South Park Creators Have A New Film

Vince C writes "Trey Parker and Matt Stone are back to filmmaking again. No, it is not a South Park movie and no they are not acting. In fact, it is a totally different media... marionettes. Yep! Puppets folks. They are making Team America:World Police. If you liked the original Thunderbirds and hate the live action remake but also love comedy sticking it to our current government then you are going to love Matt and Trey's new project. Trailer and more info at the movie's site."

Comments

Re:Just saw the preview

[Akai]

Actually my bet is everyone is a target. Matt and Trey have happily attacked all sides in south park, so I expect that BushCo will be in for at least as much abuse as the "Liberal Elite" in this one.

I just don't understand...

[iamdrscience]

I cannot fathom what made the producers of Thunderbirds think that it would be a good idea to do it as a live action movie and not with puppets. Thunderbirds' whole fucking gimmick was the puppets. Without the puppets it would have just been another mediocre, wholly forgetable kids action cartoon.

Huh?

[Copperhead]

For a second, I thought I was at Ain't It Cool News!

How exactly is this news for nerds? Yeah, I'm looking forward to the movie, but I'm not looking for information about it on slashdot.

The best thing

[iamdrscience]

The thing I like the most about Matt Stone and Trey Parker's shows/movies is the extraordinary balance they generally provide. They make fun of the ridiculousness of all political perspectives. They make fun of people on the left, people on the right, liberals, conservatives, etc.

And that's really the way it should be, because both "sides" in politics are, for the most part, composed of reasonable people, the problem is the people to the extremes of both sides.

Re:Labelled already as liberal traitors

[ArcticCelt]

I was just pointing out that the ones who where the firsts to complain and who are right now "pissed off" are the politicians and that I think it's kind of hypocritical to say to the people how the subject of terrorism should be used in a movie when they are continuously using it in the interest of their personal campaigns.

In my opinion humor is a valid medium to communicate social or political messages and opinions and I don't think it should be directly or indirectly censured. When we look back in history we can see that comedy as been continuously used in literature and on stage to denounce injustices or promote new ideas and event start revolutions.

Re:Labelled already as liberal traitors

[moonbender]

Al Qaeda is in shambles

Is it? Who cares? There are plenty of idiots to fill their places. Certainly more than 3 years ago.

one major terrorist state has been liberated

Mission accomplished, eh? Not exactly the impression you get watching the news.

and either Syria or Iran will also fall if Bush gets the second term

They will "fall"? What's entailed by that? Nation-wide anarchy? Terrorism? Tens of thousands killed by weaponry, hundreds of thousands starved to death? Proliferation of arms that were previously in the hands of the respective government? Sounds great.

Re:worrisome

[Mr2cents]

Hmm.. a movie about the reactions to 9/11 and the president is not even in it. Maybe that's the insult?

Re:Just saw the preview

[maxpublic]

Hate to break it to ya, but the 'new' republican party seems to be just as much in favor of big government as the old democratic party. Other than religion and gun control, it gets harder and harder to tell the two parties apart with each passing year.

Max

Re:You say...

[maxpublic]

What good do the libertarians do besides being the political equivalent of apple fanboys?

So instead we're supposed to engage in groupthink, join the Borg, and "be one" with one of the two major parties - despite the fact that we disagree with both of them on a number of fundamental issues?

Nice attitude, that.

Max

Some counter examples

[gad_zuki!]

>vurrrrry correct about everything

Like that piece of war porn The Jessica Lynch story?

Or how they pulled the Reagans?

Or how dissenting voices regarding the Iraq invasion were barely heard?

Or how a Hollywood star is now the governor of California and a Republican.

Or how media ownership is concentraed into the hands of a few vocal conservatives?

Or how F9/11 got dropped by Disney and was in "can't find a distributator" mode for a while?

Or how every "history" movie (especially WWII) is ahistoric and highly pro-American. With the exception of Vietnam movies.

Or how the Pentagon will lend Hollywood any equipment they want but they get to edit the script for right-wing pro-military ahistory "patriotic correctness?"

Or how TV was quick to digitally remove the twin towers from every skyline as not to upset anyone?

Or how shows that tackle history in an honest and non-partisan way only exist on PBS?

Or how Malkin can go on TV and say Kerry shot himself for his medals? Or how Anne Coulter can openly call Liberals treasonous and demand the deaths of muslims and coverting them to Xtianity. Both of whom are still on the pundit short list for other shows.

Or how only a satiric comedy show (the Daily Show) can actually break and frame issues in a manner which isn't corporate media ass-kissing?

Yeah, its pretty PC lefty out there! You many know some liberals in the industry, but it doesnt make a difference if their bosses (who dictate policy and bias and call the shots) are conservatives like Rupert Murdoch, Rev Moon, etc.

Re:Some counter examples

[isa-kuruption]

Or how they pulled the Reagans?

Public opinion "pulled" the Reagans off CBS. Viewers of CBS threatened to boycott the network, including it's advertisers, and because CBS's revenue is based on the money it makes from it's advertisers, it felt best to hand it over to Showtime (who's money is made based on subscription rates) where it was shown many times. There is no "conspiracy" here, just the facts of cold, hard cash.

Or how dissenting voices regarding the Iraq invasion were barely heard?

Because "all the people" that mattered were not dissenting, including people like oh.. John Kerry... who was for the war just as much as the President was. However, he heard PLENTY of how dissent from the French and the Germans in this time period.

Or how a Hollywood star is now the governor of California and a Republican.

Not the first, probably won't be the last. However, remember Arnold is married to a Kennedy and is socially liberal while economically conservative. Bush did not support Arnold during his run, and therefore, now, Arnold is not supporting Bush. So, this has less to do with a "ring wind conspiracy" as you would have us believe and more to do with getting Grey Davis out of office for being an idiot.

Or how media ownership is concentraed into the hands of a few vocal conservatives?

I don't know where you get your information. Ted Turner? Hardly a conservative. Yet, he owns several networks. This has nothing to do with politics. Although you conspiracy theorists would like us to believe that "big media" is controlled by the right in order to convince us there isn't a liberal bias in the media (which there is).

Or how F9/11 got dropped by Disney and was in "can't find a distributator" mode for a while?

Again, that's about money... Disney was threatened with a boycott of it's products, and when it came down to the cold, hard cash... they backed away. However, it was the Miramax "brothers" who saved the day and gave us that enlightened film produced by Michael Moore... (yeah, right, enlightened....)

Or how every "history" movie (especially WWII) is ahistoric and highly pro-American. With the exception of Vietnam movies.

Why wouldn't a histoical movie of WWII be highly pro-American? If you remember, the US was attacked without cause on December 7. Not only was the war effort in response to that unprovoked attack, but it was also to remove from power one of history's worst criminal to humanity, Adolf Hitler, who had killed millions of Jews. Now when you consider that the effort the US took both militarily and industrially to pull off such a thing, it should make one sit back and awe at the pure ability of a people to come together for a common goal.

Or how the Pentagon will lend Hollywood any equipment they want but they get to edit the script for right-wing pro-military ahistory "patriotic correctness?"

I'm sorry, but I would not lend Michael Moore by computer to check his webmail if I knew he would then turn it against me somehow because I used Mozilla instead of MSIE. And the Pentagon does not lend, it leases... and 99% of the time it's either footage and not equipment itself.

Or how TV was quick to digitally remove the twin towers from every skyline as not to upset anyone?

Yeah, this was nuts... but it was Hollywood. Again, it's the cold, hard cash that influenced this one.

Or how shows that tackle history in an honest and non-partisan way only exist on PBS?

Considering PBS is, at least partially, federally funded, it's strange you would say "gov't influences history" and then say "except PBS, they're cool". I dunno... seems odd.

Or how Malkin can go on TV and say Kerry shot himself for his medals? Or how Anne Coulter can openly call Liberals treasonous and demand the deaths of muslims and coverting them to Xtianity. Both of whom are still on the pundit short list for other shows.

Re:Some counter examples

[Anonymous Coward]

The only problem was they were saying "Bush=Hitler" and "Oil Grab", nobody was saying they didn't have WMD, didn't hear it from France, Germany, Arab states, etc.

Actually, that is what was being said. The whole point of Powell going before the United Nations was to show the world our case for WMD. And he failed.

The world, and much of the U.S., was unconvinced that compelling evidence was there. The non-believers (remember the Freedom Fries?) were mocked. And there was much name-calling about how they were cowardly, or were corrupt and only trying to cover shady deals.

And even now, the administration is making the intelligence community out to be the scapegoats, when so many were not convinced. What does that say about the President's judgement?

Re:Some counter examples

[Chris Carollo]

Or how Moore can go and make film, books, etc that basically say Bush and Saudi Arabia conspired to kill 3000+ Americans because he wants some oil. He's now significantly richer and on the even shorter list for the shows.

I'm not a huge fan of Moore's one-sided rhetoric, but he's certainly never said that Bush had specific knowledge of the attack before it happened and was a coconspirator in its execution. He's been very critical of a lax attitude that allowed it to happen and extremely critical of Bush's reaction to it, but you're putting words in his mouth. Please provide a quote with a credible source.

Now, speaking about Ann Coulter, she said: "We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity." In the same article she advocates carpetbombing Muslim countries (and thus knowingly killing innocent civilians). And yet she remains a top conservative pundit.

libertarians?

[gad_zuki!]

Parker and Trey both recieved public aid to goto college at the the University of Colorado.

Both are now multi-millonaires with very little in common with you and me. If they have a philosophy its contrarianism and vulger/shock humor. To hold them up to anything else is being a bit pretentious about their work, which is as anti-pretentious as it gets.

Re:Just saw the preview

[1u3hr]

I used conservative/libertarian interchangable when talking about hollywood because everything is pretty much straight up liberal/socialist coming out of that neck of the woods.

Give me a break, For every Michael Moore there's a thousand flag-waving "My Country Right or Wrong" types making stuff like Pearl Harbor, We Were Soldiers, etc ad nauseaum.

Re:The worst thing, in my view...

[sielwolf]

Not blacks and latinos? I can't tell if this is a joke or not but they've had episodes about both groups several times ("Fat Butt and Pancake Head" "Here Comes the Neighborhood" "Krazy Kripples") along with the Chinese, Japanese, gay, and the handicapped.

How original!

[rjamestaylor]

• also love comedy sticking it to our current government

How refreshing! It is so hard to find a comedic medium willing to "stick it" to "our current governement." What an artistic risk!

(sarcasm, of course.)

Truly, could anything be more formulaic than a punkish slam at out Government? I don't care what you think of "our government" -- there is no lack in this overrun category. In web terms, a plot line attacking GWB is like a website in 1998 having "Pamela Anderson" in the META tags. Lame.

Re:Just saw the preview

[Ath]

Wow. You should be banned from watching South Park because you are too stupid. In your cited examples, the "lesson learned" is actually doing two things. First, it is making fun of the way sitcoms always have to spout off some lesson at the end of the show. Second, it is making fun of the whole concept that there is a right answer to most issues. The so-called right answer inevitably comes down to a person's own views, which bias how we each look at situations.

The idea of trying to stick Trey and Matt into some political category is ridiculous. They make fun of everything and clearly show that they don't find anything beyond reproach. That's why many of us love their comedy, not because we think they agree with our particular political bias.

The only problem is that morons like you come along and "see" that Matt and Trey are really making some moral statement that reinforces your own biases. I mean, if you can watch the Underpants Gnomes episode and read into it a pro big business message, you are using some concentrated crack. Who knows if Matt and Trey feel that way and who cares if they do, but they sure didn't stick the message into the episode to teach you that lesson.

Re:This isn't new... or funny

[Anonymous Coward]

By neglecting to include the 11,000 Iraqi dead in your figures, you have invalidated any credibility your post might have had. Making fun of terrorism is tasteless. Making fun of the War on Terror is fun: it provokes conservatives into making clown noises.

Throw away your vote?

[2nd Post!]

The average US citizen probably has 20, possibly now even 30, votes in their lifetime.

A vote is only thrown away when you don't vote.

Vote against your principles only if you think voting for your principles would result in some catastrophic intrusion in your life, but I don't think Bush vs Gore was such an event, nor do I think Bush vs Kerry is also such an event.

What a crock of shit--but it got modded up anyway

[rd_syringe]

As usual, the liberal mantra of "oppressed dissension" is a paranoid lie invented to make Bush look bad.

Or how they pulled the Reagans?

The script for the movie was almost entirely falsified. They portrayed everybody in a negative light and even implied Reagan was completely senile. CBS pulled the show after fan complaints--the government didn't do a thing. CBS could have gone ahead and aired it if they wanted to. Fuck, man, Barabara Streisand's husband was playing Reagan!

Or how dissenting voices regarding the Iraq invasion were barely heard?

This is the most laughable claim in your list. Protesters were "barely heard?" Are you freaking kidding me? Every channel on TV aired protester opinions, all the newspapers--even a feature film "documentary" that made $100 million. There are endless liberal smear books on the market right now. You're completely lying, and you know it.

Or how a Hollywood star is now the governor of California and a Republican.

What this has to do with anything, I have no idea. Just a random jab for no reason.

Or how media ownership is concentraed into the hands of a few vocal conservatives?

Most of the media is liberal, according to all the polls.

Or how F9/11 got dropped by Disney and was in "can't find a distributator" mode for a while?

Yeah, it was dropped LAST YEAR. Moore was told about it way back in 2003. Gee, he brought it up right before Cannes as some sort of conspiracy, I wonder why?

Or how every "history" movie (especially WWII) is ahistoric and highly pro-American. With the exception of Vietnam movies.

Another irrelevant lie. Not every history movie is ahistoric and highly pro-American. Not only have you not viewed every history movie, but I could list endless films that contradict your claim.

Or how the Pentagon will lend Hollywood any equipment they want but they get to edit the script for right-wing pro-military ahistory "patriotic correctness?"

Care to cite a single example for this false claim?

Or how TV was quick to digitally remove the twin towers from every skyline as not to upset anyone?

What the FUCK does this have to do with the left OR the right wing? It was done out of sensitivity for 2,000 people being lost in New York. It's not a right-wing conspiracy to wipe out the twin towers in an episode of Friends. Jesus H. Christ.

Or how shows that tackle history in an honest and non-partisan way only exist on PBS?

"Honest and non-partisan way" = liberal or anti-American. PBS is well-known as a liberal station. You just demonstrated your bias, lol.

Or how Malkin can go on TV and say Kerry shot himself for his medals?

She didn't. Another complete lie. This is why liberals are frowned upon by the majority of the folks. It's not about issues anymore, it's about personal vitriol toward people you actually HATE because you disagree with them.

Or how Anne Coulter can openly call Liberals treasonous and demand the deaths of muslims and coverting them to Xtianity.

Yet another complete lie. Care to cite a single quote or example?

Or how only a satiric comedy show (the Daily Show) can actually break and frame issues in a manner which isn't corporate media ass-kissing?

Funny, since Comedy Central ran ads for Fahrenheit 9/11 an average of EVERY FIVE COMMERCIALS. John Stewart and Stephen Colbare are--you guessed it--self-proclaimed Democrats.

As a matter of fact, before every taping (as well as in interviews), Stewart always expresses his surprise that people view the Daily Show as a non-biased source of news analysis. It is not.

Yeah, its pretty PC lefty out there!

Hollywood is liberal. This is common knowledge. A journalism poll showed that the majority of journalists are liberal.

You many know some liberals in the industry, bu