I love these two guys, but do you ever notice how they always seems to say "We're about to do something so outrageous...

I love these two guys, but do you ever notice how they always seems to say "We're about to do something so outrageous, it's probably gonna get us sued or thrown off of television?". I mean, South Park is still a plenty edgy show, don't get me wrong, but at this point, why do they still anticipate that happening? They said it this month too, but then nothing outstandingly crazy happened on the show. I guess it's just that from their perspective they see what they're doing as being perhaps even more provocative than it is? I dunno. I don't get it.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/u1XubtHhVI8
telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/7668606/Times-Square-car-bomb-police-investigate-South-Park-link.html
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

A combination of building hype and desperately trying to get a self-fulfilling prophecy going so they can finally get thrown off of television.

It's the foundation of the show. The first run of the show up until the South Park movie was all about being able to say whatever they want to say, and they were actually threatened with cancellation a couple times for going too far.

Honestly ever since the proved that there are no lines they can't cross, the show has lost its sense of direction.

That season where they had Pewdiepie and tried to make a point about how internet entertainment is the new it thing because it doesn't pander and milk things to death, without ironically realizing internet entertainment do just that, basically sums up the problem with them to.

They're grandpa's. They're grandpa's and they are desperately trying to cling on the old idea that they were the edgy subversive counter-culture not realizing that by becoming famous and shaping entertainment and popular culture as we know it, they ARE the culture. And they don't like it.

>pretty edgy

lmao. those fuckers went full sjw by the last 2-3 seasons

people that go full SJW don't make rape jokes.

How many other cartoons are still written and directed by the same guys for 21 years? I'm surprised they haven't taken a backseat in the production like Groening, or delegated their positions so they do nothing but voice act like MacFarlane.

rape jokes with males isn't problematic, tho. especially if the male is supposed to be the "evil shit lord" u.s. president

I think it's just the way they think and see the world. They genuinely do think they're about to go way too far all the time, but then a new season rolls around and anyone who considers themself a dedicated fan is just like "Okay, yeah, that was edgy, but hardly any more so than last season, or the season before...". It's weird.

>not realizing
>and they don't like it.

wat

Yeah, even after decades and making millions from South Park, they're still outsiders in regards to the rest of Hollywood. Like Trey said before Despicable Me 3, nobody that he didn't already know had ever asked him to voice act in their movie.

Them not showing Muhammed and going so far as to edit the previous episode miffed a lot of people who respected them for not giving a fuck. They should have said to CC "show him or we're done."

MacFarlane's writers have always been the gut of that show. A few from Rhode Island are why the show used to be so full of actual Rhode Island jokes as well as the just plain better writing before they were cancelled.

By the time they were brought back they'd lost some of those dudes.

Peter being a degenerate Rhode Islander, though many people don't recognize him as being so specific anymore, is exactly why it was funny.

They didn't want to edit the previous episode. Everything about 200/201 getting censored was beyond their control, even the DVD commentaries were bleeped because they were mad. And according to Vernon Chatman (Towelie's VA and the guy behind XRA), Trey bought a ticket to South Africa and told CC if they pulled that shit again he'd leave them like Dave Chappelle.

IT'S ALL A DAMN PR STUNT.

I'm more annoyed with how they said they just wanted to focus on fun, wacky plots this year with no focus on politics, yet this season is still quite political.

>why do they still anticipate that happening?
Because they're kind of old and out-of-touch.
In their day if they did what they did it'd probably be an issue.

>tfw you'll never make a hit television show with your college buddy

>Beyond their control
So is being cancelled. That's the point.

When they lost the "We offend all people the same, good God we could be cancelled any week" schtick they lost their balls. It's when it was laid bare that they weren't interested in being equal opportunists but rather would cave when Comedy Central decided the needed to cave.

>Trey bought a ticket to South Africa and told CC if they pulled that shit again he'd leave them like Dave Chappelle.

Doesn't matter. He didn't do it and wouldn't do it. Even if he paid for the shit. It's a few hundred dollars to a multi-millionaire trying to make a point.

Trey and Matt could probably leave South Park if they had it up to here with CC, but that would also result in the dozens of people who work on the show to lose their jobs. And not all of those people are multi-millionaires who could ither retire or easily find another job. That's a lose-lose situation that most people don't recognize.

Besides, they were being threatened by actual terrorists. I wanted them to stick to their guns too and tell CC to fuck off, but sometimes you have to realize how big of a risk something is. Like when all those Charlie Hebdo guys got shot for that Islam drawing.

But they didn't cave in. They kept mentioning how much of a bitch move this was, and even leaked an uncensored clip of 201 on to the internet.

>you'll never love or connect with anyone on the level that Matt and Trey do

>even leaked an uncensored clip of 201 on to the internet.
They did not. Any Muhammed picture you've seen is from SBF, which has since also been removed from store fronts or edited.

>I wanted them to stick to their guns too and tell CC to fuck off, but sometimes you have to realize how big of a risk something is.
Then they don't get to sit around (or their faggot fans) and say shit like "We're about to do something so outrageous, it's probably gonna get us sued or thrown off of television".

That's my point.

The distinction we're making here is not that it was a credible threat (it wasn't since Hebdo happened a decade later, it was the Danish cartoon that spurred the controversy), not that it was a good business decision for their workers, but that they continue to act as if they really don't give a fuck when they clearly give a fuck.

I don't give a fuck how you feel about it. They're faggots for acting so brazen when you've described why they aren't and won't ever truly be brazen.

TJ Miller leaving SV because he got sick of being the reason Pied Piper failed was a brazen move. Whether I think that show is good or not is beside the point. That's truly sticking to your guns.

>They did not.
Um, they did.
youtu.be/u1XubtHhVI8

>TJ Miller leaving SV because he got sick of being the reason Pied Piper failed was a brazen move. Whether I think that show is good or not is beside the point. That's truly sticking to your guns.
TJ Miller wasn't threatened by terrorists or anything of the sort though.
That's a completely different scenario.

>(it wasn't since Hebdo happened a decade later, it was the Danish cartoon that spurred the controversy)
And people died because of protests over the Danish cartoons. Hell, there was a deactivated car bomb near the Viacom offices when those South Park episodes aired. There was a legitimate threat, and you can call them faggots all you want, but people's lives were genuinely at risk.

Prove to me they leaked that. Otherwise I'm sitting here left thinking you believe every leak is intended.

>That's a completely different scenario.
See you think the terrorist thing is credible. It isn't. That's the only thing that separates them. They both boil down to "the suits do what I want or I leave."

TJ Miller told the show runners to come up with something other than derivative shit or that he'd walk (from the show he helped create). He did so when they didn't.

What did Matt and Trey do when CC censored their shit? They flinched and use the "scary terrorists" bullshit to defend themselves (which I don't think they ever actually did so I don't know why you or the rest of their fans do).

They caved because Comedy Central caved from pressure put on them likely by Time Warner. Not due to fear. If you were older than twelve you would know that they'd had hundreds of groups threaten them before that because of various depictions.

And by the way, do you remember what Hebdo did a few years back after literally being attacked?

pic related is the french making them look like pussies.

They're faggots.

Actual Muslim extremists were threatening them. What makes you believe it wasn't credible? And TJ Miller didn't leave because of that. He left because he got mad that Silicon Valley wasn't becoming more political.

>They're faggots
I'd rather be a faggot than somebody who got my staff murdered by terrorists.

>liking TJ Miller
That sounds really faggy, user.

Idiots.

Matt and Trey didn't censor the episode, Comedy Central did at air without their permission.

The entire speech is about how threats of violence clearly get people what they want.

I never said that nor do I like him. It's an example of someone sticking to their guns.

>Actual Muslim extremists were threatening them.
They threaten America for existing daily. And, as I said, they got many just as "credible" threats before and likely even still.

The most absurd part of your replies is you're painting it as if I said "they should have wanted to get murdered". I brought this up in reference to the assertion that:

>The first run of the show up until the South Park movie was all about being able to say whatever they want to say, and they were actually threatened with cancellation a couple times for going too far.

>Honestly ever since the proved that there are no lines they can't cross, the show has lost its sense of direction.
Specifically
>proved that there are no lines they can't cross

When in fact I think it's the opposite. They lost their teeth when even they realized there are lines THEY were not willing to cross.

I didn't say they did. Not once did I say that. So stop asserting I did.

They never hold the power to censor or not. CC does and Time Warner above them. The point is that they decided to continue working with them which removes any truth to the "proved that there are no lines they can't cross" bullshit you alway see faggot ass fans say.

>they decided to continue working with them
as opposed to breaking contract and being in legal trouble with no income and no ownership of their own property?

Don't be such a gigantic retard.

Dude, their lives were genuinely at stake and they stuck to their guns, only losing because the network went out of their way to censor them, which to this day they are still pissed about. I know you probably have some sort of hate-boner for Matt and Trey, but stop bending over backwards to justify it.

user you simply want to have the cake and eat it too. That's my point. It's been my point. You've wanted my point to be "they should've invited the muslims for a private viewing so they could kill the staff personally."

My point has been, is, and will continue to be they don't get to say "there is no line we won't cross" when there literally was a line they would not cross.

And that is when I feel the series lost it's teeth. You can disagree with it losing or having teeth and when or if that happened. You CAN NOT tell me there is "no line they won't cross".

>they don't get to say "there is no line we won't cross" when there literally was a line they would not cross.
I'm not sure you understand that that phrase means.

"no line they won't cross" doesn't mean IF THE NETWORK DOES SOMETHING WE QUIT

It means they're not afraid to make fun of something people hold sacred.

You're a fucking idiot.

>that is when I feel the series lost its teeth
So you think there was a dramatic change in the show itself based on the fact that Matt and Trey didn't bow to pressure and had to be forcibly censored?

Your theory is retarded.

user, you sound really mad. Just chill and quit sperging over Trey and Matt using hyperbole.

>their lives were genuinely at stake
So are yours and mine just be being westerners. If you think the threat against them is any more credible than the threat against you than you honestly don't have a brain.

An ocean separates us all (Matt, Trey you and me) from the same people who want to kill ALL of us. And don't tell me who I do or don't like. I love many episodes and seasons of SP. And I love Basketball.

But all of that was made before you could even speak yet you little bitch.

user, you realize we're at the point of you saying "you're wrong, I'm right" don't you? You aren't "right". You just haven't realized, still, I'm simply justifying my opinion.

>"no line they won't cross" doesn't mean IF THE NETWORK DOES SOMETHING WE QUIT
It literally does. You just don't hold words to their actual standard.

At least this faggot has admitted (while telling me I'm sperging as if that's not what 90 percent of Sup Forums is) that it's hyperbole. Marketing fluff.

It's complete bullshit but at least Matt and Trey don't believe it.

What part of "car bomb found near Viacom offices" do you not understand?
telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/7668606/Times-Square-car-bomb-police-investigate-South-Park-link.html

And the Revolution Muslim guys who threatened Trey and Matt weren't random trolls, but were arrested for criminal activity and sentenced for threatening other people.

Why are you obsessed with the word "faggot?" You've used it so much it sounds like a verbal tic.

>It literally does
You don't get to redefine phrases in the common lexicon because you use them wrong

>you realize we're at the point of you saying "you're wrong, I'm right" don't you?
Except we're not. Your theory doesn't follow and your understanding of the words you are using is flawed. That's not "he said, she said," that's you being ignorant and obstinate.

Go find the definition to try and "prove" me wrong. There was a line drawn and they did not cross it. That is literally what happened.

The reasoning for not crossing the line does not matter. The line was not crossed. That is all that matters. You disagree that it's a big deal, but I can't see how you can say I've attempted to redefine anything.

I understood all of it. There are many more recent attacks against america as a whole and many more recent proclamations that we should all burn.

>There was a line drawn and they did not cross it
Haha, holy shit. You're literally mixing metaphors.

Read a fucking book.

>There are many more recent attacks against america as a whole and many more recent proclamations that we should all burn.
Just because there are attacks all the time doesn't devalue one in particular. These are people's lives, not statistics.

>There was a line drawn and they did not cross it. That is literally what happened.
Ignoring the whole "two different phrases" thing you seem to have missed, a more accurate analogy would be that a line was drawn and they crossed it but CC prevented anyone from seeing them cross it.


It's ok to be wrong, kid. It's how we learn. Grow from this experience.

>Your theory doesn't follow and your understanding of the words you are using is flawed.

I disagree.

What are the two "metaphores" I mixed up?

I never said it did. I haven't said this once.

I guess I should repeat my point is that they and their fans say "there is no line they will not cross" and that there was a line that they would not cross.

The replies have all been centered around "they were in danger." Which is beside the point.

You can disagree all you like, a conclusion not following from its premises isn't subjective.

So let the terrorist win then. I guess we should instill shiar law if they threaten us with bombs.

Actually explain your point and how it doesnt follow, because all you are doing is saying "YOU'RE WRONG!" Like a child

"SJW" doesn't just mean "disagrees with you".

The fact that you're getting assblasted by their opinions kind of shows they're still doing what they always have, doesn't it?

My theory is they said there was no line they wouldn't cross. Then there was a line drawn (still need to be told how this is conflating two "metaphors") and they didn't cross it.

How is my premise removed from my conclusion there?

>Which is beside the point.
No, it's not. It's the entire reason why they were banned from showing Muhammad. Unless you think Comedy Central just banned the usage for no reason, and Trey and Matt willingly obliged despite all the evidence to the contrary.

>metaphores

"no line they won't cross"
and
"drew a line in the sand"

One is a generalism about not caring who is offended by what you say.

The other is about an individual setting a limit (and doesn't really apply as they crossed the line CC attempted to draw)

u dum nigga

user, the reasoning doesn't change the fact that there was a line and they didn't cross it.

I don't see how so many people can tell me that's not true or doesn't follow a logical line.

The contemporary media cultural landscape is outrage bingo for everyone, and the more content you put out, the more likely you are to get some arseholes knickers in a twist on social media.

These two clowns put out 20 shows a year plus games and other random shit.

Maybe they make too much of it for publicity, but it's a real occupational hazard that must be hard to judge. You never can tell who is going to be pissed off at whatever it is.

>explain how something doesn't follow
You are far dumber than I could have thought possible.

Think about what you just said.

>my theory
>talks about the metaphor shit again
Do you have the memory of a goldfish?
See

And we keep telling you they crossed it but CC censored them. Yet you keep insisting that they should have quit their jobs and forgone any responsibilities out of some principle bullshit. Only a fucking retard would do that just because they weren't allowed to show a picture of Muhammad.

If you'd attempted to go to an official source you would see that you are in fact, wrong.

It's the same metaphor used in different ways. But they are incredibly similar and are, in fact, the same. One is simply based on arbitrary line and the other based on a line someone has drawn. But they aren't removed from each other.

So "there is no line we will not cross" covers all lines. Including lines "drawn in the sand".

You're attempting to use technicalities to ignore the fact that you've been attacking me rather than just saying you disagree.

As we get further and further away from the original comment you seem to forget that this is predicated on them saying they're doing something so fucked up they'll be cancelled.

the tagline should be "there is no line we won't cross, unless Comedy Central doesn't let us show you us crossing that line" or "we're doing something that will get us cancelled. that is, if Comedy Central didn't edit it and decided, instead, to just cancel us."

>

the tagline should be "there is no line we won't cross, unless Comedy Central doesn't let us show you us crossing that line" or "we're doing something that will get us cancelled. that is, if Comedy Central didn't edit it and decided, instead, to just cancel us."
I don't think there's anybody that anal or autistic to use those taglines.

>It's the same metaphor used in different ways

Also, , wasn't me you stupid fuck

>I'm not wrong, YOU'RE ATTACKING ME
You're going to wind up knowing absolutely nothing, thinking you know everything, and thinking everyone is out to get you.

I suggest you learn some humility.

>there is no line we won't cross, unless Comedy Central doesn't let us show you us crossing that line
I want you to read what you wrote very carefully, over and over, until you understand why it's stupid.

The reason you've posted a reaction image is the official sources you could go to say exactly that.

But user, you haven't done anything but attack me. And, passive aggressive as it is, telling me to learn humility (something you cannot even learn) is an attack.

The basis for this entire back and forth has been that you understand why they didn't "cross the line". Or that you think they did and that comedy central was the one that didn't.

But you've gotten to the point of trying to "prove" my opinion wrong by telling me I'm referring metaphorical lines incorrectly.

You simply disagree with me yet you think it is a matter of factual disagreement rather than on of opinion. That you would tell me to "learn humility" is pretty indicative of the self-awareness you have.

Yes let's do that.

>There is no line we won't cross
meaning: Matt and Trey will go as far as they like

>unless
this means they will not go as far as they like

>Comedy Central doesn't let us show you us crossing that line
This is the reason why they will not go as far as they like.

It's akin to saying "I will touch my cock where ever when ever I want, unless some is there to see."

>It's akin to saying "I will touch my cock where ever when ever I want, unless some is there to see."
No, it would be "I will touch my cock wherever I want whenever I want and this guy might block you from seeing it"

The difference being they're still touching their cock/crossing the line.

Again: if you mentally define anyone telling you that you are wrong as simply someone with another opinion to be dismissed you will stagnate horribly as a person.

>referring metaphorical lines incorrectly
Is english not your first language?

Stay in s

>telling me to learn humility (something you cannot even learn) is an attack.
What is that supposed to mean? Cannot even learn humility? Humility is a state of one's view of themselves. Unless you genuinely believe someone cannot learn an idea of who they are.

They wouldn't be close to where they are today without the help of Hollywood luminaries such as George Clooney.

user, you're wrong. Just fucking stop. You aren't even disagreeing with me anymore in your posts its just baseless attacks.

Go find the source to prove I'm poor at english or fuck off.

You're misreading my statement then. The unless means that they will not go as far as they like.

They will not make another Muhammed episode ever again. Not uncensored upon delivery at least. That would be them continuing to touch their cocks. Comedy Central told them to stop touching their cock and they stopped.

My French isn't very good, do I understand the text on your pic correctly?

"They are armed, we're screwed, we have champagne!"

>Go find the source to prove I'm poor at english

Jesus you're at the point of creating a translation that doesn't exist.

"They have guns, fuck em, we have champagne."

I'm guessing your the same person who's just replied to another one of my comments after joining in later here.

Did you find that source? Because they didn't.

>getting mad at someone for not knowing French
user, chill your autism. Fuck learning humility, you need a therapist.

>TJ Miller

>Everybody was like, "What the f— are you talking about? You're on this successful show. Don't you want three more years of solid acting work and don't you want to be a famous television actor?" And I was like, "No, not really." I'd like to parasail into the Cannes Film Festival for The Emoji Movie because that's the next new funny thing that will make people laugh.

user, the word that you misunderstood just so happened to make my posting of that image completely antithetical to my post.

Nobody perfectly misunderstands something like that.

And the major problem with saying "Fuck learning humility, you need a therapist." or even the original "I suggest you learn some humility" is that it's something someone who needs to look into a mirror would say.

That statement automatically infers that you know the correct amount of humility a person should display. When the fact that you think you have a greater grasp on it inherently shows that you don't.

god TJ how can you be this.....dumb

And in that same interview he says:
>And so I thought it would be really interesting if suddenly they were able to rid themselves of him. If they had truly had enough of him, which is what they're always saying, then why wouldn't he just exit? What if they're really suddenly like, he's gone? Now what? Who does Richard have to complain about? Who is f—ing up their situation?

Pretty much how I characterized it.

Though, like I told the other user (given that you're quoting the other post you're either him or agree with him) that's beside the point. The reasoning is not what matters. It's the actual following through of a statement: "We do what I want or I walk."

>We do what I want or I walk.

What else did he want? After reading the interview it seems like he just thought his character had run its course. I don't see any reference to him wanting to do something, getting shot down by the network, and then leaving.

>If you wanted Erlich to be essential to the group, did you have any conversations with the showrunners, Mike Judge or Alec Berg, about possibly moving in that direction?

>No, because that was the joke.

Seems like he liked the character as-is, but was simply done with him

>"We do what I want or I walk."
That's not how running a show works, you idiot. There's a reason why TJ Miller is now this fucking clown people mock for The Emoji Movie and his behavior, because he was a retard who didn't understand compromise.

> And then the people that don't are like stupid f—ing websites like TV Overmind or something, and they're putting forth very reasonable, well-written logic for why this is so dumb and the only thing I'll ever be good at was this part in Silicon Valley. Yet none of them have seen Yogi Bear 3D, so they're all talking and chit-chattering and squawk, squawk, squawk — but none of them have seen Yogi Bear 3D. So they don't know that I've already done the best thing that I'll ever do. And because of that, there is no fear about any move in Hollywood for me. I'm just on the downslope. This is all a downward spiral, career-wise.

what the actual fuck TJ

I didn't say he shouldn't be. Just that Matt an Trey can't say there is no line they wont cross or that they'll have something "this season that'll get them cancelled."

There is no "them getting cancelled" as the network can just edit them before broadcast. Which they are fully aware of and complacent in.

This has been the point since my first post. That them saying that is bullshit. If it wasn't they would make another Muhammed scene and tell Comedy Central to show it or cancel them.

>Which they are fully aware of and complacent in
No, they aren't. Multiple anons have told you that they were against these edits. In fact, by making Comedy Central angry, they did in fact cross a line by going against their bosses. Therefore making every post you've made in this thread pointless.

>trying to talk sense into this retard
just stop, user

>they were against these edits.
And yet nobody has even attempted to touch:

>If it wasn't they would make another Muhammed scene and tell Comedy Central to show it or cancel them.

Very easy for them to put their foot down. If they're so against it, if they're so willing to write shit that'll get them cancelled, then do it. We know Muhammed got censored last time. If they truly want to rustle jimmies why not go to the subject that rustled their own by getting them censored?

Because they're complacent in it.

They literally never said that, you're misquoting and/or reading clickbait. Trey has said, multiple times, that they're ready to call it quits at any time if they're run out of town.

Nice movement of the goalposts

Unfortunately for you there's a large difference between doing whatever you want and not being afraid, and doing what you know will anger someone purely out of spite.

>still doubling down on these points
Flat-earthers are less stubborn and retarded, dude.

How have I moved the goalposts?

Not an argument.

>How have I moved the goalposts?
You absolute fucking retard.
>inb4 you bitching yet again about lines not being crossed

>How have I moved the goalposts
>you're retarded

this is how this exchange has gone the entire time.

Reminder:
user said:
>It's the foundation of the show. The first run of the show up until the South Park movie was all about being able to say whatever they want to say, and they were actually threatened with cancellation a couple times for going too far.

>Honestly ever since the proved that there are no lines they can't cross, the show has lost its sense of direction.

and I said:

>Them not showing Muhammed and going so far as to edit the previous episode miffed a lot of people who respected them for not giving a fuck. They should have said to CC "show him or we're done."

How you have gotten to mad to just continuously call me retarded I really don't know. Either you know someone who worked on the show are are just a pathetically obsessed fan.

There is literally no other reason to be so vitriolic to someone thinking them pulling the episode was a bitch move or that me thinking they're complacent in the censorship (as is shown in their own documentary 6 Days to Air in which they haggle for jokes to make it past censors) is so contemptible.

You're clearly on the spectrum and simply projecting that onto me. I don't know why.