First two thirds were great, the last part wasn’t quite up to snuff. But damn, the Poltergeist parody was spot on! Probably the funniest segment of the entire season (so far). And yeah, that LOTR reference–with the old perv as Gandalf, no less–was hilarious. Mostly, I loved Stewie talking to the spirits through the TV, but only for inane conversations about Friends. And the Joe Theaters/Tri-Star ripoff was a riot.
Best episode in the last dozen or so. hilarious! The creepy old guy (Harold? Herbert?) always makes me laugh uncomfortably, but this was the best use of him ever. Great jokes throughout, and the plot actually held together. nice.
It’s amusing how many shots of the beginning of TTT they copy exactly for the LoTR parody (Gandalf diving after his staff/walker, the faraway shot of Balrog and Gandalf falling towards the water, and so on)
What’s interesting was the appearance of Statler and Waldorf, the Muppet critics. Wouldn’t Disney have a case for copyright infringement? The two were perfectly in character, so they can’t claim satire or parody - it was basically de facto employment of a liscense they didn’t pay to use. Does anyone familiar with copyright law have any opinion?
Merely mentioning a licensed character, which is what the joke basically amounts to, isn’t usually considered infringement. Years ago when I was reading Marvel comics, I remember an editor saying something like, “We don’t mind when Stephen King characters read Spider-Man or the Hulk, and Brooks Brothers doesn’t mind if Tony Stark [Iron Man] wears one of their suits.” Meaning: no damage to either brand is done, no endoresement could be construed, and there just aren’t enough hours in the day to crack down on everyone who so much as mentions one of your trademarks or properties.
The joke was more than a mere mention - the two were on the show, perfectly within their element (i.e. they weren’t commenting on a porno, or a dog fight, which would lend to the parody defense), delivering their shtick. Family Guy is a comedy show and it used two copyrighted comedic characters genuinely to enhance their program.
That’s not like Tony Stark wearing a Brooks Brothers suit, but like a Ken doll being sold wearing a Brooks Brothers suit. Or Carrie dating Peter Parker, not merely reading about him. Or having the CSI: New York team hand over some evidence to Batman for him to give an opinion on.
Could Disney sue FG? Sure, anyone can sue for pretty much anything.
Would they have anything approaching a worthwhile case? No. Even if the use weren’t covered by some First Amendment defense, Disney hasn’t suffered any harm from it. No harm, no damages. No damages, no reason to sue.