Blogs > Cliopatria > On John Stewart and Team America

Oct 17, 2004

On John Stewart and Team America




I realized today that there is a clear link between Jon Stewart’s evisceration of the self-important “dicks’ (Stewart’s word) on CNN’s Crossfire last week and the brilliant “Team America: World Police,” the newest movie by Trey Parker and Matt Stone, the South Park folks.

And let there be no doubt about it. Stewart absolutely ate Tucker Carlson’s lunch. Wonkette has done the best job of the blogs of keeping this story up to date. You can watch the video in a number of formats from her site. Stewart is on the attack, and Carlson tries to get the upper hand in the argument by pointing out that Stewart asked Kerry softball questions. Stewart on more than one occasion had to point out that his show is on Comedy Central and that Crossfire is on CNN. It is withering, and Carlson is out of his depths (Begala was at least smart enough mostly just to stay out of the way).

In any case, you know how you can tell that Tucker Carlson got his head handed to him? He told Jon Stewart he was not funny. Even as the audience was laughing. Even as Carlson and Begala were laughing. Calling someone not funny when they are pretty clearly funny is to me a pretty clear sign that you’ve lost the debate.

This is where the link to Team America comes in. I saw the movie last night. It was great. Yes, it goes over the top sometimes. Yes there are things I do not think worked as well as others. Yes, there are lengths to which I would not have gone. But here’s the thing: That is the point of watching satire. You cannot simply say this is funny, this is funny, this is funny, but I draw the line here. Because others would draw the line elsewhere. Given my recent stands on gay issues, do I wish they had not played up the Film Actors Guild acronym joke quite so much? Of course I do. But I cannot say that I think it is hilarious to skewer Hollywood actors but that you can go too far, and then for ,e to have the arrogance to assert where that line ought to be. Their whole point is to go too far.

So where do I get to the connection between the South Park/Team America guys and the Stewart interview? As I do with most newly-released movies, I’ve gone and read many of the reviews, including fan reviews, and one of the refrains from people who hated the movie was that it either was not funny or that it was not intelligent. Let’s let that latter criticism pass without much comment: I’ll toss my intellect out there with any of the online posters who gave it one star. And I know few things in this world, but I know Tom Bruscino is going to love this movie, and he does not need anyone’s stamp of approval for smarts. Under the movie’s intentional façade of dumbness is a whole lot of smart, stinging commentary, whether one likes that commentary or not. But let’s also be clear: This movie is not only funny, it is hilarious. Sure, there are groanworthy moments, but here is one bit of advice: Don’t go to see “Team America” if your other option that night is to rent “Citizen Kane.” This is a raunchy, randy, gross, scatological, offensive, violent, rude, crude, juvenile movie. But, you know, with puppets. It is not for everyone. But it is funny, and it is smart.

My own take on the politics of this romp? Everyone of late wants to claim Parker and Stone as their own. Andrew Sullivan was the first person I saw use the term “South Park Republican” to describe what he perceives to be their politics. But I do not see the link that clearly. I have seen every episode of “South Park,” some of them dozens of times. I have repeatedly seen the South Park movie, which was inescapably brilliant. I do not buy the view that these guys are conservatives per se. They have a huge libertarian streak in them. And their libertarianism skewers anyone who wants to encroach on their rights, anyone who posits themselves as guardians of propriety. They also understand that there is evil in the world and that sometimes it must be stopped. But I am not prepared to yield that ground to conservatives or Republicans. For one thing it would be factually and historically inaccurate. For another I think it would miss the whole point of Stone and Parker, who hardly make today’s military and political leadership out to be brilliant or heroic, and who do not quite seem wholly sympathetic to the current political climate. By their own words, this movie is far more about making fun of Hollywood than it is about politics. Their interview in the newest Entertainment Weekly tackles these questions explicitly (including their own assertion that Crossfire sucks) and while the full text of that interview is not online, this is. That seems about right. These guys are subversive. They may well vote Republican for all anyone knows. But I think above all, their work is simply skeptical. It is certainly subversive, and in ways that most cultural conservatives surely would disavow, indeed loathe. Sometimes I do not agree with it. Sometimes I do. But I almost always leave laughing, scratching my head, or disappointed that it is over.

One other thing that has been bothering me. I have seen several reviews that have pointed out that the voice of Kim Jung Il sounds suspiciously like Cartman’s. These are reviewers who are poseurs. Yes, one can hear slight aspects of Cartman, as both the voice of Kim Jung Il and Cartman come from the twisted genius and voice repertoire of Trey Parker. But real South Park fans will note a closer resemblance between the voice of the North Korean dictator who is this movie’s baddie and the owner of South Park’s lone Chinese restaurant, who is in one episode recruited by the town to repel incoming Mongolian hordes by building a, um, Great Wall. Oh yeah – I think it should be fairly obvious that those of you who are sensitive might want to avoid this one. This is the most gloriously un-PC movie since, well, “South Park: Bigger, Badder, and Uncut.”



comments powered by Disqus

More Comments:


Derek Charles Catsam - 10/18/2004

Don --
I liked the Friedman piece once he got to the gist of it -- I thought the whole Cosby reference was clunky, to say the least, but once he hit his stride, it was provocative, partially because it was one of the few times he has drawn in his new globalization hobby horse in a way that I found compelling.
And I agree with your own conclusions in this vein. but you probably knew that.
dc


Don Graves - 10/18/2004

Derek (and others),

If you haven't read it already, take a look at Thomas Friedman's column in Sunday's Times. In the same vein as Jon Stewart's withering critique of the media about not holding our politicians' feet to the fire, Friedman makes the case for politician's to hold Americans' feet to the fire. Probably not something that will happen when candidates are so choreographed by the political parties, but you never know. I'm not naive enough to think we will ever see a candidate like a "Bill McKay" of any political persuasion win a national election. Still, it would be refreshing for a candidate to remind people of the reality that the U.S. is not the world leader in anything by birthright.


Derek Charles Catsam - 10/18/2004

David --
Of course now you'll probably hate it. But if you like skewering pretensions, this is the one to see!
dc


David T. Beito - 10/18/2004

Very interesting. You've redoubled my desire to see this movie at the first opportunity. One of my favorite South Park's episodes is the one that skewered mandatory diversity training.