TW
Er... I don't think so! Don't forget, SKY don't make the Simpsons - FOX do!
Errrr beginning title sequence actually made by SKY and SKY actually use it to promote The Simpson on it channel.
Fox has also started using the SKY promo to promote Simpsons on FOX.
FOX is majoritly owned by News Corporation (a Murdoch Company!)
SKY's biggest shareholder is News Corporation (a Murdoch Company!)
see any similarities between SKY (UK) and FOX (US) ???????
I'm sure it was Fox (or an American production team anyway) who filmed the scenes; I remember readng that they were coming over to the UK to film some suitable scenes for the intro.
amosc100 posted:
chris posted:
Antz posted:
I've got a feeling Sky told Ricky to include all the High Definition comments
Er... I don't think so! Don't forget, SKY don't make the Simpsons - FOX do!
Errrr beginning title sequence actually made by SKY and SKY actually use it to promote The Simpson on it channel.
Fox has also started using the SKY promo to promote Simpsons on FOX.
FOX is majoritly owned by News Corporation (a Murdoch Company!)
SKY's biggest shareholder is News Corporation (a Murdoch Company!)
see any similarities between SKY (UK) and FOX (US) ???????
I'm sure it was Fox (or an American production team anyway) who filmed the scenes; I remember readng that they were coming over to the UK to film some suitable scenes for the intro.
BF
Nerd alert!!
One thing ive noticed about it is that the 'homer' is driving a 'left hand' drive car dispite it being the UK, but its because he has to get out the left hand side of the car on the driveway.
One thing ive noticed about it is that the 'homer' is driving a 'left hand' drive car dispite it being the UK, but its because he has to get out the left hand side of the car on the driveway.
RE
Suprised at most.
The episode was all over the place. As what most people stated above me, it didn't deserve much of the hype.
BillyH posted:
The overnight ratings are 2.2 million - the highest rated Simpsons episode on Sky One ever (the previous record was 1.65 million in 2001) and the second highest rated Sky One show ever, the highest being the sixth season premiere of Friends in 2000 (2.86 million).
Suprised at most.
The episode was all over the place. As what most people stated above me, it didn't deserve much of the hype.
GL
I thought it was OK, worthy of a few laughs at least. But why do so many people always say it was "bowel-churningly awful/tripe/rubbish" like it's a definitive statement. I just can't stand that. At least say "I think it is" or "in my opinion".
Also it seems to me as if some people are just never happy with anything at all at the moment? They just seem to say everything was "tripe/drivel/rubbish" without backing it up. Everyone seems a lot harder to please. No wonder I'm such a pessimistic teenager...
And yes, I've seen Grumpy Old Men, and I love it. But don't forget, they are self-conscious that they're moaning old gits. More than can be said for some poeple....
Also it seems to me as if some people are just never happy with anything at all at the moment? They just seem to say everything was "tripe/drivel/rubbish" without backing it up. Everyone seems a lot harder to please. No wonder I'm such a pessimistic teenager...
And yes, I've seen Grumpy Old Men, and I love it. But don't forget, they are self-conscious that they're moaning old gits. More than can be said for some poeple....
DA
so when are c4 going to start showing New epsiodes?
Apparently Channel 4 are going to have a big catch up later this year, showing all the 'new' episodes that they have the rights to at least.
623058 posted:
BillyH posted:
Technically, Channel 4 have still yet to show Series 13, which started in late 2001 - so they're actually five years behind. Will probably be four by the end of the year, though.
so when are c4 going to start showing New epsiodes?
Apparently Channel 4 are going to have a big catch up later this year, showing all the 'new' episodes that they have the rights to at least.
NE
I quite frankly thing that nearly anyone who thought that the Gervais episode was quality, or remotely entertaining, has little concept of what the Simpsons used to be or how good some episodes were compared to the Gervais episode.
I liked Gervais in the office, and what annoyed me most about this was that it was just a blatant character transfer, nothing new, different, or unusual about the character of Charles, he was just "David Brent from the Office UK". The songs were plain embarassing, Marge's simpering and playing dumb about Charles' feelings was terrible, the plot was weak at best, in the majority revolving around getting a HDTV (I had hoped it had been dropped half way through, but no, it pops up again at the end). What was the point of Moe and the celery tantrum, and the whole Lenny party at the start? Why the cut scene to the Irish pub with the drunken housekeeper? Why yet another episode where the stability of Homer & Marge's relationship was explored? Why did Charles' wife and son have faux-pas English accents that jarred horribly with Gervais' real accent?
The satire about Fox had potential, but it came across as totally forced, and done to death. They've [the writers] already made the point in previous episodes about Fox's creative genius [Nee, 'Who Wants To Marry A Million Bears', 'No Pants Island' and 'Fart Date'].
If people believe that it wasn't really that bad, fine. I would ask them to watch "Last Exit to Springfield" and compare. I personally was gutted by it, it did absolutely nothing for me.
bee bee see posted:
I thought it was OK, worthy of a few laughs at least. But why do so many people always say it was "bowel-churningly awful/tripe/rubbish" like it's a definitive statement. I just can't stand that. At least say "I think it is" or "in my opinion".
Also it seems to me as if some people are just never happy with anything at all at the moment? They just seem to say everything was "tripe/drivel/rubbish" without backing it up. Everyone seems a lot harder to please. No wonder I'm such a pessimistic teenager...
And yes, I've seen Grumpy Old Men, and I love it. But don't forget, they are self-conscious that they're moaning old gits. More than can be said for some poeple....
Also it seems to me as if some people are just never happy with anything at all at the moment? They just seem to say everything was "tripe/drivel/rubbish" without backing it up. Everyone seems a lot harder to please. No wonder I'm such a pessimistic teenager...
And yes, I've seen Grumpy Old Men, and I love it. But don't forget, they are self-conscious that they're moaning old gits. More than can be said for some poeple....
I quite frankly thing that nearly anyone who thought that the Gervais episode was quality, or remotely entertaining, has little concept of what the Simpsons used to be or how good some episodes were compared to the Gervais episode.
I liked Gervais in the office, and what annoyed me most about this was that it was just a blatant character transfer, nothing new, different, or unusual about the character of Charles, he was just "David Brent from the Office UK". The songs were plain embarassing, Marge's simpering and playing dumb about Charles' feelings was terrible, the plot was weak at best, in the majority revolving around getting a HDTV (I had hoped it had been dropped half way through, but no, it pops up again at the end). What was the point of Moe and the celery tantrum, and the whole Lenny party at the start? Why the cut scene to the Irish pub with the drunken housekeeper? Why yet another episode where the stability of Homer & Marge's relationship was explored? Why did Charles' wife and son have faux-pas English accents that jarred horribly with Gervais' real accent?
The satire about Fox had potential, but it came across as totally forced, and done to death. They've [the writers] already made the point in previous episodes about Fox's creative genius [Nee, 'Who Wants To Marry A Million Bears', 'No Pants Island' and 'Fart Date'].
If people believe that it wasn't really that bad, fine. I would ask them to watch "Last Exit to Springfield" and compare. I personally was gutted by it, it did absolutely nothing for me.
CS
I've got used to new episodes of the Simpsons being close to unwatchably bad, but genuinly thought that the Gervais episode might be an exception.
Ye Gods, it was appalling!
The main problem with new episodes, for me, has been that the story has been so linear, with plots that startr with one thing, then suddenly switch to another, then another, and another, without ever offering a sense that the strands are ever going to hook up. Gervais did nothing to deviate from that formula.
Plus it was so fast! Characters would completely change their mind in a heartbeat, plot "revelations" would happen instantly - Charles' wife announced she was with Selma (or was it Patty), and everyone's reaction would happen instantly, without any time to take in the news
I just don't know what the hell the big deal was, I just found the whole episode pathetic.
Ye Gods, it was appalling!
The main problem with new episodes, for me, has been that the story has been so linear, with plots that startr with one thing, then suddenly switch to another, then another, and another, without ever offering a sense that the strands are ever going to hook up. Gervais did nothing to deviate from that formula.
Plus it was so fast! Characters would completely change their mind in a heartbeat, plot "revelations" would happen instantly - Charles' wife announced she was with Selma (or was it Patty), and everyone's reaction would happen instantly, without any time to take in the news
I just don't know what the hell the big deal was, I just found the whole episode pathetic.