OLD GODZILLA WAS HOPPIN AROUND

OLD GODZILLA WAS HOPPIN AROUND

Other urls found in this thread:

newgrounds.com/portal/view/330027
soundcloud.com/knightofgames2/the-ultimate-showdown-of-ultimate-destiny-except-only-godzilla
reuters.com/article/us-tennis-espn-adler-idUSKBN15U04G
youtu.be/_8uM0zOBuSw
newgrounds.com/portal/view/688867
newgrounds.com/portal/view/682264
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

>now it's playing in my head
>that horrible porn parody

>that horrible porn parody
Excuse me, what?

I'll never stop loving this.

>he's never seen it
OH BABY HERE WE GO FOLKS

newgrounds.com/portal/view/330027

one day. newgrounds will shut down. just as club penguin did.

Jesus Christ how the fuck did I never hear about this after all these years.

Ah. The days when the internet was a simpler place.

>FUCK POPSICLE'S YOU LITTLE BITCH

TOKYO CITY LIKE A BIG PLAYGROUND

>no one posting the Old Godzilla version
For shame.
soundcloud.com/knightofgames2/the-ultimate-showdown-of-ultimate-destiny-except-only-godzilla

Why have you come here, Turtle King?

Neils newer stuff like mouth sounds is amazing

I'll have to check it out thanks to this thread user. anything else you recommend?


on another note, do you guys ever think there will be anything like the flash boom again? it won't happen with flash per say but i'd imagine a similar medium

It's not impossible, but I think it's very unlikely. A big part of what made the flash boom is that the internet in the aughts had gained mainstream attention and following, but it was still a lawless mess. The technology had advanced enough to allow for something like flash, but most people still didn't really use it in a regular fashion. The lack of attention and the lack of any of any other kind of content such as the old flash stuff cultivated creative insanity.

About the closest thing you might see is a Source Filmmaker explosion, but people were doing all kinds of nutty shit with Garry's Mod well before SFM, so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I am honestly kind of surprised no one has tried to do a new version of this.

Then again, I have no idea how you could improve upon perfection.

What would the references even be today? Serious question.

Spirit Phone is pretty great

Yeah, this is the main sticking point.

God help us, it would probably be a bunch of shitty memes and Vin Diesel. And the winner would be that Nazi fuck PewDiePie.

>Michael Moore crushing Bush

2000 politics feel surreal to look at today

Kind of amazing to remember that people never believed that politics could possibly be more ridiculous than Bush Jr.

WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWow

Does Moore even do anything anymore? I feel like now that anyone can do what he does he should not be relevant at all

He did something stupid I would hardly call the guy a nazi

He does, but nobody really gives a shit any more.

What did he do again?I heard he got in trouble but I don't know what he did.

>that feel when Baman & Piderman are eventually getting a music video with the help of the guy who made this song.

All these years and that video still makes me horny.

He got kicked off youtube for making an anti-Semitic video. Considering how fucking retarded political correctness is these days, I highly fucking doubt he did anything wrong. Fucking hell, I highly doubt he even said anything that could even be called anti-Semitic if you applied the tiniest shred of common sense. We live in a world that I do not want to be a part of.

reuters.com/article/us-tennis-espn-adler-idUSKBN15U04G

Funny how nobody has an issue that the platform gives the potential "hate speech" which Pew was pointing out in the first place.

And he did it in a way that was, functionally, pretty much what Sup Forums does every ten seconds.

...

There isn't a sense of income being exchanged for shitposting though, right?

Does it fucking matter? Do we have Free Speech, or don't we?

He didn't get kicked off of youtube, he was only removed from some premium advertising thing, had his YouTube Red show canceled, and dropped from Maker Studios. All because WSJ pressured Google and Disney(and probably sent the video they made that misrepresents the footage they took)

He's still on youtube and everything.

What happened was in a few of his videos he made anti-semitic jokes or skits. They all were to specifically criticize something(like that retarded YouTube Heroes program), making fun of how the media will take anything out of context to try and smear him, or how the media portrays him in a negative light.

Which is hilarious in a way because the media did the very thing he said they'd do.

And soon enough, he'll stop making "ironic" anti-Semitic jokes and just make actual anti-Semitic jokes (like that "Jews found another way to fuck over Jesus" comment he did about Fiverr a few months back).

Stupid fuckhead deserves his reaming.

Christ almighty. Fuck Let'sPlayers, but even that faggot doesn't deserve that shit.

Now there's 50 million+ twelve year olds who understand how untrustworthy the media is. It's like they're making themselves obsolete on purpose.

Bottom line is context is critical to understanding the situation which is tossed aside to make money.

WSJ basically did this - youtu.be/_8uM0zOBuSw

If he didn't want to be mistaken for an anti-Semite, he shouldn't have done the kind of shit that anti-Semites do.

He wouldn't be wrong to make such a joke. If you're going to get fucked over for being a little blue, then what does it fucking matter? Go for fucking broke. We're already seeing a lot of the gains from the Civil Rights movement of the sixties being rolled back in popular consciousness because this PC horseshit is ruining lives. People are going to end up making the 1930's uncomfortable with their racism because why the fuck not? You're fucked either way.

He's actually toned down on the LetsPlay stuff recently and has been moving towards a little different style videos that are much better than most of his really old content.

I agree though, he doesn't deserve this.

He didn't do anything that anti-semites do though. He made jokes that were very clearly jokes when taken in context, and the WSJ took those clips out of context.

So it's 1984, and I need to worship Big Brother then? Gotta walk on eggshells and be absolutely fucking certain that everything I say is double plus good?

>If you're going to get fucked over for being a little blue, then what does it fucking matter?

You can be offensive and "edgy" without making marginalised people the butt of a joke.

If you want to tell a rape joke, who would you like to make comfortable with laughing at it: rapists or rape victims? Which one of those two groups would you want in your dedicated audience?

If it were me personally, I'd want to somehow have rape victims laughing at it. But I consider Free Speech to be absolutely sacrosanct human right. I think it's much bigger and more important than America's First Amendment. Anyone should be able to say anything they want without repercussion. If you can find an audience for rapists, then who the fuck are you or I to say that that's an audience that shouldn't exist? Shut people down for their actual acts. Don't ever shut people down for the shit they say.

Right now, it's like this: The First Amendment protects people from government intervention in speech and expression, with rare exceptions (e.g., defamation, calls to violence). It does not guarantee anyone the use of a platform they do not own. Disney and YouTube both have every right to disassociate with PDP; nothing in the First Amendment protects him from having his contracts yanked because of shit he says.

I'm all for free expression and all that gay hippie bullshit, but if Disney and YouTube want to drop PDP over his bullshit, ain't nothin' I can do but ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

>PewDiePie
>Nazi fuck

Did I miss something?

Jewish people are anything but marginalized, user. We're fucking everywhere in the entertainment industry.

I really don't know where you got the idea that Jews are somehow marginalized from. You should get your head out of the 1940's.

>Anyone should be able to say anything they want without repercussion
>without repercussion
thanks for going full retard, I was worried you had a point to make

I have a message for you from Mel Brooks.

It reads as follows.

"Go fuck yourself with a cactus."

I don't think PDP is gonna get dropped by Youtube. Yeah, they dropped his Youtube Red shit, but they can't drop his actual channel. Not because it's immoral or any shit like that, but because he's got what, 3.8 million subs or some shit? If he gets dropped, and takes his shit to some other video hosting site, Youtube's in shit.

I fully understand. I don't disagree, in terms of how it currently works. But I still believe that free speech, as a general concept, is bigger and more important than that. I would advocate more legal protection for speech than exists right now. In the exact same way that it would be a Federal crime for a business to refuse service to a black person on the basis of race, I fully believe it should be a Federal crime for a social platform to refuse service to anyone on the basis of speech.

Speech, any and all speech, should be a protected class and there should be absolutely no consideration as to the content of that speech.

That is what I firmly believe.

>Absolute freedom of speech? That's so stupid a concept, I can ignore centuries of philosophy and just call it retarded.
For fuck's sake, user...

WSJ published an attack article on PewDiePie by taking anti-semitic jokes and skits out of context in an attempt to discredit him

>he's got what, 3.8 million subs or some shit?
He has 53 million.

Why he's so popular, I'll never understand.

So where do you draw the line? What speech do you want to have silenced?

>Speech, any and all speech, should be a protected class and there should be absolutely no consideration as to the content of that speech.

Do you believe that you should be allowed to ask others to commit acts of violence on your behalf without government intervention or punishment?

Because that is basically the endgame of your idea here: That unfettered and unlimited free speech for you is more important than the rights of other people.

Life doesn't make sense man.
The funniest part of this whole controversy is watching Journos locking down their social media accounts because an army of twelve year olds are shouting at them.

Basically? Yes.

I draw a very hard and sharp line between speech and action. I personally find a very clear and distinct difference between threats of violence and acts of violence. I do not believe for a second that there is any crossover between the two.

Every single person on this planet has, at one point or another, said out loud that "I want to kill [xxx]". Very, very few of those people have ever acted on that statement.

Let's get all of this social justice shit aside.

How would John Wick fare in the Ultimate Showdown?

So you would have no problem with someone telling a large crowd to kill you? Not "I wish he were dead" or "I hate that motherfucker", but flat-out "KILL THAT SON OF A BITCH RIGHT NOW"?

I like the fact that you use that argument because it's also used in Twelve Angry Men, a movie more people need to watch to understand how the fuck our justice system is SUPPOSED to work.

>Twelve Angry Men

Oh, the movie where the jurors basically do their own investigation of the crime? As soon as that juror introduced the other knife, that should have been a mistrial.

I don't really give a shit about free speech. It's just how a lot of people I know who make racist jokes all the time are suddenly playing moral crusader and acting like PewDiePie's a monster for making that joke. Everyone makes race jokes all the time, but people turn their heads and glare when PewDiePie does it?

No problem at all. If people in the crowd do kill me, then those individuals are responsible for murder and should be charged as such. The person who made the initial comments? Completely and utterly innocent and guilt free.

Yes, I understand that this seems rather insane, but I do not take my support of complete and total free speech lightly. I will defend the supposed extremes.

So if a person went up to a police officer and said "I am going to kill [x]", that police officer should not be allowed to arrest that person because of what they said?

No. I don't believe that assault, in the legal sense (threatening with the ability to carry through with the threat) is a crime. Battery is a crime. Not assault.

Again, legal definitions of these terms. Legally, assault is purely verbal. Battery is a physical action.

...I was referring more to the use of logic over emotion, I forgot the part you're talking about as it's been a long time since I watched the film. Derp.

So you literally have no problem with, say, someone hiring a hitman by saying "I want you to kill [x]"? You believe that the hiring party should be found innocent because "free speech"?

First of all, the entire concept of a "hitman" comes from video games and movies. Every single hitman that a regular person could find is a government plant.

Second, as I've tried to make very clear, I draw a definitive line between speech and action. I would say that looking for and "hiring" a "hitman" constitutes an action that would you make an accessory to attempted murder. In this very specific example that you have given, the actions extend beyond speech. So no, they wouldn't be innocent because of speech. They have committed actual actions that go beyond speech.

>PDP is more important than Neil C.
I can't say I'm surprised. But, still.

Let's say PewDiePie posts a video wherein he asks his 53 million followers to kill you. Like, no mistaking his intent, he wants someone in his follower base to legitimately kill you. Possibly even for a prize of some sort.

Do you really think he should get off scot-free for that?

I will give two answers, because in my mind you are asking two different things.

>1) PewDiePie posts a video wherein he asks his 53 million followers to kill you
Completely innocent. No repercussions or charges. All he did was say something. Let me make this very clear - I do not care what anyone says. I will never concede this point. Saying something is meaningless. Anyone can say anything.

>2) PewDiePie posts a video wherein he asks his 53 million followers to kill you. [He offers] a prize of some sort.
This is what I've already stated. Now he is performing an action that extends beyond speech. Now he is encouraging murder with a monetary incentive. This would be illegal regardless of how free or censored speech is. You can't offer money to a very select group of close friends for a murder. If this were to take place, he would have moved beyond the realm of speech and into the realm of paying for murder.

>Every single hitman that a regular person could find is a government plant.

>I do not care what anyone says.

So if he asked his followers to kill someone you love, you would not want him punished if that someone was killed?

You really think speech itself isn't an action?

>Now he is encouraging murder with a monetary incentive.

And encouraging murder for free, that's all fine and dandy?

Get the fuck outta here, you bloodthirsty sociopath.

>the chuck norris verse

No, I do not.

Simply consider it in this sense.

We're posting on Sup Forums. Sup Forums regularly has Punisher storytimes. The Punisher is a character that murders criminals, ostensibly (depending on the writer) for reasons that could be chalked up to "so they can't hurt anyone else". So, let's say that some user on Sup Forums goes out and commits a spree-killing. And they directly reference The Punisher as an inspiration. Would you say that Remender or Ennis is responsible for their actions? Should they go to jail because, through their writing of a violent character, they "advocated" mass murder?

No, I do not think that speech is an action. Speech is simply speech.

So you do not see someone encouraging the murder of another person - and I mean someone literally saying "Kill [x]" - as the equivalent of a fictional depiction of murder?

YOU ARE A FUCKING SOCIOPATH.

Sure seems that way, being unable to differentiate between fiction and reality.

>So you do not see someone encouraging the murder of another person - and I mean someone literally saying "Kill [x]" - as the equivalent of a fictional depiction of murder?
>So you do not see
>So you do NOT see
No. I don't see it as equivalent. Am I to assume that you made a mistake and you didn't intend to include the "not"? If that's the case and what you actually meant to say is:
>So you do see someone encouraging the murder of another person - and I mean someone literally saying "Kill [x]" - as the equivalent of a fictional depiction of murder?
Then yes. Yes I do. I do see them as completely equivalent.

Neil Cicada is everything wrong with internet 'culture' in a nut shell. He doesn't make anything, he just remixes shit in an ironic fashion.

Faggot, have you heard his past three albums? They're 100% original.

Eh personally, I agree with him. Not quite to the same degree.

Saying 'Kill [x]' is to take action. Telling somebody to take a specific action, instructing them to do a thing is akin to being complicit. That said, that's not where the conversation started - 'I think [x] should die.' or 'The world would be better off without [x]' or the like are a different beast.

>They're 100% original.
No, they aren't. Are you really that retarded that you can't hear what's going on in there?

Its literally all samples spliced together. That's all he's ever been capable of, because he's not an artist, he's a hack remixer playing to irony, without a bone of creative expression in there. He's the epitome of the meme generation, an empty cup when placed outside the internet.

PewDiePie was bitten by JonTron and got turned into a nazi.

let's steer this discussion back on course a bit. post some newer newgrounds animations, see what other anons think.

newgrounds.com/portal/view/688867

>one man asks the eternal question
>one waifu
>or monster girl harem?
newgrounds.com/portal/view/682264

I'm going to assume the first verse is enough to get the gist of it..

Reminder that Neil is nailing Ming Doyle right now and you can't do anything about it.

I never got what was supposed to be funny about this video.

"Not fiding it funny" is the term you use

"I don't get it" makes people think that you are retarded for not seing the obvious concept of a music like this

i'm going to do this from memory

GANDALF THE GRAY
AND GANDALF THE WHITE
AND MONTY PYTHON AND THE HOLY GRAIL'S BLACK KNIGHT
AND BENNITO MUSSOLINI
AND THE BLUE MEANIE
AND COWBOY CURTIS
AND JAMBI THE GENIE
ROBOCOP
THE TERMINATOR
CAPTAIN KIRK
AND DARTH VADER
LO PAN
SUPERMAN
AND EVERY SINGLE POWER RANGER
BILL S PRESTON
AND THEODORE LOGAN
SPOCK
THE ROCK
DOC OC
AND HULK HOGAN

I could keep going because I know all the words but that would take too long

I had only seen the original, thank you for this

the fuck is this shit

In the ancient times, in the long long ago, it was known as a viral video. A meme from a time before time or at least before Sup Forums.

In the dark ages of pre-social-media internet, "random humour" was very popular. So wacky and zany!

>ywn be a 13-year old watching Idiots of Garry's Mod again

...