Messages

[helping]

You mention south park and family guy as though they are actually helping your argument that cartoons are at least as good now as they were in the 80's. 

If vulgar, low-brow, in-your-face comedy is your thing then I basically agree.

South Park tackles topical issues like The War on Terror, racism, religious hypocrisy and gay rights and shows alternative points of view to how society usually views these things and somehow THAT'S low-brow? Get real!

As for Family Guy, I agree, it's low brow. It's also funny. It's definitely funnier than anything from the 80s, so much so that it mocks the 80s consistently. Jesus, they devoted a whole episode to how stupid The A-Team was. Even I found that funny regardless of being a big Mr T fan.

in conclusion you know nothing about anything and you smell

I love Arthur.

Anyway, just because there are a ton of educational programs doesn't mean kids watch them. They would rather watch stupid programs, because they are collectively stupid. Why are you arguing this? Do you have kids? Are they smart? Good. Thank you for doing a good job raising them, unlike 99% of parents. I've spent years working with kids. When I was a kid, I wanted to grow up to be a programmer, or a writer. Most of the kids I've worked with in my 8 years of experience want to be a Power Ranger or a Super Saiyin.

Maybe you might try not believing research before you start typing random words on your keyboard. Just because the United States releases figures about the quality of its education in order to make itself look good does not mean that it does, in fact, look good. By the way, like I said, I love Arthur, but the only kids I have ever known that watched Arthur without turning it to Nickelodeon's or Cartoon Network's stupidfests are people with parents who actually give a damn. Where do you stand financially? Have you ever lived in government assisted housing? I've worked with kids who live in the ghetto who only even exist because their parents want a tax write off... And there are much more of them then there are of parents who care. When you don't care, you turn on whatever is on the tv so your kid will shut up.

Wow, great. You asked me a lot of questions. But nothing you've said prove that 80s cartoons were better, which was your original hypothesis. If anything, I'd say the standards of cartoon have become more complex.

People criticise stuff like, say, Pokemon (I did) but when you actually consider how complex Pokemon really is, what with all those Pokemon and their individual strengths and weaknesses, it's far more advanced than Ninja Turtles.

At least the shows of the 80's tried to have plots, and character development, and messages. Today, it's just a series of toilet humor, violence, and over-the-top weirdness so kids will pay attention and not bother their parents.

It's funny how you criticise Power Rangers because Power Rangers is essentially Ninja Turtles. A rag-tag team who are physically similar (except for colour coding) but have their own archetyped personalities while they battle forces of evil. Essentially, Ninja Turtles and Power Rangers are exactly the same in terms of plot, character development and messages. So I don't see how you can praise one and condemn the other.

Oh and... Turbo Teen. Nuff said.

Leave it to Grandpa Macphee to harp about something pointless!

How about you kiss my giant shut-yer-goddamn-mouth!

Cartoons for children. Compare any of the cartoons of the 80's to Spongedumbass Squarefuckwit, or Loonatiks, or My Gym Partner is a Monkey. Sure, the 90's introduced Animaniacs, Freakazoid, and Tiny Toons, but this was the turning point between cartoons for kids and cartoons for adults. The cartoons for kids in the 80's were great. The cartoons for young adults in the 90's were great. The cartoons for adults in the 2000's are great. The cartoons for kids since the 80's have progressively decreased in value, and the cartoons for kids today only go to prove that in another decade or children will have a collective IQ of 6.

I don't think you can imply that cartoon are dumber today. According to Wikipedia, "Because of FCC-mandated regulations that began in the mid-90s, broadcast stations were forced to program a minimum of three hours of children's educational/informational ("E/I") programming." (source)

Thus, in the 80s they had Ninja Turtles. Meanwhile in the 90s, they had Arthur.

So, maybe you'll want to re-state what you said about kids today having a collective IQ of 6. Unless of course this is some Bizarro World where educational programming makes you dumber. Also, you might want to try doing a little research before randomly punching out words on your keyboard.

Keep in mind, guys, I'm not saying Ninja Turtles is shit. I used to watch it, collect the cards and toys and so forth. I was a child of the 80s as much as anyone was. But honestly, I'd rather watch an episode of the Batman animated series (90s) than Ninja Turtles (80s).

Oh and just so everyone knows, the 80s gave birth to what I consider the dumbest premise for a cartoon: Turbo Teen.

The fact remains that the 80's were the best era for cartoons in history.

Uh, weren't the 90s the decade of the best Simpsons episodes? And when South Park started? And Futurama? And Family Guy? Or the decade Cartoon Network began? Or when Nickelodeon launched their Nicktoons, like Ren and Stimpy and Rugrats? Or when Steven Spielberg joined with Warner Brothers to create Tiny Toons, Animaniacs and Freakazoid?

Just to note as well: in the 80s, cartoons based on Garfield won the most Emmys for best animated program throughout the decade. And there was that time in 1987 when a cartoon based on Cathy won. Oh an another time in 1983 when Ziggy won. Nuff said.

Hah, Babar. You stole that joke from City Slickers. For shame! :-p

There wasn't any scene in City Slickers where Billy Crystal wanks off a bull and drinks its jizz.

Which makes me wonder, what the fuck did you watch??

EDIT: Was it City Slickers 2: The Legend of Curly's Electric Boogaloo?

My Dad was listening to the radio and they had a competition where everyone had to tell their best "chicken cross the road" joke. Most were really crap, but this one tickled him...

Why'd the rubber chicken cross the road?

To stretch his legs.

Whoa, that's pretty devastating. Sorry to hear.

I'm comfortable enough with my sexuality to admit that when I look at Brad Pitt, I say to myself, "Now there goes a fine specimen of hot, hot manhood."

This is such a strange thing. I am confident enough with my sexuality to look at Brad Pitt and detest him for being this handsome. I feel that's quite healthier than the recent apologetic streak our kind has decided is good form in such occassions.

So then should I just hate or be openly hostile to people I perceive to be more attractive than me?

I agree. I find it's healthier to appreciate that someone is more physically attractive than me and remain confident in my own strengths. I find that being hostile towards handsome people isn't attractive and being confident is.

There's an obsession that physical attractiveness is the only attractiveness when there are many other aspects that prove way more attractive. Someone might not be physically attractive but might have a certain charisma. Or could be an engaging talker. Humour also goes a long way. All these things can be way more powerful than physical attractiveness is you use them the right way.

It's like what Seth Rogan says in the 40 Year Old Virgin: "I am ugly as fuck by traditional standards, but I still get with women. Aren't you curious as to how that's possible? ... Most men just straight up, don't know how to talk to women."

As for my pick, Scarlett Johansson. That red dress she wore at the Golden Globes? Wow! I mean... wow!

About Borat:

I thought it was to exploit America, not make fun of Kazakhstahn.

If you've seen it, you'd agree that 90% of the comedy is based on how primitive Kazakhstan is (or Borat himself), and only some remaing percents actually mock USA.

Actually, no. That's not really it either. As Sasha Cohen himself says, it's about Americans letting their guard down to reveal their true nature to someone who is very naive of Western culture. If you think only 10 per cent of the film is making fun of the USA, I'd say you need to rewatch the film.

[Song:]

Song: Dance With Me by Orleans
Comment: Very sweet. Play this to your girlfriend/wife/significant other and she will give you lots of kisses.
How I discovered it: During last year's US House election campaigns, I saw Stephen Colbert interview Orleans co-founder John Hall, who was running against incumbent New York congressional representative Sue Kelly. Both Colbert and Hall harmonised a few bar of Dance With Me together and it sounded quite beautiful.
Fun fact: Hall won against Kelly and is now the Congressional Rep for New York's 19th district. Many attribute his appearance on The Colbert Report to aiding his victory. During his interview, Colbert offered him "smear cards" to smear Kelly as a joke. Hall selected one that read: "My opponent smokes marijuana".

See Colbert's interview with John Hall here.

See the follow up interview after Hall won.

Why aren't more people discussing the foxy narrator chick?

I'm more interested in the foxy-sounding British chick doing the voice over.

I get a kick out of all crappy post-Naked Gun Leslie Nielson movies. Movies that are essentially "Naked Gun but with x". Movies like Spy Hard (Naken Gun with Spies) or 2001: A Space Travesty (Naked Gun in space).

And speaking of which, time for an avatar change!

Well, you get an A for effort.

Incidentally, if I was a Sim I'd sound waaay sexier than that.

Also, I think you've misinterpreted my ramblings for rage. There's a big difference. But like I've said before, it's best to think of me as the AGS version of Grandpa Simpson -- a rambling old man who no one should really listen to.

I don't particularly agree with DG's way of going about it either - but that's purely because I expect a bit more from him than just cropping up when he needs to vent some rage about something. But, at least he made a post of it and didn't one liner us all to hell.

C'mon. I find I creative way of saying "Korn is untalented" and that's "rage venting"? I think you're overreacting a little. It has nothing to do with venting rage and everything to do with me not liking Korn.

Then again, believe what you want to.

Your post lacks any consistency DG. You accuse me of using the comment 'people who lack an open mind towards foreign music genres', but you've obviously got Korn summed up into your own nice comfortable stereotype.

At least it's based upon what I've listened to of Korn -- mainly their most popular albums and songs. If that's their popular stuff, I can't imagine their other stuff is any better. If you think it's a stereotype, fine. But at least it's a stereotype actually based upon some evidence.

Doing this means that ultimately you're going to end up listening to the same old until you get sick of it, and when it comes to the point that you're looking for something new all these bands you've stereotyped into genre's will be unaccessible to you.

I haven't stereotyped any genres. All I'm saying is that Korn hasn't developed past their angsty teen hate-my-parents rock since Life Is Peachy. At least other bands branch out and try new things. Korn has been repackaging the same album over and over and over. And they've got an eighth album due out soon. I can't imagine it'll be any different.

---

As for anyyone who has said something along the lines of "don't reply if you don't like Korn": Cut the sanctimony and stop being crybabies. If we're going to start a thread about, of all things, Korn, we should allow a right of reply from people who don't like Korn. I don't know what you guys think, but one-sided conversations are shit.

I've shown Evil and Chicky and others enough respect. I haven't said "ur a bunch of retards for liking Korn". No, all I've said is I don't like Korn and these are the reasons why. I haven't made fun of ANYONE in this thread. Well, except for Korn, I guess. But that's because I think they're untalented hacks.

Instead of going "boo hoo don't write if you don't like em" why don't you participate in the actual discussion. Perhaps post your own thoughts about Korn. At least I respect Chicky for replying back to me with something of substance that relates to the discussion at hand.

A lot of you are going "let them discuss Korn without others saying they don't like em". What are we supposed to do? Start a thread where people can talk about how much they don't like Korn and anyone who likes Korn can't respond?? Now, that's retarded!

If people want to go discuss Korn without anti-Korn people replying, go post about it on a Korn board!

I mean, seriously, someone starts a thread about a topic and you're NOT allowed to reply if you don't like it?? What kind of twisted world are you people from!! Y'know, it is possible to show someone respect AND disagree with them BOTH AT THE SAME TIME. I'm sure my rambling on about how I think Korn are untalented isn't going to stop Chicky or Evil or anyone from enjoying them. It's not like I took all their Korn CDs, put them in a big pile, lit them on fire and danced around the flames naked.

Bloody hell, we've had threads where people have disagreed about topics and they're still allowed to reply without anyone going "you hate such-and-such? dont reply!" Has the AGS forum really gotten to the point where, of all things, Korn is too HOT a topic for discussion?

oh wait i forgot this is the internet and its serious business

I'll say it. They're terrible.

You always get dicks who lack an open mind when it comes to music. I can guarantee neither Pslocum or 'Medical Waste' have actually taken a listen to this album.

I love when this happens. Whenever someone says X band is terrible, it usually leads to two things: a) accusations of being hat0rz who don't have an open mind, or b) accusations of being hat0rz who haven't listened to the album yet.

I've got an open mind. Why? Because I listened to some Korn albums. My conclusion: A bunch of angsty high-school wankery from a bunch of angsty, untalented dorks. They do the same angsty bullshit on every album and that's all they'll ever do. Compare the lyrics of one of their recent songs to one of their earlier songs. It's all the same: "hi i'm an outsider of society who craves sex to ease my pain of dead bodies everywhere but my girlfriend fucked me over so i hate that bitch whore meanwhile i fucked my best friends girlfriend and now i hate myself and i also hate my parents so i now want to kill myself fuck fuck fuckity fuck".

I've heard a lot of people say they're musical geniuses. Why? Because they invented nu metal? Bloody hell, look at other bands spawned under the nu metal tag: Linkin Park, Limp Bizkit, P.O.D., Slipknot... I mean, Jesus, I've never heard of a more untalented category of bands (yes, more untalented than polka bands and barbershop quartets). This is what Korn created? Seriously, the music industry could do with out that shit.

And describing Korn's appearance on MTV as a "great show" is like eating crusty two-week old hotdog from the fattest, hairiest, smelliest carny you've ever met, rubbing your belly and saying "YUM YUM YUM! MORE PLEASE!"

Oh dear.