Yeah, I sure hope that The Simpsons: Movie won't be like that.
(Users Browsing this Thread: )
I doubt it, because they have something like five writers and five executive producers or something, plus it's directed by Silverman, so it could be a good sign.
Last edited by Zeus; Today at 12:00 PM. Reason: to fuck with you
Originally Posted by Steve
Yeah, I think it will do good, hopefully it won't have a bad plot.
Changing topic here, but I remember in the R&R thread for "The Girl Who Slept Too Little", people said they thought the "Read the patent number, bitch" joke was too Family Guy-esque, however, the show has been using that word since as far back as season 3 production-wise (in 8F18 A Streetcar Named Marge [or season 4 air-date wise]), when Bart is watching the beauty contest on TV, he says "he's such a bitch!". There's also another use of it towards the end of season 4 (forget which episode), and don't forget "Two Dozen and One Greyhounds".
They're all used in different ways though I guess. I don't remember the Girl Who Slept Too Little quote, but it looks like it's used in a derogatory sense, whereas the one in a Streetcar Named Marge is almost a compliment, and the one in Two...Greyhounds is literal.
Edit: I saw a funny little quirk in My Sister, My Sitter today. As Homer sits there on the couch in his suit, Bart runs through for some reason, rusn past Homer and then grinds to a halt, and looks at Homer again. It's quite odd the way he was running through, and it's a cool little quirk.
Last edited by Nebuchanezzar; 10-02-2006 at 02:48 AM.
I'm probably annoying people by now, but I was just watching THOH 6, with the Homer3 segment, and I realized Professor Frink draws on the wall behind the bookshelf where Homer disappeared. But how can he draw on it if Homer went through it, and if seconds later Chief Wiggum shoots at the wall and the bullets go straight through it?
It's because it doesn't matter.Originally Posted by Ivan
Maybe it has to do with how forceful the action was. Homer pretty much leapt into the vortex, as did Bart. The bullets were going super fast. Frink, on the other hand, was not forcefully drawing on the wall.Originally Posted by Ivan
Good theory. It works, so I'll accept it
to be fair, that happened in the source material, twilight zone's "little girl lost", too, so any error in logic can be attributed to that.
and iirc, the explanation there was that the interdimensional portal was localized at a specific point on the wall (inside the chalk), and not the entire wall itself.
in fact, now that i think about it, that was the reason he drew on the wall in the first place. to show that the portal was only inside that area. so really it's a question that answers itself.
Maybe only the "purest of heart" can penetrate it, thus why only Homer, Bart, and to an extent Wiggum could do so...
I go with Jamie or Jammy's explanation really.
I watched Viva Ned Flanders today, and I feel I was way too harsh on it previously. It's nowhere near as bad as I remembered it, and even so, I forgot a lot of good, light hearted and funny things in it. I'd give it around a 6/10 now.
By the way, even though I'm two days late - Happy Birthday Mike Scully!
Last edited by Nebuchanezzar; 10-03-2006 at 07:23 PM.
Happy birthday Mike! How old is he?
Also, the fact that this only has 5 members in a year made my day:
There's a big list of Simpsons fan listings for characters, groups, episodes (yes, there's even a NKOTB one...somebody make a Cape Feare one, quick!) etc here:
Last edited by Adam R; 10-04-2006 at 08:31 AM.
Did anyone else notice in "All's Fair in Oven War," that Ned says he wouldn't have a "Hindu's chance in heaven." in the Kwik-E-Mart?
It adds to the humour.Originally Posted by Frank Grimes Sr.
she didnt exactly read shrek the 3rd, which apparently exists as some sort of companion book for a pixar movie. no, this would probably take several minutes (perhaps 10), and would have ultimately depricated the shrek 3 cinematic experience
she merely looked at the book
she saw it, perhaps in the childrens section of a barnes & noble, registered it in her mind as being in existance, and filed it away for later as the subject for a post on BOOKS YOUVE READ. only she just looked at it. and it was shrek 3
in a way its the saddest post ive ever read
-toxic shock syndrome
Originally Posted by coltonwiggum
Maybe, but it's part of my increasing problem with Flanders. He is intolerant of others.
^That really ticks me off about Jean-era Ned. Jean certainly has all of Ned's bases covered when it comes to religion and politics, but the heart of the character is absent: Flanders' kindness towards others. In my opinion, this is what always defined Flanders; religion, no matter how essential a trait, was still a smaller part of Ned than is tolerance and love towards others. It pains me nowadays to see Flanders have this irritating superiority complex.
I think Maude's death has to do with something big difference to the whole Flanders family. Or I may be wrong though.
I did see some change from Ned before Maude's death and after, but I can't really tell what it is.
I just watched 'Barting Over'. The classic thorough the half part of the act 3, but I don't really think winning Bart's heart by showing a 'great' skateboard skill was not really good idea to end the conflict (which leads to climax). Those happened frequently during Jean era, I noticed.
calmer than you are
Even if Flanders started to change for the worst after Maude's death, I don't think the writers meant for it to cause Ned's changes, and even if that's the truth, I find it a bad excuse to ruin a perfectly good character.
I've felt that Flanders has been a terrible character for quite a few years now. In the early years, he was a likeable, if irritating, person. He was perfect as the Anti-Homer of the show. Ned was perfect in every area that Homer wasnt. That was his place in the show. And it was good characterisation, I know a lot of people who are like the early years Flanders. And he was religious but he wasnt some psycho zealot like he has been portrayed as in the last five years or so.
Now his character has been ruined by cheap jokes (praying to Marge's scarecrow because it resembles a cross etc.) but what really irritates me is the bad biblical puns hes always making in recent seasons. They arent even funny. Every word he says has to be a cheap joke, hes become very one dimensional.
Even the other Springfielder's dont seem to like him anymore. He seems to have become a joke around Springfield and even left town once because of it. Its a long way from the whole town turning out to help him in "When Flanders Failed". "Ned Flanders is in trouble?!!"
Dont Get Up Gentlemen, I'm Only Passin' Through...
Let's not forget the most unbelivably shit Flanders line ever "It's hotter than a fox news weather skank"
He's still had good episodes in the last few years though Home Away From Homer, and A star is born again, even though I don't quite agree with how they developed his decision to sleep with the actress, he was still well written.
Flanders is quite possibly the character that has most dramatically declined for me (yeah, he even rivals Homer). I agree with what Jim said completely.
Also, he's all over the place, I mean, like TFD says he has a complete lack of tolerance towards others' beliefs (all though I admit I laughed during his exchanges with Apu in Midnight Rx), but I think what annoys me even more is the complete opposite, he is way too sensitive. So many poor Flanders moments have came out of him being much too sensitive about him and his sons pleasing God in every way. My all-time worst Flanders line is "I won't even eat vegetables over two inches long". Seriously, what the fuck is this line? I despise it so much.
Again, going back to what Jim said, he was the perfect "anti-Homer" which made him such a great character at the start and now they've reduced him to this overrly sensitive exaggeration of a religious person. Why on earth does the show need to have this kind of stereotype, let alone this annoying, unfunny character that we have now?
[QUOTE=TheForbiddenDonut In my opinion, this is what always defined Flanders; religion, no matter how essential a trait, was still a smaller part of Ned than is tolerance and love towards others. [/QUOTE]
Not to mention fact that in the case of "Old Ned" it actually seemed to be connected with each other. He was positive character but from what IŽam getting here, he probably became victim of post-11th September arguments. I donŽt want to sound rude but in such cases IŽam glad that I donŽt live in US, where political ideologies from that or the other side seem to dictate everything.
i agree with adam r, in the first maybe 7,8,9 seasons he was just a really nice guy who hardly ever got angry and took abuse in good nature, but he's become so serious about religion that he's not funny anymore. an example of this is "the monkey suit" in which he gets angry at the fact of evolution being taught in schools. in earlier episodes i think he wouldn't have cared about it and just contiuned on
The way I interpret it, Flanders has been recast by the writers to play the role of the post 9/11 conservative fundamentalist christian american in the show. Unfortunately the transition to this new persona has not been very smooth and has made this extremely likeable character quite unlikeable.
It can be attempted to be explained by the fact that Ned has drowned himself more in religion ever since his wife's death and has gradually developed an almost obssessive conservative political perspective.
It can act as the basis for social commentary or a realistic character development in some cases but when he's portrayed as Springfield's resident Mel Gibson who makes "Passion" esque films and tries to force creationism in place of evolution, it is hard to believe or like.
It's a bit like having sex with a jellyfish: once might an interesting experiment, twice would be perversion!after I told him my name, he beat seven shades out of me and left me in a dumpster with a bar of soap shoved in my mouth and a brush shoved in where the sun doesn't shine
Don't know if I entirely agree with this. Ned's extreme right wing Christian politics can be traced at least back to "HOMR" and the "Gravey and Jobriath" segment, and less so his Harry Potter book burning in "Trilogy of Error". If there's a deliberate trend on the part of the writers (and I do think there is) to match the current political environment with Ned, it started before September 11th, and is probably just more reflective of the George W. Bush's religious conservative base (and maybe Bush himself) in general more than anything else, judging from the timing of when the jokes started.Originally Posted by Imperciph
This is also another way of suggesting this trend had started during (late) Scully, not Jean, even if Jean has continued it.
In that case, I revise my theory that the staff recast Flanders as conservative fundamentalist christian american about the time Bush was elected into the White House to satirise the attitude of his base voters. The unlikeable, bigoted religious take on life in Ned's character started to show up first time around 2000-01 with the stuff you mentioned. Do you agree with this ?
Problem is that season 12 (like the whole Scully era) had weak characterisation, these were just a few jokes which didnŽt seem to take itself seriously (I love that HP moment), now it is more and more forced and IŽll say nothing new by statement that Jean has raised crippled phoenix.Originally Posted by Channel Surfer
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)