South Park - "Imaginationland" Trilogy (Spoiler alert!) - GoFuckYourself.com

Redmanthatcould · 11-19-2007, 01:17 PM

The three episodes are numbers 163 (?Imaginationland?), 164 (?Imaginationland: Episode II?), and 165 (?Imaginationland: Episode III?). I could go on about how funny they were, and how they still push the envelope of what is acceptable?but I?d rather discuss the mind-fuck aspect of the series. I?ll try to not give too much away.

Let me start by reiterating that you should watch the 3-part South Park series before you read what I?ve got here. Without a doubt, these three episodes were the most sophisticated ones I?ve seen from them. That being said, it?s still South Park, so there are definitely certain themes you might not enjoy if you are not a fan?

--- SPOILER ALERT --- SPOILER ALERT --- SPOILER ALERT ---

It starts with Cartman claiming to have seen a Leprechaun, which Kyle is highly skeptical of. So Cartman makes a bet, which Kyle agrees to (by signing a contract), that if the Leprechaun exists, Kyle has to suck Cartman?s balls; if it doesn?t, Cartman owes Kyle $10. This was one of the underlying stories across all three episodes.

They end up catching the Leprechaun, and we find out the Leprechaun is from ?Imaginationland? and is trying to warn of a terrorist attack. So it goes, they travel to the universal place which all things imaginary exist. A terrorist group attacks this place with a suicide bombing. Imagionationland was setup with a division ? one side held ?good? characters/ideas, while the other held ?bad? characters/ideas ? which was divided by a wall. The terrorists break down the wall, which leads to our ?imaginations running wild?.

This is fucking brilliant. Terrorists attacking our imagination?come on?that is genius, admit it! The government then gets involved, and the Supreme Court rules that because our imagination is not ?real?, the military can nuke this ?land? without having to go through Congress/government. I skimmed over a lot of the story, because this is as much as I need to interpret the idea of ?imagination?.

As to not get into a semantic argument, you need to be OK with the fact that it is universally accepted that things we can?t ?call for? in the real world, might ?exist? somewhere else. Feel free to believe in God, love, and Santa Claus; but understand that they all have the same property of no-worldy-impression. Other concepts seem to have an impression in the world, but can still fall into the same category; you know what a unicorn is, and we can see/use it at our leisure, but the idea of ?unicorn? can only be called for from our minds. If you are OK with this so far, then read on.

The episodes sparked some really interesting ideas; none of which I claim to have answers to, but I will play devil?s advocate, to stimulate some thought.

Is there a ?realm? that exists, that houses our general imagination? Ideas like Santa Claus, love, God, cartoon characters, etc., don?t ?exist? in the world, but we can all think about these topics?so where do we ?call for them?? A unique position that Kyle brings up, is how ?real? these objects/ideas are. The thought is they ?exist? by transcending time; meaning they have been ?around? before us, and will seemingly be ?around? after us. So are these ?imaginary? objects/ideas real? Are they more ?real? than us, since they ?exist? long before and long after we do?

Another semantic argument will come up as far as what is meant by ?real?, and ?exist?. It is tough to explain, especially since they require context (i.e.: real how? Exist where? etc.). These can be very tough roadblocks to get past, but the main thought is?where does the imagination reside, and is there a general/universal ?imagination? that is more real than humans themselves?

There are some ideas from number theory and metalogic that can *help*, but I don?t think they necessarily apply. The thought is numbers exist somewhere that does not rely on human interaction; calculus would be calculus with or without humans.

Would God, love or Santa Claus still be God, love and Santa Claus, with or without humans?

BOSS1 · 11-19-2007, 01:21 PM

did not have time to read your essay but it was super funny and like any piece of art interpratation is dependant on the observer

the real magoo · 11-19-2007, 01:23 PM

just watch the fucking thing here
http://www.stansdad.com/season11/episode10/

dav3 · 11-19-2007, 02:34 PM

I loved that trilogy. The SP writers are truly genius.

D · 11-19-2007, 02:46 PM

Was a great trilogy.

Those woodland critters are just _so_ wrong.

D · 11-19-2007, 02:49 PM

GigoloMason · 11-19-2007, 03:26 PM

Aww we can't just kill her... Let's pee in her eye socket!

madfuck · 11-19-2007, 03:28 PM

Wow that is funny and i guess somewhat funny in way it is an alright show

fuzebox · 11-19-2007, 04:08 PM

To be honest I'd rate it quite low on the south park humor scale, by the time the third episode was playing all i wanted was for it to end so they could start with a new idea. With the exception of man-bear-pig, none of the jokes were that funny to me, and i'm a huge SP fan. Shrug.

flowereater · 11-19-2007, 05:24 PM

manbearpig is funny and gore lol

rapmaster · 11-19-2007, 06:23 PM

It was good but I think their other multi-episode stories were better.

gandalfuy · 11-20-2007, 07:05 AM

i just love south park!

Forest · 11-20-2007, 07:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by flowereater

manbearpig is funny and gore lol

IM SERRRRIIIIIIAAAALLLLLLL

gornyhuy · 11-20-2007, 07:41 AM

I was kind of disappointed actually... It had great potential and some great moments, but it didn't rate up with some of the brilliance of the past 2 seasons.

Enemator · 11-20-2007, 08:02 AM

I think you should get out more....

just a punk · 11-20-2007, 08:38 AM

The Imaginationland Trilogy is one of the best South Park series IMHO.

Stephen McTowelie · 11-20-2007, 08:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BOSS1

did not have time to read your essay but it was super funny and like any piece of art interpratation is dependant on the observer

My thoughts exactly great trilogy though ! I liked seeing jesus there lol

Oh and cartman's woodland critters are funny but way fucked up.

fuzebox · 11-20-2007, 09:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gornyhuy

I was kind of disappointed actually... It had great potential and some great moments, but it didn't rate up with some of the brilliance of the past 2 seasons.

This is how I felt also.

Scott McD · 11-20-2007, 09:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the real magoo

just watch the fucking thing here
http://www.stansdad.com/season11/episode10/

Cheers !!!

Redmanthatcould · 11-20-2007, 11:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gornyhuy

I was kind of disappointed actually... It had great potential and some great moments, but it didn't rate up with some of the brilliance of the past 2 seasons.

I looked at it from the perspective of comedy + philosophy... which is why I found it to be pretty excellent. I've seen much funnier SP episodes, of course, but I haven't seen many as funny and thought-provoking as this trilogy.

Skillz Unlimited · 11-20-2007, 12:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fuzebox

To be honest I'd rate it quite low on the south park humor scale, by the time the third episode was playing all i wanted was for it to end so they could start with a new idea. With the exception of man-bear-pig, none of the jokes were that funny to me, and i'm a huge SP fan. Shrug.

What he said.

uno · 11-20-2007, 02:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Forest

IM SERRRRIIIIIIAAAALLLLLLL

I still don't get why he says that in the cartoon.

Just Mike · 11-20-2007, 03:07 PM

jeff

great essay. I totally think you are on to something. I had a few less philosphical thoughts as to what they were trying to really say but I think you hit the nail on the head

All in all the SP trilogy was a 7 out of 10 for me. I loved the woodland critters coming back that was my favorite as well as the seeing all the random childhood charachters from imagination land. anyone else see HR PUFF n STUFF LOL

11-19-2007, 01:17 PM	#1
Redmanthatcould Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 2,771	South Park - "Imaginationland" Trilogy (Spoiler alert!) The three episodes are numbers 163 (?Imaginationland?), 164 (?Imaginationland: Episode II?), and 165 (?Imaginationland: Episode III?). I could go on about how funny they were, and how they still push the envelope of what is acceptable?but I?d rather discuss the mind-fuck aspect of the series. I?ll try to not give too much away. Let me start by reiterating that you should watch the 3-part South Park series before you read what I?ve got here. Without a doubt, these three episodes were the most sophisticated ones I?ve seen from them. That being said, it?s still South Park, so there are definitely certain themes you might not enjoy if you are not a fan? --- SPOILER ALERT --- SPOILER ALERT --- SPOILER ALERT --- It starts with Cartman claiming to have seen a Leprechaun, which Kyle is highly skeptical of. So Cartman makes a bet, which Kyle agrees to (by signing a contract), that if the Leprechaun exists, Kyle has to suck Cartman?s balls; if it doesn?t, Cartman owes Kyle $10. This was one of the underlying stories across all three episodes. They end up catching the Leprechaun, and we find out the Leprechaun is from ?Imaginationland? and is trying to warn of a terrorist attack. So it goes, they travel to the universal place which all things imaginary exist. A terrorist group attacks this place with a suicide bombing. Imagionationland was setup with a division ? one side held ?good? characters/ideas, while the other held ?bad? characters/ideas ? which was divided by a wall. The terrorists break down the wall, which leads to our ?imaginations running wild?. This is fucking brilliant. Terrorists attacking our imagination?come on?that is genius, admit it! The government then gets involved, and the Supreme Court rules that because our imagination is not ?real?, the military can nuke this ?land? without having to go through Congress/government. I skimmed over a lot of the story, because this is as much as I need to interpret the idea of ?imagination?. As to not get into a semantic argument, you need to be OK with the fact that it is universally accepted that things we can?t ?call for? in the real world, might ?exist? somewhere else. Feel free to believe in God, love, and Santa Claus; but understand that they all have the same property of no-worldy-impression. Other concepts seem to have an impression in the world, but can still fall into the same category; you know what a unicorn is, and we can see/use it at our leisure, but the idea of ?unicorn? can only be called for from our minds. If you are OK with this so far, then read on. The episodes sparked some really interesting ideas; none of which I claim to have answers to, but I will play devil?s advocate, to stimulate some thought. Is there a ?realm? that exists, that houses our general imagination? Ideas like Santa Claus, love, God, cartoon characters, etc., don?t ?exist? in the world, but we can all think about these topics?so where do we ?call for them?? A unique position that Kyle brings up, is how ?real? these objects/ideas are. The thought is they ?exist? by transcending time; meaning they have been ?around? before us, and will seemingly be ?around? after us. So are these ?imaginary? objects/ideas real? Are they more ?real? than us, since they ?exist? long before and long after we do? Another semantic argument will come up as far as what is meant by ?real?, and ?exist?. It is tough to explain, especially since they require context (i.e.: real how? Exist where? etc.). These can be very tough roadblocks to get past, but the main thought is?where does the imagination reside, and is there a general/universal ?imagination? that is more real than humans themselves? There are some ideas from number theory and metalogic that can help, but I don?t think they necessarily apply. The thought is numbers exist somewhere that does not rely on human interaction; calculus would be calculus with or without humans. Would God, love or Santa Claus still be God, love and Santa Claus, with or without humans?

11-19-2007, 01:21 PM	#2
BOSS1 Confirmed User Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Montreal / Sparta Posts: 4,331	did not have time to read your essay but it was super funny and like any piece of art interpratation is dependant on the observer __________________ NEW SITE: Stockings Kingdom Lesbians in Latex, Lesbians in Stockings, Granny Sex, BDSM Porn, Latex and Sex, Custom Foot Fetish, Femdom Movies and Kinky Porn Pass. 300+ hosted flvs, 500+ hosted galleries, Page Peel ADs.. NATS export and payouts twice a month

11-19-2007, 02:34 PM	#4
dav3 Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 7,348	I loved that trilogy. The SP writers are truly genius. __________________ Webmasters :: Juicy Ads :: ACWM :: Crak Revenue :: Money Tree

11-19-2007, 02:46 PM	#5
D Confirmed User Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: The Valley Posts: 7,412	Was a great trilogy. Those woodland critters are just _so_ wrong. __________________ -D. ICQ: 202-96-31

11-19-2007, 02:49 PM	#6
D Confirmed User Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: The Valley Posts: 7,412	__________________ -D. ICQ: 202-96-31

11-19-2007, 01:23 PM	#3
the real magoo So Fucking Banned Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: EU Posts: 1,637	just watch the fucking thing here http://www.stansdad.com/season11/episode10/

11-19-2007, 03:26 PM	#7
GigoloMason Confirmed User Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 742	Aww we can't just kill her... Let's pee in her eye socket! __________________

11-19-2007, 03:28 PM	#8
madfuck Registered User Join Date: Oct 2004 Posts: 2,032	Wow that is funny and i guess somewhat funny in way it is an alright show

11-19-2007, 04:08 PM	#9
fuzebox making it rain Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: seattle Posts: 22,112	To be honest I'd rate it quite low on the south park humor scale, by the time the third episode was playing all i wanted was for it to end so they could start with a new idea. With the exception of man-bear-pig, none of the jokes were that funny to me, and i'm a huge SP fan. Shrug.

11-19-2007, 05:24 PM	#10
flowereater Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 621	manbearpig is funny and gore lol __________________ designer badass ----------------------------------------- www.infectisites.com for bookings and design rates, contact [email protected]

11-19-2007, 06:23 PM	#11
rapmaster Confirmed User Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 1,576	It was good but I think their other multi-episode stories were better. __________________ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SIG_Sauer_P226

11-20-2007, 07:05 AM	#12
gandalfuy Confirmed User Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Montevideo, Uruguay. Posts: 4,686	i just love south park! __________________ I'm not back.

11-20-2007, 07:41 AM	#14
gornyhuy Chafed. Join Date: May 2002 Location: Face Down in Pussy Posts: 18,041	I was kind of disappointed actually... It had great potential and some great moments, but it didn't rate up with some of the brilliance of the past 2 seasons. __________________ icq:159548293

11-20-2007, 08:02 AM	#15
Enemator Confirmed User Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 1,252	I think you should get out more.... __________________ I live in your nightmares. I make you dream you're getting bumfucked by a razor blade only to wake up and find I gave your wife an enema and tube-fed you her shit.

11-20-2007, 08:38 AM	#16
just a punk So fuckin' bored Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 32,386	The Imaginationland Trilogy is one of the best South Park series IMHO. __________________ Obey the Cowgod

11-20-2007, 03:07 PM	#23
Just Mike Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: In a land FAR FAR away Posts: 3,726	jeff great essay. I totally think you are on to something. I had a few less philosphical thoughts as to what they were trying to really say but I think you hit the nail on the head All in all the SP trilogy was a 7 out of 10 for me. I loved the woodland critters coming back that was my favorite as well as the seeing all the random childhood charachters from imagination land. anyone else see HR PUFF n STUFF LOL __________________ EMAIL: [email protected] / ICQ: 56205262 AWEMPIRE