The Official Stan Discussion Thread

Discuss South Park characters with all your friends, buddies and guys.

Moderator: Big-Will

ShaneHaughey
Posts: 11192
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 8:36 pm

Re: The Second Official Stan Discussion Thread

Postby ShaneHaughey » Thu Apr 10, 2008 7:43 pm

Stan wise, let us see...
Well, his one line(Regarding math problems) at least shows he is attentive in school.
That's how it's down here on the farm!
superiorsavior
Posts: 4261
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 10:05 pm

Re: The Second Official Stan Discussion Thread

Postby superiorsavior » Thu Apr 10, 2008 8:51 pm

We need more of the boys together (INCLUDES the secondry kids) and less invented charactars/ one kid hogging the spotlight episodes. Stan/Kyle/Kenny/the rest had almost no role in this...

If your real life is boring, then I feel for you. Mine isn't.

My life is more boring than yours I suppose :shock:

But RL is always more boring than what happens in South Park. It should be. A cartoon based on exageration of reality shouldn't be less exciting or simmilarly exciting to RL.

Tell me, did you enjoy Raisins? Did you enjoy My Future Self 'N Me? I did, and before you start saying MFSNM is unrealistic, note I am talking about the base plot structure.

Well, a realistic plot structure is a good thing... I suppose I misinterprited your comments a bit, but I had the impression you wanted a realistic story fullstop, devoid of any MFSNM wierdness. The actual plot structure of earier seasons, devoid of massive leaps to Cannadian parliment and such, is better. Cartman is less EXTREMEZ than you call him, and I'd say I like his madness more than Stan's dry wit, as it can exist without any wierdness to comment soberly on unlike Stan's but... yeah, after the new episode (cartman in costume for a whole ep, again) I see the faults in him alone. But again, I think ALL the kids are bad alone.

I don't want the show to turn into a "tween" drama, but there is such a thing as NON-parody comedy.

Like the old seasons? I wouldn't argue with the show going back to the old style... a bit of satire/parody can be injected into it, but I think the absurdity of the older seasons is the basis of the best humour. Hence I don't want it to be 'like real life' and lack cow cults and dull poliecemen. More charactar-based comedy please! It sounded from your comments, that you wanted the show to turn into one of Rob's drama fics but...

So Pip based episodes were well-developed and good? Mkays, just checking, because Pip-based episodes bore the heck out of me

EpisodeS? Where's the other Pip based episoe plz? I only liked PIP, as a good parrody of Gt. Expectations, I know I'm odd in liking that episode but... I liked the book too :shock:

How many solo episodes are there even in the series?

Too many. Near-solo episodes piss me off too.

Stan is political or not- if he says it.

Well, he has said a lot of political comments, because M and T use him that way, but he has said a lot of them. They need to put him in a position to be political, unlike Kyle who gets political for no reason, but he is more of a political tool than any of the other kids I'd say, the subtext of a lot of his rants. No literalist reading of SP please, take the show in context :S

Monthy Python the show was skits. You don't need the straight man for skits.

Eh, I think the older and better episodes of SP were more skit-based than the new ones, and required less of a strait-man, but.. stan/Kyle are too much of a strait man in Britney and other episodes, almost never having funny moments of their own.

Spongebob sucks.

I beg to differ but... that's only my oppion. An example of a skit-based comedy that works in my view, and very similar to the old-season SP...
Superior2you
Check my Fanarts!

Death will take us so don't fight it. Become it and lean to win.
sarahm1989
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2008 2:18 am

Re: The Second Official Stan Discussion Thread

Postby sarahm1989 » Thu Apr 10, 2008 9:00 pm

im disappointed that there hasn't been much of stan in season 12. cartman has been overused although i agree that he is funny and is a very important part of the show. i agree with whoever said earlier that cartman hasnt been acting like a kid and instead is acting too much like an adult recently. i think that is stan's place. stan is the mature and rational one. it is ironic and therefore funny that he is more of an adult than the adults on the show. cartman is funnier when he is immature. i miss his whining, cursing, teasing, and manipulation in childish ways like he did in the old episodes (for example: but MOOOOMMMM i want _______). yes some of his more adult like episodes are funny but he is encroaching on stan's mature territory, especially in 1205. i also have to disagree with the people who think that stan is capable of violence. he has also not manipulative. there have been some instances where he was selfish such as ladder to heaven but in general he is always trying to do the right thing (and hey nobody is perfect which makes him all the more real) anyway, he has never shown anything but disgust towards violence. he hates hunting and he saved all the baby cows in fun with veal. yes he did once pull a gun on kyle but he never would have shot him. it was just an extreme situation. stan is a kind, sensitive, mature, character who keeps everything from getting too crazy which is what makes the show what it is. i always feel like i learn something (or am at least reminded of something i should know haha) from stan and he always puts things into perspective. i think that without his rationality the show would just be crazy (still funny) but crazy all the same and people would just be left thinking wtf was that? and yes some people would think that is great but it would get old after a while
that being said stan is the best character on the show!
ShaneHaughey
Posts: 11192
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 8:36 pm

Re: The Second Official Stan Discussion Thread

Postby ShaneHaughey » Sat Apr 12, 2008 12:19 am

superiorsavior wrote:We need more of the boys together (INCLUDES the secondry kids) and less invented charactars/ one kid hogging the spotlight episodes. Stan/Kyle/Kenny/the rest had almost no role in this...

If your real life is boring, then I feel for you. Mine isn't.

My life is more boring than yours I suppose :shock:

But RL is always more boring than what happens in South Park. It should be. A cartoon based on exageration of reality shouldn't be less exciting or simmilarly exciting to RL.

Tell me, did you enjoy Raisins? Did you enjoy My Future Self 'N Me? I did, and before you start saying MFSNM is unrealistic, note I am talking about the base plot structure.

Well, a realistic plot structure is a good thing... I suppose I misinterprited your comments a bit, but I had the impression you wanted a realistic story fullstop, devoid of any MFSNM wierdness. The actual plot structure of earier seasons, devoid of massive leaps to Cannadian parliment and such, is better. Cartman is less EXTREMEZ than you call him, and I'd say I like his madness more than Stan's dry wit, as it can exist without any wierdness to comment soberly on unlike Stan's but... yeah, after the new episode (cartman in costume for a whole ep, again) I see the faults in him alone. But again, I think ALL the kids are bad alone.

I don't want the show to turn into a "tween" drama, but there is such a thing as NON-parody comedy.

Like the old seasons? I wouldn't argue with the show going back to the old style... a bit of satire/parody can be injected into it, but I think the absurdity of the older seasons is the basis of the best humour. Hence I don't want it to be 'like real life' and lack cow cults and dull poliecemen. More charactar-based comedy please! It sounded from your comments, that you wanted the show to turn into one of Rob's drama fics but...

So Pip based episodes were well-developed and good? Mkays, just checking, because Pip-based episodes bore the heck out of me

EpisodeS? Where's the other Pip based episoe plz? I only liked PIP, as a good parrody of Gt. Expectations, I know I'm odd in liking that episode but... I liked the book too :shock:

How many solo episodes are there even in the series?

Too many. Near-solo episodes piss me off too.

Stan is political or not- if he says it.

Well, he has said a lot of political comments, because M and T use him that way, but he has said a lot of them. They need to put him in a position to be political, unlike Kyle who gets political for no reason, but he is more of a political tool than any of the other kids I'd say, the subtext of a lot of his rants. No literalist reading of SP please, take the show in context :S

Monthy Python the show was skits. You don't need the straight man for skits.

Eh, I think the older and better episodes of SP were more skit-based than the new ones, and required less of a strait-man, but.. stan/Kyle are too much of a strait man in Britney and other episodes, almost never having funny moments of their own.

Spongebob sucks.

I beg to differ but... that's only my oppion. An example of a skit-based comedy that works in my view, and very similar to the old-season SP...


1- RL may be more boring than SP, but that does not make it boring or any less funny. That is my point. You can be realistic and be funnier than if you were being wacky.
2- Mkays, so you basically agree with me besides the Cartman=Extreme? By Cartman being extreme, I mean plots revolving around him are less realistic than those that revolve around other characters.
3- I didn't like the book and I didn't like the episode.
4- Name some solo episodes, because I can only think of around four. Near solo episodes also fall under a wide definition. Start namin'.
5- If you don't discuss characters ICly, then there is no point in discussing the character. I will always discuss the character ICly. You also have yet to define what you mean by being political; so far, all I can think of is Stan being goaded into showing his opinions and acting upon them. If that means he is political, then everyone is political, because if you goad someone into a reaction they will respond. Stan is no different than your average person; his situations have been different.
6- Old season South Park had plots that were able to hold the episode together. Spongebob's plts were never good. It also isn't skit based, it is story-based. The difference between the two type is that skits shows are shows like "Saturday Night Live", "Mad TV", and "Monty Python". Story based shows are about 90% of television, South Park included. Most cartoons on networks like Nick are small episode based shows that feature two episodes per 22 minute program. They are not skits.
That's how it's down here on the farm!
vexille
Posts: 641
Joined: Mon Sep 27, 2004 11:23 pm

Re: The Second Official Stan Discussion Thread

Postby vexille » Sun Apr 13, 2008 12:22 am

When was the last time Stan made an appearance without a line of dialogue. Even Kenny said more than him. Not that I'm bashing this weeks episode, it wasn't quite unusual to see Garrison running after a penis. And it was fun watching Cartmanez lecturing on the finer points of cheating. Maybe they'll find new ways to complicate Stan's life in the episodes to come.
Image
Calix Meus Enebriens "My Cup Makes Me Drunk"
superiorsavior
Posts: 4261
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 10:05 pm

Re: The Second Official Stan Discussion Thread

Postby superiorsavior » Sun Apr 13, 2008 12:47 am

It's sad to see wendy brought back into sstan's life only for stan to be thrust so far out of the spotlight as to make her invisible again :(

all I can think of is Stan being goaded into showing his opinions and acting upon them.

What other definition of political is there? A member of the senate house? You don't need to be a politician to be political! He just expresses his opinions more than many of the other charactars, and has far stronger oppinions than most kids, who um and arr, whereas he tells people strait. Most people don't know much about an issue, and know it enough to not have a strong oppinion or to just go with the flow and they are therefore non-political. Stan has views totally opposed to those around him and knows a LOT about them for a kid his age.

I will always discuss the character ICly.

You can discuss IC-ly and refer to context... well, I can try to at least. It's best to realise how the creators use the kid, because that's how he's likely to act in future, not what you hypothesise a kid like him is like. They know his charactar better than anyone else, afterall, he IS just a badly-drawn and sketchilly charactarised young Trey.

Stan is no different than your average person

He's not different from your avarage 17-19 year old, perhaps, but a heck of a lot different from the avarage 9 year old. He has more strong and reserched political oppinions than most kids his age, maybee because his life expierience forces him to campaign a lot more than most kids, but we can't use life expieirences as an excuse for some things, or we'd have to use them as an excuse for everything, if we're being consistant.

Old season South Park had plots that were able to hold the episode together. Spongebob's plts were never good.

If skits contain charactars that recur in other skits, they could equally be small episodes. The difference between a long skit and a small episode is very subjective, I'd say. All I was trying to get at, was that the kind of humour used by those shows (absurdidty, charactar based) was more prevelant in the early seasons than it is now. At least, that's what I think I meant to say *too lazy to look at what I said earlier*

Name some solo episodes

AMLF, Pip, Cat Orgy, Stanly's cup... ok, true solo episodes are few and far between (other kids appeared even in some of the one's i mentioned) but I think episodes where less than half of the main charactars appear for more than one line, is a near solo episode. That's most of the new episodes then, which are all "Cartman V Kyle and screw everyone else" or "Butters/Cartman" or whatever... only one A plot, with no room to incorporate the other kids.
Superior2you
Check my Fanarts!

Death will take us so don't fight it. Become it and lean to win.
ShaneHaughey
Posts: 11192
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 8:36 pm

Re: The Second Official Stan Discussion Thread

Postby ShaneHaughey » Sun Apr 13, 2008 2:35 am

superiorsavior wrote:It's sad to see wendy brought back into sstan's life only for stan to be thrust so far out of the spotlight as to make her invisible again :(

all I can think of is Stan being goaded into showing his opinions and acting upon them.

What other definition of political is there? A member of the senate house? You don't need to be a politician to be political! He just expresses his opinions more than many of the other charactars, and has far stronger oppinions than most kids, who um and arr, whereas he tells people strait. Most people don't know much about an issue, and know it enough to not have a strong oppinion or to just go with the flow and they are therefore non-political. Stan has views totally opposed to those around him and knows a LOT about them for a kid his age.

I will always discuss the character ICly.

You can discuss IC-ly and refer to context... well, I can try to at least. It's best to realise how the creators use the kid, because that's how he's likely to act in future, not what you hypothesise a kid like him is like. They know his charactar better than anyone else, afterall, he IS just a badly-drawn and sketchilly charactarised young Trey.

Stan is no different than your average person

He's not different from your avarage 17-19 year old, perhaps, but a heck of a lot different from the avarage 9 year old. He has more strong and reserched political oppinions than most kids his age, maybee because his life expierience forces him to campaign a lot more than most kids, but we can't use life expieirences as an excuse for some things, or we'd have to use them as an excuse for everything, if we're being consistant.

Old season South Park had plots that were able to hold the episode together. Spongebob's plts were never good.

If skits contain charactars that recur in other skits, they could equally be small episodes. The difference between a long skit and a small episode is very subjective, I'd say. All I was trying to get at, was that the kind of humour used by those shows (absurdidty, charactar based) was more prevelant in the early seasons than it is now. At least, that's what I think I meant to say *too lazy to look at what I said earlier*

Name some solo episodes

AMLF, Pip, Cat Orgy, Stanly's cup... ok, true solo episodes are few and far between (other kids appeared even in some of the one's i mentioned) but I think episodes where less than half of the main charactars appear for more than one line, is a near solo episode. That's most of the new episodes then, which are all "Cartman V Kyle and screw everyone else" or "Butters/Cartman" or whatever... only one A plot, with no room to incorporate the other kids.


1- Being political= Actively taking up causes/beliefs when not goaded in order to enact change or have your opinion heard and counted. Stan is goaded into having his opinions heard and counted- he doesn't offer them up freely. According to your definition, everyone who votes is a political person. The rest of your points don't really have much to do with Stan being political- they have to do with him being opinionated. Opinionated=/=political.

2- I should have said: Stan is no different from your average person- in the context of the kids in the show.

3- The comparison between episodic and skit based shows is, as you have said, debatable. So, let us say that Spongebob fits the bill as a skit based show. It now resembles South Park less and less as South Park is episodic. And the skits in Squarepants make it even worse- they aren't funny. And you can praise it for the character based humor, but if the characters are dumb, boring, and don't require but three seconds to think for, then the character based humor will be...dumb, boring, and without thought. If Spongebob is episodic, then the plots suck. If it skit based, the humor sucks. Both things actually suck no matter what, but if you go one style the problems get worse.

4- Mkays, so we can now say for certain that, between the two of us, we can gather enough hate for for pretty much all solo episodes there are. So, the main point you had to start with(Stan is a boring character, his solo episodes are boring.) has more or less been ruined because all solo episodes have sucked. Therefore, we can now discuss Headliner episodes: When Stan headlines an episode, isn't it usually full of epic win?

5- Tomorrow, Trey Parker could decide that in the new episode Stan becomes a space alien from the planet Neek-Neek-Nook and it will be canon in the show. Does that now mean that we have to accept it and go, "lol yeah!"? No. It means we have to try to understand why and how. Same thing with normal Stan: Trey can write whatever he wants, but to be a good analyzer of the characters you have to imagine that it is really happening, and that means wondering why Stan acts the way he does and how it comes about. Just because he is a fictional character doesn't mean he lacks depth.
Plus, you have made one of my points yet again: You say that " It's best to realise how the creators use the kid" not, "It's best to see how this could is."
The difference to you may not be big, but it is to me a very large gap. Remember how everyone was bitching how Garrison's character was ruined after #901? According to your logic, they would have no reason to bitch because Garrison's character is entirely up to Trey's desires. Here, my point is not that Stan's episodes are always full of win, but that he, the character himself, is made out of epic win and when he is used well the episodes are great. When used poorly as has been the case several times, the episodes are bad. This all goes back to your original point of Stan and Stan based episodes being boring. It is not the fact that Stan is boring that causes you to think that, it is the fact that he is used poorly andf in boring ways. If for the next season Cartman did nothing at all and was like Kenny, would that make Cartman boring as a character? No, it would mean he would be used poorly.


6- Another thing that makes Stan not boring is the different possibilites he has in terms of character since he seems to be your average kid. The fact that he seems so average means that there is more open to him in the area of character development than most of the other characters. There are VERY few plots based in reality that couldn't be pulled off well with Stan.
That's how it's down here on the farm!
HAcoreRD
Posts: 644
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2007 12:28 pm

Re: The Second Official Stan Discussion Thread

Postby HAcoreRD » Sun Apr 13, 2008 5:38 am

^

Stan can do well in solo episodes if the creators decide.

"Let's give Stan schizophrenia, and bipolar disorder."

But seriously though, Stan can work just as well in any episode as Cartman or Kyle can, same for Kenny. Just because Stan's the least nutty of the group doesn't take away from him, just cause he's not nutty doesn't mean he'll encounter sane people.
superiorsavior
Posts: 4261
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 10:05 pm

Re: The Second Official Stan Discussion Thread

Postby superiorsavior » Sun Apr 13, 2008 3:42 pm

1. OK then, Stan's informed and oppinionated on political issues for a kid his age. By my definition, most people who vote are poltical because, yes, they're a part of the political process. Everyone's politcal, in certain issues that concern them deeply. Stan just seems to have a lot of issues that concern him, especially for an 8 year old. Maybee because his life situation forces him to care about things like art censorship and the ethics of religion and war, but he still holds those views. Your definition is of an activist, not a politcal person.

3. Your descritpition of Spongebob as unfunny, and it's charactars as shallow and incoherent, is debatable. The charactars in SP are hugely incoherent, changes in
SP generally fit the charactars and the world. The plots are sometimes sucky, sometimes great, just like South Park. I can't convince you that something's funny, i'm not Mr. Zhao, I won't try explaining the jokes in Spongebob for 4 hours. I'm very selective with my comedy (grouchy git who hardly finds anything funny) but Spongebob as much of a laugh-provoker as MP Flying Circus for me (not up to the Goodies standard though). It's in terms of charactar based comedy that I dinf them both to succeed the best.

4. When stan headlines an episode, it's good. But not if he hogs too much of the screen-time, or has too many headlines. I think his charactar can headline as well as any other, but it's best the other kids are present too. Same with any kid. Cartman has been able to headline more successful episodes than Stan though thusfar, so he does have more medals for epic-win.

5. OK, i worded the last post badly. I still think we should see the kids at least partially in terms of what they are used for though.

my point is not that Stan's episodes are always full of win, but that he, the character himself, is made out of epic win and when he is used well the episodes are great

Well, almost any charactar if used well enough is going to make a great episode. I agree then, despite the near-meaninglessness of your point. Also, the best evidence that he's a good charactar, is if he has a lot of victorious episodes. He does, so he's a great charactar, no denying that. He's just not got as many epic wins as Cartman. Perhaps he's got a lot of potential, just less than most charactars I'd say. Most of his mysteries have been explained away already. Unless the show invents some more.

6. Of course, if his streanghts were utiliesed well the episodes he's in would rock, as far as the plot allows. But the same goes for any charactar, if they're used well enough. I don't see how being less-normal makes a charactar less open to charactar development, in fact, i'd say they're more open, in terms of explaining why they act that way.
Superior2you
Check my Fanarts!

Death will take us so don't fight it. Become it and lean to win.
ShaneHaughey
Posts: 11192
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 8:36 pm

Re: The Second Official Stan Discussion Thread

Postby ShaneHaughey » Thu Apr 24, 2008 11:08 pm

1- Then your definition of political and mine(And most people's, I'd fgather) is wildly different and really renders debating moot since you think holding beliefs/opinions involving politics(Therefore, just thinking really) makes you political. I think you are insanely wrong, but since that is your definition, it is a moot point. By the way, activist=political person. You don't need to protest in the streets and other things to be an activist IMHO; all you need to do is attempt to convert people to your way of thinking when not really needed. An example would be an athiest who when he HEARS faith being mentioned on MSN feels the need to start a debate. He is an activist because, in his daily life, he acts on any shred of possible political material. Someone who votes may only look up politics the day before they vote on Wikipedia. They are about as non-political as you can get, but will vote because they feel as though it is an obligation. Believe me, I know too many people like this.

2- How does Spongebob even have good characters? I mean, seriously, Family Guy is funnier than Spongebob and has characters that are just as good. Family Guy isn't funny. I don't get it at all why anyone finds Spongebob is funny and I never have. Unlike South Park or other shows who can defend their show from a content standpoint, all Spongebob fans seem to be capable of is, "Well, my opinion!". And you know what? That is fine until you start comparing.

3- The only reason Cartman has been able to headline more episodes is that since his character is a more extreme, you can put him in more extreme situations. Stan is a realistic characters. Putting him in extreme situations can work very well, but if the situation is handled poorly, it fails. With Cartman, it is harder to f*ck up the extreme situations because it is more in character. So, we get to how characters have been used and how they are different from what the characters are capable qabd how fgood they are. Another example is Kenny- a fine character with lots of room for development but who is hardly used.
Stan could spend the entire episode in front of the camera and it would work- but the episode would need to be written to actually work for the character. Stanley's Cup, as an example, could work just about as well with any character besides Stan. It really didn't have much of a Stan flavor to it. Cartman WOULD have been a better choice because you could go places with him easier than you could Stan. If the episode had been written to better reflect Stan's character, it would have been better.

4- IC or death- because, otherwise, we'll have this same argument again in a while.

5- But you really missed the point- he SHOULD have PLENTY of more mysteries available to be discovered because, first off, it is almost always the normal people who have the best secrets and, secondly, they haven't revealed as many for him yet. We'rve already had this debate on MSN regarding character development and trait depth: You need both. Stan could have much more character development and it would make sense.

6- If you are less "normal" then you close down paths for character development while you open very few. The only benefit is that trait depth can be slightly improved upon- slightly. Being normal has many great benefits: More paths are open, and the less likely you are to see that character take that path the deeper the trait depth can go. Of all the character, Stan has by far and away the most area open for character development.



ANYWHO....
#1207 was, how does one say, epic f*cking win on the Stan front.
That's how it's down here on the farm!
superiorsavior
Posts: 4261
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 10:05 pm

Re: The Second Official Stan Discussion Thread

Postby superiorsavior » Fri Apr 25, 2008 12:08 am

I'll leave the debate for another time, don't take this as defeat. I will be back!

I want to say that, having watched 1207 (and 1206, another Stan episode) I can clearly say he's back in buisiness as a central charactar. His 'action hero' portrayal by fans is defended here. He really loves wendy and feels he needs to show it to her, but doesn't puke around her anymore. He really loves Shelly even if she hates him. He's willing to save Kenny, so he must still like him.
Superior2you
Check my Fanarts!

Death will take us so don't fight it. Become it and lean to win.
Sizzling Lynn
Posts: 859
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2007 5:20 pm

Re: The Second Official Stan Discussion Thread

Postby Sizzling Lynn » Sat Apr 26, 2008 6:40 am

'm very satisfied with the latest episode. I missed the StanxWendy moments in South Park. They were (and, thankfully, are) THE South Park couple.
Image
Summer_warmth_24
Posts: 9
Joined: Mon Jun 09, 2008 3:34 am

Re: The Second Official Stan Discussion Thread

Postby Summer_warmth_24 » Wed Jun 11, 2008 10:42 am

The reasons why I love Stan.

1.) He has Wendy back
2.) A good leader
3.) He's very mature
4.) He knows how to drive
5.) He's forgiving
6.) Voice of reason
7.) Animal lover
8.) He's Assertive
9.) Very Athletic
Michaeloptv
Posts: 3545
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 6:02 pm

Re: The Second Official Stan Discussion Thread

Postby Michaeloptv » Sun Jun 15, 2008 5:04 am

This is good, I live 007,


"The name is Marsh....Stan Marsh".

Have Cartman as 'Q'
and Wendy as the Bond Girl that Stan needs to save:)

Also featuring Kyle as some crazy guy that follows Stan in his "Mission" :P
AgY
Posts: 11
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2008 6:32 pm

Re: The Second Official Stan Discussion Thread

Postby AgY » Sat Jun 21, 2008 6:54 pm

Stan is one of my favourites. I think that he is the most modest boy in the team, and I like when he wrinkles :lol: his forehead, when Randy does stupid things.

Return to “Character Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests