What's new

Just saw Team America (1 Viewer)

Pete-D

Screenwriter
Joined
May 30, 2000
Messages
1,746
I agree with your points Robert.



Anyway regarding Oscar nominations I doubt Matt or Trey will ever get nominated for anything by the Academey again.



They showed up at the Oscar's a few years ago wearing dresses and the Oscar broadcasters (ABC I think) refused to show them during the obligatory "and the nominees are" shot.
 

Seth Paxton

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Nov 5, 1998
Messages
7,585
Robert,

for me its not a case of thinking that stars COULDN'T know things, at least as much as ME or YOU. It's that they are speaking from an authority position (being able to speak your mind in a major media outlet) without the appropriate career experience in politics and diplomacy.

Let's be realistic, be it Madeleine Albright, Condy Rice, or Jimmy Carter, Clooney or any other star simply does not get the same level of exposure to the people and information it takes to really understand political situations. And yet actors often get a lot more access to the public to speak their opinions on those subjects than the people who do know them, and then they speak on it as if they do have that knowledge.

Even the more actively political actors like Tim Robbins are restricted from knowing the politics biz like people in major positions of power and diplomacy.

quote:Hell, take a look around the internet
Really now, does the "internet" in the vague chatroom/blog site sense have the kind of power to reach the masses that talking on Leno or in People does? You don't demand your right to get on national TV and talk politics, probably because you don't feel as though you are exceptional in your knowledge. That doesn't mean dumb, that just means that you realize you aren't an AUTHORITY, just a person with an opinion.

Clooney or whomever is not in that national spotlight position because of his political knowledge (typically), but rather because of his acting (or other) career.

It's a bit like Rumsfeld getting on Meet the Press and ranting about how letterboxing is a rip off because it doesn't use your whole screen and how DTS is really no better than Pro-Logic. Besides thinking he's wrong, you might also be inclined to say "how the hell does he know, is this something he knows a lot about?".

And THAT is what Trey and Matt are all wound up about when they attack stars in South Park/TA. It's not like these stars are humble about their OPINIONS normally. Acting like you really KNOW is obnoxious even when regular people do it to each other, as we see at HTF all the time.

Remember how people questioned Dennis Miller as a color commentator for Monday Night Football? Well if Miller has less insight to the NFL than someone who worked as a coach or player in the leauge, then isn't that the same sort of complaint?


And we haven't even touched on the fact that the entertainment industry is perhaps more tied to APPEARANCE than any other career (even politics). It's not unusual for someone to become a star without really having even average smarts. Certainly this is not a fast rule, but a ditzy star is not exactly unusual. And this only fuels the questioning of what part of being an actor makes someone qualified to discuss politics more than the average Joe.


Of course the irony here is that many politicians begin as stars of some sort and spin that name/image recognition into a political career. I would agree that initially a voter should be cynical about voting for a star just because they are a star, but such a person can learn the politics biz by active participation at various levels (like Reagan starting with the Actor's Guild).

So Bill Bradley speaking now carries more weight than Sean Penn to me. But if Penn did take on a political career and put his money where his mouth is, I would respect and admire the effort. In that way a star like Robbins or Penn who take a much more active role have a lot more of my respect because at least they are trying.
 

Robert Anthony

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2003
Messages
3,218
Seth, I don't think you're arguing the point I'm arguing. Granted, you make a good argument--but all Jefferson said was that it was somehow amazing to believe a "hollywood actor" would know this stuff. That's it. He wasn't talking about whether or not they were abusing their celebrity to put forth their views (educated or not) he was simply drawing a direct line from profession to level of intelligence, and that's what I was arguing against. Which is Not what you're arguing against.
 

Jefferson Morris

Supporting Actor
Joined
Jun 20, 2000
Messages
826
quote:he was simply drawing a direct line from profession to level of intelligence, and that's what I was arguing against.
If that's how my post came across, that's not precisely how I intended it. Seth said it a lot better: The political opinions of Hollywood actors aren't necessarily any less valuable or informed than those of the average grocery bagger, veterinarian, or film fan. However, the average grocery bagger, veterinarian, or film fan doesn't get asked to appear on Charlie Rose to disseminate his or her political views.



I guess you had to see the interview to understand. Mr. Clooney dismissed the idea that there was any possible connection between Mr. Hussein's regime and terrorism with the blithe authority of someone telling us what color the sky is: "Well, of course it's blue! Anyone can see that!"



--Jefferson Morris
 

Chuck Mayer

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2001
Messages
8,515
Location
Northern Virginia
Real Name
Chuck Mayer
Having finally seen the film, I'd like to address the sturm & drang. I find it mostly misplaced. The only REAL bashing of the actors came at their FAG headquarters, where Baldwin discussed how they were best suited to help the future of the world. It was a simple dig. Everything after that was so over the top as to be silly fun, and not making a statement in the least. Like Jefferson, I appreciate it. I don't want to hear the unsolicited political opinions of my grocery clerk, my boss, or the guy flying my plane. I don't need it from the actors who make films. Not because I think they are stupid (many of them are, but it's not a valid stereotype), but because I could care less. As another example, the EW I got free at BB had a nice article on Halo 2. The guy writing the story for the game stated that the story was a "damning condemnation" of blah, blah, blah (take a guess). Same situation. I don't care, nerd. It's a videogame where I KILL a lot of bad guys. I don't want his pet opinions anymore than I want to hear the other side's demagogues.


In short, the movie was apolitical. I also felt it didn't have much in the way of teeth to that end anyway. It was a Bruckheimer satire, and a fairly smart, amusing one at that. The only stance it took was philosophical, in terms of D's, P's, and A's. Which I found quite funny.


In short, no controversy here, except for what viewers bring into it.


Funny film (though not as funny as I had hoped),
Chuck
 

dpippel

Yoyodyne Propulsion Systems
Supporter
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2000
Messages
12,292
Location
Sonora Norte
Real Name
Doug
quote:Funny film (though not as funny as I had hoped)

Just saw it this weekend and I'm with you, although for me it only hit the mark about 10% of the time. I was expecting more and was disappointed. If the film had been released about a year ago it would have had a lot more bite. To little, too late.
 

Mikel_Cooperman

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jan 16, 2001
Messages
4,183
Real Name
Mikey
I saw it over the weekend and enjoyed it. I wouldnt say it hit it's mark say, as much as Bigger Longer uncut but I think it was hillarious.

I didn't go in thinking it was going to have a Political statement or have any meaning, I just expected it to be fun and it was.

Doesn't look like it has much staying power though. It's Box Office is already sinking.
 

Ian_H

Supporting Actor
Joined
Aug 6, 2001
Messages
569
quote:Doesn't look like it has much staying power though. It's Box Office is already sinking.




Nope and there have been a few articles about how they basically did the movie for free. They gave up thier front end to make it and when it went over budget they gave up thier back end. There are some funny articles about the hell that was making a puppet movie.



--Ian
 

Tim Hoover

Screenwriter
Joined
May 27, 2001
Messages
1,422
I finally saw the movie this past Tuesday and I have mixed feelings about it. While I'm not above laughing at childish jokes involving foul language, the overall structure and dialogue in the movie just fell flat. IMO, if you overuse movie cliches to poke fun at them, it fails to be funny and instead just becomes cliched like the subjects of mockery.
 

Sean Laughter

Screenwriter
Joined
Aug 3, 1999
Messages
1,384
I may as well inject my opinion since I finally saw the film a week or two ago. It rather dissapointed me actually. I was expecting to be laughing out loud the whole time, but the only scene that really did that for me was the puking in the alley scene, and that was mainly because of the gag with the score.



I can't really place why I didn't really find it all that funny, it just didn't play well with me I guess. I was literally laughing nonstop the first time I saw Southpark:BLU, so I was rather surprised I was somewhat disinterested in this film about halfway through.
 

Rob Silver

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Oct 23, 2004
Messages
78
Good, everbody's seen it. Looks like I'll have the movie all to myself when I see it this coming Tuesday during my looong lunch break...
 

Seth Paxton

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Nov 5, 1998
Messages
7,585
Yes, I have agreed earlier in this thread that the film just isn't as solidly funny as much of their other work, though I still find their voice as comedians to be quite enjoyable even in a more average work like this.



However, stuff like the "I'm in trouble signal" (waving arms wildly) really did crack me up pretty good. It was at its best when it was willing to be silly. That's one of the best things about the Kim Jong Il stuff. "Oh, Herro" with his face right in the camera is just funny to me in a silly way. Oh, and the crappy undercover makeover they gave Gary.
laugh.gif






quote:I don't want to hear the unsolicited political opinions of my grocery clerk, my boss, or the guy flying my plane
This is exactly the context it should be put into. The next time you hear a non-political guest (not in the politics industry in some form) going on about their political stance on a non-political show just imagine that you are hearing it from your grocery clerk as they ring you out.



Would any of us really want to hear our dentist or the guy at the post office just start ranting about politics to us? Maybe if we agreed, and even then my main thought would be "great, but can you just stick to interacting with me in the manner this exchange warrants, ie, just do your job please".



A star's job is to discuss being a star, to act, and to promote/discuss upcoming or previous projects.





Of course, I don't mind a star being invited on a political talk show and talking politics. Its not that they are more qualified there, but rather that the intention of the show is to discuss politics and therefore its what a viewer expects from the guests. I don't expect it so much when I turn on Leno or Rose.





And again, I don't think the guys did a very solid job of lampooning the stars. Instead they settled for simple cheap shots (like Damon being dumb). If anything they missed some good jokes there. There didn't seem to be anything nearly as biting as "bad information" as a running gag against the administration.
 

Matt Stone

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2000
Messages
9,063
Real Name
Matt Stone
I agree with you on this one, Seth. Hit and miss. Some very funny stuff (the songs), but some head scratchers ("Matt Damon") as well.
 

ThomasC

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Dec 15, 2001
Messages
6,526
Real Name
Thomas
The thing behind the "Matt Damon" joke is that when the puppet arrived on set, Matt and Trey thought the puppet looks dumb/retarded, so they made him that way. Think of him as Team America's Timmy. :)
 

Nicholas Vargo

Second Unit
Joined
Oct 4, 2001
Messages
419
Location
La Mesa, CA
Real Name
Nicholas Vargo
Saw the film this past Saturday,and I thought it was pretty damn funny. The only problem was I only laughed out loud about four times. I just simply laughed or chuckled at the rest of the gags. Unlike "South Park: BLU", where I laughed out loud nearly the whole way through, "Team America" has a hard time finding the right balance between what it is trying to do. Then again, I got there about 10 minutes after it started, so maybe it had a funnier beginning that I might've missed, even though I know almost everything that happens up until then in the movie (I showed up right when Spottswoode introduces Gary to all who work at Team America).



Still, it managed to pull itself through with the songs and the satire, which were still funny enough for me to recommend. I think the sex scene is another stand out. It looked so fake that I just had to laugh, and that made it perfect.



Even the conclusion, which takes place at Kin Jong Ill's palace was very funny. In fact, it reminded me a lot of the USO show in the conclusion of "South Park: BLU", but they still pulled it off brilliantly with the suttle differences.



So, do I think "Team America" is one of the best films of the year? No, of course not. Do I think it's a good movie? Hell, yes!



*** out of ****
 

David Galindo

Screenwriter
Joined
Mar 30, 2003
Messages
1,264
The soundtrack to this film is fantastic. Half is hilarious Parker/Stone music, and the other half by James Newton Howard...yeah, I like that mix.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest Articles

Forum statistics

Threads
356,810
Messages
5,123,552
Members
144,184
Latest member
H-508
Recent bookmarks
0
Top