Review: ‘Simpsons Movie’ appeals to TV fans

Directed By: David Silverman

Starring: The voices of Nancy Cartwright, Yeardley Smith, Julie Kavner, Hank Azaria and Harry Shearer

Rated: PG-13

It’s hard to imagine a television show running for 18 years.

Harder still to imagine that, outside of a “little sprucing up,” the characters remain exactly as they were in 1989.

The baby is still a baby, endlessly sucking her pacifier. Her brother and sister are still in grade school. Dad is perpetually 36, and mom, 34. Only the characters’ memories of what happened “10 years ago” have shifted with time.

But continuity of characters is not the reason “The Simpsons” has been around so long. It really boils down to great writing, which creator Matt Groening and fellow producers James L. Brooks and Sam Simon have been adamant about from the beginning.

Each 22-minute episode is packed with more plot and sub-plots, great dialogue, sneeze-and-you’ll-miss-them sight gags and verbal asides than any TV show in history.

“The Simpsons Movie” lives up to expectations, set by the show, the fourth-longest-running show in primetime TV history. (Only “Gunsmoke,” “The Red Skelton Show” and “Cops” have more years on the tube than “The Simpsons.”)

The movie isn’t as good as the best episodes of the TV show, but that’s not really a criticism. It’s like a “bonus” epic episode. A 90-minute movie simply can’t keep the pace that a 22-minute rapid-fire TV show maintains.

But then again, on TV, Marge couldn’t use the expletive she does (only once) in the film, and we couldn’t see (very briefly) the part of Bart’s anatomy we see here.

As for plot, it wouldn’t be fair to give too much away; the element of surprise is a big part of successful humor. By now though, anyone who watches TV has seen the “spiderpig” bit.

The film, in a nutshell, is: An Itchy and Scratchy cartoon with a clever segue into the film; Homer “adopts” a pig; Bart “adopts” Ned Flanders; Lisa meets her perfect boy and they raise awareness of the pollution in Lake Springfield; Homer screws things up (doh!); Springfield is isolated from the world; the Simpsons escape and move to Alaska; Springfield gets in serious trouble; the Simpsons come home and try to save the day.

Most of the usual suspects are on hand, but there are simply too many characters that we know and love to give any one of them much screen time. Chief Wiggum and Flanders get the lion’s share of the supporting parts. Also in evidence are a few of the jabs the TV show always takes at Fox, its home network.

Usually when you notice a bevy of writers credited on a given movie, it’s a sign there was trouble along the way, and other screenwriters were hauled in to “punch things up” here and there. That’s not the case here, however. There are 11 writers listed – including Groening and Brooks who most likely have the final say – but all of the writers have been affiliated with “The Simpsons” for years, and the screenplay (like the TV scripts) appears to be a truly collaborative effort.

When the TV series debuted, it was argued, mostly by people who hadn’t seen the show, that Bart was a “bad influence” and the Simpsons were a textbook example of a dysfunctional family. It’s always been my contention that they are as typical (with added slapstick) of the average American household as any TV family portrayed by “real” people.

“Simpsons” fans will love “The Simpsons Movie,” and I can’t imagine anyone who isn’t a fan even thinking about seeing it.

While Homer proclaims early on in the film, “Only a sucker would pay for something they can get on TV for free,” for the devoted, it’s well worth the price of a ticket.

Jim Wunderle owns Wunderle Sound Services and is a Springfield free-lance writer and musician. He can be reached at info@wunderlesound.com.