Mirror of mankind: Homer Simpson?

Carly at the Movies column by Carl Larsen

There must be a little Homer Simpson in every American male; otherwise I would not be sitting down to review “The Simpsons Movie” stripped down to my skivvies, munching on a donut, and grinning like an absolute idiot.

Like approximately two-thirds of the TV show’s initial audience (which once stood at 28 million weekly viewers), I drifted away from watching the weekly madcap antics of the Simpson clan several years ago. But right from the get-go of this frighteningly funny film, this cinematic sausage stuffed with social satire, the laughter came hot and heavy and never stopped.

In other words, it’s a darned funny movie; don’t miss it.

The basic plot is simple enough. Out of his loveable stupidity and recognizable greed, Homer manages to pollute a nearby river. The Environmental Protective Agency (run by Albert Brooks) clamps a gigantic dome over the city to keep pollution from spreading, but Homer and his family escape to Alaska, where they must decide whether or not to return and save Springfield.

Along the way, we barely notice how the film’s quartet of writer/producers (James L. Brooks, Matt Groening, Al Jean and Mike Scully) deftly skewer unfunny subjects like government surveillance, Al Gore’s movie, the Alaskan oil mess, Fox studios, ad nauseum, on their satiric spite spit.

The film is obviously set in the near future. You can tell that because Arnold Schwarzenegger is president (”They hired me to lead, not read!”), and the oft-ignored EPA has become a powerful instrument under evil leadership. Bizarre as it sounds, this movie (and often, the TV series) comes dangerously close to being a tool for social commentary, leading one to possibly ponder: Is Homer Simpson, not William Shakespeare, actually the Mirror of Mankind?

Be it weighty philosophical tome or simple Homeric epic, the usual vocal suspects are on hand to enliven Bart (Nancy Cartwright), Marge (Julie Kavner), Lisa (Yeardley Smith), and of course, Homer (Dan Castellaneta). They’re joined by Hank Azaria and Tress MacNeille to interpret most of the characters’ voices, along with a crew of about 88 zillion technicians working their animation magic.

(Only the backgrounds are CGI; the rest is animated in the old-fashioned way.)

One-liners and sight gags come almost too fast to catch, and pop culture takes a real pummeling. Tom Hanks does an amusing cameo (there are 98 speaking parts!), and dozens of characters from earlier episodes show up – some favorites all too briefly.

In the interest of fairness, we should toss a bone to the Homerphobic few. Let’s admit that, in this long-awaited movie, Groening & Co. eventually have to pay the price of success. There are probably too many animated characters in the show, and their self-referential gags sometimes come too fast. But let’s face it, the overall charm of the whole thing, the absolute nutsiness of Barb and Lisa and Marge and all the characters we’ve loved for two decades simply overrides any shortcomings “The Simpsons Movie” might have.

For a couple of months, various Internet forums have blossomed with heated discussions about the rumor that Bart, Homer’s hated/beloved son, appears with “full frontal nudity” in the movie. It’s all done in good taste, I think, and of course hilarity ensues, even though the film is rated PG-13 for “irreverent humor throughout.”

Irreverent, indeed. The Simpsons’ nerdy neighbor, Ned Flanders, as church-locked as ever, has quite a pivotal part in the plot, and wee Bart even begins to wonder if Ned might not be a better father than Homer.

To those of us who are profoundly devoted to Homer’s horrid approach to parenthood, such conjecture is blasphemy. But never fear, things all work out and by the end you’ll feel gluttonously satisfied.

Oh, and by the way, be sure to stay until all the credits have rolled at the end of the film. The fun ain’t over ‘till the houselights come up.

Mmm. Dat donut was good. Gimme ‘nother.

Carl Larsen is a regular contributor to The Augusta Free Press.