the first three lines.

Current TV Role: Charles "Chuckie" Finster On All Grown Up
Birthplace: Kettering, Dayton, Ohio, USA
Birthday: 10-25-1959

But the year is different on Internet Movie Database, it says 1957. I guess I'll go with '57 since that's what DotheBartman said one post up.

[Reply #554 on:]

 

Originally posted by Spawn_3005:
I had a question about that episode. Why was everyone in the end credits named "John Smith" or "Jane Smith"?

Scientologist leaders have been known to sue people who publically slander their "religion." The John Smith/Jane Smith thing is a funny way to cover their asses - the episode ends with Stan saying "So sue me!", as if SP itself is daring Scientology to sue them, only to have fake names throughout the entire credits, suggesting that they actually do fear that they might be sued. Great joke, but not many people seem to get it for some reason.

[Reply #555 on:]

Probably because we're stupid. Thanks for explaining it, it is very funny.

[Reply #556 on:]

Spawn: Says 1957 on Wikipedia. I'd go with that.

[Reply #557 on:]

 

Originally posted by i_c_weiner:
Spawn: Says 1957 on Wikipedia. I'd go with that.

 

Originally posted by Spawn_3005:
But the year is different on Internet Movie Database, it says 1957. I guess I'll go with '57 since that's what DotheBartman said one post up.

Thanks for the advice.

[Reply #558 on:]

It is fairly well known that Cartwright lies about her age. She was actually born in 1948.

[Reply #559 on:]

^What the fuck?  Since when is that "well known"...or indeed, even referred to?

Looks like someone needs a truth injection.