Slashdot Mirror
Review of Team America World Police
The movie is essentially a parody of your standard summer blockbuster. In this case we have "Team America", the stereotypical hodge podge band of freedom fighters brought together to kick ass (not surprisingly) for America and for Freedom. It turns out that marionettes are the ideal vehicle for such a film: the summer blockbuster genre has at its very core the super huge special effect. A parody would be hard pressed to convincingly duplicate these effects. But these are puppets. So the effects are supposed to look silly. And this is fortunate: the film takes constant blissful pleasure in the blockbuster tradition of demolishing national monuments, from the Eiffel tower to Mount Rushmore.
Our team of freedom fighters hits all the standard cliche's: we lose a member, find a replacement, who gets jaded and ultimately must come to terms with his feelings about his job while the team comes to accept the new guy.
Of course, there is some sort of a plot as well. In South Park the movie, Parker used Saddam Hussein as his evil joke. This time it's Kim Jong-il. He's really no different than Saddam was last time around. Just a ludicrous bad guy. In this case he's busy masterminding a stupid plot where he unifies the hollywood liberals and various terrorist organization as part of your standard wreck the world plan. It's thin, but no thinner than what it parodies.
I think my general concern going into this movie was the politics. The movie could very easily get mired down in preaching a point. But thankfully it never really does that. It simultaneously makes fun of liberal hollywood actors, and the rah rah 'Go America' right wing stereotype. But the movie isn't really picking sides: it's more about parodying the genre of summer blockbuster then it is about right vs left or war vs peace. Thats a good thing. Parker has proven time and time again that he can make simple points very well. South Park has addressed countless social issues over the years, and the feature film really took issues like censorship and parenting in a very meaningful way. Team America doesn't spend much time trying to seriously address the issues. It's just simple fun.
The other major concern that I harbored was that the marionette jokes would run thin. As I said before, the use of marionettes works great for mocking special effects, but the film easily could have constantly referred back to the fact that we are watching puppets. There are only a few jokes like that. Since they are used so sparingly, they make it all the more amusing when it happens. And there's a lot of hilarity to be derived from puppet sex when the film is pretending to be serious about it.
Like all of Parker's movies, they come out guns blazing, and 30 minutes in, I find myself needing a commercial break. The jokes are constant and funny. Maybe too funny. By the middle of the film you see something funny but are so desensitized that it's tough to muster another laugh. Of course then they turn around and beat you over the head with something new.
It's also worth noting that the facial puppetteering is really cool. Everyone involved should be really proud of themselves for pulling off something so visually unique.
I really enjoyed the film. I went in with high hopes and was pleased to have them all met. Even my wife, who is quite sick of South Park and wasn't looking forward to watching this at all came out absolutely giddy with laughter.
If you're a South Park fan, you'll love this movie. If you're a fan of summer blockbusters, and can tolerate the language, you'll love this movie. If you're a prude, watch something else. As for me, this is the first movie in months that I decided to buy the DVD before it was over.
...we got a movie based on politics that really doesn't have a bias or an op-ed piece, and just around Election Day. It's just a movie making fun of everyday politics and the current events that we face. Sometimes we just have to look at what's going on and laugh instead of picking sides and blaming people for it.
Ask and Discuss your HTML and other web dev stuff
I'm looking forward to see this... I want to see how much lampooning of the hollywood actors and the real-world political figures is done. I hope most people mocked in the movie at least laugh at themselves...
Julie Moult is an idiot.
-1, gratiutous use of the word "neo-insert_whatever_you're_trying_to_insult". You fail it.
I'm a big fan of Fireball XL5, Thuderbirds, Stingray, Capt. Scarlet, Supercar, etc. so the marionette aspect totally worked for me.
My only problem with the movie was seen as a strength in the review, where he said:
The movie could very easily get mired down in preaching a point. But thankfully it never really does that. It simultaneously makes fun of liberal hollywood actors, and the rah rah 'Go America' right wing stereotype.
The problem is, I see our political system in a greater crisis than simpletons like the makers of this movie. Their whole political consciousness is like "there are dicks and assholes, and we need the dicks because of the assholes." Which, of course, is errant nonsense. True we need "cops" to put "bad guys" behind bars, but invading other countries on lies, stripping away civil liberties, and skewing the tax code to favour the welathy and bankrupt the treasury is not excusable.
So, by playing both sides, all they do is come down on the side of the Powers That Be, who, at this time are corrupt, murderous plutocrats who are (as Bush stated some time ago, but not in so many words) bent on a unipolar global hegemony.
So, I found the politics offensive, but no more so than any other typical hollywood crapola film. And it is *extremely* funny, so I would give it a B-. DEFINITELY worth seeing, but to be soon forgotten due to the cluelessness of the poltical stance of the makers.
RS
Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
"I'm so sick of this 'cool neo-libertarian crap.' You get to whine about taxes, blame everything on the two party system, and then still be about legalizing drugs and being pro-gun."
;)
Yeah, people who are so serious about liberty as to be fanatical about it are stupid! That Kim Jong-Il sure showed those libertarians a thing or two when he abolished the ownership society and created the ultimate complete welfare state.
But seriously, I'm not sure you understand what libertarian means. You (a "liberal", obviously) seem to think it's some kind of right extremist movement. Conservatives, on the other hand, think it's some kind of wacky leftist movement. But it's neither. If you can't handle our crazy, freedom-loving ways, just ignore us and we'll try not to bother you at parties.
Oh yea, you can have gunshots, swearing, explosions, people dying in sprays of blood... but simulated sex between two marionettes is bad, bad, bad! Maybe the censors got mocked in the movie also? :P
Julie Moult is an idiot.
These are our children who are watching these sorts of things.
The movie is rated R - your kids can only see it if YOU take them
Where oh where has my Underdog gone?
instead of planning on your government to care for you.
No, I don't harbor any such illusions, that's why I carry a cyanide pill around with me. If things get bad, I can save myself the suffering.
maybe you should take a look at Barlett and Steele's new book on health care in the US. not only do we spend more, we live shorter lives, get sicker, and actually have wait times for most procedures within a statistically insignificant margin of Canada and much of western Europe. Whatever might have been good about the US health care system, say 20 years ago, has faded in the stupid experiment of a "free market" running health care. Result? 10-20% of expenditure is spent on bureaucracy (contrast with "bureaucratic government" running Medicare at 2-3% of expenditure), and the most senior physicians are just quitting the insurance scene entirely. The fundamental problem is that a free market system works when "selling more" makes sense according to some metric. But "selling more" health care is the opposite of what just about everybody wants from a medical system, and so it starts to break down. Add in the fact that "choice" is virtually incomprehensible in a system where employers pick insurance schemes and most consumers don't know even basic medical facts.
The real truth is that FDR's welfare state was a band aid to avoid a revolution that was brewing in American society during his term as president. Unlike the systems initiated in Europe, which were put in place as a result of direct protest by unions and other non-capital-owning organizations. FDR headed off the fears of the capital owners of the US by instituting a minimal welfare state that did enough to ease the worst fears of the poor, but little more.
And as for your 43% gains this year, lucky you. Just glad you weren't retiring in a period that saw persistent declines in stock values, let alone right after a massive drop like '87 or the tech bubble blowout.
Orgasmo! Their best film of all. Not available on DVD yet though (Some rumor of "soon")
Contrary to popular belief, coding is not all free blow-jobs and beer. Those things cost MONEY!
For the same reason The Simpsons, Futurama, and South Park (among others, though my memory is lapsing right now) are 'nerdy'.
Look at the number of +3 to +5 "Funny" posts in the comments of every article and you find at least one South Park reference and at least one Simpsons reference.
All are shows that mostly only nerds get the humor of. Sure, you have the overt dick and fart jokes, but there's an underlying substance. Nerds 'get it', while the people who are pleased by dick and fart jokes help to keep the series(es?) popular.
Team America, I gather, is about the same, if, like everyone says, it's just like an episode of South Park. Thus, two levels of humor, one nerdy, one pedestrian, and thus newsworthy for nerds.
I would hardly call the current US healthcare system an experiment in free markets. It is the non-"free market" aspects of the current healthcare system that are causing it to suck so bad. Luckily it's in the process of correcting itself as best it can in spite of government interference. When healthcare ultimately does operate as a smooth free market, Doctors will have suffered a significant loss in their pay compared to how things used to be, insurance companies won't get to do the evil things they currently do, and everyone will actually be able to afford decent healthcare. Insurance will be for traumatic events and serious illness, and will be unneccesary for routine medical treatment, which will be affordable.
11*43+456^2
*Sigh*. Looks like not many got the humor.
sigs, as if you care.
They just can't have a slashdot topic icon like democrats and republicans do because Slashdot is helping to reinforce our failed two-party system. Isn't it time that, in light of this discrimination, the "Your Rights Online" section get erased? It's obvious no one here actually cares.
If guns kill people, then CmdrTaco's keyboard misspells words.
No one's ever accused someone of being a "South Park Liberal."
Like all good satirists, Matt and Trey take shots at both sides of the political spectrum. However I can't help but notice that the overall bent of their philosophy is somewhat conservative -- or at least non-liberal.
In Team America they satirize the "pro-America" folks as well-intentioned, though a touch careless or unaware of the side-effects of their actions. Fair enough. But they skewer the left-wing forces mercilessly -- all the movie was really missing was a Mecha-Streisand.
IMNSHO, those who review Matt and Trey's work and say that they're taking shots at both sides equally are *deluding* themselves -- perhaps trying unconsciously to explain away their popularity as something other than a blasting of the Liberal idiots who make up a large amount of the chattering classes.
They come down HARD on the Left Wing, and are damn funny as a result.
Social Security may not provide the best investment return you're hoping for, but it has allowed millions of Americans the ability to retire with some sense of stability.
Social security is not an "investment" it's a pyramid scheme. Or if you want to be less harsh, you could think of it as a pension fund with 0% return, where distributions are outpacing funding. Why not give people the freedom to invest money how they choose is tax deductable funds? Heck, even government backed savings bond would be a better investment than social security. Just imagine all the elimination of overhead?
no matter what happens to my personal investments, I'll still have a nice income waiting for me when I retire.
Oh really? Are you so certain that social security will still be around when you retire? They continue raising the minimum retirement age. For me, I'm looking at 45+ years into the future! There is zero guarantee that anything even remotely resembling social security will exist by the year 2050.
I'd rather invest the money myself thank you. I'm responsibly enough that I understand risk and proper investment allocation. Social security (for retirement, and for people who make a certain $$ a year) is nothing but a safety net for people who are financially irresponsible.
It just seems ironic that two guys whose bread and butter is political statements would go on to make a film parodying those who make political statements.
While I agree on the basic tenets of libertarianism, let's face it: its pie-in-the-sky bullshit. Corporations have broken the trust too many times, at too high a price, to allow themselves to govern themselves. The human cost is too momenumental.
There are some things that government can and does do better than private business. Such as: infrastructure. Infrastructure can include bridges and roads, but should also include health infrastrucutre and education infrastructure.
Its not socialist to want a single payer insurance system, similar to Canada's or Europe's - its common sense. Our health care system sucks. COBRA payments for a single adult usually consume an entire week's worth of unemployment, and unemployment usually is less than half of a former wage, meaning that two weeks of unemployment is already spent on rent.
The real problem is class conflict. The middle class's frustration and anger is pointed at the poor - we see them getting the social programs that we don't qualify for. Its never pointed at the rich, as they enjoy the benefits of our tax dollars in other ways - but don't contribute themselves.
My problem with subsidized housing is that I don't qualify for it. I used to get pissed at people choosing not to work during a boom, to use what income they earned as disposable income when I spent most of my post-tax dollars on necessities - necessities that cost more as a result of others receiving them for less than they are worth.
Truth be told, Americans are fucked. Middle class, urban and suburban youth are completely fucked. We are at the wrong end of a real estate boom, making home ownership nearly impossible, we are saddled with ridiculous levels of debt for college, and preyed upon by scumbags from Citibank, to sign up for easy credit when we are in college.
Yet we believe it is the way it is because if it were the way it is in Europe, we would pay higher taxes. That's complete bullshit. Europeans pay very similar levels of tax, but they enjoy more benefits. Young people don't have to worry about how to afford college - about taking part time jobs while in school - they just have to worry about doing well in school. When they leave, they can take an entry level job that doesn't pay well, because they can enjoy subsidized housing, until they move up the ladder - without an 800lb gorilla on their back (college loans).
We are so fucked. All our money goes to an inefficient corporate monster known as the military industrial complex - that failed to protect us on September 11th, and failed to find the people responsible - and so far has managed to increase the risk Americans face abroad by lacking any self control, and applying brutality, torture and possibly murder to our enemies - enemies that easily created by our hamhanded approach to world dominance.
Just as paving a highway makes it easier to conduct business where that highway leads, so does providing health care and free education. An educated workforce is a productive workforce, that fully utilizes its intelligence, to help build the industries that build America. A healthy workforce is more productive, and regular checkups and preventative medicine leads to longer, happier lives.
But enough of my anti-libertarian rant. The issue here is two hypocrites who can dish it out pretty good. Where do they get off? I support their right to freedom of speech - especially when I disagree with it. I think they are stupid to paint tobacco companies as reasonable, and think they are stupid for "rah-rahing" the war in Iraq. But I don't go around mocking them for expressing their political views. That's America. This bullshit of personal attacks and saying that disagreeing with our government is supporting terrorism is playing right into the hands of the fascist plutocrats on Wall Street, who pull the strin
So this slashdot review is not out of the ordinary, and it's nothing to criticize IMHO. However the general prevalant practice in marketing, of influencing key people in groups, or decision makers, is quite reprehensible. I don't care much about the effects in entertainment because People Know What They Like but I'm much more concerned when it comes to medicine and the drug industry. (An aside: carefully read those posters in your doctors' office next time, what products are they advertising?)
What does it say about our society when we readily celebrate instruments of death and destruction, but can't even bring ourselves to look at parts of our own bodies that bring life itself?
Funny because some people were claiming that these two characters were republicans. There is a whole "Southpark Republican" sort of movement out there.
:)
In sort, I just don't give a shit what their politics are, even though I am a pinko commie bastart I tend to enjoy their work. Although sometimes when I read some of their interviews they just come accross as being plain retarded, and it seems hard to associate some of their productions with their every day personas. But my guess it is that their inverviews are just designed to piss off whoever happens to be reading them.
Bottom line, don't take what people say too seriously. Even if they make damn funny stuff...
That joke originated on South Park and has become a staple post on /., not the other way around. You put the cart before the horse.
Speaking as a lifelong Social Libertarian (you know Anarchist, without the punk) I'm sick of American so called 'libertarianism' as well.
Yeh, get rid of Government and have less laws, but can we keep that bit about property law enforcement, oh and Corporate Law, we like that too. But all the other laws, yeh we hate them.
Quicktime is tightly integrated with the OS, so there is no loading time for the movie to start. You click on it - it starts. Windows media has to open, load up, buffer - which takes at least 10 seconds longer to start than quicktime.
It's a quicktime movie because the film was made on a mac.
Didnt both these guys receive federal aid when they went to college?
Uh - keep in mind that college wouldn't be nearly as expensive if nobody could receive federal aid. If the Federal government would allow anybody to borrow $100,000 per year as long as it was spent on tuition, then you'd see college prices raise to $110,000 next week. Under this kind of system it is perfectly reasonable to be against federal aid and yet freely accept it for oneself. Banning it would only work if it were banned uniformly, causing colleges to find ways to cut costs...
The fact is that I don't agree with all the positions of any of the parties. However, for me the Libertarians tend to have the most reasonable positions on the issues that matter to me. I wouldn't assume that if they were elected their first order of business would be to impose total anarchy during week one.
The Eiffel tower IS a national monument... (Hint: The USA isn't the only "nation" out there)
You know I'm laughing at you right now. I swear Libertarians bite easier than any other political grouping.
Quicktime IS the cross-platform option. I hate going to sites like Yahoo Launch or MTV and not being able to see videos because their using Windows Media Player (embedded), because I'm using a Mac.
.mov files on Linux. I've never had any problems with QuickTime on Windows. I install it on all my clients machines as part of the standard set-up, and walla, it just works.
QuickTime is available for Mac and PC, and MPlayer and a couple other applications will play the
But as for your complaint, there are movie trailers in formats other than QuickTime, you just can't access them from the Apple site. The issue is that Apple collects and displays movie trailers. Millions of people use these trailers daily because of they are accessible. Searching for trailers elsewhere requires going to many different sites, and using different media players from Windows Media to RealPlayer, this codec here, a different codec elsewhere.
Let's face it people link to Apple because their collection of trailers are easy to navigate, accessible, cross-platform, and in a single location. This just encourages movie studios to create more QuickTime trailers, because studios know people will go to the Apple site to look at what's coming out.
At the end of my write-up I end up deciding that the NC-17 would be justified, and since it's the industry voluntarily doing it (and not the government) there isn't really a free speech issue.
There are two points on which my argument turns: first, that "those both under and over 17 are probably used to seeing vaginal sex referenced and occuring in mainstream commercial films, but are not used to seeing oral sex occuring." That fact would trigger "a film that most parents will consider patently too adult for their youngsters under 17."
The second is that self-regulation, under the implicit threat of governmental regulation if self-regulation doesn't occur, is not indirect censorship. And even if it were, it's only partial censorship, as consenting adults still have access to the film.
- Neil Wehneman
My legal education, in nifty podcast format
Does this help?
Your whole review is spent incensing the movie.
Causing it to become enraged or...?
Sorry if you think that's a typo flame but I really have no idea what word you meant to put there.
This is only informative if you dont give a rats ass about the legalilty of the whole thing. Sorenson based codecs are patent encumbered and gross. They should stick to mpeg4 base stuff like xvid, so we can all play.
Oh there are tons of "monopolistic" practices that apple engages in. The oourt though, quite rightly, understand that as apple has a small market share on computers, that it can continue doing just as its done. Remember the rules are that monopolys arn't illigal, trying to get a monopoly isn't illigal, but once you've got one, you have to be careful with what you do with it.. Unless your Microsoft of course.
I call bullshit. Federally backed low interest loans may in fact allow more people to go to school and increasing demand for education and allowing schools to charge more and provide more.
That said, I don't think the limiting factor on the cost of higher education is how much money the federal government is giving out. In fact, less than half of students get any form of loan at all, let alone federal. The average loan? 5K. With tuiton running 25K \ year some places, it just isn't all getting paid for by the government.
That, and people aren't that dumb. We do get ourselves into more debt than we can handle, but who is really going to put themselves into 450K of debt for a college education in the states? You'd see tons of people going overseas and others not going to school. The demand would be low enough the universities would have to lower prices.
-----
Oh, and both of these guys dropped out of college as well and did quite well for themselves on their own.
Ignorance breeds ignorance. Pick up a newspaper. Go online to each of their websites. Listen to NPR.
There is a frickin reason why we have a vote so that we (partly anyway in the representational democracy) can have a direct effect on the course of our nation. Whether you like it or not, that is everyone's job. Not just a few "elite" people who know the issues. I find it incredibly sad that anyone would think this way.
Sig it.
Y'see, the system was designed to be robust. That's why it's a "representative republic" instead of a direct democracy. That's why there are three branches set at odds with each other. The guys who wrote it up were assuming that the only way to keep a few people from screwing all the rest was to give everybody a chance to take some part in it with lots of opposition and lots of ways to block each other from overstepping their proper limits.
By voting, you're providing that necessary opposition, the much-needed buffer to thwart extremist control-freaks. So, VOTE. Figure out who you'll vote for later however you want but the more votes, the better.
I saw this film last weekend and never got the summer blockbuster thing. I saw it as parodying America--we rush in without thinking, blow things up, wreck the place, then say we've made the world safer. It parodys actors to the extreme: just because they make big bucks and are always on the covers of tabloids, somehow they're better equipped than politicians to work towards peaceful international solutions. And its parodys of the puppets tend to be funniest of all.
I do agree Parker and Stone let loose on everyone. The right wing, the left wing, terrorists, and puppets are all fair game. But I don't think blowing up Mt. Rushmore was parodying summer blockbusters. It was a statement that the current U.S. extreme mindsets (liberal and conservative) are doing more to destroy the ideals of the founding fathers than any terrorists ever could.
Who knows, maybe I'm just reading in more than is really there. But I think Parker is a damn smart guy who hides his commentary in humor extremely well.
Oh, and the puppets and the sets were incredible. No wonder they got so burned out making this--it's artwork in and of itself.