Outstanding Animated Program (for Programming Less Than One Hour) : The Simpsons

Ok, I know that Robot Chicken and Creature Comforts America should be winning me over hands-down, but I have to give love to one of the best "Simpsons" episodes I've seen in a long time. It had a solid, yet playful narrative with an insight into Homer and family that I didn't think could seem so fresh after over a decade of exploring their characters in every way possible.

Outstanding Animated Program (1+ hours) : Imaginationland (South Park)

This special was just plain imaginative. I think the beauty of animation is that you can be more inventive with it than any other medium, and Parker an Stone have shown they know how to get the most out of their extra creative license.

Outstanding Art Direction for a Single-Camera Series: Pie-lette (Pushing Daisies)

I know, I know. This is such a predictable choice since "Pushing Daisies" really relies on its art direction. But really, would "Pushing Daisies" BE "Pushing Daisies" without the whimsicle set pieces, ambiguously-vintage costumes, and delightful pies? Production designer Michael Wylie really created an autonomous world that is unflinchingly sweet and nostalgic --- and that contrasts beautifuly with the grimmer themes of death the show's plot surrounds.

Outstanding Casting for a Comedy Series : Pushing Daisies

I'm pretty sure "30 Rock" is a shoe-in for this category because of its perfectly-casted guest roster, but I think "Pushing Daisies" ultimately earns this award for its initial casting as a new series. I mean, c'mon guys. It's Lee Pace.

(That said, if "The Office" were nominated, I would choose them right away because of the most perfect casting of Amy Ryan I've ever seen.)

Outstanding Cinematography for a Half-Hour Series : My Name is Earl

I just love the cinematography in this show. The washed-out whites and dull shadows just feel like a dingy border town.

Outstanding Cinematography for a One Hour : Dexter

I think the title sequence alone deserves the cinematography nod.

That's it for now! I'll get to the "fun" categories in a later post, complete with more pining over Lee Pace.

This episode, excellent as it is, has two things worth focusing on for The Zen of South Park. The first is it's self-reflective jabs regarding the length of a show's run and that it should be canceled. Yes, South Park is talking about itself...jokingly. South Park has numerous self-reflective jabs (think of the Cartoon Wars episodes, in particular). Can you think of any others?

The second thing that's great to focus on is the Jewish stereotypes. "What!?" you cry. "There are stereotypes involving people of Jewish descent?" Yes, I know it's shocking, but also shockingly true, and a number of them are explored in this episode, particularly the notion that Jews control the media. Yep, they're everywhere, especially when it comes to the media. Hitler knew it (see his Table Talks for evidence) and Trey and Matt know it. Considering the fact that Matt is Jewish, evidence of this stereotype is already emerging.

Joosians live on the planet Fognl, and are big green aliens that look suspiciously Jewish, have Brooklyn accents, control all the media in the universe and seem to be blood relatives of Kyle (discovered when they eat some gross food). If you don't understand any of the references I'm making or if any of the jokes from the actual episode seem unclear (and are related to Jewish stereotypes), don't hesitate to ask.

Did you like this episode? What was your favorite joke? What stereotypes did you notice that I didn't mention here?

In The Zen of South Park I'll explore the effects of revealing so many Jewish stereotypes as well as Cartman's anti-Semitism, and discuss why South Park has provided us with an excellent medium of leaning about these things.

A South Park video game, hmm...

Does anybody have any idea what the premise will be or how it will work? Have you heard anything else? Would you get this game (pending you have the platform for it and know more about it)?

What would you like to see in a South Park Video Game?

Spaced is a British television situation comedy written by and starring Simon Pegg and Jessica Hynes (previously known and credited as Jessica Stevenson), and directed by Edgar Wright. It is noted for its rapid-fire editing, frequent dropping of pop-culture references, and occasional displays of surrealism. Two series of seven episodes were broadcast in 1999 and 2001 on Channel 4.

One Spaced episode was even used as inspiration for the smash hit, Shaun of the Dead. Now the complete series is coming to DVD!

This Complete Series set is everything Spaced's fervent following would demand. Each episode is complemented by the original commentaries as well as newly-recorded gabfests that also feature American friends of the show, including Kevin Smith, Patton Oswalt, Quentin Taratinto, Matt Stone, Diablo Cody, and Bill Hader. There are deleted scenes and outtakes, and, best of all, an hour-long 2007 Q&A with Wright and the cast. A must have!

That's right. I said it. There is no global warming. Sure, excessive carbon is not good for our environment, ozone layer or collective health - I certainly won't deny that - but the notion that the world's temperature is increasing in an unnatural way is absurd. In fact, not only have global temperatures been decreasing for a few years now, not only should the earth have warmed up substantially after the mini-ice-age of the 14th-20th centuries, and not only am I always a little cold and appreciative of an extra degree or so, but some NASA scientists have attributed the global rises that were being detected to the sun's own increase in temperatures (did humans cause that?). Basically, there is no concrete evidence that it is actually humans and their activities that are contributing to the temperature of the earth.

All that said, I am not anti-environment. I recycle. I don't litter. I drive 55 mph because it's the optimum speed to conserve gas. I just think that before we go believing every little word that scare-mongers scream at us we should probably ask to see some actual scientific evidence and not just believe it because they say it's scientific. Let's question these things a little more thoroughly.

And that brings us to South Park. South Park questions the nonsense spewed at us left and right about global warming and saving the environment. God bless it.

In "Terrance and Phillip Behind the Blow" it's Earth Day and the crazy Earth Day leaders are psychopaths, blaming everything on the Republicans and murdering people for the sake of their cause. As Stan says, "Environmental activists don't use logic or reason." This episode, along with "Manbearpig" in which Al Gore is a raving lunatic trying to prove the existence and danger of a make-believe creature that's half man, half bear, and half pig (and which we see in Imaginationland), as well as others that refuse to tolerate the nonsense of bullshit environmentalist' claims, is awesome for its willingness to stand up to the monolith that is the environmental movement. Few people will publicly stand up to the ridicule that is associated with not believing in what everyone tells them is true (like standing up to bunk religious claims when everyone around you is a believer), but Trey Parker, Matt Stone and Michael Crichton are among them.

So when you watch South Park tonight, remember that it's about more than Terrance and Phillip's problems with blow.

Do you believe in global warming? What's your reason why? Do you think I'm a raving lunatic? What do you think about this episode of South Park? Where else does South Park knock global warming?

A lot of times d-bags like to tell you they are hard-nosed realists and unsentimental skeptics who coolly assess the facts and don't let their emotions cloud their judgement. If you believe this, d-bags will surely laugh at you, and let's face it, you deserve it. The soul of d-baggery is making someone else play by rules that the d-bag doesn't have to follow. For the sake of enlightening and instructing non-d-bags in the ways of d-baggery, Chunque will explain heroes to the world. The difference between a d-bag hero and a traditional hero is all in the dress code. That is, a normal person doesn't require his sentimental crap to come dressed in a uniform.

For a d-bag a hero is anyone who has the power to wreck someone else's life but decides not to out of sheer benevolence. Alcoholic fathers, mustachioed cops on the take, anyone who saves a kitty from a tree, Bill O'Reilly and Rush Limbaugh are all heroes by this definition. Let's make this a no-brainer: if you are man enough to use sophisticated legal arguments to defraud the powerless and waste precious resources -- just because you can -- but are sensitive enough to get choked up over a Mel Gibson movie like The Patriot, you are probably a d-bag hero.

The dark lord of d-baggery says that conservation is a "personal virtue". Let's unpack that for the non-d-bags who might read this blog. By "personal" he means domestic, feminine, and weak. An "impersonal" virtue, on the other hand, is the kind that heroes have: masculine, skeptical, rational, wasteful, outwardly directed, careless of others' needs or safety, committed to a larger cause -- the big picture -- which the d-bag has impersonally decided was in everyone else's best interests.

Sadly, it is difficult for every aspiring d-bag to be a hero by practicing impersonal virtues. (This is particularly true for d-bag intellectuals like Christopher Hitchens, Penn Jillette, and Trey Parker.) That is why there are more opportunities to be a d-bag hero at your local Hummer dealership than there are on the battlefields of Iraq and Afghanistan.

A few years ealier, my family had acquired a VHS copy of Bill & Teds Bogus Journey, most likely by dubbing it off of Encore or the Starz Network.  Primus only appeared briefly, during the battle of the bands sequence of the film and, although it only featured mere seconds of Les Claypool singing the last few lines of Tommy The Cat, I would watch it repeatedly.  Just that brief clip fragment.  Over and over.  Rewind and Re-Rewind.  A decade and half after this appearance Les Claypool actually wrote, directed, scored, and edited an original film of his own.  When it eventually came, the film arrived in the form of a mockumentary about a struggling jamband.

The film, Electric Apricot: Quest For Festeroo, originally premiered in 2006 with some extremely limited showings.  Q & A's and appearances with the musician/filmmaker were included with showings in such locations as Portland, Oregon and Los Angeles.  Although Claypool may represent a big name draw to those of us who are fans of his work, in all reality, he doesn't draw shit for weight in the industry as a film director.  Electric Apricot was a low budget independent film project without any real distribution.  Seeing its potential, the folks at National Lampoon acquired rights to the film, in turn, making it the first "out of house" feature ever for the production company.  Electric Apricot subsequently began it's nation wide release on November 9, 2007 with a distribution that, although improved, roamed slowly over the following months, just a few big cities at a time.  By the time that I finally saw the Seattle showing in March of this year, Claypool was already selling pre-release limited edition DVD's while on tour with his latest self-titled project.  In the middle of last month, Quest for Festeroo became available for purchase through Claypool's website and is now finally available elsewhere for purchase and/or rent with some new and solid DVD extras.

Claypool's

I truly did enjoy the film from the first time that I saw it, however, after re-watching it I have found that it's much better than I had even previously recognized.  The Seattle Viewing took place at the Central Cinema, which is a really nice venue that serves pizza and beer to little booths while you watch the film.  They played old school black and white Flip the Frog cartoons before the film and a mental-hygiene style short documentary about a pseudo-political college girl who smoked weed and dosed up with her friends at 60's dinner parties.  Like I said, I really enjoyed the film, but I think that my expectations, coupled with the fact that I was sitting behind an obnoxiously drunk group of pharmy, gutter punk wingnuts reminiscent of a dirty Camden, NJ Phish lot, may have detracted a bit from my original experience with the material.  On follow up viewings of the DVD, the material seems to pop out at me more and more.  This can not only be attributed to an "adjusted" mental state, but also to the subtle yet intelligent dialogue as well as with the production methods and approach behind the film making itself.  Obvious parallels have been drawn between Claypool's project and the original legendary rock band parody This is Spinal Tap, however, as Les addresses himself on the DVD extras, Electric Apricot is much less "overt".  The content works more along the lines of Ricky Gervais projects like the BBC version of The Office.  Claypool also explains that he has based a career on music that "doesn't grab you on the first listen" and that the film was intended to be more "layered" in a way that would provide the viewer an opportunity to notice more and more on each viewing.  Although the term "cult hit" has been maliciously raped to the point where it's almost devoid of any substantial meaning, such layering and subtleties have been important ingredients in the staying power and re-watchability of now classic films like Boogie Nights and The Big Lebowski.  Another key element utilized by all three films is their attention to character development.

In an interview on Current.com, Claypool expresses that music in the Jam world is more about "how you approach the music" than the actual music being made.  He goes on to claim that the process of making the film itself was "a lot like jamming".  The musician turned filmmaker made a conscious effort to tailor the project to his limited budget, which was no doubt comparable to that of music videos that he had directed in the past.  He settled on the affordable yet flexible style of shooting the movie as a student documentary.  Then, after employing long time friends with musical talent to round off the four piece Jam Band, he wrote a loose script outlining the basic traits of each character and important directions that the film should take.  Beyond this light treatment, the actors had to do lot of tinkering and adlibbing with their characters as well as co-write the music.  From 2004-2005, the band, performing as Electric Apricot, played a handful of actual live gigs and stayed in character quite a bit.  Over time and through such experimentation, each of the main characters really began to take form.  For the most part, it is clear as a viewer that the actors "know" their characters and enjoy playing them.  This is especially apparent in my favorite of the DVD special features where they do an entire interview with High Times Magazine as Electric Apricot and never once break character.  Les' film direction in front of the camera as an actor/bandmember is done with a light touch, primarily focusing on wrangling the other actors back in when necessary to ensure that the storyline follows the intended path.  There, of course, is often a point "A" and a point "B" that must be reached, but the actors are able to bounce easily off of one another and their often spaciness and wandering attitudes are just more factors that play well into the concept of a stereotypical jam band.  It has been said that the approach for the film was to roll the camera as much as possible and to later search through all of the material for the "nuggets".

The main plot-line revolves around the four-piece jam band recording their first album with hopes and dreams of reaching a spot on the lineup for the fictional Festeroo rock festival.  Claypool plays drummer Lapland "Lapdog" Miclovich who fancies himself as more of a technical geek.  He is a music nerd and reads a lot of Popular Mechanics.  Bryan Kehoe, a highschool friend of Claypool and fellow member of The Flying Frog Brigade, plays the Apricot's guitarist, Steve "Gordo" Gordon.  He is the long haired wastoid, heavy stoner type that's obsessed with the guitar work of Jimi Hendrix and Jerry Garcia.  Bass Player, Steve "Aiwass" Trouzdale, is played by Adam Gates (Highball With The Devil) and is the type of musician that thinks of themselves as a great intellectual and artist.  He's politically minded and is "changing the world" through the bumper stickers on the back of his van.  The super spiritual meditating earth concious keyboardist, Herschel Tambor Brilstein, is played by Jonathan Korty.  In his jeweled tibetan baseball cap, he often lectures about the powers of yoga and healing but is always the first to snap when things don't work out.  Matt Stone (South Park) and Seth Green (Robot Chicken), both of whom had Claypool write and perform the theme songs for their animated programs, play a pair of tapers while Dian Bachar (Orgasmo/Cannibal the Musical) plays a cheesy young audio tech trying to weasel his way up in the business and Arj Barker (Flight of the Conchords) is their travelling super fan with his own patented dance move.  They may be exaggerated at times, but these are the type of stereotypical personalities that I have repeatedly come in contact with through my years on Phish tour, at festivals, and by attending a liberal arts college, etc.  I knew people who actually did blow glass dildos and sold them on lot to supplement their income and I even know someone who punched a kid for talking shit about Jerry Garcia.  For me, as a viewer, one of the more engaging aspects of the movie was recognizing these characters from real life and realizing that they had never been effectively portrayed on screen before. 

The first questions that I seem to hear when people find out about the film relate to if it attacks the jam band scene maliciously, and I personally don't believe that it does.  If you want to see an offensive representation of tour kids and jam band music, by all means rent the 1999 straight to video cinematic catastrophe Around the Fire.  It stars former Tiger Beat cover boy Devon Sawa and the alchoholic nip-slip disaster known as Tara Reid and is a completely misguided atrocity.  Quest for Festeroo was made from a much more educated perspective on the scene and, although most people who know of him primarily through his work with Primus wouldn't think "Jam Band" when they hear the name Les Claypool, he knows his shit and actually does hold some street-cred when it comes to the genre.  He has lived in the bay area his entire life and carries on the Grateful Dead tradition of performing a New Years Eve show in San Francisco every year, whether it is with Primus or one of his many other projects.  In 1994, Claypool sat in on the Phish classic YEM when his band Sausage opened up for them at the Laguna Seca Daze Festival in Monterey, CA and again with the band for an encore at a '96 gig in Vegas.  Since then he's formed such supergroups as Oysterhead (featuring Trey Anastasio and Stewart Copeland) and Col. Les Claypool's Bucket of Bernie Brains (feat. Bernie Worrell, Buckethead, & Brain) and has played numerous Jam related festivals.  Jason McHugh, who produced and acted in the film as the band's manager "Smiling Don", grew up around the scene attending Dead shows himself.  Cameos from the likes of Mike Gordon (PHISH), Bob Weir (Grateful Dead/Ratdog), and Warren Haynes (Govt. Mule / Allman Bros.) help to further validate the mockumentary and it's credibility in the jamband universe.

The sharp and hilarious references are what really carry any parody or spoof film such as this and keep them interesting, despite the often less direct approach and slow tempo.  Electric Apricot does not disappoint and is consistently spot on and accurate with their mentions throughout the film.  The guitarist "Gordo" claims to have the "Jerry recipe" as he holds a guitar with noticible resemblances to Garcia's Doug Irwin Tiger guitar and the group even has a song that has clear elements of Not Fade Away.  Aiwass has his huge musical epiphany to become a bass player at a Phish show during one of the glowstick wars which, if memory serves me correct, used to occur every show during the 2nd song of the 2nd set.  The fictional band addresses and refutes the obvious similarities between their logo and that of the Dead's Steal Your Face by explaining that the Apricot's logo has an 11 pt lightening bolt as opposed to 13 pts.  What they don't mention about the logo is the other stolen imagery such as the Allman Bros.' peach or the foot from the Europe '72 album.  The first reference that really caught my attention was when they introduced a private investor/fan that was funding all of their recording and musically related expenses.  I leaned over to my girlfriend and explained that he was for them like Owsley was for the Dead right before the character "Gordo" reiterates my statement on screen.  References like these may be too obscure for the mainstream audiences but, for the nerds who know shit like the fact that Shoreline Ampitheatre was constructed with an aerial view of a Steal Your Face logo, it is fairly satisfying to try 'n' catch 'em all like Pokemon.  There are comments relating to Rainbow Gatherings and it's expensive yuppy counterpart, Burningman, but others refer to much more recognizable connections in music and film.  There is mention of the old rumor that Pearl Jam was named after "cum", allusion to Caddy Shack when Claypool does his Chevy Chase "Nananananana..." impression during a golf sequence, and a moment where Aiwass is "writing" a song that has clearly already been written by lazy eyed Thom Yorke & Radiohead.  Claypool even recruits his cousin to play a band counselor with group therapy sessions mocking Some Kind Of Monster and Metallica, a band that Claypool unsuccessfully auditioned for in the '80s.

The production struggles of the movie actually mirrored those of the bands own quest at times.  When Electric Apricot finally performs for their spot on the "remnant stage" at Festeroo, the crowd is noticeably somewhat sparse. They were originally booked to play and film their performance to a larger crowd at the Shakedown Festival in the Portland area, but that didn't work out.  Shakedown was marketed as the West Coast equivilent to multi-day festivals like Bonnaroo that were filled with incredibly large and diverse lineups.  The people behind Shakedown Fest were forced to move locations to another spot in Oregon yet, despite obvious complications, more bands were booked and more days continued to be added to the festival.  When there were complications and shit hit the fan, it happened way too late.  People were already in line with tickets in hand when the festival was cancelled.  These were people that had travelled from all over country, many of which had dumped a shit ton of cash on plane tickets, hotel accomodations, and other expenses.  The acts themselves were not even informed that there was no way to pay them.  Shakedown became one of the biggest promotional, financial, and legal festival disasters since the shit covered, grunge-enthusiast frat boys went pyromaniac at one of those watered down 90's versions of Woodstock.  Right after the drama went down, I co-interviewed one of the main big shots associated with Shakedown on air for a pirate radio show over a speaker phone.  We were pretty faded and taking swigs off disgusting, yet potent,  homemade wine as I threw zingers at him like, "Are you honestly saying that there was no way for you to reasonably foresee the lack of funding until mere hours before the gates were scheduled to open?  What about all of the people that travelled across the country and spent all of that money?"  I would then pull the receiver away and cover it to block our drunken laughter. Incredibly serious and methodical answers would reflect back at us.  "I am not at liberty to discuss that information for legal reasons...blah...blah..."  What I could not know at the time was that the cancelled festival also left Claypool's film in the making without an ending while.  Actors and crew had real jobs and lives to get back to.  Pulling last minute strings, Les was able to book a spot on the Earthdance Festival taking place in Laytonville, CA on Wavy Gravy's Hog Farm.  The legendary Merry Prankster/Ice-Cream flavor even makes an appearance wearing his clown nose and sounding like Redd Foxx smashed on Jagermeister.  The live performance was filmed at Earth Dance along with festival footage that was filmed and cut between there and the High Sierra Music Fest.  Candid interviews were filmed of concert goers with forearms full of various multi-colored festival wristbands who speak of the magic and wonder for such gatherings.  Our writer Memes, who was at the Electric Apricot show at Earth Dance, verifies that the enthusiastic twirling hippy footage was authentic and that the crowd seemed completely oblivious to the parody involved.  There is a midnight clip where the actors are filmed in the Techno orb tent of Earth Dance's camping area.  I could only imagine grilling on acid and doing keybumps of Molly by glow stick wielding candy ravers and having Les Claypool enter with a camera crew wearing a bad wig.  With their spontaneity and resourcefulness, the crew was more than capable of piecing together a sufficient ending and pulling their project out of an impending tail-spin.  Such positive statements can not be said for the promoters of the Shakedown Festival.

Although it has already made rounds through select theaters and is now available on DVD, Les Claypool continues to work at promoting his debut feature film.  Claypool hosted a showing of Electric Apricot: Quest For Festeroo as recently as June 13th.  The viewing took place at this years Bonnaroo Music Festival and had a follow up Q & A.  Les performed at the festival back in 2006 when the movie was originally beginning it's slow screening process and there was talk of it being viewed at Bonnaroo back then.   Whether it was shown that year or not, I can't say, because I was not there that year.  Due to unpleasant situations involving the authorities, I did not attend the festival beyond 2005.  The point is that the film is still gaining ground 2 years after it hit its first film festival.  So is Quest For Festeroo the next big "cult hit"?  I don't know and it really doesn't fucking matter.  What I do know is that this is not a movie that is going to have huge marketing campaigns and billboard advertising behind it.  Nobody is going to get an Electric Apricot promotionalThirsty-Two Ouncer at Circle-K or glass dildo toys in their Happy Meals.  It will have to rely almost solely on word of mouth and, for it too be successful through such methods, there has to be some level of substance behind it.  I believe that that substance is definitely there.  I read an interview where Claypool mentioned that there is a possible cartoon spin-off in the works.  It seemed a little far fetched so he may have been intentionally fucking with people.  Then again, with his connections to animators, Comedy Central and Adult Swim along with the success of programs such as Metalocalypse, the project actually seems rather feasible.  I'm sure the most important thing for Claypool at this point, is that he's been able to prove that he deserves funding for future film work and that he has the ability to pull something of real quality off as an auteur.  If he decides to continue in the comedic realm, the folks at Nationl Lampoon will no doubt help him out by, at least, offering to work with him on an "In House" production.  He deserves it, if for no other reason than because he has single handedly helped resucitate a name whose last real sign of life came 25 yrs ago with the film Vacation.

-Dead C

http://www.imdb.com/video/imdb/vi1659044121/ -- trailer for "hamlet 2"

How the Jinx Crew fondly remembers the queue to see the new Star Wars films. The geeks in their Darth Vader outfits, the light sabers duels in the cinema isles, the blue slave girls in their barely there outfits. Oh good times, that queue made total sense. Other movie goers had fun with the crowd and everyone went home wishing Phantom Menace was a better film and hoped against hope George Lucas won't screw things up farther by continuing to use Jar Jar Binks.

Yet a queue for a computer store? Man, this queue is making allot of geeks look bad. It's a store. It offers the same product as the team around the corner at Next Byte. The Jinx Crew as they rounded the corner of King Street to walk down George Street came to a dead stop in their tracks and snorted their laughter. We had all read about it in the Sunday papers but didn't want to believe it. As reported there are geeks and nerds who roam the wilderness waiting for the call, waiting for another Apple Stores to open and then fly in, sit on their asses for days on end in little blue deck chairs, waiting to receive a free t-shirt. Then return once more they return to the natural beauty of the wilderness. 

We counted fifteen proud souls sitting in their deck chairs waiting for the Apple Store to open. Some sat heads down staring at the soft light from their computer screens. We were all sure they were eagerly blogging about their experiences of sitting on a major road in Winter. Riveting stuff I'm sure. The Jinx crew noted how pedestrians scooted out to the end of the pavement as they walked by to stare firstly at the queue then the store, this caused of frowns from the pedestrians. The Jinx Crew wondered if the pedestrians thought the queue would start singing hymns to Steve Jobs or trying to convert them to the Apple way of life. That would be better than sitting on your ass all day, surely?

Later after the Jinx Crew had finished their boxing classes we walked back down to George Street, the queue had gotten longer and had started to snake back down King Street, the security guards were watching the queue very closely. It appeared a major shindig was going on inside. Groups of people wandered the store with glasses of champagne in hand. The queue outside looked a little dejected. No Champagne the true Apple fan.

If the Jinx Crew has advice for Apple Store Opener Devotee's it this. 

• Get a cool name for your group. Anything that has geek or nerd should not ever be considered. Appleheads, Evil Empire Fighters, you get the idea.
• Matching outfits may offer you better understanding from the passing parade of bewildered pedestrians. Beige pants and backpacks should not be considered.
• If reality TV shows have taught us anything singing and dancing will give you street cred. Seriously think about dancing maybe Spike Jonze style to Praise You.
• Elect a President or create a hierarchy that TV crews can talk to, that way you control how the world see you, instead of weird sitted devotee's with nothing else to do.
• Get someone famous in the queue.

As the Jinx Crew left we were convinced that Matt Stone of South Park fame was sitting in the queue. True or not we're not sure. But if Matt Stone was there, dammit we should have joined the queue as well. Finally please note the Jinx Crew loves Apple produces and we use them every day. Long live Apple!

In short, what I enjoy are their Buddhist sentiments and the ability to question absolutely everything that they're told must be the answer. Indeed, there's no acceptance of the notion that "just because" is an answer to anything significant or important either.

The Zen of South Park, I think, very much captures the essence of Trey and Matt's thoughts in this interview, and though I started writing the book before I saw the clip, it certainly reassured me that I was interpreting their show the right way. I hope you enjoy the video. If you know of other clips like this please send them to me. What did you think of the clip? Anything you objected to that they said? Anything you really liked?

South Park tonight, though it has almost nothing to do with religion, is absolutely hilarious. It's the one that begins with Randy Marsh on The Wheel of Fortune trying to figure out what N_GGERS is. The clue is, People Who Annoy Me.

So, today's topic is about using other people's work in your own (fanfiction). Is it okay to use other people's characters in your own work? What if you never make money off of them and it's all online? How far should intellectual property rights go? Can we really control - or should we even try to - what's on the internet?

As many of you know J.K. Rowling has recently tried to stop certain people online from using her characters in their own stories. The question is, why. I'm not talking about her reasons in particular, but why I imagine it could be important for someone to restrict the use of her characters. In the first place, it's her intellectual property. She created it and as such has the right to use it as she pleases. Okay, fine - that seems reasonable. Unreasonable, though, is the idea that once she created those characters, she had control over them. Harry Potter and the world around him is an idea and those ideas are in the public forum. The movement of ideas can't be stopped and neither can our imaginations (watch episodes 1110, 1111, and 1112 of South Park about Imaginationland if you don't believe me). If you write a poem, you don't have the right to tell me how to interpret and understand it. Once it's out, it's out. And in a certain sense, the same goes for fictional characters.

We ask questions like, what would Harry Potter do in this or that situation and then we imagine how it would go and even argue with our friends about what Harry would do based on our understanding of his character. This is pretty natural and the basis for a lot of high school literature classes. Is that a violation of intellectual property? So we take it a step further. We go online and we write up this imagined scenario with a character that the public is already familiar with. Is that wrong? Well, it's certainly trickier. Discussion in class or with friends is one thing but suddenly I've put pen to paper (though it could have been an essay for a teacher that I posted online?) or fingers to keys and I might have a lawsuit on my hands.

In fifth grade my class read The Phantom Tollbooth, an absolutely wonderful book (go to www.thezenofsouhtpark.com/Merchandise to purchase it now). We were asked to write an additional chapter to this book as an assignment and then we read our chapters aloud to the class. I wrote chapter 15 and a 1/2. How clever of me. What if I'd posted it online? What if we all had? Adorable, it certainly would have been, but couldn't the author have found it problematic that we were using his characters and potentially, shall we say, defaming them? This, I think, could be the issue. If I wrote a graphic and detailed novel about Hermione Granger and Ronald Weasely making the hottest, kinkiest, nastiest and raunchiest sexy time imaginable (sometimes what I see in my head does not need to make it to paper) I would probably be defaming Rowling's intellectual property by corrupting readers' images of these characters (or showing them that Ron was more creative and interesting than we thought). I could see how an author might oppose me doing this. So if sex is a problem, what about Ron playing videogames all day? Is that defaming his character? What about Ron smoking crack? Who knows what Rowling could have a problem with us writing about and this, as I see it, is the issue.

As I've already said, I don't imagine this scenario as one where people are trying to make money off of her intellectual property (save some Google AdSense ads, perhaps), but they are potentially messing up her creation and therefore causing her to lose money. Arguably, though, it's free advertising for her since all of the collectibles and books and ideas in people's heads all go back to padding her pockets. Since we can't really know the net effects considering all of the other variables regarding the continued success of Harry Potter, maybe it's best to leave well enough alone - especially when we remember that at best, shutting down a site doesn't mean the content won't appear elsewhere and that all advertising is good advertising so by harping on the doings of one or two people, Rowling is only publicizing their actions since she is the public figure and not them.

But this issue is a lot closer to my heart - and my own work - than the above would let on. I am writing, as many of you know, about South Park. That is someone else's intellectual property (I'd like to say Trey Parker and Matt Stone but I'm going to go more with Comedy Central and Viacom) and I am using it. More than that, I'm using it to make money. Sure, it's free publicity for everyone involved and I seriously doubt that anyone will watch South Park less after reading my book - probably more (at least I'd like to think so). After all, I'm agreeing with the show and fleshing out its ideas and supporting its methods. But maybe that's the problem. By claiming that South Park is saying this and that I could actually be defaming the creators or their show in some way - that is, if they disagree. But the thing is, I've got it pretty spot on (I would argue that, wouldn't I) and even if they don't agree with my assessment, it all goes back to the poem issue I brought up in the beginning.

If you're a poet and write a poem, I can interpret it however I want. Sure, it has a context and the way you feel about it and why you wrote it but it's freaking poetry - if it doesn't have multiple layers of meaning (and some the poet herself doesn't see), it's probably crappy poetry in the first place. And the same goes for a show like South Park. It's a brilliant social commentary with multiple layers of meaning saying dozens of things at once. Like many writers, Parker and Stone probably only see some of the wider implications embedded in their work once they're done with it and reread it. That happens to me all the time when I edit. I didn't even know how deeply my thoughts were enmeshed in the work until I read back and saw what I was really getting at. With South Park I have just taken even more steps back than even they perhaps (and my friend who edits my own work, Kush - next week's guest blogger - sees the big picture I'm creating better than I do sometimes) and looked at their entire compendium to really extract all of what is being said about religion.

And now I'm going to try to sell my collection of thoughts about the matter and make money of off their intellectual property. But hell, for them it's free advertising and hopefully understanding that other people really do get, care about, and appreciate what they're saying (pending I got any of it right).

I like to look at this as though it were academia. Academics take other people's work all the time, whether art, historical sources, literature, or whatever, and write all about it and it's meaning. It's how we understand the period, the culture, the history, the authors and so much more. And no one gets sued for it (mostly) because we are allowed to write about what other people say and do. Journalists do it every day. It would be one thing if I just reprinted someone's poems or published my own South Park DVDs but I'm not concerned with the images and the original product - just the ideas that are conveyed. I may quote the words said by Cartman in writing but I'm not showing him saying them. Of course, I'm not making fanfiction because I haven't had Cartman say new things or created my own South Park episodes (though those are all over the internet). I have just taken what Cartman and Stan and Mr. Garrison and others really did say and explained why it's meaningful and what larger implications it has and the lessons it can teach us.

So, this is clearly a complicated issue and people have a right to feel the way they do about protecting their intellectual property. Fortunately, I haven't run into any problems yet and with other South Park books out there, I don't expect to (until I put clips in a chapter by chapter format on my website), but J.K. Rowling has created her own issues by being upset with the use of her intellectual property. But how far should she go and is there a point to going there? I really can't say, but I do know one thing - fanfiction is an internet based grassroots approach to utilizing ideas and with the globalizing world coming at us faster every day, there is no stopping that even if you tear down one website that talks about Hermione and Ron gettin' busy behind the rows of mandrakes.

Do you agree? Disagree? How? Why? After leaving your comments here, make sure to check out Chandler's thoughts at chandlermariecraig.wordpress.com.

Reason: Each of you at various points have called yourself libertarian. Is that an apt description?

Parker: People started throwing that word around to describe us right around the second or third season. They would sit us down and go, “So are you libertarian?” And I would always say, “I don’t know, am I? You’ve seen my stuff.”

I still don’t really know the answer to that question. I think I am, though.

Stone: I think it is an apt description for me personally, and that has probably seeped into the show. But we never set out to do a libertarian show.

Reason: When you say libertarian, what do you mean?

Stone: I had Birkenstocks in high school. I was that guy. And I was sure that those people on the other side of the political spectrum were trying to control my life. And then I went to Boulder and got rid of my Birkenstocks immediately, because everyone else had them and I realized that these people over here want to control my life too. I guess that defines my political philosophy. If anybody’s telling me what I should do, then you’ve got to really convince me that it’s worth doing.

Click here for the full interview. 

Here's the latest Chad Vader installment

The series is the brain child of Matt Stone and Aaron Yonda, founders of Blame Society Productions. They write, shoot, and act in every episode. They actually do a lot more than just the Chad Vader videos. They have the kind of off-beat humor I enjoy. You can check out their website here: Blame Society Productions

This Film Is Not Yet Rated this week.

Documents a history of the MPAA ratings board. Talks to numerous directors and actors about the censorship of their movies before they could be released. Includes directors, Kevin Smith, Matt Stone, John Waters, Darren Aronosfsky, Maria Bello, Atom Egoyan.(IMDb)

youtube

youtube

It's a must see for anyone who loves film.





Why does this happen? Well, let me just let the non-writers who stop by in on a little secret: Writing is...SO. MUCH. WORK. All right, that's overexaggerating a little bit. But usually, it's not what you would call "fun." In my limited experience, the only people I've met who "enjoy" writing are those drafting personal essays, because, well, they're writing about themselves. (Can you even begin to grasp the irony of a blogger making such a statement?)

For the rest of us, there's hours of planning and character background and "off the page" scenes and yadda-yadda. After that? It all sucks. Or, at least we think it does. It's like that typical sitcom one night stand: The first night you have an idea, it's the sexiest thing in the world. You love it. You wonder where it's been your whole life. You take it home. Hop in the sack with it. It's the greatest night of your life.

Then you wake up the next morning and wonder what the hell you were thinking.

That's writing. It's constantly second-guessing or wondering if you could have done better. I've written a few times now that you should enjoy your writing and make it entertaining for you. That's really me talking about the best case scenario. Those few moments when you have "fun" are the goal, but it takes a lot of digging to get there. But you have to wonder if it has to be like that. This is supposed to be some type of art, isn't it? You have to be personal, don't you?

There's probably a middle-ground somewhere. So I present to you a few wise words from Trey Parker, co-creator of South Park, on a more spontaneous approach to writing (from this interview with The A.V. Club):

AVC: Why do you create the show on such a tight, grueling schedule?

TREY PARKER: Actually, it's been interesting, because we've tried many times, and last year was the last time we really tried—we came in over the summer and said, "Let's just do some stuff. There's no deadline, there's nothing." And we wrote and directed and created some of the worst crap we've ever made in our entire careers. I always like, in the interviews too, I like to fancy myself more of a musician than anything else, but it really is—for me, writing an episode of South Park, it's like sitting down and writing a song. When you sit down and write a song, you kind of have the idea for the song, and you sit there at the piano and you kinda just write it. And then of course later there's some dinking around with it and changing some stuff. But there's this thing that happens when the song first comes out, that sort of magic when it first comes out of the ether, and you can't even really explain where it comes from. That happens so much with music, and people understand that with music. But I really think that a lot of movie and TV should be the same way.

So much of what you see now in Hollywood is written and directed by committee, and you can see it. Things are so workshopped and so run around the room, and so overthought. And finally, once you have a draft and then a draft of the draft, then they go in there and they work on every single little joke, and "Is there a gag here? Is there something here?" You would never do that with a song. You would never sit around for a month and talk about what a song should sound like, and what the chorus is going to be. To me, every episode is like a song, and every season is like an album. There's that part of the day when you first get the idea and you say, "This could be really funny." And you sit down and you write it. There's just something that happens there that doesn't happen when you really give it a lot of time beforehand. And that's basically my long-winded answer of saying I'm a procrastinator. [Laughs.]

I really love this here analogy. All that procrastinating I wrote about in the first few paragraphs comes about from overthinking to the point of writer's paralysis. And there's no need.

I used to want to be a musician. And, I don't mean to brag, but holy god I was prolific. There were nights I'd stay up till five in the morning in my secluded third floor room writing song after song after song. Now, screenwriting certainly takes longer than writing a song, but if I were to actually analyze the time I spend working on my scripts, more than half of it would be wasted on "Ugh, I don't know what to do here. This isn't good. Should I keep this?" and not writing. Instead, I could have just written what I felt to be right at the time, and went back later. It's just a draft, it's a just a draft.

Now, this isn't me telling you it's OK to be lazy. There's a difference between half-assing and simply writing because something at that particular moment affected you. Using the former technique, you wind up with underdeveloped characters in underdeveloped plots. The latter technique contains sincerity. It's not trying to be anything, it just is. And this is what makes great writing.

So give it a try. Like any writing technique, it will probably work for you sometimes and be your downfall on other days. Plus it should be noted that Trey Parker and his buddy/South Park partner have been working on this show for about ten years now. So it's probably second nature at this point. But it's worth it to try and explore new approaches to your craft. And it's good for your brain.

That's it for now. Stand-up will be up this weekend.

Oh, and I'm a college graduate. Smell ya later, Emerson.

Well I still expect somebody make parody of harry potter as a boy who similiar to Kenny of South Park…

Below is a website where you can watch every episode of South Park episode for free including last weeks episode: "Canada on Strike".

This political, social, pop culture, Peabody awarding winning satirical cartoon continues to get better and better. This last episode is probably one of the funniest I've seen (the week before left me in tears I was laughing so hard), and this season is one of the sharpest (last season was pretty amazing as well). Unlike Family Guy, which is quickly running out of gas, and The Simpson's, which has lost the genius while remaining funny enough, I see no end to Trey Parker and Matt Stone's brilliance.

Before looking at this website you may feel the need to watch the clip titles "Whats, What in My Butt", three minutes of the one of the funniest things I've ever seen. I caution you to watch the entire episode. In fact check out every episode of South Park for free at southparkstudios.com. I'm currently making my way through the first season.

As far as I'm concerned, this website and hulu.com are the futures of mass media entertainment, and Parker and Stone (as they normally are) remain at the forefront.

p.s. If you haven't been keeping up with that other brilliant cartoon satire, download Frisky Dingo at i-tunes. $1.99 an episode, ten minute episodes. 2 Seasons. This, and South Park are probably two of the best things on the tele. And American Dad is completely underrated (superior to it's brother Family Guy).

Once again Trey and Matt come up with a fantastic idea to deal with current events! This week on South Park, Canada decides to go on strike because they aren't receiving enough money. Simple enough, I suppose. Well, the boys end up creating an Internet sensation with Butters dancing in various costumes just to make some money to give to Canada so their favorite TV show can come back on the air. I know that in the beginning of the season I criticized the guys for not commenting on the writer's strike. Well, I must say it was worth the wait because this episode did it total justice. I feel like they represented the feel of the strike from both sides of the argument. I am so happy that the writers are back because this week's episode was fantastic!

http://southparkstudios.com --- click on the link to view this week's episode.

Todos os episódios foram liberados grátis na internet!

Trey Parker e Matt Stone tomaram essa decisão, alegando que estão cansados de baixarem o programa deles ilegalmente o tempo todo, então queriam dar uma alternativa legal. Ótimo pra gente, não?

Bem, mas estão em inglês, é claro. E sem legendas. Mas se você já tem alguma noção de inglês, mesmo que não fale fluentemente, vale a pena ver, até porque ajuda a desenvolver o seu vocabulário e pronúncia. :)

Pois então, aqui está o link... www.southparkstudios.com

---

Assim que eu tiver tempo (só Deus sabe quando...), vou pegar uns pra assistir. É ótimo, apesar de não muito educativo. Huhauhaua.

Achei a novidade no Jovem Nerd.

Post relacionado:

• Assista Lost online grátis

- postado por Isabela

Après Deezer qui permet d'écouter légalement de la musique sur Internet (pas d'en télécharger, il faut pas déconner !), c'est au tour de la video et plus précisement de South Park de devenir légal et gratuit!
Le site http://www.southparkstudios.com/ offre donc la possibilité de visionner toutes les épisodes de toutes les saisons de South Park en streaming et légalement (c'est le plus important en quelque sorte)

Le tout est payé par la publicité abondante sur le site mais pas envahissante.

Partant du principe que la série était de toute façon téléchargée massivement sur le web, les auteurs, Trey Parker et Matt Stone, ont donc voulu en faciliter l'accès, afin qu'un maximum de personne puisse voir les aventures de Cartman, Kyle, Stan et Kenny.

Les deux auteurs ont toujours favorisé la diffusion de leur oeuvre et ont toujours affirmé être pour le téléchargement des épisodes de South Park.
De plus, la publicité, rémunérant le site, offre un revenu supplémentaire alors inexistant avec les plateformes de téléchargement illégales. On espère que le concept contaminera les autres séries et pourquoi pas les films !

Pour les non-anglophones, un site français (http://www.southpark-tv.com/) propose le même service mais n'est pas officiel et donc pas légal, mais semble jouir d'une certaine tolérance de la part des ayant-droits hexagonaux.