Talk:Trey Parker and Matt Stone

Move to South Park. Also, format is incredibly lazy and reductionist. Pro what? Con what?--ZooGuard (talk) 21:55, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I just turn South Park into a fork; it was a redirect to Comedy Central. If you wanna merge, how should we go about it?Civic Cat sig 2.PNG Talk to Civic Cat   21:59, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, it's pretty easy. Take the little bit from the lede here that's workable, and delete the rest of this lazy, lousy, listing nonsense.--[[Image:adsig.png|25px|link=User:AD|AD]]talk 22:18, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
 * So we'll talk about Team America in the South Park article and repeat what WP says about SPR, huh? Instead of actually analyzing their TV show and movie and maybe other works, huh? Weaseloid didn't think South Park was on mission.Civic Cat sig 2.PNG Talk to Civic Cat   22:24, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Some of this seems like the author is missing the joke. I always thought Team America was mocking Jingoism, not embracing it. ClothCoat (talk) 22:29, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
 * (EC)Well, yes, there is a definite case for mocking Jingoism. For example, there's all those priceless cultural icons blown up for the sake of stopping a few arabs, thus depicting Murricans as reckless and stupid. Furthermore, the song "America, Fuck Yeah" is easily interpreted as "America, Fuck You". Also, the song "Freedom isn't free (costs a buck 'o five)" is blatant mocking of the Murrican ideal of freedom and the idea of fighting for it that is always touted by jingoistic personages. Etc. etc. . See, that's the thing about them. Their humour is always easily interpretable and reinterpretable for or against one side. That's how a lot of their comedy works, deliberately so, I believe. Nullahnung (talk) 22:46, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, some of it does seem like it's missing the joke... Nullahnung (talk) 22:47, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

I thought so too, but maybe I wasn't concentrating hard enough. Talk to Civic Cat   22:33, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Haha yeh... let's scrap this article after moving the good bits to another page. That sounds reasonable. ClothCoat (talk) 22:42, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
 * are there any good bits? I am amused that the author feels south park is positive about the gays. Mr garrison has been such a good role model for me. AMassiveGay (talk) 22:48, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
 * (EC)Afaik, South Park doesn't really have a stance on gays, apart from being really shallow and going for the low-hanging fruit of gay ridicule sometimes. As for the creators themselves, all they willingly reveal about themselves is apparently being pro-gay marriage and pro-guns: http://insidetv.ew.com/2013/01/05/south-park-gay-marriage-pro-gun/. Nullahnung (talk) 22:55, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Sure. Let's put the Team America into an article that was a redirect because it was considered to be off-mission. Yeah, Parker and Stone are mock American jingoism because they're anti-liberal. They are somewhat pro-gay, I think.Civic Cat sig 2.PNG Talk to Civic Cat   22:51, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't know what their personal opinions are, but if they are pro gay in their body of work, its hidden well. AMassiveGay (talk) 23:03, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Do you watch it? Doesn't strike me as homophobic. Funny yes, homophobic, not so much. They even had an episode redefining fag as being annoying and nothing at all to do with homosexuality. --Barryjon (talk) 23:08, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Mr fucking garrison AMassiveGay (talk) 23:15, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Once again: http://insidetv.ew.com/2013/01/05/south-park-gay-marriage-pro-gun/
 * Make of that what you will. Nullahnung (talk) 23:17, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
 * as I said earlier, none of that is present in their work AMassiveGay (talk) 23:21, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't think mr garrison is especially homophobic. He's a big gay stereotype but he's so absurdly overdone its comical and hard to take real offense. They poke fun at everything and everyone. It's a comedy show, it's not supposed to be taken too seriously. I will grant you that it is this type of stereotype in the media that can make it difficult for young people to accept their sexual orientation as they can not only can't relate to it but don't want to be thought of in that way. There are so many other lgbt characters and people in the public eye these days though that I think the humour in this is just that. IMHO. --Barryjon (talk) 23:55, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

From a lyrics page I just searched]. It is indeed hard to tell if they're being satirical. Talk to Civic Cat   00:17, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

BoM The Musical
Didn't they also create the funny as fuck BoM the musical?--Barryjon (talk) 23:06, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, they did. Wouldn't mind watching it, actually. Nullahnung (talk) 23:17, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Yiu should. It funny from start to finish. I was in tears. There was one piece that I considered truly blasphemous and in poor taste but I doubt that would bother most here. Very thoroughly recommended. --Barryjon (talk)

Delete
Of questionable missionality. But, more importantly, written terribly. Author also doesn't seem to understand the material reviewed. (E.g., Team America is mocking jingoism, not celebrating it.) Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 23:28, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete. 23:31, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete (adding tag). Acei9 23:33, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Bigga bada boom. --Barryjon (talk)
 * Done. Acei9 00:17, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

This frikin' debate is questionable. Talk to Civic Cat   22:50, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

This is how I see it, we have four similar pages: Comedy Central, South Park Republican, South Park itself, and this.

South Park was an article, but after Weaseloid figured it was off-mission, it became a redirect (I'm assuming he thought it and did it). Comedy Central seems to focus mostly on the Muhammad controversy. SPR seems to be a bunch of POVing: Milton Friedman a SPR? Didn't he die before the series? Whatever.

Me, I was focusing on two of the works of the two creators, South Park and Team America. I presume that many RationalWikians and lurkers are familiar with the show, and even the movie, and as this is a site that analyzes, we can analyze their works to see if they promote a right-wing and possible pseudo-scientific agenda. I say they do. Are creators of comedy, particularly low-brow comedy, not the most politically correct? You bet. Is there a rule that they have to be balanced? No. an they have elements of fantasy? Sure.

Still, while the work is funny at times (less as I get older), it often indulges in sexism, racism, anti-Semitism, and pushing the right-wing agenda, with maybe a soft spot for gays—as they themselves might be gay. They attack Prius users: nothing wrong with that, but Jim Bob (or whatever his name), one of the good guys in the show, drives a Hummer. Are Hummer drivers in real life less arrogant, less "douches" if you will, than Prius ones? Aren't they entitled to a little bit of self-satisfaction? Let's analyze.

As for the movie Team America, if there was any irony, I didn't find it. Maybe, as I said before, I wasn't trying hard enough. I remember seeing the movie. I was somewhat positive about it—the Thunderbirds thing and hearing about the puppet sex scene. The first 15 to 30 minutes were tolerable—the set-up I supposed. Then when one of the characters asked, "What do you think about your freedom" or words like that, I took this as a bad sign—sort of like Don Cherry's speech at the Rob Ford inaguration (Pink Suit was cute). The first part of the speech might have been tolerable as a set up, but it was frikin' disappointing afterwards. The movie just continued with the dissing. The fake Korean accent, the "Hans Brix" thing. What's next, buck teeth and jokes about rice-burners?

As for the sex, what could have been a cute concept—puppets having sex—turned it into a scat scene—just what's with Try Parker and Matt Stone and scat and things anal? Fine I suppose if you're into it, but many, myself included, aren't—indeed, I find it gross. (Note to PSL and Brx: what's worse, Parker and Stones fascination with scat and things anal, or Quentin Tarintino's thing for women's feet in his movies? Or his superfluous use of the "N-word." Do care, don't care, care little, care-for-one-not-the-other?) Add this to South Park's implicit support of Dubya Bush and the American military and foreign policy, and the portrayal of liberal actors as America-haters, and what do we have(?): I think we're receiving a not-so-unambiguous message. Now if you think the movie is parody? Okay: there is the speculation that Conservapedia, Ann Coulter, and Fred Phelps are parodies. To me it’s more of wp:Wikipedia:Duck Test. Maybe it's not worthy of the attention of Conservapedia as they aren't as explicit or as certain, but this site has a CP namespace. All I want is an article that addresses the stuff I posted. Ann Coulter doesn't produce a TV show and fewer see Phelp's videos, so while these two potential parodists might have more notability and be more on mission than Parker and Stone, it ain't much more.

As for the "Fuck Yeah!" as a version of "Fuck You!," I thought it was based on trying to be more vulgar or exclamatory as "Hell Yeah!," but even "Fuck You!" could less irony and more intentional.

So what do we do? Turn South Park into an article again? Might as well ask Weaseloid: he seemed opposed to it and he's one of the big-wigs here. Want to have it as SPR, complete with analysis of the show independent of whether Colin Powell or Milton Friedman conforms to this vague notion of what is or isn't an SPR, or the different varieties of SPR—indeed, why not SP Democrats or SP Libertarians—fine; still, where would Team America fit in either SP or SPR? Want to make the Comedy Central one even longer, much of it on South Park—and again, nothing on Team America? You might want to defend why importing content from this article to any of the above would stand if in several months somebody like Sophie shows up with a machete (like she did with Northwest Territory, or Stabby vapping it entirely). I, for one, might not be there to exhort her to put it down. I did my bit with this article and its defense. Talk to Civic Cat  00:17, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Jimbo drives a hummer, you're saying he's a good guy in the show. Allow me to disagree and point out that he was driving a gas-guzzler in stark contrast to what is right (reducing emissions) and generally can be seen to be in the show as a representant of American idiocy, if you've watched the other episodes with Jimbo.
 * Especially after reading how you just weren't able to detect the blatant parody of jingoism in Team America even after trying, I am now convinced that you are suffering from some kind of confirmation bias that weakens these elements in your eyes and brings forth other elements (that btw I can't seem to perceive in the movie... maybe I'm the one suffering from confirmation bias, who knows). Nullahnung (talk) 02:40, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I could detect the blatant parody of jingoism in movies like Full Metal Jacket, but not this POS-of-a-movie; but yes, I might be suffering from some kind of confirmation bias that weakens these elements in my eyes and brings forth other elements; and/or it could be a while since I've seen it, nor am I eager to watch it again. As for Jimbo, he's a macho man, he's not, as they'd say in South Park, a "pussy" or "douchebag" who does sissy things like drive a Prius. BTW, here's an example of good parody (IMO).Civic Cat sig 2.PNG Talk to Civic Cat   21:10, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Too many similar pages. Add info about trey and matt parker on another page, plus this page is inaccurate. I'm destroying this page now. My first page delete, I'm so excited. ClothCoat (talk) 21:27, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
 * aaand it's back. This article is an embarrassment, tedious to read, and baffling beyond belief. I don't see anything in the mission about scattershot animation masquerading as social commentary. Also, not enough fart jokes. Sprocket J Cogswell (talk) 21:34, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Nah, it's just one of the most popular TV shows in the US.Civic Cat sig 2.PNG Talk to Civic Cat   21:39, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Listen, to whoever's saving the page, I actually agree that trey and matt have their issues but this page is not necessary. Look, just copy and paste the parts you like to another page, ok? Thank you. ClothCoat (talk) 21:42, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Or preferably don't. Most of it's junk & would still be junk on any other page.  21:49, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Which ones? Talk to Civic Cat   21:44, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Show me the part of the mission about "popular TV shows in the US" please. Still not enough fart jokes. I blame Canada. Sprocket J Cogswell (talk) 21:44, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
 * It's right under the bit about the most famous shipwrecks EVAH. 21:49, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

It was in the now deleted article. But I guess I've lost the popularity contest. What is a greater waste of time: my watching Team America or editing here? I'm leaving for a while before I get ticked. Talk to Civic Cat   21:48, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
 * South Park Republicans is a bit leaky too.Civic Cat sig 2.PNG Talk to Civic Cat   22:23, 25 November 2013 (UTC)