Cinemassacre Defends KotCS

One of these days people are going to use the search function and gone will be the days of needlessly repeated topics.

...or perhaps that's all just wishful thinking...
 

emtiem

Well-known member
No sequel could be as bad as how everyone bangs on about KOTCS. Miserablists.

I like that guy's attitude. They're only a bit of fun.
 
Last edited:

WeAreGoingToDie

New member
Thanks Atilla!

@ residentalien: no need for a waving finger of shame. I skimmed general and the KotCS forums, didn't see a thread, so I made one. :)

I have to say that James's thoughts on KotCS are refreshing in that he takes a very relaxed and normal approach. I really appreciated him touching on South Park and how it was very much a critique on how some overreact to the film.
 

Gabeed

New member
You know, every time someone tries to explain that South Park was commenting not only on the flaws of the movie, but also the overreacting of fanboys, I feel like calling bull****. The only people who I have ever heard saying that are, unsurprisingly, fans of Indy 4. Look, I love South Park, but these guys are a couple seasons past their prime, and their humor, although often clever, is almost always blunt and direct, with the point of the episode being continually hammered in rather than developing much or becoming more complex. I think that the three Indy rape scenes and previous depictions of Spielberg and Lucas in the episode "Free Hat" illustrate Parker and Stone's feelings on the matter quite clearly. They're basically fanboys. Unless I've missed an episode commentary that y'all have seen, I think that those claiming the South Park episode is a subtle critique of reactionary film criticism are looking for an instance that was never intended and does not truly exist.
 

Cole

New member
Gabeed said:
You know, every time someone tries to explain that South Park was commenting not only on the flaws of the movie, but also the overreacting of fanboys, I feel like calling bull****. The only people who I have ever heard saying that are, unsurprisingly, fans of Indy 4. Look, I love South Park, but these guys are a couple seasons past their prime, and their humor, although often clever, is almost always blunt and direct, with the point of the episode being continually hammered in rather than developing much or becoming more complex. I think that the three Indy rape scenes and previous depictions of Spielberg and Lucas in the episode "Free Hat" illustrate Parker and Stone's feelings on the matter quite clearly. They're basically fanboys. Unless I've missed an episode commentary that y'all have seen, I think that those claiming the South Park episode is a subtle critique of reactionary film criticism are looking for an instance that was never intended and does not truly exist.
I didn't even think it was funny - that's the biggest issue here. I'd be fine if they poked fun at the film and it was funny, but sorry if rape comes off mean-spirited and not funny to me.

Even if what you wrote is true, and that's not what Matt Stone and Trey Parker intended........it can still be interpreted as such. Was the reaction not totally overblown and ridiculous? The characters go to see a movie and are traumatized?

I think Stone and Parker may have intentionally straddled the fence, I don't know. But an artist's intentions are irrelevent - it's the interpretation of the work. And we only care what Stone and Parker think because of the cultural significance of South Park.

The funniest part of the episode was with Butters, when he shoots Cartman in the crotch and then at the end when he stammers, "I thought that movie was pretty good."
 

StoneTriple

New member
Gabeed said:
You know, every time someone tries to explain that South Park was commenting not only on the flaws of the movie, but also the overreacting of fanboys, I feel like calling bull****. The only people who I have ever heard saying that are, unsurprisingly, fans of Indy 4.

You know, every time someone tries to explain that South Park was commenting only on the flaws of the movie, I feel like calling bull****. The only people who I have ever heard saying that are, unsurprisingly, Lucas bashers.
 

Forbidden Eye

Well-known member
Attila the Professor said:
I think I heard something about this...

But in the interests of allowing a suddenly thriving discussion in the thread that this was originally mentioned to continue, we'll let this thread remain.

Maybe you or somebody else can remove all the posts from that thread related to this video and merge them here? I think this can merit a thread of its own considering how big and vague that other thread has become.

As for the video, I more or less stated exactly how I felt here.
 

WeAreGoingToDie

New member
Forbidden Eye said:
Maybe you or somebody else can remove all the posts from that thread related to this video and merge them here? I think this can merit a thread of its own considering how big and vague that other thread has become.

As for the video, I more or less stated exactly how I felt here.

Regarding Psycho II, it is worth a watch. It in no way is like Jaws 2 or most other sequels to classic films. The return of Tony Perkins and Vera Miles makes the film feel legitimate despite lacking Hitchcock. It's a good story as well, reversing roles of victim and aggressor, placing Norman in the victim role. I won't spoil much else, but you should check it out! If you're a Hitchcock fan, Psycho III is also worth a watch just for the references to Vertigo.

Anyway, Indy related things: I believe South Park attempted to play both sides and failed to do so. The message I saw them trying to convey was that too many moviegoers these days overreact to even the smallest things. Butters was being the voice of reason in that he simply liked the movie and didn't let to negatives impede on his day to day life. Unfortunately, South Park went too far with their analysis and became the poster child for KotCS hate. The raping scenes were way too much for me (and this is coming from a guy who saw Saló and owns all the Saw films). I think the rape scene affected me because, aside from the awful idea of using gratuitous rape as a joke, it also put two filmmakers who I admire in a bad light. As soon as I saw the scene of Lucas and Speilberg, I knew I would have to see it appear again and again as an animated gif in online discussions. Stupid internet.

This brings up another beef of mine: internet culture is too wrapped up in the attempt to make the newest meme. Nuke the fridge was repeated ad nauseum not so much because those who perpetuated it wanted to criticize the movie, but more so because they wanted to be the next big internet craze.

This is why James's words make me so happy, because it affirms that there are still people out there who watch movies and don't let the faults get under their skin. I'd prefer to have a low blood pressure and be happy than spend countless hours raging about digital monkeys. Did I hate the monkey scene? Yes! Do I waste time raging about it and building it up in my head? Hell no! The most rage I get about the scene is when I rewatch KotCS. I simply scoff and shake my head when the moment arrives, then I forget about it and enjoy the rest of the movie. (y)
 

Dr.Jonesy

Well-known member
WeAreGoingToDie said:
Nuke the fridge was repeated ad nauseum not so much because those who perpetuated it wanted to criticize the movie, but more so because they wanted to be the next big internet craze.

I recently found out that the main founder of NuketheFridge.com has died last month at age 38.

I am sorry to hear about his death even though I hate the website. But by the looks of the lack of updates and the fact that he was the writer of all the articles the past 2 years, I feel the site has likely died with him.
 

Darth Vile

New member
WeAreGoingToDie said:
Regarding Psycho II, it is worth a watch. It in no way is like Jaws 2 or most other sequels to classic films. The return of Tony Perkins and Vera Miles makes the film feel legitimate despite lacking Hitchcock. It's a good story as well, reversing roles of victim and aggressor, placing Norman in the victim role. I won't spoil much else, but you should check it out! If you're a Hitchcock fan, Psycho III is also worth a watch just for the references to Vertigo.

I loved Psycho II as a kid. Classic example of a great date video... ;)
 

Gabeed

New member
Firstly, I think the discussion of whether "rape is funny" is somewhat irrelevant. I won't try to argue that it is or isn't, I'm addressing the misguided perception that Parker and Stone were "making fun of both sides," although you would think the brutality of three rape scenes would make it clear where the writers stood. Incidentally, I didn't think the episode was even that funny, but I'll get into that briefly below.

WeAreGoingToDie said:
Anyway, Indy related things: I believe South Park attempted to play both sides and failed to do so. The message I saw them trying to convey was that too many moviegoers these days overreact to even the smallest things. Butters was being the voice of reason in that he simply liked the movie and didn't let to negatives impede on his day to day life.

Yeah, uh, but I think you forget who Butters is. He's the naive, gullible kid who optimistically likes everything, such as "Hello Kitty Island Adventure" in the WoW episode. Butters was meant to accentuate the dislike of Indy 4 by the South Park writers, by exhibiting the only person who liked the movie as the naive "loser" of the show.

I mean, these guys didn't even devote the full episode to Indy 4. Half of it was about Cartman and Butters doing Chinese accents because of the Olympics. It had nothing to do with the Indy 4 plot. You would think that if the writers had anything to say about the fanboyism tearing through cinema today, they would have, in order to make their opinion clear. Instead, they devoted pretty much all of the Indy 4 time to either rape scenes or mourning the rape scenes, and 50% of the entire episode making tired Chinese stereotypes. The "I learned something today" ending dealt with Cartman and Chinese, and didn't succinctly explain the writers' comprehensive, detailed opinion regarding Indy 4. That's because the writers' premise, "Indy 4 raped our childhood," didn't require summing up.

StoneTriple said:
You know, every time someone tries to explain that South Park was commenting only on the flaws of the movie, I feel like calling bull****. The only people who I have ever heard saying that are, unsurprisingly, Lucas bashers.

The "hidden message" of the episode has never been "found" by anyone I know, fan of the movie or not. I have never seen it proposed anywhere except in this forum. Thus my conclusion. If you don't find rape funny, or think South Park is washed up anyway and not worthy of even bothering, I can respect your opinion and even agree with you on some points. But I urge you not to delude yourself into thinking the writers were subtly mocking "both sides" when there is so little evidence for it.
 

Stoo

Well-known member
Gabeed said:
You know, every time someone tries to explain that South Park was commenting not only on the flaws of the movie, but also the overreacting of fanboys, I feel like calling bull****. The only people who I have ever heard saying that are, unsurprisingly, fans of Indy 4.
Well, I'm not a big fan of Indy 4 but definitely saw both sides being mocked. Quite obvious, really, with the rape analogy being the biggest example.
 

Cole

New member
Gabeed said:
The "hidden message" of the episode has never been "found" by anyone I know, fan of the movie or not. I have never seen it proposed anywhere except in this forum. Thus my conclusion. If you don't find rape funny, or think South Park is washed up anyway and not worthy of even bothering, I can respect your opinion and even agree with you on some points. But I urge you not to delude yourself into thinking the writers were subtly mocking "both sides" when there is so little evidence for it.
I don't disagree that the overwhelming response is that people think it's a (nasty) insult of the movie, but that doesn't mean it's correct. Little evidence? Isn't that what we're discussing?

If it's true that Stone and Parker despised the movie that much and their response was to have Lucas and Spielberg raping Indy as an obvious metaphor.........how can you take that as a rational and reasonable reaction?
 
Cole said:
I don't disagree that the overwhelming response is that people think it's a (nasty) insult of the movie, but that doesn't mean it's correct. Little evidence? Isn't that what we're discussing?

If it's true that Stone and Parker despised the movie that much and their response was to have Lucas and Spielberg raping Indy as an obvious metaphor.........how can you take that as a rational and reasonable reaction?


Rationality and reason, eh? From you of all people? :rolleyes:
 

Montana Smith

Active member
ResidentAlien said:
Rationality and reason, eh? From you of all people? :rolleyes:

Or from the South Park crew! :confused:

"Kick the baby!" :eek:

To my knowledge Family Guy hasn't launched an assault on KOTCS, but they did have a pop at Temple of Doom in Stewie Griffin: The Untold Story:

"Indy! - Lady only here 'cause she humping director."
 

Cole

New member
ResidentAlien said:
Rationality and reason, eh? From you of all people? :rolleyes:
Wow, all these personal digs against me.........I must have really gotten to you, Resident. Not that it was very difficult....
 
Cole said:
Wow, all these personal digs against me.........I must have really gotten to you, Resident. Not that it was very difficult....


Lol. "Gotten" to me? Ha. No, I just can't help but picking on those who open themselves up to ridicule. Trust me-- you don't make it very difficult.
 

Dr. Gonzo

New member
<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/46795355@N07/4539206418/" title="lucas rapes jones by Chad Bronder, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4016/4539206418_e1a8064a5b.jpg" width="500" height="373" alt="lucas rapes jones" /></a>
 
Top