Jump to content

Singapore Sling

TSS Member
  • Content Count

    130
  • Joined

  • Last visited

5 Followers

About Singapore Sling

  • Rank
    Canonical lore

Profile Information

  • Interests
    Lil B
  • Gender
    Male
  • Country
    United States
  • Location
    Based World

Recent Profile Visitors

7237 profile views
  1. anal fucking rules

    1. KHCast

      KHCast

      Are you like new here or...? Lol

    2. Singapore Sling

      Singapore Sling

      shut the fuck up

    3. Blacklightning

      Blacklightning

      Really not sure how you thought this would go. Bye bye, I guess.

  2. Why is every Abridged series the source material but they just act incredulous about things?

  3.  Why is every Abridged series just the source material but louder.

    1. Ivo the Coldsteel

      Ivo the Coldsteel

      stop hating fun ugh

  4. People keep saying Paper Mario got dark and I legit have no idea what they're talking about. Granted I only played the first two. Did I miss something or is this just another "I interpret the vaguest sense of drama and bittersweetness as darkness" thing, cuz I remember Thousand Year Door even brought the fucking computer back to life.
  5. I watch gay porn in my garden shed.

    I lie to everyone that my father's dead.

  6. Watching Fox Kids like a stone cold badass.

    1. QuantumEdge

      QuantumEdge

      God, I remember that channel all those years ago.  Made me feel like I was seeing stuff I wasn't old enough for.  Terrific stuff. 

      Bring it back here Disney.

  7. So does genuinely adult stuff just really fuck you up, or?
  8. No, my point is that what you are defining and praising as having deep, dark themes are shows that explore their concepts with the intent of introducing their most surface level aspects to children. It's like the difference between Beast Machines and Caprica. Both shows are, effectively, about the same thing (cold, religious epic novels serialized across multiple episodes dealing with the trauma of immortality and reincarnation as two warring sides attempt to build a new afterlife). I happen to love both. But I would not, say, recommend Beast Machines with "Hey, you'd love this show, man, it's really dark." Because to an adult, it isn't. It explores its themes, concepts, and characters in a way that are streamlined, cleaned up, and approximated for a child. I happen to think it does so very well and is a well written show, but I would not push it as a particularly dark show in conversation with an adult because it is, by design, a softened, introductory version of its concepts. And the reason I bring up rape, torture, death, etc. as being vital in this context is because you are bringing up war stories. Voltron and Avatar are stories set during or against the backdrop of war. And you wanna know what happens during war? Rape, torture, death, blood, guts, people eating feces and whatever else. I was only bringing concepts to the table that your examples opened up. Because, no, as an adult, I wouldn't think to praise a wartime story for its darkness if it avoided the grand majority of visceral effects of war and made a point to have dorky, wide eyed and loud cartoon characters as its leads to soften the blow of its harsher elements. I would think that it could be praised for saying these things in a way a child can wrap their head around, but you don't seem to be doing that. And again, I adore Avatar. I happen to think Last Airbender and Legend of Korra are some of the best cartoons in recent years. I love both passionately. But Avatar: TLA is not a dark show. It takes certain concepts and, with a lot of sophistication and craft, streamlines and softens them so they can be an introduction to children about those concepts. So I don't really get the logic when you decide to say "No, see, Voltron and Avatar, are very dark, they deal with genocide!" But then you back pedal the moment works that actually, viscerally deal with the concept get brought up. It would be one thing if this was just "I think these are well written shows that introduce these concepts to children in a way they can handle." But your first instinct when questioned was to dig into how deep, how dark, how sophisticated they actually are. You were praising war stories for not being needlessly violent. War stories. Do you see the fallacy here? Your praising of dark children's material feels less like sophistication and more like there's something more prudish going on, here. Trying to talk to someone else like these shows actually have very deep, involving themes for adults is a misnomer: it is possible to enjoy children's media (as I do without reservation), and anyone should love what they love. You praised Voltron and Avatar for depicting genocide and then, in the exact same post, lamented the fact people associate darkness with violence. Do you see where an outside observer may find your priorities to be a little skewed, here?
  9. You know. I anticipated this exact response. This exact one. Almost to the letter. That's how predictable this issue is. Alright, let's break this down. But before I do, I should preface this post: there is obviously nothing wrong with enjoying media for children, regardless of what it is. I am a cartoon addicted gooberchild, and I also feel like current cartoons are written in a way that make them wonderful introductions to certain concepts for their target audience. Children are spoiled with thoughtful entertainment. That's not what this is. My specific beef is trying to parade your childhood loves like they're actually adult and deep all along, which is always full of utter garbage. This is also not, necessarily, an exact response to OP's post either. I think OP's off base thinking ANY aspect of Sonic could really come off as having a "dark tone", but y'know, credit where credit's due, OP's mostly asking about personal taste. They're not really insisting on some intellectual high ground. Yeah, dude, I guess I have to be the one to break it to you: these aren't dark shows. And yes, I have seen (and liked!) them. That's why I referenced war films when bringing them up; I was asking, as you praised these war stories for children, if you'd seen war stories like Grave of the Fireflies or All Quiet on the Western Front. Because I knew that Avatar and Voltron were, more or less, war or at least war adjacent stories. But we see how well that went. I have a lot to say about how you swerved around those two works, but I'll get to that later. It also says a lot to me that one of your "deep storytelling" techniques is just "Character development via conflict", as if this is somehow not the most bare bones, basic thing a story can do. Nothing you cite here is inherently darker than anything else because of one big thing: they are censored and approximated with children in mind. This is all done in a context where the child audience is directed to both acknowledge the presence of these things but to then be cushioned from its harshness with colorful characters, wacky asides, and goofy comedy. This is not made for "tonal balance", like you seem to think: this is specifically done because these concepts are being introduced to a child audience, and the conventional wisdom is that children require humor or general brightly tinted optimism to be able to cope with learning about harsher ideas. That is the purpose of this "good humor." It doesn't exist to create some kind of human element or some more "balanced" tone; it certainly can do that, but that's not the case here: these exist to make these concepts cushioned and censored for children. You know dark works that feature all the stuff you say Avatar and Voltron have, but are actually made for adults? Grave of the Fireflies. All Quiet on the Western Front. Men Behind the Sun. Philosophy of a Knife. Salo, or 120 Days of Sodom. Saving Private Ryan, which leans way more into inspiration porn territory (cuz, well, Spielberg) but still qualifies. Or novels like The Good Earth, The Grapes of Wrath. Stuff that wasn't designed to cushion its audience and instead presented the harsh realities of its subject with, well, a very harsh and visceral honesty that things like this deserve. As an adult, or, hell, even as a teenager or young adult, there is no good reason to insist you be coddled and cushioned in the same way an eight year old would be. I can't tell how interested you actually are in the subject matter of these shows, or if you're just thrilled that you can still watch shows made for children and found a way to make yourself feel more intelligent while doing so. I strongly disagree with this. Because when you say "most people", you're just thinking of other cartoon and comics nerds. I know when I, and plenty of other people, think of "dark" I think...well, stuff like David Cronenberg, Lars von Trier, Todd Solondz, and any murderer's row of creators like that. There's way more stuff out there than just your genre fiction, and not everyone has the same frame of reference you do when it comes to tone and its purpose. And y'know, you mention the dark age of comic books...but y'know, that stuff isn't really entirely bad. It is entirely possible to just have fun with things like that. I unironically enjoy the HBO Spawn cartoon and one of my favorite things it ever does is just adapt the Overtkill character, who is literally named Overtkill. Overtkill is a 90's action figure robot man the mob hires to kill Spawn. And his brief appearance in that show is one of the most amusing things I have ever seen. Sure, that sort of visceral, surface level fun is blazingly and unabashedly adolescent...but still loving kid's cartoons somehow isn't? It really sounds like, after all these years of fandom, the people who cling to their kid's cartoons as being genuine meaningful, dark explorations of the human condition are just really humorless. But that can't be right. Both of these films were designed to sell toylines aimed at a children. The Dark Knight, I would agree, is a very good movie and one of my favorite superhero movies in particular...but its entire superheroic thing really does round about to it being way more bittersweet, if anything, than most of the crime films it's taking inspiration from. It's still very much a superhero/pulp approximation of crime stories, making adjustments accordingly to somewhat soften the reality of its premise in favor of the fantastical. Likewise, The Empire Strikes Back is not only nothing a child can't handle...its renowned cliffhanger ending is the bare bones, basic ending that the old pulp serials Star Wars took inspiration from (after all, Star Wars began as an idea to adapt Flash Gordon). And those cliffhangers, that will-the-hero-get-out-of-this-one gumption were written for... ...wait for it. You see where this is going? Children. I mean, goodness, this is the cliffhanger that got immediately softened by a more wily Luke Skywalker and a surviving Han Solo because "Kids won't want Dead Han toys." That sort of pulp serial storytelling, with the heroes in perilous danger with seemingly no way out, is a massive, iconic staple of children's entertainment. Empire has a great cliffhanger, and is a great movie, but...I'd never call it dark. Never. Because it's not. It's a children's adventure story, with the classic ending that ensures you'll see the heroes again in their next story. You really sound like you just want basic drama, not actual darkness. It says a lot to me that you didn't address the actual war stories I'd presented to you and dove immediately into more genre fiction. I could get the Game of Thrones comparison at least, but your outright refusal to acknowledge anything outside of your genre bubble is the most telling to me. And yeah, The Last Jedi isn't "dark." I've seen it. I'd call it boring more than anything else, but I legitimately don't get how people think that movie is dark. I mean, there's a loud, obnoxious comedy beat like every seven or so minutes. It is a viciously jokey movie constantly undermining every single emotional concept it has. I can't speak for Batman V Superman, as I have not watched it, but...it's still a movie with Superman and Batman in it made for a mass audience with a merchandise base aimed at children. I would not be surprised if it was largely "child's approximation of dark", which, for whatever reason is the only kind of dark you seem to praise. The one that cushions and coddles you. And for the record, since you reference Saw, there're "torture porn" films that're thematically dense or meaningful that require that brutality. Martyrs (French version only) is a brutal, haunting story putting humanity to task for its obsession with the afterlife. The first American Guinea Pig film is an incredibly violent film with next to no "character development" but is a tonal art piece about the nature of religious redemption and how we rationalize how hatred for others in a way to maintain our moral integrity. Hell, there's a short film just called Elephant that is just a series of non-sequitor scenes of people being coldly shot in their day to day life that, with time, has only become frighteningly more and more relevant. All of these require blood, guts, and all those things you and other nerds like you seem to think are lesser or below you. Sometimes, it is absolutely necessary to do those things in stories, lest you risk losing the punch and power of your subject matter. So again, I ask. It's just a simple question: why do you want to be talked to like you're an adult, but censored as if you were a child, and why do you not think these two things are contradictory?
  10. This always feels like the most critical issue to me, as condescending and elitist I'm sure it comes across. There's some (childish) logic to wanting your childhood love to have some element of heavier storytelling or themes (the validation that you were right all along in what you gravitated to, that even as a younger child you were a discerning mind), but it's mystifying to me that the desire for something heavier manifests in "God I wish my childhood favorite would grow up" and not just...seeking other things. Then again, I was a morbid kid, morbid teen, and morbid adult: my idea of seeking out heavier material was less wondering if my kiddie shows were capable of it and more just plucking a Marquis de Sade anthology and diving in. And if Justine isn't pitch black, I don't know what is. I feel the biggest element of this conversation people feel the need to have over and over again is just the reluctance to move beyond their safety blanket. Which, if that's the case, how much do you really want or need darker material anyway? That being said, there're a couple comments in this thread that're nagging at me, and I'd like to explore them in more depth. So, here's a thought: what's...exactly wrong with wanting to be edgy? The show referenced in my sig, Jam, is a sketch comedy written largely to be provocative and surreal mostly for its own sake. Intentionally tapping into a surreal, dream-like id to simulate a specific experience and to experiment with tonal dissonance in order to seek the real boundaries of comedy. It has no real thematic aspirations beyond really picking apart what its audience may or may not find funny. I also think it's one of the greatest shows ever made. Or, hell, what about the exploitation films of the 1970's? Faces of Death, Mondo Cane, Goodbye Uncle Tom...a lot of these films required edginess as its ultimate goal because the entire point was to relish in the harsh realities of the real world to shock and horrify a more pampered audience. The edginess WAS the end that justified the means: sometimes a work of art can exist purely to serve as a wake up call to its audience. I happen to think the original Faces of Death and Goodbye Uncle Tom are masterful, brutal pieces of art. I don't think they would've been improved with tact, restraint, or a need to not be edgy. Sometimes, edginess can be vital: particularly in times of social unrest or change, and you need something visceral and overt to push some aspect of reality or your point into the public view. These shows aren't dark. Voltron: Legendary Defender is an introduction to war for children. Avatar: The Last Airbender approximates its themes for children. Have you seen a real war film? Like a real, genuine war film? Something like Grave of the Fireflies or All Quiet on the Western Front? Voltron and Avatar are nothing compared to those. And someone will inevitably say, "But Sling, they aren't designed to be like that." And, yes, that's basically my point. It just raises a question for me: if you're such a big SatAM fan, and you like the idea of darker material in your series...what is it about darkness that appeals to you where you seem to really enjoy it in the context of a show for children? Why do you like darker subjects being censored for you so it can be handled by a child? I'm not trying to insult you. I'm legitimately curious. But...that's just not true. At least, not the way you say it. What about profanity is inherently superficial? What about firearms is inherently superficial? You just present this as if it's an agreed upon fact, but it isn't. Profanity is a valuable, and powerful, tool of expression. There is an intensity to swear words that is not available in a lot of their synonyms: "damn" hits harder than "darn", and there's a reason "fuck" is the single most versatile word in the English language. The fact that profanity exists does not, in of itself, signal immaturity. I'd actually argue avoiding them is at least some sign of immaturity: a lot of their equivalents are designed, and here's that rub again, with children in mind; and most of the time, you try to avoid those words because you want to shelter children. I get that there's been this narrative in all ages kidvid fandom that artfully avoiding profanity or artfully dancing around needing to be visceral makes you more sophisticated: but some stories need that visceral element. To use a kid's show example, since that will probably be more familiar to the thread: Gargoyles absolutely benefited from the fact it was allowed to use real, actual guns rather than those "pesky laser guns" (to borrow Frank Paur's words) that other 80's and 90's cartoons had to deal with. GI Joe by contrast, a series about warfare and about soldiers, had absolutely no business being as sanitized as it was. Gargoyles committed to being a riff on cop shows, and while it obviously did not necessarily succeed as being an animated, urban fantasy Hill Street Blues, did absolutely feel like a better show simply due to the presence of firearms. (It also doesn't really dictate tone either way: goddamn Brave and the Bold had realistic firearms, and frequently in its more comedic episodes. They don't dictate tone in any conceivable way.) Which leads into my wider point. If you are doing a game about Shadow the Hedgehog's morality, there is no real reason not to have him bust a cap in a motherfucker. Sonic's entire character is about being pure id and wandering from place to place purely for the sense and thrill of adventure. If you want to do a game that tells a story about Shadow, who is theoretically a darker foil to Sonic, it does make sense that the content of his story would get a bit gnarlier. As much as I joked about it in another thread...yeah, sure, what exactly is wrong with a game about Shadow that happens to use real life firearms and profanity? Why do these, or rather, "the use of them alone" indicate a lack of maturity? I would rather elements closer to reality be integrated in a story that is meant to be about paying closer attention to repercussions. Shadow the Hedgehog didn't do it very well. At all. But I don't really find them conceptually wrong, and I certainly don't see these two things as inherent signs of immaturity. Though Shadow the Hedgehog is such a hilarious b-movie of a game that hating it almost feels like someone just has a stick lodged as far up their ass as humanly possible. It is just fun in how goddamn serious it wants to be. I'll gladly take more cheesy dark. Give me that shit. Though that being said, I have no real interest in Sonic "growing up with me" or becoming "darker" in any conceivable way: if it were up to me, it'd basically be the Boom cartoon, but all the time. But I like the Pontac and Graff era stories more than most people. Sometimes superficially "dark" shit can be fun. It's possible to enjoy, say, a slasher movie that has no aim other than to have a couple teenagers die like idiots in the woods for nothing other than the amusing nature of it. Something being superficially brutal and vulgar is not inherently bad, nor does rejecting this make you any more sophisticated. And as for meaning...well, pleasantly surprising when it comes up on the rare occasions it does, it's not really what I go to Sonic for. As I told SatAM fans on Bumbleking back in the far off, prehistoric hellscape of 2015 or so: If you want a dark story about animals and a political uprising, just read Animal Farm. There's even a cartoon! Very much so.
  11. How are we defining "dark"? Because I wouldn't consider most of the things cited in this thread as dark in any capacity, or not frequently enough to warrant defining them by this tone. If your definition of dark is "serious but censored and approximated for a child", I think there're bigger things worth discussing than whether or not Sonic should follow that suit. This is a serious question, by the way. This is a topic and subject that's kind of near and dear to my heart, and I (generally, but not exclusively) vastly prefer darker stories over lighter ones, but I frequently feel like fandom doesn't really understand what they're talking about...usually because they don't have a lot of exposure to different varieties of art and stories. If you're citing Nickelodeon or children's cartoons as your immediate frame of reference for dark themes, maybe you're not really wanting darkness. You're asking for heavier concepts...but filtered and censored for a child, even though theoretically you're an adult (or, I suppose, a teenager bare minimum). That's somewhat troubling. So, yeah. How are we defining "dark"?
  12. miles "ho tendencies" prower

    1. Wraith

      Wraith

      This is my favorite post on this site

    2. VEDJ-F

      VEDJ-F

      Damn man, look at them hoe tendencies. 

      wallpaper_101_tails_07_pc.png

  13. Singapore Sling

    Positive Things About Forces?

    I'm not trying to be obtuse but you really could say that about nearly every 3D Sonic game.
  14. Singapore Sling

    How has Sonic Forces affected your opinion of Sonic Team?

    That situation isn't even remotely the same. Tails's story is about becoming his own person and defining himself by being inspired by Sonic, but not defined BY Sonic. The scenario I'm proposing is continuing Shadow's arc of contrasting the idyllic past with the more confusing, ambiguous future: if we have direct flashbacks to Shadow's past, what exactly is so off about using Classic Sonic for flashback levels? It certainly fits, and even further fits the nostalgic tone of Shadow's flashbacks (and hell, why not make a cute Classic Shadow for those flashbacks too, if only to emphasize his innocence in the face of tragedy). Tails's story is about becoming his own man, which really has nothing in common with Shadow's story in SA2, which is about him staying true to how he is defined by the wishes from his best friend. They are, quite literally, the exact opposite story.
×

Important Information

You must read and accept our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy to continue using this website. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.