Review: The Simpsons ‘The War of Art’

Spoilers Below:

Does anyone else think we’ve toyed with the stability of Luann and Kirk Van Houten’s marriage enough in this show? Can’t we leave these poor people alone? Blue-haired discrimination, I tells ya. The folks are just trying to get along, and now they have to be placed on the rocks once again, just to bring the characters some relevancy. But let’s get to the episode.

After Lisa’s new pet guinea pig destroyed the family’s treasured boat painting that hung above the couch, the replacement they bought (at a yard sale) turned out to be worth a fortune.

After a heated debate regarding whether or not the Simpson family should share the proceeds of the painting with the Van Houtens (from whom they bought it), Luann and Kirk ended up separating, with the Simpsons taking in the latter.

Caring only for the financial aspect the dilemma, Homer and Lisa ventured to the painting’s source to confirm that it was indeed sold to Kirk, and not Kirk’s bimbo (who called him “Beef Kirkey.” What’s with beef nicknames tonight?) and would thus be the legal property of the Simpsons.

However, after discovering the pricey painting was a forgery, the family learned that beauty is beauty, and the original artist doesn’t necessarily matter.

In Case You Missed It:

1) No couch gag? I feel robbed.

2) What’s this nonsense about Lisa never having a pet of her own? I recalled her having a cat named Snowball (he died, he died…) and a hamster named Snuffy (he died…)

3) Don’t worry about replacing the boat painting. It was a only business gift, after all. (S9E20 “The Trouble with Trillions”) Right?

4) Folks on the Simpsons side in the painting disagreement: Selma, Lenny, Superintendant Chalmers, Helen Lovejoy, Kearney, Dolph, Lou, Moe, Apu, the Northern Irish Leprechaun, Mr. Burns, Mr. Teeny, and Sherri (or possibly Terri).

5) People on the Van Houten’s side: Patty, Carl, Principal skinner, Reverend Lovejoy, Jimbo, Eddie, the Leprechaun, Smithers, Nelson, Mrs. Hibbert, Ned Flanders, and Terri (or possibly Sherri). Oh, how this issue has torn the town apart!

6) Homer said, “Leonardo DaVinci Code.”

7) Making a good point about parents “friends,” Homer pointed out: “Aren’t they just the parents of a kid who happens to hang out with our kid?”

8) Homer Math: 100% – 25% = 65%

9) “We were gonna treat you to dinner at an upscale chain restaurant and never explain why…” Homer said to the Van Houtens. Well, dammit, they took my solution.

10) Why hate on Cal State Fullerton, Simpsons? Why?

Although some lines really tickled me in a way that if Loretta ticked me in that way I’d say, “Oh yeah. That’s nice. That’s the spot,” this episode was a swing-and-a-miss overall.

Maybe it was a bit too preachy. Maybe it wasn’t weird enough for the average fan. Maybe it was just missing something. And what was that something…?

That wasn’t a rhetorical question; I’m really wondering what it was missing.

In my humble opinion, the show – like the Bob’s Burgers that preceded it – simply didn’t quite meet the potential it could have reached.

You see, I love me some Thrillhouse. I love how his mom thinks he’s cool, how he hangs out with monkeys from Pier One, and how he once blew his eyebrows right off his face. However, this episode, which starred the boy wonder and his blue-haired family, didn’t result in the hilarious geek-fest that I thought it would. It was funny, but it could have been better.

In addition, the story arc was awkward (Was it about guinea pigs? Or the Van Houtens? Or art?) and the whole thing seemed like a venture that was probably better on paper than the actual execution of it.

It’s not that I can’t sympathize with Kirk, it’s just, after all this time, I don’t think I have a feeling to let him borrow.