The director of the movie "You're Next" applauded this 'homage'.

So wonderful

The Simpsons’ couch gag has become a great place for innovative filmmakers and artists to show off their take on the iconic nuclear family and the many denizens of Springfield. From the creators of Rick And Morty, to Don Hertzfeldt, Guillermo Del Toro, John K., and many others, all have left their individual stamp on the opening of the classic show and its opening segment. Now another artist has thrown his hat in the ring, albeit unofficially, with a gruesome blending of The Simpsons with Adam Wingard’s film You’re Next.

Lee Hardcastle is an experienced stop-motion animator that has applied his craft to a segment in The ABCs Of Death, a mash-up of Frozen and The Thing, and even a music video for the group Gunship. Now Hardcastle has brought that same off-kilter horror sensibility to his proposed couch gag for Springfield’s first family with a possibly NSFW-ish (due to clay violence and gore) and fairly disturbing short. Hardcastle’s couch gag opens serenely enough before devolving into a home invasion pastiche just like You’re Next—much to the appreciation and applause of Adam Wingard himself. It’s unclear although unlikely that Fox will actually use this couch gag on screen, but maybe it will help boost Hardcastle’s chances for crafting a Treehouse Of Horror intro/segment.

>> ^bareboards2:

@shinyblurry, have you heard of "Blue Dog Democrats"? They are conservative Dems not much different from right of center Republicans. Obama had to get his own party together.
And the whole "individual mandate" thing came from Heritage Foundation ideas for how it could be done.
Obama started with single payer and ended up with this pastiche of ideas that is somewhat painful.
That is compromise and that is principle.
Republicans gutting the "death panels" from Medicare to make political points, when those "death panels" have been proven to 1) provide comfort to the family and the patient 2) after the patient dies, the survivors have much better mental health because they knew they were following their loved ones' wishes and 3) saves a buttload of money spent on unwanted-by-the-patient extraordinary measures. That is unprincipled.
I'm still mad about the "death panels." Putting political points before what is best for American citizens and American taxpayers. Shameful. Full on shameful.


So, basically what you're saying is, it was okay for Obama to leave the republicans out of the negotiation process, and that he is still a hero because he had to negotiate within his own party? Come on. That's not real compromise, and it certainly isn't real leadership. You have to remember that he promised to bring people together and reach across the aisle; yet when it came to his signature legislation, he took the low road, and that because he could. He was more than happy to leave the republicans out of the loop.

I don't have any comment on death panels because I haven't really researched the issue. By default, I don't trust the government to manage anything right, and certainly not my health care. I agree with the principle of small government, because big government is exponentially more corrupt than small government. In any human institution you will have corruption, because mans nature is inherently sinful. The more power you give, the more corrupt it will be.

@shinyblurry, have you heard of "Blue Dog Democrats"? They are conservative Dems not much different from right of center Republicans. Obama had to get his own party together.

And the whole "individual mandate" thing came from Heritage Foundation ideas for how it could be done.

Obama started with single payer and ended up with this pastiche of ideas that is somewhat painful.

That is compromise and that is principle.

Republicans gutting the "death panels" from Medicare to make political points, when those "death panels" have been proven to 1) provide comfort to the family and the patient 2) after the patient dies, the survivors have much better mental health because they knew they were following their loved ones' wishes and 3) saves a buttload of money spent on unwanted-by-the-patient extraordinary measures. That is unprincipled.

I'm still mad about the "death panels." Putting political points before what is best for American citizens and American taxpayers. Shameful. Full on shameful.

Feels a bit weak to do a Star Wars pastiche. One for the more dedicated I suspect.

>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:

I disagree. QT knows exactly what he is doing. Some of his films are dialog driven (Reservoir Dogs, Pulp Fiction, Jackie Brown) and some are genre and/or action driven films (True Romance, Kill Bill, Inglorious Basterds). I have no doubt he is capable of writing another Pulp, and that one day he probably will, but for now he is doing high-art pastiche of the classic exploitation dramas he grew up with. This is not to say that these action films are less good than his dialog films, they just have different aesthetic criteria.
He is much like Speilberg in this way, if polar opposites in dialog and style. Speilberg has his serious movies, and he has his homages to the serial action films of his youth.
Prediction: Eventually Quentin will eventually get his fill of action films and create another magnum opus, and likely get himself an Oscar in the process. I would absolutely love for him to take his favorite film of recent times, Battle Royale, and make an American-culture-specific version - not a remake of the film, but a remake of the concept as it would occur if it played out with American high schoolers.
Also, comparing QT to Shayamalan is blasphemy. Even Shayamalan's best work was an average film with a great twist. Shayamalan has never shown even an ounce of the writing or directing skills that QT has. Take it back. TAKE IT BACK!!1!>> ^lucky760:
Win.
I no longer have any confidence Quentin will make another Reservoir Dogs- or Pulp Fiction-caliber film, and I've made my peace with that, but I will still eagerly await every one of his new projects with fervent anticipation.
(I just hope he never descends as far down as M. Night Shyamalan.)



I think even he knows he's lost something. Politely disagree, sir. *tip hat*

I disagree. QT knows exactly what he is doing. Some of his films are dialog driven (Reservoir Dogs, Pulp Fiction, Jackie Brown) and some are genre and/or action driven films (True Romance, Kill Bill, Inglorious Basterds). I have no doubt he is capable of writing another Pulp, and that one day he probably will, but for now he is doing high-art pastiche of the classic exploitation dramas he grew up with. This is not to say that these action films are less good than his dialog films, they just have different aesthetic criteria.

He is much like Speilberg in this way, if polar opposites in dialog and style. Speilberg has his serious movies, and he has his homages to the serial action films of his youth.

Prediction: Eventually Quentin will eventually get his fill of action films and create another magnum opus, and likely get himself an Oscar in the process. I would absolutely love for him to take his favorite film of recent times, Battle Royale, and make an American-culture-specific version - not a remake of the film, but a remake of the concept as it would occur if it played out with American high schoolers.

Also, comparing QT to Shayamalan is blasphemy. Even Shayamalan's best work was an average film with a great twist. Shayamalan has never shown even an ounce of the writing or directing skills that QT has. Take it back. TAKE IT BACK!!1!>> ^lucky760:

Win.
I no longer have any confidence Quentin will make another Reservoir Dogs- or Pulp Fiction-caliber film, and I've made my peace with that, but I will still eagerly await every one of his new projects with fervent anticipation.
(I just hope he never descends as far down as M. Night Shyamalan.)

Been saying it for years: indie is shit. It is pastiche pop art, meaning it's inherently derivative. Ironically, musicians and fans of indie fancy themselves counter-cultural (hipsters) when all they've managed to do is raid their parent's record collection and grandparent's wardrobe. Furthermore, there needs to be a moratorium on the following instruments: glockenspiel, celesta, toy piano, or any other bell like instrument. These are staples of the indie diet and they make any track INSTANTLY sound like a Target commercial. I could go on but indie will be dead and gone before I'd finish the rant.

I'm sure Mr. Tarantino did most of these on purpose. It's top shelf pastiche.

>> ^blankfist:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_ridicule


This isn't ridicule, it's more of a pastiche or homage. I've had this conversation with you many times.

Simplified argument:
Assumptions cannot be used as evidence of themselves. That's called begging the question and is a logical fallacy.

Can't remember the last time somebody said 'pastiche' to me. Wunderbar!

In reply to this comment by hpqp:
They even did a pastiche of the music, how sweet!

They even did a pastiche of the music, how sweet!

One thing I've been reading, the further away from political blogs, and deeper into actual medical and economic experts has been that mostly they think the issue has to do with incentives.

People talk about how it's a bad thing that doctors get paid to "do stuff" rather than provide good outcomes. Likewise, insurance companies have every incentive to deny coverage, since paying for coverage is essentially pure loss to them. This has led to a really awful pastiche of common practices and regulations all designed around trying to provide tweaks to the resulting issues (e.g. covering preventative care) that ignore the root problem with incentives.

It's something I'd really love to see be a central part of the national discussion -- how to get everyone's incentives right.

I keep wishing we lived in a universe where something like Brad DeLong's proposed health care system could be something on the table.

It seems to me like such a plan could actually achieve a bipartisan support (or at least could simultaneously be appealing to people from both the right and left). I'm a bit annoyed that most of the real debate in this country isn't about policy even in the slightest, instead it's just some giant propaganda war.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

This is edited so damn well I forgot that it was cobbled together pastiche. I expect big things for this post.

You know, I do remember hearing something along those lines, but I haven't ever watched it dubbed. Mononoke-hime is actually possibly my favorite Ghibli (that or Grave of the Fireflies...SO SAD), so I guess I ought to upvote anyway lol.

In reply to this comment by smibbo:
the English version of "Princess Mononoke" was not a dub, it was rewritten by Neil Gaiman especially for American/English audiences with the supervision of Miyazaki. It had American and British stars and while not at all a different film was much more than a dub. I know because I own both the subtitled original and the reworked English. THe reworking is just as excellent as the original.

In reply to this comment by JAPR:
I don't vote for dubs as a general rule.

the English version of "Princess Mononoke" was not a dub, it was rewritten by Neil Gaiman especially for American/English audiences with the supervision of Miyazaki. It had American and British stars and while not at all a different film was much more than a dub. I know because I own both the subtitled original and the reworked English. THe reworking is just as excellent as the original.

In reply to this comment by JAPR:
I don't vote for dubs as a general rule.