A very interesting interview with Matt and Trey

That doesn't make what the show said wrong or irrelevant because according to the interview the real point is that they aren't trying to take a stand either way.



Then you've obviously not been watching the show very much and missed their portrayals of Bush.

Also, they aren't trying to be cynics and "hold Bush accountable". And seriously, if the show turned into typical Bush bashing, I would stop watching it in a second.

I don't get why its the responsibility of Trey Parker and Matt Stone to go "Shame on you Bush! You should be impeached!"

There seems to be an undertone here that the show apparently isn't liberal enough and not anti-Bush enough to be considered good.
 
Reminds me of when John Stewart was on Crossfire, accused of not asking John Kerry hard-hitting questions: "You're on CNN. The show that leads into me is puppets making crank phone calls."
 
The "Douche and Turd" episode was basically saying that both candidates were equally bad. I thought their point was crap then and, now that Bush has had another four years to decimate the country, I think it's crap today.



They portray Bush as a likable, folksy moron. Not exactly scathing



But they have no problem portraying Al Gore as a pathetic, desperate lunatic. Or featuring Hillary Clinton's vagina eating a man.



You don't need to be a "liberal" to know that Bush is a wretched excuse for a president.
 
You ever seen 'That's My Bush'? Yeah, same writers.

They don't bash Bush because EVERYBODY does it! Even everyone's favorite around here 'Family Guy' does it. No one bashed Al Gore, they did. I think calling George Bush a turd sandwich is pretty insulting, don't you?

Or would you rather South Park be 'Lil Bush'?
 
Don't worry, our messiah will be in office in a few months.



LOL, not sure where this came from.



OK now I got to tell you. This really sounds like some sort of liberal, claptrap bent commentary here. That you feel Parker and Stone are much meaner in their portrayals of Democrats than Republicans.



Lil Bush has plenty of stuff like this.

Once again your argument here seems to be that the show doesn't bash Bush enough and it should be more like a Michael Moore documentary. I see no point that the show needs to be like Michael Moore then it wouldn't be South Park. South Park has always done a fine job of cutting through the BS arguments and showing many things for how ridiculous they actually are. If you already know that Bush is a wretched president, why do you need South Park to tell you that?

Also to all the hardcore fanatics that are so anti-PTC and censorship here seem to have already forgotten the great episodes and material South Park did about these issues.

Once again, if South Park ever became typical Bush-bashing, I would turn it off and never watch it again. You have a million other bad animated shows that have already done that.
 
I too think it's odd how little they attack Bush on South Park but are open to attacking just about every other dang person under the sun, from Al Gore and Hillary Clinton all the way down to someone like Britney Spears, who really doesn't deserve it. That they really haven't touched Bush (who is hands down one of this countries worst presidents) to me speaks a lot towards Parker and Stones preferences.

I don't buy the school of thought that Trey Parker and Matt Stone don't venomously attack Bush just because they don't need to. Please VileOne, respect the opnions of others, because they're just as valid as yours.
 
Because Trey Parker and Matt Stone are clearly card-carrying, red state, elephant riding Republicans. They have touched Bush. People have pointed this out.

The Britney Spears episode was also pretty brilliant and relevant as well. But South Park was far from the first person to do something like that. Who are you to say that they shouldn't have or that Britney doesn't deserve it?

Family Guy and Seth McFarlane shows have never taken this kind of heed. Daily Show doesn't. Most stand up comics don't.

Michael Moore still did the interview with Charlton Heston and won an Academy Award.



You are missing the school of thought. People including yourself seem to have a misconception that they don't venomously bash him enough. I don't feel I'm being disrespectful. I am simply trying to figure these arguments out and add to the discussion.

Now here's my question to you. Why does South Park as a show have to take an impeach Bush stance? I don't exactly consider likening Bush to a turd sandwich what I'd call praise or not bashing him either.

Also, I think the shows that tend to take more of the bent that people have here about Bush and politics are inferior shows. Seth McFarlane made American Dad because he hates Bush and he was angry that it looked like he was getting re-elected. And the reason I feel the shows are inferior because they have in fact taken a specific bent and made it very overt.
 
Many levels?! Maybe if it were a news show or something. It doesn't need justification other than The Rule of Funny. Since they weren't actually using the word to insult gay people I don't think it's something that should be considered so seriously, even if it is offensive. Plus, it's something a lot of people say in real life without being hateful. That doesn't justify it, but again, I don't think a show like this needs to justify it. That's not their job.
 
Don't want to spread any further controversey, but I'm just going to say that I agree with near everything Matt and Trey said. :p Then again, I'm probably biased since I've agreed with them alot in the past. Heck, alot of the reactions of their detractors politically on this thread kind of proves their points.



Ditto. I wanted an animated reality show parody, not a total gross-out, no continuity crazyfest. Total Drama Island, though far from perfect, is closer to the mark on my preference than Drawn Together was.
 
They weren't calling players of that game that, they were calling gamers who spend a ridiculous amount of time playing a video game that. It was the same principal behing the World of Warcraft episode. There's a big difference between playing a game casually and becoming obsessed with it.
 
I'm pretty sure Style was referring to the slur against gay people itself rather than any offense Guitar Hero players should feel.

Edit: 10,000th post. Whee.
 
I disagree. Are we supposed to find humor in the fetus stem cell episode, the superman parody notwithstanding? It's unrealistic to ask people to not be offended by that sort of stunt just because it's a cartoon. I have some standards. When it gets offensive for it's own sake, the show is no better than Family Guy--if that. Jokes and humor can be offensive, but shock value isn't synonymous with humor. It's generally a product of lazy writing. It's easier to write an "extreme" episode claiming to go way too far than it is to write something cohesive. Especially since the "extreme" episode is doomed to become nothing but an irrelevant mess once it's replaced by the next cynical attempt.
 
Well, I certainly found humor in the stem-cell episode, and I certainly don't consider myself an individual who has low standards. I found this episode funny not because of "shock value," but because of the sheer ridiculousness of the entire plot as well as the exaggerations. I mean, come on: Christopher Reeve breaking the necks of fetuses, and slurping out their innards, on Larry King Live, and yet Larry King seemed not the slightest bit irked? So, don't jump to the conclusion that everyone laughs at "offensive" material just *because* it's deemed by many people to be offensive. People find certain things funny for different, subjective reasons, and the humor in South Park is no different. Further on this note, what's offensive to you may not be offensive to someone else: there is no such thing as objectively offensive material.

To paraphrase the late, and forever great, George Carlin: "I believe you can joke about anything. The thing that matters is how you construct the joke, what the exaggeration is. Every joke needs at least one exaggeration to be way out of proportion."

However, I must go on record as stating that I agree with you regarding your dislike of Family Guy, for that show is painfully unfunny drivel completely lacking in originality, not to mention the fact that all of the voices - especially Seth MacFarlane's - are annoying!
 
Yeah, I consider myself a person who does have boundaries when it comes to comedy... but that stem cell episode is great. It's just so bizarre. If anything, the more offensive joke in that episode is the way Christopher Reeve speaks with those long pauses. Probably part of the reason I also laugh at that, in spite of myself, is that it's subtle. It's not obvious that they're poking fun at him, but you just know they are. It really walks the fine line between "cruel" and "so wrong it's funny".

As Trey & Matt themselves mentioned in the interview, the show is a lot less mean-spirited and cynical than many of its contemporaries, and that's why it wins me over. The attitude presented in Drawn Together and modern Family Guy is what offends me (even though FG has less extreme content). South Park has some sort of undercurrent of moral responsibility even though it contains jokes that many would consider immoral. And I would say that no, they're not immoral, or moral -- they're just jokes. There seems to be a clear distinction. The jokes are just an honest attempt to make us laugh; nothing more. The show's morality is a separate matter, and it usually works for me as well.
 
Oh, in that case he's definitely being overly sensitive. The kids call each other that word all the time on South Park. It's not meant to offend, it's just the type of word that kids that age call each other.
 
When South Park first came on, Isaac Hayes was out there defending the show's content. When asked about the show's bad language, Hayes said point blank that at the same age, he and his friends in the third grade were also cursing like sailors when the adults weren't around.
 
I'm a pretty thin-skinned person who gets offended pretty easily. I get offended by the messages in a lot of Disney animated films. I was a bit offended by the morals in the last 2 Harry Potter books.

However, I don't think I've ever been offended by an episode of South Park.
 
I think TheVileOne has a point. So far almost all the arguments in the thread have been because they don't agree with Matt & Trey's political stance because it's "wrong". Which seems a bit of a silly point to argue.

Why is it so hard to believe that they don't bash Bush much because it's tired and predictable? Why is it that they HAVE to be republicans?

Whether you want to admit it or not, there IS more Bush bashing than liberal bashing on TV (especially adult animation), so it makes perfect sense why they wouldn't want to do it. What else would they say? Bush is dumb? lol?
 
Back
Top