Thoughts on #304 - A STAR IS BORN AGAIN

Review: This was a good episode, even though the plot was utterly predictable. The funniest part was Ned's fantasy about Hollywood with James L. Brooks. The jellyfish thing was typical Simpsons where some unheard of annual event suddenly happens when a plot setup is needed. This ep needed more for the Simpson family to do, but I give it an A-.

"Tony Hill" wrote in message news:[email]...

I thought it was great tonight. The part with the Bridget Jones' diary author was great. LOL. And Nelson: "Ha-ha! Fight Lupus!" Was great too! I'd give it an A.

"bertie" wrote in message news:...

I'm embarrassed to say I didn't get the Fight Lupus joke. Since you thought it was funny, can you please explain it to me.

Thanks, UB

"underbush" wrote in message news:[email]...

news:...

Just because he was running in the Lupus fun run, he felt the need to support his cause after the "ha-ha".

I'm still puzzling over when Nelson got so civic minded that he would enter such a fundraiser (and collect pledges). But it's nice that he takes it seriously enough that while he is distracted enough to laugh at Ned and the movie star, he remembers to promote the cause.

Michael

"Tony Hill" wrote in message news:[email]...

DAMN YOU C-BAND! I've wanted a C-Band satellite for years, kind of hard when you live in an apartment.

This was a solid "A" all the way through. Apu's comment about Mia Farrow and Homer's typical reactions at dropping his concession goods and seeing Sara's cleavage at the same are classic Simpsons' moments

j zed wrote:

I think it needed to last a little longer, though... similar to "Dental plan! Lisa needs braces!" . It goes to the point where its no longer funny, and then beyond to the point where it's hilarious again.

Christopher Morse wrote in message news:...

i didn't enjoy this particular joke - it's been done many a time - until they panned back to it several moments later. that saved it for me.

/t

I myself thought this episode very very good. It was a great Ned centered story:)

Robin:) NRobin1027

On Sun, 02 Mar 2003 23:02:47 GMT, Tony Hill wrote:

I liked the Benny Hill parody, wasn't too crazy about the whole having-Flanders-cheerfully-betray-his-deeply-held-beliefs-for-a-cheap-laugh aspect.

Scott Munro wrote in message news:...

That was my problem with last night's show. I thought it was great that they showed Flanders as a human being with normal (or at least semi-normal) male thoughts. However, I couldn't believe it that he actually slept with her! I mean, this is Flanders, the most faithful Christian character on the show! I can see him wanting to, and even starting to- but Flanders just wouldn't do it. Flanders may be a dork, and he may be over-zealous, but he has always been very faithful to God and the bible. The writers ignored this completely when they wrote that scene. Out of all the complaining I read here about out-of-character behavior, this might be the worst of all time.

This is Flanders were talking about. If that's not Flanders, he's done his homework.

If Ned has not slept with that woman on Sunday night, the episode would have been better. It is ALWAYS better no matter what that the characters stay in character even after more than 13 years. I liked most of the episode, but Ned having sex with that woman was not good. It is too much.

In article , Jeffro wrote:

In general, I didn't find the entire episode as funny as most of the people in this thread, but you've pinpointed the biggest problem, and it's especially disturbing that it seems to be part of a trend. The creators of the Simpsons spent years developing these characters, and now, in the past couple of seasons, they seem to be willing to sacrifice the greatest sources of humor and not even for a very good payoff.

I've always worried that the greatest danger in the longevity of the Simpsons is that they would weaken the characters so much that it would cast a shadow on the earlier episodes, and now I can see it happening. So Flanders had extra-marital sex and didn't think it was so immoral. Now they can't turn around next week and have him shocked over that sort of thing (although I'm sure they'll try). They just diminished one of their funniest characters.

I just thought of something very analogous; in Joe Adamson's great book about the career of the Marx Brothers, he said in their later years, on every movie they made there was some smart guy who thought it would be a great idea to have Harpo shout "Murder" or something, so they could advertise in the trailers "hear Harpo speak for the first time." As i recall, Adamson's comment on that was: "To some people, characterization is just a gimmick."

I guess those people now include the writers of the Simpsons.

• Dennis D.