The Simpsons you pay for

Rating: 7/10 (18 August 2007)

Why a movie-length Simpsons? No doubt money had something to do with it (this film has grossed $US 125 million in the US alone in three weeks). The huge team of writers have not taken the opportunity to do much different from the usual string of gags, sight and otherwise, delivered at breakneck speed. There is a rather mawkish re-affirmation of "family values", but then the Simpsons have always had a sentimental streak. When it comes to authority, subversiveness comes to the fore - the US Environmental Protection Agency will not be urging people to see the film  though small government advocates might.
The sets and crowd scenes are a little more elaborate than those in a standard TV episode; the Alaska scenes are quite beautiful. Although the writers have produced witty and intelligent stuff they stop short of anything that might offend any sizeable portion of their audience. Religious belief is an example. Homer is not the fervent believer that Ned Flanders is, but he goes to church nonetheless. Casting a lovable central character as an atheist is simply not acceptable on US television.
Lots of the secondary characters get a gig, but often a very short one. Baby Maggie gets to utter her first word, right at the end, in the credits, which, by the way, are just about the longest in cinema history and include a sizeable portion of the population of Korea, where much of the animation work was done. If you like the Simpson on TV you'll like the film, but it goes no further than an above average TV episode.