*2010: The End of Serialization As We Know It* Post-Air Thread

Discuss new episodes without ruining them for people in other time zones.

Moderator: Big-Will

Big-Will
Board Moderator
Posts: 18085
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2003 2:57 am

Re: *2010: The End of Serialization As We Know It* Post-Air Thread

Postby Big-Will » Sat Dec 17, 2016 1:41 pm

mario88 wrote:when it comes to kids, it's normal to mantain a certain level of "fluidity", because... they are kids, they are not fully developed people. we can quote the simpsons on that, when nelson (if i recall correctly) bullies the fat nerd kid calling him homosexual and he replies: "i'm not homosexual... i'm not anything yet" (i am going with my memory on this so the words might not be 100% right but the sense was that). but really, waaaaay too many people love to speculate too much on such things. most of them trying to force their fantasies onto things. it's not just south park of course, it happens pretty much with any popular show. as for randy and gerald in the hot tube, i tend to agree with the point of that episode, there is probably a 1% of homosexuality in heterosexual people, just like, i believe, there is a 1% of heterosexuality in homosexual people.

Martin: I'm not gay. I'm nothing yet.
The South Park Scriptorium
The South Park Scriptorium on Facebook

Favorite Character: Butters
Need to look for something on the board? Use the search links below: US version and UK version
VACOOLA
Posts: 665
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:55 am

Re: *2010: The End of Serialization As We Know It* Post-Air Thread

Postby VACOOLA » Sun Dec 18, 2016 2:45 am

nall wrote:
VACOOLA wrote:Uncomfortable, really? :?

Oh, absolutely. These are very different situations. Have you (or someone close to you) never developed a romantic interest in someone you've known for a long time? I have, and have known others who have, and it can be a very awkward thing to broach. Maybe you're too young to have experienced these things, or maybe you're just lucky and should go play the lottery.

Maybe. All I know is that life is a lot easier when you are a crudely animated cartoon character with an unproportionally big round head. You simply don't have enough time for all that old-fashioned awkward sentimental crap, unless it's needed for comedic purposes. No time for complicated mating rituals because of so many other things crammed into a short 22-minute episode. You always have to get straight to the point.

Now let's find ourselves a couple of such characters that would fall into the "romantic interest in someone you've known for a long time" category. How about Cartman & Heidi, for instance? They've known each other for like... eternity. What did Heidi do right after her very first date with Cartman? Yep, she took the initiative. Not only did she flash her tiny giny, but she went on to blatantly flirt with that fat turd in public, thus making other girls faint and puke. What a naughty girl! Bad Heidi, bad! And she's not even a stupid spoiled whore, unlike most of those other girls. On the contrary, she is smart and allegedly funny. But that's how they do it in South Park. No awkwardness, no restraint, no old-fashioned sentimentality. Some of us can relate to that on a personal level, while others can't, which is perfectly understandable, considering it was never supposed to be an accurate reflection of the real world. And that's the beauty of it.

nall wrote:I'd ask if I need to go on, as normally we could have moved on a long time ago.

Except we have actually moved on from the question of whether a person can be pushed into being gay and in a relationship with another supposedly gay person to whatever it is now. This thing seems to have taken on a life of its own. The problem is it's still way off topic.

nall wrote:Yes, the sexual orientation of many characters in the show is intentionally ambiguous

Interesting. Maybe you should have told us sooner.

nall wrote:it would appear you are either trolling

I realize that my sarcastic irony coupled with my brilliant wit and modesty can be a bit over the top for some people, but... I'm only standing my ground. If that's your definition of trolling, then go ahead, call me a troll, I don't care. From what I gather, this desolate forum board could use more so-called "trolls" like yours truly.

nall wrote:or need to double-check your perception of reality.

Thanks for the tip. I appreciate your concern. It never hurts to double-check one's perception of reality, which I will certainly do. Maybe I will end up looking through a rose-tinted reality enhancer too as a result.
theChriss
Posts: 12
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2016 10:55 am

Re: *2010: The End of Serialization As We Know It* Post-Air Thread

Postby theChriss » Sun Dec 18, 2016 7:35 am

Serialization is over, huh? Rest. In. Peace.
JVM
Posts: 901
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2008 8:34 pm

Re: *2010: The End of Serialization As We Know It* Post-Air Thread

Postby JVM » Sun Dec 18, 2016 2:04 pm

My previous statement was intended to extend to adults as well. I see it as a rule of the SP universe.

I'm curious if the title of this episode will turn out to have just been a pun (civilization to serialization) or if we really will see a change of some sort in the show's format next season. I'm hoping if we go back, it's closer to the S18-S19 vibe of stories with similar themes and ideas, and not a full reversion to a completely different SP depending on what fits the parody of the week.

I think a key problem is the last three seasons all tried to tie everything together in the last 2-3 episodes, and that's what really seemed to sink them. There was a lot of enthusiasm for the continuity in early S18, and then it fizzled out a bit when the last two episodes weren't as impressive to people. S19 felt similar - people seemed to be loving the arc until after the finale. S20 went both ways, but S20 was a lot heavier on arc setup. I would argue it didn't help all three big stories seemed to go for a big conspiracy setup.

(Of course, a truly great writer could probably tie the Music Executive, Leslie Meyers, and even the Member Berries together, by examining the relationships between media companies and advertising...)

But I think back to S14A, S14B, and S17, most notably - all three runs had huge stories, but then ended on simple stuff. "Crippled Summer", "Creme Fraiche" and "The Hobbit" are all a lot smaller and more intimate than the preceding episodes, but they do manage to work in their own ways. That doesn't mean you need to buck continuity either - an episode about the girls or Randy or Timmy and Jimmy after several episodes about the main boys can still happen in the same arc without violating one another and while preserving rerun value.

Imagine, if you will, if the events of S20E10 were bumped up to S20E09, and then the final episode was, say, just about Stan trying to win Wendy back, or the Gender War, but without the trappings of Gerald or Denmark or Member Berries or President-elect Garrison. I think that could've been a strong way to end the season, character-wise, if the emotional story is strong, although some casual viewers would probably prefer more satire.

Alternatively, I would be fine if Matt and Trey tried more long-term continuity. Mr. Slave has only really been around once in a decade (cameos notwithstanding) but Garrison calling him worked out fine. More stuff like that could keep the SP universe cohesive and keep continuity about without having to keep saying "'member last week? 'member the season premiere?" Bring back a ball that was left in the air a year or two ago and reintroduce it instead of soft resetting between seasons, as S19-S20 kind of did.
OFFICIAL WIKI MODERATOR :D
My Fanfics | My Fanart | My Wiki Talk Page | My Inbox | My SP Forum
Favorite Characters: Kenny and family, Stan, Wendy, Tweek, Kevin Stoley, Mephesto, Pip (RIP)
Favorite Episode: "The List" (s11e14)
Big-Will
Board Moderator
Posts: 18085
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2003 2:57 am

Re: *2010: The End of Serialization As We Know It* Post-Air Thread

Postby Big-Will » Sun Dec 18, 2016 3:33 pm

theChriss wrote:Serialization is over, huh? Rest. In. Peace.

* as we know it (which was plot-driven - it was all about finding the troll behind the gender war). :lol: Some people are hoping for character-driver serialization, like Mrs. Choksondik's brief stay as a teacher in Seasons 4-6, Kenny's death arc in Season 6 and Mrs. Garrison's arc in Seasons 9-12 (although Gerald's arc was also character-driven as well as plot-driven).
The South Park Scriptorium
The South Park Scriptorium on Facebook

Favorite Character: Butters
Need to look for something on the board? Use the search links below: US version and UK version
theChriss
Posts: 12
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2016 10:55 am

Re: *2010: The End of Serialization As We Know It* Post-Air Thread

Postby theChriss » Mon Dec 19, 2016 1:59 am

I wouldn't mind that though. I actually really like those kinds of continuity, but each episode being tied together into one story just wasn't good.
nall
Site Admin
Posts: 1569
Joined: Thu May 20, 2004 8:52 am

Re: *2010: The End of Serialization As We Know It* Post-Air Thread

Postby nall » Tue Dec 20, 2016 1:38 am

JVM wrote:we wouldn't have Heidi/Cartman to play with this semester if Cartman had been defined as homosexual earlier, for instance.

Well, even if we were giving him labels, are we sure that's the right one? He's shown some interest in girls before, e.g., Patty Nelson in season 9, and seemed upset when Wendy rejects him after their time together in season 4. And last season, he was fantasizing about himself.

JVM wrote:In the finale, he seems to acknowledge not finding her funny and his Mars visions now ending in a horrific alternate world don't help, driving his misogyny. Even now though, he waves sweetly at her and still seems to thin highly of Heidi Turner personally, even if he mistrusts women.

He did call them all "conniving snakes in the grass" and didn't really reciprocate a lot of her physical actions there. Definitely seems like that relationship is headed for a lot of trouble, at a minimum.

mario88 wrote:when it comes to kids, it's normal to mantain a certain level of "fluidity", because... they are kids, they are not fully developed people. we can quote the simpsons on that, when nelson (if i recall correctly) bullies the fat nerd kid calling him homosexual and he replies: "i'm not homosexual... i'm not anything yet" (i am going with my memory on this so the words might not be 100% right but the sense was that). but really, waaaaay too many people love to speculate too much on such things. most of them trying to force their fantasies onto things. it's not just south park of course, it happens pretty much with any popular show. as for randy and gerald in the hot tube, i tend to agree with the point of that episode, there is probably a 1% of homosexuality in heterosexual people, just like, i believe, there is a 1% of heterosexuality in homosexual people.

Actually, science claims that sexual preferences are - on average - expressed by that age, although averages don't apply to everyone and it can take some people a really long time to really interpret this stuff.

"Accumulating studies from the United States over the past decade suggest that the development of sexual attraction may commence in middle childhood and achieve individual subjective recognition sometime around the age of 10. As these studies have shown, first same-sex attraction for males and females typically occurs at the mean age of 9.6 for boys and between the ages of 10 and 10.5 for girls."

(This tends to be shocking to a lot of people; but that's because our mindset is way out of date. The average age of puberty and related functions has dropped by over five years in the last 150 years.)

And sexuality is not a binary thing, like many people seem to believe (or maybe just use as a simplification). The Kinsey Scale is pretty good for this kind of thing:

Image

Of course, people also tend to get in trouble categorizing because some behaviors are associated with gay or straight people - for instance, effeminate behavior in males, but that can be misleading.

"VACOOLA wrote:Now let's find ourselves a couple of such characters that would fall into the "romantic interest in someone you've known for a long time" category. How about Cartman & Heidi, for instance? They've known each other for like... eternity. What did Heidi do right after her very first date with Cartman? Yep, she took the initiative. Not only did she flash her tiny giny, but she went on to blatantly flirt with that fat turd in public, thus making other girls faint and puke. What a naughty girl! Bad Heidi, bad! And she's not even a stupid spoiled whore, unlike most of those other girls. On the contrary, she is smart and allegedly funny. But that's how they do it in South Park. No awkwardness, no restraint, no old-fashioned sentimentality. Some of us can relate to that on a personal level, while others can't, which is perfectly understandable, considering it was never supposed to be an accurate reflection of the real world. And that's the beauty of it.

Heidi and Cartman essentially been "ex-communicated" from the social group and gone through a shared, traumatic experience. This is not analogous to Tweek and Craig, at least at the point in time they were called into PC Principal's Office.

"VACOOLA wrote:
nall wrote:Yes, the sexual orientation of many characters in the show is intentionally ambiguous

Interesting. Maybe you should have told us sooner.

The fact that's things in the show are ambiguous or not revealed to the viewer does not mean that I don't know the answer. It also doesn't mean that I won't hint to it.. or that I won't intentionally try to mislead people. Muhahahaha.

VACOOLA wrote:
nall wrote:or need to double-check your perception of reality.

Thanks for the tip. I appreciate your concern. It never hurts to double-check one's perception of reality, which I will certainly do. Maybe I will end up looking through a rose-tinted reality enhancer too as a result.

If you get one, let me know - I think I'd let to try them out after hearing you talk so much about them.

(But seriously, regardless of Tweek and Craig's actual sexual preferences, that session in PC Principal's Office was pretty damned uncomfortable.)

VACOOLA wrote:
nall wrote:it would appear you are either trolling

I realize that my sarcastic irony coupled with my brilliant wit and modesty can be a bit over the top for some people, but...

Oh, so you've had them on this whole time!

theChriss wrote:Serialization is over, huh? Rest. In. Peace.

For all of you talking about the End of Serialization, don't forget that the title is The End of Serialization As We Know It. ;)

JVM wrote:But I think back to S14A, S14B, and S17, most notably - all three runs had huge stories, but then ended on simple stuff. "Crippled Summer", "Creme Fraiche" and "The Hobbit" are all a lot smaller and more intimate than the preceding episodes, but they do manage to work in their own ways. That doesn't mean you need to buck continuity either - an episode about the girls or Randy or Timmy and Jimmy after several episodes about the main boys can still happen in the same arc without violating one another and while preserving rerun value.

It goes further back. I actually tend to think back to season 6 - we had the underlying story of Kenny being dead and the boys trying to find a replacement fourth kid, and going through Butters and Tweek. (I guess they wanted a blonde for the fourth?) But a lot of those episodes were perfectly good standalone episodes, imho.

kfgg wrote:
nall wrote:One thing I will add about this season is that I liked all the Cartman and Heidi fanart. Thanks to all who drew it.

I'm glad (most of) our official couples get so much love :D


You must spend a lot of time on Tumblr. There's so much of it there. Part of the job handling all the Internet, Social Media right?

We actually have a team and my role at the Studio is more broad than that, but yes, I do enjoy viewing fan art on Tumblr (and other sites) and interacting with all the fans.

That said, out of the major canon couples, we've gotten a lot of Cartman/Heidi, Tweek/Craig, Stan/Wendy, Butters/Charlotte (although less of the last two lately). Very little Token/Nichole. Someone needs to get on that stat!
mario88
Posts: 154
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2015 8:13 am

Re: *2010: The End of Serialization As We Know It* Post-Air Thread

Postby mario88 » Tue Dec 20, 2016 11:32 am

the whole discussion has gotten out of our hands, it was supposed to be about the series finale but we have made of it a discussion about sexual orientation :mrgreen:
He is the record!
kfgg
Posts: 2943
Joined: Tue May 11, 2004 6:12 pm

Re: *2010: The End of Serialization As We Know It* Post-Air Thread

Postby kfgg » Tue Dec 20, 2016 12:38 pm

mario88 wrote:the whole discussion has gotten out of our hands, it was supposed to be about the series finale but we have made of it a discussion about sexual orientation :mrgreen:


"We have noticed America definitely has a pre occupation with gayness" - Matt Stone. I know that almost 20 year old intro quote may or may not have been a joke but it wasn't wrong. The way this thread went sorta proved that.

So I'll just let these two guys be raging bisexuals or gays in my mind. Why stop after almost 14 years? I don't want to. At all. I can't draw for the life of me, but when I was 16 I literally took out crayons and drew these guys having a romantic dance. Long before I knew anybody else did the same type of thing. If it was not for being able to wander off and think about these two, I never would have made it thru high school. Period. I almost didn't. It was a falling out between them in the second half of season 10 that actually made me want to go back to high school and graduate after a year away feeling hopeless about my future. So yeah, it matters to me a little more than the average person. I'm thankful for these guys.

Image

Image

And again I'm so sorry for keeping going off topic here. How to be relevant......oh yeah I had to re-DVR the episode because the TV went out. Did I mention that? It's on my U-Verse box outside of the Series Record folder. I was lucky to have been able to jump to my phone and switch to the internet stream of the network while the service was out. I didn't miss a single minute during the initial airing. Thankfully.
Stan and Kyle :)
JamesPolo
Posts: 223
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2016 7:15 pm

Re: *2010: The End of Serialization As We Know It* Post-Air Thread

Postby JamesPolo » Tue Dec 20, 2016 2:35 pm

I believe in my own psychology.

I think sexual orientation is more nurture in humans. Nature has all species mainly having heterosexual relationships for procreation purposes. Things like safety/survival and food abundance affects the baby rate in a species to a region.

When we say, "someone is gay", I have a different definition. I don’t define things as others do. For me the following about sexuality is:

Gay is someone committing an act that region which is either considered an act of the opposite sex or treats someone/something as though it is the opposite sex, when it is the same sex or seen as such.

Straight is someone committing an act that is common to that region which is normal for that gender to act on between male and female and same gender interactions or with things.

I think all human acts and made items are either from our own nature or from the unique human ability and longing to create new things from observing nature and other living things. So when someone commits an act we know there are one or many things to relate to that act based off human and nature and other species acts.

If someone is to state their sexual preference, then fine but I don’t like this completely. I find it is the actions and results which dictate who is gay and who is straight. So I would say someone who says they are gay is meaning on average they commit gay acts and the same goes for people being straight that they commit straight acts.

Where I agree with many psychologists is that someone can be gay but are not literally gay. For example, a bully is a gay person when bullying someone of the same sex but also a bullied person is gay too as a cause and for allowing it and following a bullies lead. It doesn’t mean they are gay all the time. It means that there are gay acts being committed which means at times they are being gay. To bully someone the aggressor subordinates the recipient which nature states a man is the dominant and a female is the subordinate. Thus, this is a gay relationship as men shouldn’t be acting the way they do in a bully situation. Bullying ties into war also which is gay. Things comes down to the why of an individual act of bullying occurred which can be seen as war.

Now there are many different social structures so that plays in too. Some have one male and many females where others have many males and females. Now humans are supposed to be monogamous so it would be someone being abnormal to act differentially yet Western Civilization has taken on people dating many people and having children with different people.

Education and better communications between nations make people more the same and just human. But there is war, so is war gay? This comes down to personal view of motive. If someone has a legitimate reason to go to war over survival than this is at a point of the two sides not being the same species and so fighting for survival. So I would say this kind of important warfare is not gay yet I am skeptical of accidents. War for survival over an event that led to a people needing to fight for survival can be seen as an intentional mistake as I think people know and do plan all things that happen to them in the future. So with this all war is gay. War for fun is a lot like bullying and so that is gay. Its gay as coveting someone else and theirs is gay. Also people like to create competition for motivation for future progress which humans have a natural desire for. The competition theory can be used to show some acts as not gay.

So why do people act gay? I see this as someone was taught to be as such. It can be someone only does it at times with certain people/things and that it is not of committing homosexual acts. I think a person that is overall stated to be gay was told to be. In life there is a battle for control over someone else’s future actions. Within a society people need people to currently and for the future, to do certain jobs and tasks. This can be a job for money or shopping at a certain store. This also goes to having kids. It is that people compete through communications both verbally and by action and any other form to impose onto others of what they want from someone. It is the consensus that is what the result is of the way someone will be. Also, there is who was more dominant and of a region’s needs. All of us have listened to everyone we meet with something special. What happens is certain people win with a individual over what is listened. So someone who is gay was taught to be by a person they listened to. This could be a person they rarely talked to or a bully or a family member or friend. No one listens to a person about everything.

So when someone is gay it is that everyone had fought to pick a person’s sexuality yet people ended up with this person liking to have same sex intercourse or this could just relate to why someone has some homosexual tendencies or make gay statements.

I’d love to go on further but I got bored, sorry.
He was a wise man who invented beer. -Plato
Stanluv25
Posts: 2784
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2010 2:32 am

Re: *2010: The End of Serialization As We Know It* Post-Air Thread

Postby Stanluv25 » Sat Feb 25, 2017 7:55 pm

Well it's been a few months, I figured now was the best time to watch the last few episodes of S20 that have been on the DVR since they aired. There's a reason why I didn't bother watching them, I don't think I ever felt as bored about a season of SP as I did this time. I just didn't care about any of the stories they had. I'm not political so the less that was said about the election the better. Yes, a few jokes were humorous but I just hate politics in SP!! Gerald as a troll got old fast. Didn't care about Cartman/Heidi. The problem with the continuous story structure is the same jokes get told again and again. Hearing Cartman say girls are 'smart and funny' again and again got old! I know SP take things way out of proportion but by these last few episodes I was rolling my eyes. A lot of effort into stopping trolls but at the same time getting the trolltrace site up. Cartman wanting to go to mars. Member berries. Are women funny or not? Would women really send men to live underground on mars? Then when it looked like it would go somewhere, it stopped. Randy sprayed Sharon and Shelley with 'member berry juice' but nothing came of it. It all became too busy.

Of course my biggest issue is how Stan was used so little, as if he were just some other kid in the class that didn't really do much. It was cool to see Kyle working his smarts and being proactive on the computer, but you would think he'd enlist the help of his best friend for such a monumental task? Stan was like the 5th kid Kyle talks to to help him on the computer, what the heck?

I will always prefer boys being boys episodes or something that is a big deal, but is resolved by the end of the episode (Over Logging.) SP indeed rests itself often so hopefully it will reset into the old format of 14 episodes and no continued story line. I just hate having to wait so long for a chance at Stan being in the forefront again. I love SP but I admit, he/his family is the main reason I watch.

My two cents, see you in September.
I love: Stan, Butters, Cartman, Sharon.

I ship: Stan/Cartman <3

Stan: MMOOMM!!
Sharon: What is it honey? (gasp!) My baby's killed again!
Haa, I love that line.
ShaneHaughey
Posts: 11184
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 2:36 pm

Re: *2010: The End of Serialization As We Know It* Post-Air Thread

Postby ShaneHaughey » Tue Feb 28, 2017 4:04 am

This episode was like most of Season 20: Boring. It got too caught up in a poorly placed serialization plot. Gerald was weak the whole season yet it relied on a really weak development for him, and I never felt like the season found itself. The kids were side characters.

I actually don't dislike the idea of serialization over a season. I just think if S21 does it, it needs to bring a plot that is about the kids primarily and gives them room to do things. This season? Not so much,
That's how it's down here on the farm!
mario88
Posts: 154
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2015 8:13 am

Re: *2010: The End of Serialization As We Know It* Post-Air Thread

Postby mario88 » Tue Feb 28, 2017 2:01 pm

in my opinion a problem with season 20 was that they tried to follow the political developments, so no long-term planning for the episodes was possible; furthermore, they bet on the wrong horse (i mean for the presidency) and that likely f*cked up whatever they had in mind.
He is the record!
SouthAl93
Posts: 156
Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2016 4:13 pm

Re: *2010: The End of Serialization As We Know It* Post-Air Thread

Postby SouthAl93 » Sat Mar 18, 2017 7:31 pm

What about Stan and Wendy? They failed to conclude their breakup for this season.

Return to “Spoilers/New Episode Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 2 guests