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 » Tue Mar 18, 2008 9:41 pm

HAcoreRD wrote:I agree to disagree.

1.) timmy definately not, as he can only say "Timmy" "jimmy" and "Gobbles", unless someone hits him with a 2X4 and he acts normal. Kenny...maybe, he always gives out perverted advice. I do see your point on switching roles, but kenny really has none at this point...he's just there to keep "the boys" whole in my eyes, though that could change in 4 days for all we know.

2.) Again, i agree, they can easily be done, but then again, after watching Imaginationland DVD, it could've been done and was cut to make time, seeing as the episode length pushed the time bracket by a few seconds. Still, I'd like atleast a nod towards this. "how's Wendy, Stan?" *Barf* "Oh, that good huh?"

3.) It'd have made more sense if Stan capped the Hardly boys before turning the gun on Kyle. Stan could've then used fear to silence Kyle, or maybe he'd have kept silent out of friendship, as Kyle would've had his anwser about 9/11, and Stan would've walked free, since the government could've used the dead Hardly boys to link to 9/11. (Though the father would've needed to be killed too). I see your point about "out of fear", Stan acts human, especially when backed in a corner, but I still don't believe he would've killed Kyle.

Pacifism maybe the wrong term, Stan is always anti-war in nature and tends to talk before fighting, minus the Mormon episode, where he was provoked by his friends. Stan is always sympathetic to animals too, as he hoped he didn't hurt any beavers after crashing the boat in "two Days before the Day after tommorow". I do see your point about the "Stan-Type People" since I almost can consider myself one, except I tend to tell myself "I'm gonna have to fight" before trying to talk myself out of it.

I'm still eager for some more dark Stan. Stan and Kyle are just presented as 2 goody goody. Kyle showed his darkness last episode, I doubt Stan will follow suit, though I'm sure he will soon enough.



1- I agree, and that is my point, The characters have their pre-defined roles, they all do, so hoping for Wendy's role to increase vastly is not going to happen. That is our only point of contention.

2- And I, yet again, agree. So many times in the series, there is wasted time or moments. All that needs to happen is for a few opf those moments being used to acknowledge what we are arguing about, and we'd both be happy.

3- Much of your first paragraph deals with Stan being dark and yet still having his sense about him. Stan freaked out, snapped, and came like one second away from doing something he'd regret. He wasn't thinking logically, that is why he pulled the gun out in the first place.

And, yes, Stan is nice and kind. That doesn't preclude him from snapping or from being able to exercise extreme violence.


Generally, we agree. We agree that there is a dark Stan, that Wendy needs to be bigger in the series(Though we differ on how), and that there is wasted time.
That's how it's down here on the farm!
SouthParkSoul
Posts: 313
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2008 11:21 pm

Re: The Second Official Stan Discussion Thread

Postby SouthParkSoul » Wed Mar 19, 2008 2:17 am

Actually, after seeing the 1st episode of season 12, I wonderd why Stan and Kenny didn't turn up more.
Küssen Sie meinen Esel

Taking the Banner of the Holy Marsh! Death to the Vile Lard!
HAcoreRD
Posts: 644
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2007 12:28 pm

Re: The Second Official Stan Discussion Thread

Postby HAcoreRD » Thu Mar 20, 2008 9:50 am

SouthParkSoul wrote:Actually, after seeing the 1st episode of season 12, I wonderd why Stan and Kenny didn't turn up more.


Kenny: I don't know. 2 episodes down, I'd guess 10-12 more this season (so 4-6 more this half). I'd love to see Kenny, but i wouldn't get my hopes too high, keep in mind, Kenny was back seating all of Season 11. Season 10 was his last big role.

Stan: Better he wasn't on screen after Kyle's assault on Cartman, as he would've spent the episode trying to calm Kyle down. Stan did what was needed, drop like four lines, and ask Kyle why he wanted to kill Eric. I guess if Stan went after Kyle he found out Kyle went with Eric to the airport and decided "meh, I'll go play with Kenny then."
vavoomm
Posts: 7
Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2008 3:29 am

Re: The Second Official Stan Discussion Thread

Postby vavoomm » Sun Mar 23, 2008 2:22 am

Stan should be seen in more episodes. I'm actually getting tired of seeing Kyle in a lot more. The main focus right now is particularly Cartman and Kyle. Kenny really needs more air time, but Stan used to have a lot of it. I'm not liking the lack of it...
But that's just me.
HAcoreRD
Posts: 644
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2007 12:28 pm

Re: The Second Official Stan Discussion Thread

Postby HAcoreRD » Sun Mar 23, 2008 2:02 pm

vavoomm wrote:Stan should be seen in more episodes. I'm actually getting tired of seeing Kyle in a lot more. The main focus right now is particularly Cartman and Kyle. Kenny really needs more air time, but Stan used to have a lot of it. I'm not liking the lack of it...
But that's just me.


In fairness, Stan worked many episodes solo, more than Kyle, seeing as Kyle's almost boring w/o Cartman (or Kenny [Jubilee]).

It's early in the season, I'm sure Stan will roll around. Last episode seemed more focused on Britney than Stan and/or Kyle
vavoomm
Posts: 7
Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2008 3:29 am

Re: The Second Official Stan Discussion Thread

Postby vavoomm » Sun Mar 23, 2008 10:37 pm

HAcoreRD wrote:
vavoomm wrote:Stan should be seen in more episodes. I'm actually getting tired of seeing Kyle in a lot more. The main focus right now is particularly Cartman and Kyle. Kenny really needs more air time, but Stan used to have a lot of it. I'm not liking the lack of it...
But that's just me.


In fairness, Stan worked many episodes solo, more than Kyle, seeing as Kyle's almost boring w/o Cartman (or Kenny [Jubilee]).

It's early in the season, I'm sure Stan will roll around. Last episode seemed more focused on Britney than Stan and/or Kyle


Yeah, I know what you mean. But I'm looking forwards to SOMETHING Stan related. He's been quite left out for the past couple seasons since 'Stanley's Cup' and that was a bust.
HAcoreRD
Posts: 644
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2007 12:28 pm

Re: The Second Official Stan Discussion Thread

Postby HAcoreRD » Mon Mar 24, 2008 4:19 pm

vavoomm wrote:
HAcoreRD wrote:
vavoomm wrote:Stan should be seen in more episodes. I'm actually getting tired of seeing Kyle in a lot more. The main focus right now is particularly Cartman and Kyle. Kenny really needs more air time, but Stan used to have a lot of it. I'm not liking the lack of it...
But that's just me.


In fairness, Stan worked many episodes solo, more than Kyle, seeing as Kyle's almost boring w/o Cartman (or Kenny [Jubilee]).

It's early in the season, I'm sure Stan will roll around. Last episode seemed more focused on Britney than Stan and/or Kyle


Yeah, I know what you mean. But I'm looking forwards to SOMETHING Stan related. He's been quite left out for the past couple seasons since 'Stanley's Cup' and that was a bust.


Personally, I loved it, despite it seeming rushed. Stan did 'headline' Guitar-Queero, and shared the list, more crap.
superiorsavior
Posts: 4261
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 10:05 pm

Re: The Second Official Stan Discussion Thread

Postby superiorsavior » Mon Mar 24, 2008 4:36 pm

I think most of the charactars are boring on their own, after about 10 minutes with any kid except Cartman or Butters their charactar traits have worn thin. Most of the humour comes from their interactions with one another.

Stan has always been the biggest mouthpiece kid for the creators political views. Looking back, at "Biggest Duche In The Universe," "Turd or Duche," 'Death,' "tapped in the closset" and many other episodes after the Britney episode, he mainly exists to rant about politics, in long monologues. He was most in charactar there.

Stan has his embarresed side, and his dry "yeah, whatever" humour, as well as his rare happy moments (song in the movie, when he releases the cows in his biggest hippy episode) but has little charactar apart from that when not with his family, Wendy, Kyle or Cartman. Not that he isn't a great charactar when interacting with the others, it's just he's a bit boring on his own, as the crashing of all his solo episodes prooves.
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 » Tue Mar 25, 2008 7:40 am

The crashing of his solo episodes isn't due to him being born, it is due to him actually being the most realistic one in the show. And then, instead of going with realistic storylines, they try to parody too much with him around. Solo+Realistic Character+Realistic Plot= GREAT. Solo+Realistic Character+Parody= Usually bad.

That is why he has failed in those episodes. The plots that have surrouded him have not meshed with the character well enough. Besides, name some solo episodes by other characters that have not busted. The vast majority of episodes that feature only one character fail miserably. Episodes where Stan has the main plot, however, are usually excellent and he almost always is manning the more realistic side of the episode.


Also, you note his ranting about politics; "The Biggest Douche in the Universe" was not political. And, unlike others who rant about politics, the situation is usually thrust upon him. He is hardly ever an activist. He is opinionated, and that bears fruit when it needs to. I guess I just don't like the term ranting, as it has a negative aura about it, as if he seeks out things to bitch about. "Biggest Douche", he never would have started to do what he did to Edwards if Kyle hadn't decided to stay in New York. "Douche and Turd", all Stan wanted to do was not vote, which is not a big deal. It was others who turned it into a big deal. "Death", yet again, the situation was thrust upon him. He did not seek it out. "Trapped In the Closet" was not a political statement, it was a statement about a certain "religion". The list goes on, but Stan does not rant about politics; he usually learns something and then says it after being provoked to do so. One of the few times I can say that Stan certainly turned things political was in "Fun With Veal".

Character wise, Stan > Cartman by a long ways. Cartman is the Kramer/Archi Bunker/Random Wackie Neighbor type character taken to an evil extreme. Stan is the straight man, the normal one. If you don't have that normal one, then the show slips into the depths of absurdity, and not in the good way.
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 » Tue Mar 25, 2008 8:35 pm

^^^

Agreed, Stan's solo episodes "failures" aren't his fault, his character is basically the least disfunctional of the group, and he tries to put on an act for Wendy (note: after the movie, Stan no longer seeks to become an activist to impress her). Besides, pip's and Butter's solo episodes were failures in their own rights.

Stan > cartman, however is strictly opinion. Majority of the viewers watch South Park for Cartman's antics, there are too few viewers who view for story, plot, or moral, muchless Stan and Kyle.

I welcome Cartman episodes, but I'd rather watch Stan and Kenny than another Kyle VS Cartman scenario. What makes Stan more interesting (to me) is that I know he has it in him to surpass Cartman as a manipulating evil little boy, I'm just waiting for Stan to seize the opportunity.
ShaneHaughey
Posts: 11192
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 8:36 pm

Re: The Second Official Stan Discussion Thread

Postby ShaneHaughey » Tue Apr 01, 2008 3:33 am

I'm happy that Stan didn't get high.
That's how it's down here on the farm!
PIPaul
Posts: 202
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2008 7:29 pm

Re: The Second Official Stan Discussion Thread

Postby PIPaul » Wed Apr 02, 2008 1:21 am

Shane-O wrote:The crashing of his solo episodes isn't due to him being born, it is due to him actually being the most realistic one in the show

I never said he wasn't realistic. But how is real life not boring. If you want to see real life on TV, watch a reality show (or not, but you get my point). I want to see a cartoon, so I watch South Park. He's fleshed out, but the mould he was fleshed into was boring to start. Or at least needs other charactars to not be boring.

Dianna wrote:instead of going with realistic storylines, they try to parody too much with him around

I agree his episodes are too high on parrody. But what would you do, in M and Trey's position, if it weren't a parrody and had only mr. realism? Would you like the show to turn into a tween drama?

shane wrote:name some solo episodes by other characters that have not busted.

I wasn't trying to say Stan is a bad charactar per say; mainly that solo episodes are a bad idea, they all fail compared with group ones. With a few exceptions: Pip and Butters own episodes were good for me, because the charactars were developed a lot in those episodes, and underused elsewhere. But the main kids don't do well with solos. THat includes Butters now.

Dianna wrote:Episodes where Stan has the main plot, however, are usually excellent and he almost always is manning the more realistic side of the episode.

As long as he has other kids to make the unrealistic side. I don't really think we need the realistic side sometimes, like in the Britney episode, but...

Dianna wrote: STAN IS NOT POLITICAL

I wasn't talking about "stan's" political oppinion, because I know stan is a fictional charactar, and therefore has no oppinions. I was talking about the way M and T use him to deal their own political (should've said philosophical) oppinions. They showed their contempt of the paranormal through him (I don't htink John Edwards forced Trey to do it by brainwashing Matt into going to Jooliard!) and of Cults in general in the $$$cientology episode (don't think Hayyes declaired Trey the leader of the religion before that episode somehow). They use him to rant, basically, he's their ranting box.

Dianna wrote:Stan is the straight man, the normal one. If you don't have that normal one, then the show slips into the depths of absurdity, and not in the good way.

Montey Python had no straight man in a lot of the sketches. Did that show fail? There was no strait man in Spongebob (my view, a modern Python) though you probably hate that show. I think the absurdity can ride itself out, in the end, basically. It doesn't need a kid saying "this is what's normal" like Stan does in the Britney episode and a lot of others, like the Jacko one, it's just condecending, coz we all know what normal is we don't need to be shown it again.

HARDECORE wrote:after the movie, Stan no longer seeks to become an activist to impress her

Which is why Fun With veal was 2 seasons after the film and none of his activist episodes were before it?

What makes Stan more interesting (to me) is that I know he has it in him to surpass Cartman as a manipulating evil little boy, I'm just waiting for Stan to seize the opportunity.

He doesn't really have the motivation to do that. It's like the normal guy seing a massive flamewar, does he try to trick the troll into killing himself? No, he stays the f*ck out of it, as Stan does all the time. He knows how to play it safe.

Dianna wrote:I'm happy that Stan didn't get high.

He's got high enough in previous episodes...
bofubutt
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2008 7:34 am

Re: The Second Official Stan Discussion Thread

Postby bofubutt » Wed Apr 02, 2008 7:42 am

PIPaul wrote:never said he wasn't realistic. But how is real life not boring. If you want to see real life on TV, watch a reality show (or not, but you get my point). I want to see a cartoon, so I watch South Park. He's fleshed out, but the mould he was fleshed into was boring to start. Or at least needs other charactars to not be boring.


One of the best ways to make a great story is to take a normal person and throw them into unusual circumstances. Stan fits the role of "normal" more than anybody else on the show, with only Kyle coming close. Seeing Stan in a bizarre situation beyond his control would be infinitely more entertaining than seeing Cartman in a bizarre situation to me.

Montey Python had no straight man in a lot of the sketches. Did that show fail? There was no strait man in Spongebob (my view, a modern Python) though you probably hate that show. I think the absurdity can ride itself out, in the end, basically. It doesn't need a kid saying "this is what's normal" like Stan does in the Britney episode and a lot of others, like the Jacko one, it's just condecending, coz we all know what normal is we don't need to be shown it again.


Monty Python is not a show that's based on a story. It's a series of skits. Even the movies, which do have a central plot, rely on absurdist humor, while South Park relies on situational humor. Comparing the two is like comparing apples and oranges.

And you cannot be telling me that SpongeBob is quality programming. That show is an abortion mixed with a loose bowel movement.
Last edited by bofubutt on Wed Apr 02, 2008 1:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
ShaneHaughey
Posts: 11192
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 8:36 pm

Re: The Second Official Stan Discussion Thread

Postby ShaneHaughey » Wed Apr 02, 2008 9:59 am

PIPaul wrote:
Shane-O wrote:The crashing of his solo episodes isn't due to him being born, it is due to him actually being the most realistic one in the show

I never said he wasn't realistic. But how is real life not boring. If you want to see real life on TV, watch a reality show (or not, but you get my point). I want to see a cartoon, so I watch South Park. He's fleshed out, but the mould he was fleshed into was boring to start. Or at least needs other charactars to not be boring.

Dianna wrote:instead of going with realistic storylines, they try to parody too much with him around

I agree his episodes are too high on parrody. But what would you do, in M and Trey's position, if it weren't a parrody and had only mr. realism? Would you like the show to turn into a tween drama?

shane wrote:name some solo episodes by other characters that have not busted.

I wasn't trying to say Stan is a bad charactar per say; mainly that solo episodes are a bad idea, they all fail compared with group ones. With a few exceptions: Pip and Butters own episodes were good for me, because the charactars were developed a lot in those episodes, and underused elsewhere. But the main kids don't do well with solos. THat includes Butters now.

Dianna wrote:Episodes where Stan has the main plot, however, are usually excellent and he almost always is manning the more realistic side of the episode.

As long as he has other kids to make the unrealistic side. I don't really think we need the realistic side sometimes, like in the Britney episode, but...

Dianna wrote: STAN IS NOT POLITICAL

I wasn't talking about "stan's" political oppinion, because I know stan is a fictional charactar, and therefore has no oppinions. I was talking about the way M and T use him to deal their own political (should've said philosophical) oppinions. They showed their contempt of the paranormal through him (I don't htink John Edwards forced Trey to do it by brainwashing Matt into going to Jooliard!) and of Cults in general in the $$$cientology episode (don't think Hayyes declaired Trey the leader of the religion before that episode somehow). They use him to rant, basically, he's their ranting box.

Dianna wrote:Stan is the straight man, the normal one. If you don't have that normal one, then the show slips into the depths of absurdity, and not in the good way.

Montey Python had no straight man in a lot of the sketches. Did that show fail? There was no strait man in Spongebob (my view, a modern Python) though you probably hate that show. I think the absurdity can ride itself out, in the end, basically. It doesn't need a kid saying "this is what's normal" like Stan does in the Britney episode and a lot of others, like the Jacko one, it's just condecending, coz we all know what normal is we don't need to be shown it again.

HARDECORE wrote:after the movie, Stan no longer seeks to become an activist to impress her

Which is why Fun With veal was 2 seasons after the film and none of his activist episodes were before it?

What makes Stan more interesting (to me) is that I know he has it in him to surpass Cartman as a manipulating evil little boy, I'm just waiting for Stan to seize the opportunity.

He doesn't really have the motivation to do that. It's like the normal guy seing a massive flamewar, does he try to trick the troll into killing himself? No, he stays the f*ck out of it, as Stan does all the time. He knows how to play it safe.

Dianna wrote:I'm happy that Stan didn't get high.

He's got high enough in previous episodes...


1- If your real life is boring, then I feel for you. Mine isn't.
2- Stan is just as capable of being funny and exciting as any other character, but unlike a character like Cartman, he isn't EXTREEMEMEEMZ! Therefore, his plots require realism to be funny. 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.
3- Please don't put words in my mouth, it really pisses me off. I don't want the show to turn into a "tween" drama, but there is such a thing as NON-parody comedy.
4- So Pip based episodes were well-developed and good? Mkays, just checking, because Pip-based episodes bore the heck out of me.:P
5- How many solo episodes are there even in the series?
6- Stan is political or not- if he says it. Regardless of who writes it, once a character says something/believes something, it becomes their beliefs as well. Therefore, trying to say, "Matt and Trey use him as the soap box, he doesn't rant they do." doesn't make sense because the second he starts ranting...it no longer is just matt and Trey, it is Matt, Trey, and Stan. We are discussing in-universe and why out-of-universe effects in-universe possibilities. IN-Universe, Stan is a great character. However, out of universe choices by the writers negatively impact his usefullness.
7- Monthy Python the show was skits. You don't need the straight man for skits. Now, the Monthy Python MOVIES had straight me. King Arthur in The Holy Grail, Brian in the Life of Brian. While all straight men can have their own moments of absurdity, the fact is that Stan, like the two characters I mentioned, grounds the show. A movie of skits would fail, and an episode of South park where it isn't grounded usually fails greatly.
8- Spongebob sucks.
9- Stan has moments of activism, that has never been an issue. However, does being an activist when his emotions are called into play make Stan a political person, especially since Stan reverts back to normal by the end of an episode? No, it means he had a mad spurt of emotion that affected his politics for a brief time.
10- Stan does lack the motivation to be a manipulative bastard like Cartman. What he doesn't lack if the ability.
11- He's gotten high, but this time people were getting hooked on the high.:P


Maids, why do you have so many accounts?:P
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 » Fri Apr 04, 2008 4:25 am

Yeah, everyone got hooked on ritalin in "Timmy 2000".

And stan and kyle are equally manipulitive. See disc one of Season 6 for reference.

Return to “Character Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests