South Park Appreciation

Started by SoNowThen, July 03, 2003, 09:21:08 AM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

MacGuffin

'South Park' Creators Skewer Own Network

NEW YORK - Banned by Comedy Central from showing an image of the Islamic prophet Muhammad, the creators of "South Park" skewered their own network for hypocrisy in the cartoon's most recent episode.

The comedy — in an episode aired during Holy Week for Christians — instead featured an image of Jesus Christ defecating on President Bush and the American flag.

In an elaborately constructed two-part episode of their Peabody Award-winning cartoon, "South Park" creators Matt Stone and Trey Parker intended to comment on the controversy created by a Danish newspaper's publishing of caricatures of Muhammad. Muslims consider any physical representation of their prophet to be blasphemous.

When the cartoons were reprinted in newspapers worldwide in January and February, it sparked a wave of protests primarily in Islamic countries.

Parker and Stone were angered when told by Comedy Central several weeks ago that they could not run an image of Muhammad, according to a person close to the show who didn't want to be identified because of the issue's sensitivity.

The network's decision was made over concerns for public safety, the person said.

Comedy Central said in a statement issued Thursday: "In light of recent world events, we feel we made the right decision." Its executives would not comment further.

As is often the case with Parker and Stone, they built "South Park" around the incident. In Wednesday's episode, the character Kyle is shown trying to persuade a Fox network executive to air an uncensored "Family Guy" even though it had an image of Muhammad.

"Either it's all OK, or none of it is," Kyle said. "Do the right thing."

The executive decides to strike a blow for free speech and agrees to show it. But at the point where Muhammad is to be seen, the screen is filled with the message: "Comedy Central has refused to broadcast an image of Muhammad on their network."

It is followed shortly by the images of Christ, Bush and the flag.

A frequent "South Park" critic, William Donohue of the anti-defamation group Catholic League, called on Parker and Stone to resign out of principle for being censored.

"The ultimate hypocrite is not Comedy Central — that's their decision not to show the image of Muhammad or not — it's Parker and Stone," he said. "Like little whores, they'll sit there and grab the bucks. They'll sit there and they'll whine and they'll take their shot at Jesus. That's their stock in trade."

Parker and Stone did not immediately respond to a request through a spokesman for comment.

It's the second run-in over religion in a few months for the satirists. Comedy Central pulled a March rerun of a "South Park" episode that mocked Scientologists. Isaac Hayes, a Scientologist who voiced the Chef character on the show, resigned in protest over the episode.

"South Park" again got the last word last month with an episode where Chef was seemingly killed and mourned as a jolly guy whose brains were scrambled by the "Super Adventure Club," which turns its members into pedophiles.

Only last week, "South Park" won broadcasting's prestigious Peabody. Awards director Horace Newcomb said at the time that by its offensiveness, the show "reminds us of the need for being tolerant."
"Don't think about making art, just get it done. Let everyone else decide if it's good or bad, whether they love it or hate it. While they are deciding, make even more art." - Andy Warhol


Skeleton FilmWorks

ᾦɐļᵲʊʂ

Quote from: Garam on April 13, 2006, 01:57:09 PM
- the two minute slap sequence. It's one of those 'jokes that start funny, then go on too long, then become funny again because it's been on too long!' except it wasn't funny the first time. All of these jokes stink of crappy writing to me (but I did laugh the first time I saw the chicken bit on Family Guy.)
- That they didn't attempt to take a jab at the Simpsons. If nothing is indeed sacred, I'd think Matt and Trey wouldn't pass up an opportunity to critique the downfall of the Simpsons.

At your first point: Family Guy is rife with that type of humor.  It was sparingly at first and was tolerable.  But now it happens everal times an episode where a joke will run on for far too long.  It is much rarer that a South Park joke will drag on for so long (if it ever has happened).  This joke seemed like a clear jab at Family Guy, even with the Terence and Phillip thing where they reminisced together.  It was random, it went on too long, and was very comparable to the repititous, dry new style of Family Guy.

At your second point: The worst critique you'll hear of Family Guy, through popular mediums, is that is copied Simpsons, but there will always be that other voice saying "Family Guy might be imitating the Simpsons, but it's funnier."  Granted, Family Guy is funny sometimes, but never on more than one level.  Simpsons also had a very unique style of humor and Family Guy, while trying to remain separate, clearly dug its fingers into the Simpsons method a lot.  The critique of the Simpsons is very apparent in general.  After so many seasons, the well will run dry occasionally.  There isn't much you can say about the Simpsons, as their longevity has proven a little more powerful than a fad.

Quote"The ultimate hypocrite is not Comedy Central — that's their decision not to show the image of Muhammad or not — it's Parker and Stone," he said. "Like little whores, they'll sit there and grab the bucks. They'll sit there and they'll whine and they'll take their shot at Jesus. That's their stock in trade."

I think this is one of the first times South Park seemed to side with Christianity.  They showed us that Muhammed can't be shown, even in the context of a brief non sequitor, but it's clearly OK (since we saw the events almost back to back) to show Jesus taking a shit on George Bush.  Why will networks allow some jokes about some holy figures, but not all?  Albeit unconventional, the point was made.
"As a matter of fact I only work with the feeling of something magical, something seemingly significant. And to keep it magical I don't want to know the story involved, I just want the hypnotic effect of it somehow seeming significant without knowing why." - Len Lye

hedwig

Quote from: onomabracadabra on April 13, 2006, 02:29:40 PM
squints, complete sentences: they're your friends. 

I. Will. Agree. With this.

polkablues

The problem I have with most criticism of Family Guy is the implication that there is only one good type of humor, and everything else is somehow underdeveloped and dumb.  Random jokes and absurdism can be funny.  Obscure pop culture references can be funny.  Jokes that go on past the point of discomfort can be funny.  There's no law of thermodynamics that states "All humor must be relevant to the plot and derived from the characters and situations at all times."  For god's sake, just watch an episode of Monty Python's Flying Circus to know that's not the case.

The point is, comedy is not monolithic.  And it would get really boring really fast if it was.
My house, my rules, my coffee

I Don't Believe in Beatles

Quote from: polkablues on April 13, 2006, 09:17:41 PM
The problem I have with most criticism of Family Guy is the implication that there is only one good type of humor, and everything else is somehow underdeveloped and dumb.  Random jokes and absurdism can be funny.  Obscure pop culture references can be funny.  Jokes that go on past the point of discomfort can be funny.  There's no law of thermodynamics that states "All humor must be relevant to the plot and derived from the characters and situations at all times."  For god's sake, just watch an episode of Monty Python's Flying Circus to know that's not the case.

The point is, comedy is not monolithic.  And it would get really boring really fast if it was.

Yes, but Monty Python is a sketch comedy show and Family Guy isn't.  Family Guy generally has some sort of a plot in its episode, which Python rarely had (the bicycling tour and Mr. Neutron are the ones that come to mind), so Python going off into whatever makes sense in the context of the show.
"A film is - or should be - more like music than like fiction. It should be a progression of moods and feelings. The theme, what's behind the emotion, the meaning, all that comes later." --Stanley Kubrick

ᾦɐļᵲʊʂ

Why can't Family Guy be a sketch comedy show, though?  Is it because it's a cartoon sitcom that it's not allowed to break the barriers?  The random humor was fine in latter season 2 and season 3, but they're overdoing it now to the point of just trying to surprise the audience with how obscure it is, rather than the joke itself.

I don't think the funniness is up for debate.  That's more subjective.  The intelligence of it is easier to debate, and as of late, FG is pretty fucking stupid.
"As a matter of fact I only work with the feeling of something magical, something seemingly significant. And to keep it magical I don't want to know the story involved, I just want the hypnotic effect of it somehow seeming significant without knowing why." - Len Lye

polkablues

Quote from: Walrus on April 13, 2006, 10:17:33 PM
I don't think the funniness is up for debate.  That's more subjective.  The intelligence of it is easier to debate, and as of late, FG is pretty fucking stupid.

But intelligence is almost completely beside the point.  You can have good dumb comedy just like you can have good smart comedy (and bad dumb comedy and bad smart comedy).  It's just trying to be funny, and the only critique that matters is whether it is or not.  Which, like you said, is pretty subjective.

And I wasn't trying to make a side-by-side comparison of Monty Python and Family Guy.  I was just saying that, by the standards that South Park laid out in the Cartoon Wars episodes, Monty Python would not be considered good comedy either, which we all know is ludicrous.
My house, my rules, my coffee

Ravi

Part II was stronger than the first.  The manatee tank was a better criticism of the FG style than Cartman just telling us about their style in part I.  I'm kind of surprised they didn't go after Seth MacFarlane himself, but that might have been too similar to the Passion episode.

The extended fight slapping scene was funny because of the matter-of-fact lameness of it.  And that they break into the King of the Hill studio and nobody bats an eye.  No musical score, just slapping sounds and their voices.  Whereas I found both chicken scenes in FG to be unbearably long.

And the Osama bin Laden cartoon was funnier than Family Guy.


grand theft sparrow

Quote from: polkablues on April 14, 2006, 12:11:35 AM
But intelligence is almost completely beside the point.  You can have good dumb comedy just like you can have good smart comedy (and bad dumb comedy and bad smart comedy).  It's just trying to be funny, and the only critique that matters is whether it is or not.  Which, like you said, is pretty subjective.

This is exactly why I don't understand Garam's breakdown of the episode like it was a state of the union address.  Though, polka... about the Monty Python thing, they may not have specified but obviously they're not talking about sketch comedy.

Quote from: Ravi on April 14, 2006, 12:50:45 AM
Part II was stronger than the first. The manatee tank was a better criticism of the FG style than Cartman just telling us about their style in part I. I'm kind of surprised they didn't go after Seth MacFarlane himself, but that might have been too similar to the Passion episode.

The extended fight slapping scene was funny because of the matter-of-fact lameness of it. And that they break into the King of the Hill studio and nobody bats an eye. No musical score, just slapping sounds and their voices. Whereas I found both chicken scenes in FG to be unbearably long.

And the Osama bin Laden cartoon was funnier than Family Guy.[/img]

:yabbse-thumbup: :yabbse-thumbup: :yabbse-thumbup:

Thank you both for talking some sense. 

Ravi

This episode also had a better satire of the whole Mohammad cartoon controversy.  The shot of all the heads in the sand was a particularly evocative summation of the whole thing.  And the fact that they can show Jesus taking a crap but not Mohammad standing there.

JG

The one south park season I watched consistently was season 8, and I remember loving it.    It's one of those shows that when I watch I wonder why I don't watch it more.  The fact that it mocked FG makes me like it a little more, too. 

squints

"The myth by no means finds its adequate objectification in the spoken word. The structure of the scenes and the visible imagery reveal a deeper wisdom than the poet himself is able to put into words and concepts" – Friedrich Nietzsche

grand theft sparrow

You know, I've been sticking up for Trey and Matt for the last couple of weeks and then, for my troubles, they deliver far and away the worst episode in the show's history.  They had to have done this on purpose. 

After the whole thing in the last episode about how jokes should be derived from the characters and situations at all times and should be relevant... they write an episode largely about Oprah's talking vagina and asshole, which goes against ALL of that.

The "point" that James Frey's book touched people's lives so who cares how much was true or not, I agree with that, but, as opposed to other topical episodes they've done, THIS is a case where everything you guys say is wrong with those kinds of episodes actually is wrong.  No one really gives a shit about James Frey anymore, regardless of where you stood on him, so it's already aged.  And it just wasn't funny.  Cartman had it right: "You're the worst character ever, Towelie."

picolas

for the record/to get it off my chest i've thought/realized since team america that trey parker/matt stone are amazing at concepts, but absolutely horrible at writing the actual scenes. and after cartoon wars part one i think they're not as good at concepts anymore. maybe it's because they've been sticking with south park for so long. but the bury heads in the sand thing isn't good. the adults are becoming unreasonably stupid.

ᾦɐļᵲʊʂ

"As a matter of fact I only work with the feeling of something magical, something seemingly significant. And to keep it magical I don't want to know the story involved, I just want the hypnotic effect of it somehow seeming significant without knowing why." - Len Lye