Results 1 to 19 of 19



Thread: Missed opportunities in The Simpsons Movie?



(Users Browsing this Thread: )

  1. #1
    Uh, Hugh Jass? Welcome to Moe's's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,712


    Question Missed opportunities in The Simpsons Movie?

    Just watching The Simpsons Movie for the 1000th time (about) which I love but I can't help but feel there was a lack of Springfield interaction, specially when it comes to the characters in such a widespread show we know and love.

    I mean, I'd love to have seen Moe and Moe's Tavern involved more in the film, loads of characters really which I hope if they do another movie they do it more based around Springfield with all these characters highly involved.

    Of course, I know in a 90 minute movie of a show with hundreds of characters they can't cover them all but I do feel with the first movie a lot of Springfield and their characters were missed.

    I know there's the mob scene and intro etc.. but it's not quite the same, I'd like to see more involved around them, specially in a movie. Maybe it's cause like I say I see The Simpsons as the whole town as opposed to just the family, it's all what makes the show and is as equal/important to me so maybe that's why.

    Of course, the movie is great, I love it, however I can't help but feel while watching it now there's a whole missed opportunity there with lack of Springfield characters involved.

    If The Simpsons do another movie, I hope this is more Springfield based and has more Springfield characters heavily involved in the story.

    Thoughts, I'd love to hear what you guys thought?


    '"Uh, Hugh Jass! D'oh, somebody check the men's room for a Hugh Jass"

  2. #2
    SuperFriend Kaine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    5,612
    Blog Entries
    1


    I would've liked to see more of the secondary characters like Burns, Skinner, Krusty and Moe. Burns would've made a good villain for the movie, but instead he only got 1 scene where he releases the hounds. I liked Carvill as a villain but I would ather have a more well known villain like Burns or Hank Scorpio (who was the original choice). Sideshow Bob could also be included in some way, maybe as another villain who tries to chase the Simpsons as they go to Canada.

    I don't really buy that Homer was also forgiven by everyone in Springfield, despite being the one that made that whole mess in the first place. Also they could do without Lisa's plot, or at least replace Collin with Millhouse or something.
    Episodes rated best and worst from each season:
    1: Krusty Gets Busted/Homer's Night Out 2: The Way We Was/Bart's Dog Gets an F 3: Colonel Homer/Dog of Death 4: Marge vs. The Monorail/So It's Come to This: A Simpsons Clip Show 5: Cape Feare/Bart Gets An Elephant 6: Treehouse of Horror V/Another Simpsons Clip Show 7: Mother Simpson/Homerpalooza 8: You Only Move Twice/The Canine Mutiny 9: Lisa's Sax/The Two Mrs. Nahasapeemapetilons 10: Lisa Gets an A/Sunday Cruddy Sunday 11: Behind The Laughter/Beyond Blunderdome 12: Trilogy of Error/The Computer Wore Menace Shoes 13: I Am Furious Yellow/Homer the Moe 14: The Dad Who Knew Too Little/Large Marge 15: The Way We Weren't/Diatribe of a Mad Housewife 16: Thank God Its Doomsday/Mommie Beerest 17: Marge's Son Poisoning/Bonfire of the Manatees 18: Marge Gamer/Revenge is Best Served Three Times 19: Treehouse of Horror XVIII/That 90's Show 20: Gone Maggie Gone/Coming To Homerica 21: O Brother, Where Bart thou?/The Devil Wears Nada 22: Homer Scissorhands/The Fool Monty 23: Holidays of Future Passed/Moe Goes From Rags To Riches 24: Adventures In Baby-Getting/Whiskey Business 25: Brick Like Me/White Christmas Blues 26: Bart's New Friend/The Musk Who Fell to Earth 27: Halloween of Horror/Every Man's Dream 28: There Will Be Buds/Moho House 29: Gone Boy/Throw Grampa from the Dane


  3. #3


    Hopefully we get a sequel in the near future. Well not a direct sequel, but a new movie


  4. #4
    Uh, Hugh Jass? Welcome to Moe's's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,712


    Yeah, if we do get a new movie I really would want it to be more Springfield based, I do feel that would kinda complete it to be honest with the first movie not so much being that, we don't really have a Springfield based movie.

    I want to see Moe's Tavern involved quite well with all the regular places too which we recognise, just Spirngfield based with lots of characters involved in the storyline.


  5. #5
    not a city slicker CousinMerl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Spittle County
    Posts
    7,335


    I agree on the fact that there was too little of the secondary cast; if there's another one I expect more actual involvement and lines for a cast this big (and there should definitely have been more Springfield settings). I also think the movie should have been longer so that's another thing they should aim for with a sequel (would be neat with a 100 minute one or something; would certainly help the issue of giving the secondaries a bigger part in the story as it would give them more room to actually contribute).

    I also think it had a few too many new characters in important roles. Russ Cargill as the villain was fun but I'd rather have seen someone established on the series, Colin was fairly generic and President Schwarzenegger was pretty nonsensical (and also arguably dated now). The fact that they don't refer to them or have them reappear in the post-movie series feels kinda odd (I did like how they brought back the medicine woman/boob lady for a brief part in 'Boy Meets Curl' and had Homer refer to her as his therapist).
    Last edited by CousinMerl; 12-06-2018 at 02:35 AM.


  6. #6
    Uh, Hugh Jass? Welcome to Moe's's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,712


    That's pretty much my sentiments on it, I enjoyed the movie (of course) but there were so many things missing within it, mainly being the lack of interaction with the secondary cast and places which as a Simpsons fan these are the things you want to see, specially in a movie.

    I agree about the villain thing too people have mentioned, I don't think I feel as strongly as some about the Burns thing being the main villain but I do agree with it more so than Cargill, who was great of course but he wasn't a recognisable character at the time like Burns or even Scorpio which as mentioned was the original plan and I also felt he would have been great really considering his part in You Only Move Twice though if Scorpio had have been the main villain would Burns have also had a minimal part in the movie again, I guess we'd have just had to see with that.

    I really, really hope they do do the next movie around Springfield with recognisable locations playing a part regularly in the film and also the secondary characters too being more involved, I want to see a movie about Springfield not Alaska etc... which as I say, was all good and well but it kind of takes it out of The Simpsons when they're not in Springfield for the majority of the movie.

    I want to see Moe's Tavern, The Happy Sumo, Springfield Elementary, Nuclear Power Plant, Krusty Burger, Evergreen Terrace, all the locations we know and love appear regularly with scene's there, maybe they could even revisit the Opera or something if they wanted to, Noiseland Arcade, the list is endless of places that could possibly be covered but I would absolutely love to see this and I do hope they make it a priority within the next movie if they do of course bring one.

    They have said that pretty much another movie is no doubt going to come so I do hope that they do this time prioritise the regular locations in Springfield and the characters too, I personally want to see a Simpsons Movie (which as I say for me The Simpsons isn't just about Bart, Homer etc... but it's Springfield on a whole that makes the show so, so good!) with priority on regular locations and characters with lots of involvement in the movie as much as Bart, Homer, Lisa etc..

    In regards to the Movie being longer, I'm down for that too as long as it doesn't drag but I very much doubt it will, The Simpsons writers and team are really good and more than capable of bringing us 100 minutes or so within the movie, I have faith in them to do this and like you say, it could give more opportunity to include more cast and places too which by default wouldn't get boring either because of this.

    I really hope they do, I wonder what they'd call the Movie too? Would it be the regular Simpsons 2, Simpsons Too (a play on words) or maybe have some great title altogether, either way I'm looking forward to it, specially if they do take on board the things mentioned in this thread. I'm quite happy with whatever plot or story line they go for cause I know they're more than capable of doing this so great and won't do the movie without that either just as long as they do base it around Springfield this time with as I say, lots of regular characters and locations heavily involved this time

    Edit: Another great idea would be to reference certain things in the Movie which Simpsons fans will recognise, little lines such as "When you stole my cough syrup recipe for the Flaming Moe" or something thrown in here and there would be a nice addition, it's not a necessity at all but little things like that hardcore Simpsons fans will recognise but non hardcore fans won't be affected by not getting the reference would be great and a nice balance.

  7. #7
    Uh, Hugh Jass? Welcome to Moe's's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,712


    I've just thought about this and I know I've asked before so not sure if anyone knows exactly but as this was in development (apparently) maybe it'll be the Disney franchise who will finance this which lets be honest, Disney have been fantastic at supporting their franchises they've bought into, specially when it comes to bringing the movie's.

    I was just reading this now:

    The Simpsons Movie 2 Reportedly in Development at Fox

    There has been a lot of excitement surrounding the Disney and Fox deal, mostly having to do with the Marvel implications as well as how much more of a juggernaut Disney will become at the box office. A new report reveals that the long-awaited sequel to The Simpsons Movie is currently in development at Fox. This is definitely exciting news for fans who have been waiting for The Simpsons Movie 2 to hit theaters for over a decade. But, could the merger have a negative impact on the sequel seeing the light of day?

    In addition to The Simpsons Movie 2, the latest report states that a Bob's Burger movie as well as a Family Guy movie are also in development at Fox. Upon the 10th anniversary of the world's introduction to Spider-Pig last year, The Simpsons Movie writer-producer Al Jean and director David Silverman admitted that a follow-up could happen, but it's in the "very earliest stages." Silverman said that he'd "love to do another one." So, it makes sense that Fox would actively developing the sequel at this point in time.

    The new report states that Fox is in a period of "uncertainty," but they are actively revamping their animation department. They have brought in a new partner after the DreamWorks Animation deal expired when it was acquired by Comcast. While things are questionable at this time, it looks like Fox is intent on making The Simpsons Movie 2 along with the other projects. The report says.

    "The film studio is partnering with the Fox television studio on a big-screen adaptation of the animated series Bob's Burgers, a second Simpsons movie in development and a Family Guy film that would mix animation with live action, said people with knowledge of the projects.

    The Disney and Fox merger already seems like a done deal, even though it is not yet official. This has brought an "awkward" tension to Fox, with employees fearing for their jobs. With that being said, it seems that The Simpsons Movie 2 would be something that Disney would jump on putting out from a business standpoint alone. It's unclear as to what would happen to the newly revamped Fox animation department should the merger take place, but it has been reported that thousands will lose their jobs across all areas of the studio.

    The Simpsons Movie was released in 2007 and grossed over $527 million worldwide, making it a huge hit. It set several North American box office records, including highest grossing film based on a television series. It was also the third-highest grossing opening weekend for an animated film at the time. The Simpsons Movie 2 would be a welcome addition to the show, especially since they're about to embark on their 30th Season this year. Hopefully the Disney and Fox deal allows all of the movies to proceed. This news was first reported by The Wall Street Journal.
    Source: https://movieweb.com/the-simpsons-mo...velopment-fox/

    I know that report is from back in august but it raises some very valid points, I'm not sure if Bob's Burgers has been part of the Disney takeover but I know Family Guy has and I'm pretty sure that Disney will be way better than Fox have been when it comes to putting money into the show, it seems like Fox want the rewards but don't want to put in the finance for things with The Simpsons (IE DVD's etc..), however not that Fox don't have the money (I'm sure they do) but Disney can absolutely finance this much better too so it makes sense for Fox to not finance it, specially when the rights are going to Disney, why would they?

    So if this is to happen or in the works/very early stages I really do hope it really is completely Springfield based with everything mentioned in this thread

  8. #8
    I'm baaaack! Patches O'houlihan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Wisconsin: "More bars in more places."
    Posts
    15,611
    Blog Entries
    2


    Quote Originally Posted by YaBoiTheDuck View Post
    Hopefully we get a sequel in the near future. Well not a direct sequel, but a new movie
    If it exists, I want the extended version with the real Erin Brocovich and the deleted scenes.

  9. #9
    Uh, Hugh Jass? Welcome to Moe's's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,712


    I do wonder if they have any idea's in mind already and also if they would give it a unique title or simply Simpsons 2?

  10. #10
    Grappling with Local Oaf Beggs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    2,208


    I'd agree that they missed the opportunity to make better use of the supporting characters and famliiar locations in Springfield. Looking back, I'd have preferred it if Homer wasn't responsible for the town being placed under a dome, causing the family to be outcasts. Episodes where the family are pariahs have traditionally ranked among my least favourite in their respective eras, so in that sense, I also feel they missed the opportunity for the dysfunctional townsfolk to come together to solve the problem, with the Simpsons leading the charge to save the day. I realise the latter is basically what happened anyway, but I mean without being run out of town and all that.

    They also missed the opportunity to set the movie earlier in the floating timeline. That way, they could've had Maude Flanders as part of the cast. Also, the show plays it fast and loose with continuity and canon at the best of times, so the movie existing in its own canon wouldn't be a stretch anyway.
    A little less Generic than before.


  11. #11
    Uh, Hugh Jass? Welcome to Moe's's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,712


    Completely agree, I think with the timeline thing I am torn a little as I do respect how they didn't just throw any film out just because as they really could have released anything with The Simpsons and it would have smashed the box office, specially during their peak era's too but they didn't, they made sure they released something they felt happy with and did their best with before putting it out so I do respect that however I completely agree about the Maude thing (I guess to a degree Troy McClure, Lionel Hutz etc... but that was quite early on) though I do get where you're coming from with that.

    I agree about the plot too, we have had episodes with that kind of vibe around them already too and they're probably not my favourite either when I think about it, I mean, I enjoy them and I enjoyed the movie (loved it!) but there was so many missed opportunities with it such as the things mentioned in this thread and of course the main missed opportunities being the lack of cast and recognisable places within the movie being the main one, which as I say as Simpsons fans when you see a movie you want to see these things primarily (for me personally anyway).

    I do hope if they bring a second movie they make this priority as we've already had the movie as we know so a second movie can fill in the holes and missed opportunities the first one missed, of course it's a learning opportunity for the cast and writers too from the feedback they get etc... but if they take it on board and actually do something along these lines then that's just absolutely fantastic and is also part of why we love The Simpsons and their cast and crew, I do feel we have a very special team behind the show who care so it's a good thing really

    Lets hope the second movie really does have lots more character involvement and is set in Springfield with familiar places being primary in the movie.

  12. #12
    Grappling with Local Oaf Beggs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    2,208


    Not doing the movie in the 90s is a missed opportunity in and of itself, especially with Phil Hartman's untimely passing, but I was talking about still doing the movie when they did but having Maude alive in it. The film began production in 2001 and Maggie Roswell returned to the show in 2002, so it would've been feasible during development to write the character in and set it earlier than the current episodes. Anyway, that's just one idea.

  13. #13
    Uh, Hugh Jass? Welcome to Moe's's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,712


    Ah yeah, I get ya, yeah completely, hopefully a lot of these gaps they can fill will be done when and if the next movie comes

  14. #14
    Have Brain, Will Travel Wile E. the Brain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Location
    France
    Posts
    224


    The biggest issue I have with the movie as a missed opportunity is Lisa with Collin. Yes, it's another Lisa's temporary boyfriend, but for something as ambitious as a movie, it feels more unecessary than usual. And it turns nonsensical since the movie seems to end on a good note for them... but Collin will never be mentioned again afterwards.

    I'm also agree about the lack of use of the secondary characters, but I think we already talked about it in another thread. That's something I hope they'll fix for the next movie, if it happens.

  15. #15
    Uh, Hugh Jass? Welcome to Moe's's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,712


    Yeah, again this is another example of where a recognisable character such as Milhouse would have fit better, I'm not really keen on these kinda stories anyway so the whole Lisa/Colin thing didn't really interest me that much as opposed to the main plot and what was going on in the movie, it reminds me of the Great Outdoors film if you've seen it (John Candy and Dan Aykroyd), it's an old film but really good however the love story in it is corny and off putting, kinda spoils the movie a little, not in a way that it affects it cause it's still a really, really great movie but that could have been done with cutting out and then it would have been even better.

    I'd rather them avoid these kinda things in all films really cause they've been done so many times and nine times out of ten you know how it's gonna end up anyway, I prefer something new, different, interesting and intriguing but that's just me I guess ha

  16. #16
    not a city slicker CousinMerl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Spittle County
    Posts
    7,335


    Quote Originally Posted by Beggs View Post
    Not doing the movie in the 90s is a missed opportunity in and of itself, especially with Phil Hartman's untimely passing, but I was talking about still doing the movie when they did but having Maude alive in it. The film began production in 2001 and Maggie Roswell returned to the show in 2002, so it would've been feasible during development to write the character in and set it earlier than the current episodes. Anyway, that's just one idea.
    While I understand the sentiment of setting it previously to include past characters I think they did the right thing by setting it in the present; I think that it could have been a little offputting to some folks, newcomers especially, by essentially doing a flashback movie and I dunno if having Roswell and Maude in it would have made it any better or worse, but it's an interesting thought experiment.

    Not having made the film in the 90's is unfortunate, but I'm hesitant to truly call it a missed opportunity, perhaps especially since they were going for it and had started the process of making one (Kamp Krusty) but decided to postpone it when they couldn't make it work as a longer story (yeah, they should probably have tried and tried again but I cannot fault them too much for waiting, with the show taking up much effort and time; besides, putting everything aside to focus on making a great film could have had an negative effect on the series and by so the classic era in retrospect).

  17. #17
    Uh, Hugh Jass? Welcome to Moe's's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,712


    Yeah, I kinda feel the same about the movie in the 90's simply because I do admire the fact they didn't just throw any old movie out which they so easily could have done and made a fortune, this to me shows they care about the show and what they put out and I think that's fantastic that we have a team like that behind the show we love but from the perspective of certain characters being in the movie that never will be in a Simpsons movie, I can get that too, it's a little catch 22 I guess.

    I mean, I know Troy/Lionel exited from the show early on but how cool would they have been to have Troy and Lionel appear in the movie? However with the 90's movie if they didn't feel happy enough with it then I'm grateful for that however I'm sure they would have done a good movie too, maybe they were perfectionists haha

    Beavis and Butthead did their movie Beavis and Butthead Do America around 1996 which was while the show was still in it's peak but they also didn't throw it out straight away when they could have done and I'm not sure if you guys have seen that film but it's really good.


  18. #18
    Have Brain, Will Travel Wile E. the Brain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Location
    France
    Posts
    224


    Quote Originally Posted by Welcome to Moe's View Post
    Yeah, again this is another example of where a recognisable character such as Milhouse would have fit better
    Agreed. Besides, maybe the movie could have been the opportunity to add something to their bonding if Milhouse was used instead of Collin, something la Homer Scissorhands' subplot, to show Lisa actually likes Milhouse in some way.


  19. #19
    Uh, Hugh Jass? Welcome to Moe's's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,712


    Yeah, I may be in the minority on this but I think if you make a movie on a show or any franchise really that you love you want to see the characters you know already in the movie, not new characters you don't know or have never seen before, you want to see your favourites on the big screen.

    It's a bit before our time but I remember reading about the He-Man Masters of the Universe film and they apparently introduced a few new bad guys and good guy characters that no one had ever heard of or knew before the film and they were a bit disappointed as they wanted to see the characters they knew from the TV show, figures etc... yet all these new people were brought in so it deflated them a little.

    I guess the question is why if you have such a recognisable cast and set of characters already known and popular in the franchise would you need to make new characters in replace of them for the movie?

    I can understand the odd introduction but not too much, when you've got a big enough cast that people know and love you don't need to replace them with new characters.

    No right no wrong, just my take on it really.



Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •