Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
Saw it tonight. Quite funny. Bit better than I was expecting, actually laughed out loud in some parts.
is better because it dares to go where The Simpsons wouldn't dream.
They have jokes about sex and stuff, so ner ner.
Family Guy relies far too heavily on pop culture references that may not stand the test of time.
My mind is like a VCR. I mean a Sky+ box.
Which is incidently where most of the humour comes from.
You actually get to see Bart's cock!
And Homer sticks up the middle fingers.
surely animated child porn?
BAN THIS FILTH
To think of how many times he must have pissed out of that, and there it is, right on the screen. incredible
not a bad film though.
would do it
being 10 for 19 "seasons" is even weirder
Im hopefully watch it this week...
And family guy could never be made into a feature length movie, cos McFarlane does not know what 'plot' means. Family Guy is both amusing and completely retarded. South Park's 'Cartoon Wars' has a point.
apart from the family guy movie thats been out for 2 years now!
Just saw simpsons movie 2. was very impressed, although i did expect the worse. However it did make me laugh out loud a few times, which the simpsons havn't done in a while. Plot wasn't great though.
for that time they made Family Guy into a feature length movie
the point is, Family Guy is, on close inspection, the lesser of the three...
i need a faster internet, i'm still waiting for the girls aloud video to load so i can comment on it.
imdb has told me that the Family Guy movie went straight to video...?
kinda appeared overnight.
"The major sub-plot circles around the youngest Griffin, Stewie, who has a near-death experience at a pool when a lifeguard chair falls on him, but he survives. After having a vision of being in Hell, he decides to change his ways, but this doesn't last long. While watching television, he and Brian spot a man that looks like Stewie. Brian is convinced that he is Stewie's real father, until Stewie learns that the man is actually himself as an adult, taking a vacation from his own time period. Baby Stewie visits thirty years later to discover that his adult self, going by the name Stu, is a single blue-collar middle-aged virgin working at a Circuit City-type store. Meanwhile, Peter and Lois are trying to teach their two older kids, Meg and Chris, to date. In the future, Chris, who hasn't changed much, is working as a cop and is married to a foul-mouthed hustler named Vanessa. Meg is now called Ron, since she had a sex-change after college."
I think Ive seen this on bbc3, but didnt realise it was meant to be a 'movie.' Also, look how easily the plot seems to veer off point. If you ignore half of the first sentence, there is no plot.
reactionary attitude to Family Guy. It isn't supposed to be The Simpsons. It's not some kind of plot-driven morality play. It's ridiculous and rambling. This is why it's funny. And that's OK, y'know?
I don't think it's any coincidence that as it's got more rambling, it's also got less amusing. Or maybe it is. Or maybe I'm mixing up cause and effect. Whatever. The point is, the new episodes are rubbish.
but all TV shows have a particular formula, and all such formulae have a limited shelf life. If they reinvented themselves too much, they wouldn't be the same programme anymore.
see: The Simpsons
But The Simpsons went for about twice as long before it really started going downhill. Family Guy has almost become a parody of itself.
I just fail to see the point in people comparing or even ranking particular TV programmes, which exist for different purposes, and trying to justify this in some kind of relatively abstract critical sense.
Fair enough if people think there's some kind of real world sense in which Family Guy has begun to have a negative impact on future programme-making or society in general, but I find this unlikely. Anything else veers into sophistry.
I'd rather just... you know... "watch stuff".
is awful now and hasn't aged well. I rented it out the other day and realised how unfunny it was to the recent seasons.
They ought to make another film.
the South Park movie is one of the funniest films EVER. FACT. I will stand by that statement.
and Stone and Parker are making 2 films at the moment i think, both live action, so we have those to look forward to!
I listened to "Blame Canada" again today, it still made me laugh out loud twice.
I'm seeing it in one hour.
Staff screenings. Woo!!
I want to see it on Thursday at midnight.
I'll now get to see bits of it a hundred times though..
outlandish movie plot, stuffed full of subtle references to older episodes, superbly animated. homer actually displays some traits of his old character. YEAH!
she once told me she "liked my work".
anyway, what you doing this weekend?
I trust you judgement!!!
and I was overexcited, but it was good. Really good. I'm so happy.
I'm seeing it tonight.
i knew they wouldn't let us down.
i think ;)
The dress code is yellow, and we get to ride on a BOAT on the way there!
I thought that the beginning 20 minutes were a bit irrelevant, a lot of unrelated gags, and a bit too self-conscious, but after that when the plot kicked in, I thought it was brilliant, very funny!
Loved Homer giving the fingers and the part where Bart kills Lisa.
and it was really good. Good plot, well paced. Nice animation, didn't overuse the CG. Albert Brooks voiced a great villain (shades of a more sinister Hank Scorpio). Chief Wiggum had the best gags.
The best thing I can say about it is that it had the feel of a classic Simpsons episode. Perhaps it's won't be as quotable as some of the funnier episodes, but who cares. It's a feature length Simpsons, and I've waited so long for that. 7 thumbs up.
A quieter satire on the USA than the South Park movie, perhaps, but equally sturdy and up to the minute.
Very funny too. And I hope everyone watced the credits because there was little nuggets hidden in the end.
I enjoyed it. Wouldn't go back to see it again.
Starts brilliantly. Tails off badly.
first ralph doing the 20th C fox thing, then the itchy and scrathy movie/homer in the cinema widely missed the mark followed by the unnecessary green day appearance. I really don't think it had the feel of early episodes and was just like a recent wacky adventure episode with too many unfunny jokes thrown in. Not enough burns, not enough skinner c-
The itchy and scratchy movie was a tiny bit predictable as well. It got better after that though I think.
that I didn't like was when they were all carrying torches. The flames didn't look right.
and thought when homer was on the roof hitting barts hands with a hamer was just too much of a cariciture of the homer character and showed it is closer to the rubbish new episodes than the old classics as hoped.
ALso the film completely lacked a middle, wreck/leave springfield in the begining go to alaska for the middle, return to and save springfield in the end. They were only in alaska for about five minutes.
Better than any of the Simpsons episodes of the past few years, they're abysmal.
I think it worked in a cinema kinda way, obviously being the length of about four Simpsons episodes they had to change the formula, and it worked. They embraced the change so well - i.e. the beginning and end credits.
Animation was impressive.
A good mix of references to classic Simpsons episodes, and adult humour mixed with stuff for kids.
Is one of the best films ever. Not just animated films, not just comdies. It's amazing.