[29 July 11] Stan Larson?

This forum is founded on discussions about T Campbell's work (alone and with artist partners).

Moderators: Gisele, TCampbell

Re: [29 July 11] Stan Larson?

Postby Freemage » Thu Jul 28, 2011 9:35 pm

mindstalk wrote:Wouldn't Assistant Producer be exactly the right title? Producers being the people who provide the means for the film to be made. Aggie's Producer, Director, and Editor.

Re grenades, I thought Aggie didn't care that much about Stan.


Yeah, but Penny seems to care a lot, and so asking that directly in front of her pretty much guarantees that the other convo is coming to a full stop, at least until some fuming happens.
T. Campbell (yeah, HIM) wrote:If Freemage did not exist, it might have been necessary to invent him.

dianekikiula wrote:My sig is jealous of your sig now. :P
Valerie wrote:
I'm leaving Paps for you.
Freemage, do you have a fanclub yet, and can I please join?
User avatar
Freemage
 
Posts: 3606
Joined: Sun Jan 07, 2007 1:58 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: [29 July 11] Stan Larson?

Postby Alice Macher » Thu Jul 28, 2011 9:39 pm

NobodySpecial wrote:Lisa is probably working herself into a tizzy for nothing. Stan getting a title costs no one anything, and Aggie isn't that petty.

Granted, she probably will be giving Lisa all kinds of hell for her taste in men, but that's deserved, too.


I don't think it's Aggie Lisa's scared of. Penny :evil: hates :evil: Stan. She could well go ballistic over this. (And Lisa has borne the brunt of Penny's temper before, during the closing Macbeth performance, where she was similarly scared out of her skin.)
"Life doesn't wait forever." --Lisa Winklemeyer
User avatar
Alice Macher
 
Posts: 4416
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2010 4:57 pm
Location: Toronto

Re: [29 July 11] Stan Larson?

Postby Kamino Neko » Thu Jul 28, 2011 9:45 pm

And poor Aggie stuck in the middle.

Who will she choose? Girlfriend? Best friend? Try to mediate between them and suffer the wrath of both?
Can you hear me boy? Your devil is here!

Valerie wrote:You're in my harem, right? :oops:
User avatar
Kamino Neko
 
Posts: 2083
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 10:26 pm

Re: [29 July 11] Stan Larson?

Postby MeganKoumori » Thu Jul 28, 2011 10:15 pm

Image
Alice Macher wrote:I hereby found the new religion of MeganKoumorism. Bow down, ye faithful, and worship her!


MeganKoumori's Hunchback Fansite Here
User avatar
MeganKoumori
 
Posts: 649
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2007 1:55 pm
Location: IL

Re: [29 July 11] Stan Larson?

Postby jk9000 » Thu Jul 28, 2011 10:23 pm

NobodySpecial wrote:Lisa is probably working herself into a tizzy for nothing. Stan getting a title costs no one anything, and Aggie isn't that petty.

Granted, she probably will be giving Lisa all kinds of hell for her taste in men, but that's deserved, too.


Except I doubt Lisa is going to follow-up up the credit request with "ALSO: I've kinda been secretly boinking him for awhile now? Not relevant, just thought you'd want to know."
jk9000
 
Posts: 767
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2007 12:31 pm

Re: [29 July 11] Stan Larson?

Postby Aaron » Thu Jul 28, 2011 10:23 pm

Well it's not like they know LiStan (Stansa?) are banging. Why would anybody blow up over this? They'd probably be slightly annoyed they have to put Stan's name on the work, but really, I don't know why this is shit-fit worthy.
This is the only forum I go to where I don't have a pic for a sig. You can thank me later.
User avatar
Aaron
 
Posts: 71
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 10:35 am

Re: [29 July 11] Stan Larson?

Postby Black Cat Godess » Thu Jul 28, 2011 10:25 pm

*joins Tamar is reciting Kaddish.* Hey, if we get 8 more in here, this'll be legit.
Yo ho, yo ho, a pirate's life for me.
User avatar
Black Cat Godess
 
Posts: 128
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 6:50 pm

Re: [29 July 11] Stan Larson?

Postby JackFairy » Thu Jul 28, 2011 10:41 pm

Aaron wrote:Well it's not like they know LiStan (Stansa?) are banging. Why would anybody blow up over this? They'd probably be slightly annoyed they have to put Stan's name on the work, but really, I don't know why this is shit-fit worthy.


I don't even understand WHY Stan would want his name on the work. As Penny pointed out, this video is damaging if you ever want to work for any one of the companies highlighted there (or its subsidiaries). And Stan WANTS to be a corporate whore.

It would actually be kind of funny if Stan had no idea what the project really entailed and was just pushing for credit in his usual smarmy yuppie ambition way, only to later have it bite him in the ass.
JackFairy
 
Posts: 509
Joined: Thu Jan 11, 2007 12:37 am

Re: [29 July 11] Stan Larson?

Postby Arky » Thu Jul 28, 2011 10:43 pm

I guess if it's over 3 minutes long, there's more to Aggie's voiceover than the single bit we heard and maybe just maybe it isn't as cringeworthy as it seemed.

Or maybe it's 3:34 of cringe.

Or maybe she doesn't use the entire song.

OH LISA.

I wonder if Penny's one-time kiss with Stan will bubble to mind and cause her trouble right about now.
Arky
 
Posts: 391
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 4:16 am

Re: [29 July 11] Stan Larson?

Postby Alice Macher » Thu Jul 28, 2011 10:52 pm

jk9000 wrote:Except I doubt Lisa is going to follow-up up the credit request with "ALSO: I've kinda been secretly boinking him for awhile now? Not relevant, just thought you'd want to know."


Aaron wrote:Well it's not like they know LiStan (Stansa?) are banging. Why would anybody blow up over this? They'd probably be slightly annoyed they have to put Stan's name on the work, but really, I don't know why this is shit-fit worthy.


Thing is, why would Lisa be getting so apprehensive and scared right now, unless she were about to reveal precisely that she and Stan are FWBs? I'm 99% sure that's what this is about.

The question is, what would be Lisa's reason for doing so at this point? I see two possibilities: one, as some have already suggested, she's going to sacrificially divert Penny's and Aggie's attention away from an argument over the film itself. Or two, because she feels she can no longer keep her thing with Stan, or shouldn't have to keep her thing with Stan, a secret from her close friends.
"Life doesn't wait forever." --Lisa Winklemeyer
User avatar
Alice Macher
 
Posts: 4416
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2010 4:57 pm
Location: Toronto

Re: [29 July 11] Stan Larson?

Postby Sri » Thu Jul 28, 2011 10:55 pm

Alice Macher wrote:
jk9000 wrote:Except I doubt Lisa is going to follow-up up the credit request with "ALSO: I've kinda been secretly boinking him for awhile now? Not relevant, just thought you'd want to know."


Aaron wrote:Well it's not like they know LiStan (Stansa?) are banging. Why would anybody blow up over this? They'd probably be slightly annoyed they have to put Stan's name on the work, but really, I don't know why this is shit-fit worthy.


Thing is, why would Lisa be getting so apprehensive and scared right now, unless she were about to reveal precisely that she and Stan are FWBs? I'm 99% sure that's what this is about.

The question is, what would be Lisa's reason for doing so at this point? I see two possibilities: one, as some have already suggested, she's going to sacrificially divert Penny's and Aggie's attention away from an argument over the film itself. Or two, because she feels she can no longer keep her thing with Stan, or shouldn't have to keep her thing with Stan, a secret from her close friends.

Or she may just not want to lie if the conversation turns to, "Why are you talking to him? Why are you hanging out with him behind our backs?"
If men had wings and bore black feathers few of them would be clever enough to be crows. - Henry Beecher
User avatar
Sri
 
Posts: 139
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 9:28 am
Location: Inside my Head

Re: [29 July 11] Stan Larson?

Postby Alice Macher » Thu Jul 28, 2011 10:59 pm

Sri wrote:Or she may just not want to lie if the conversation turns to, "Why are you talking to him? Why are you hanging out with him behind our backs?"


Right, but it was she who just brought up his name in the first place. I'm wondering if she isn't maybe dissembling about Stan wanting an "assistant producer" credit on this...demo, and was basically seeking a way of seguing into the topic, rather than blurting out "I'M BOINKING STAN" immediately. But on that point I admit I may be reaching.
"Life doesn't wait forever." --Lisa Winklemeyer
User avatar
Alice Macher
 
Posts: 4416
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2010 4:57 pm
Location: Toronto

Re: [29 July 11] Stan Larson?

Postby retrophrenologist » Thu Jul 28, 2011 11:03 pm

JackFairy wrote:I don't even understand WHY Stan would want his name on the work. As Penny pointed out, this video is damaging if you ever want to work for any one of the companies highlighted there (or its subsidiaries). And Stan WANTS to be a corporate whore.

College application padding, would be my guess. And seriously, you really think that Nike (for example) will care about some obscure hobby-film that someone made in high school?
"I am the spirit that denies. All that you call sin and destruction-- or evil, if you will-- that is my proper element."
retrophrenologist
 
Posts: 1471
Joined: Fri May 22, 2009 12:37 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: [29 July 11] Stan Larson?

Postby maritza » Thu Jul 28, 2011 11:08 pm

It's not entirely impossible she could get hired with a demo like that. I guess she could be hired by a small company that caters to anti-mega-corporation feelings.

Just like there's companies that emphasize their "green" values, or sell organic products, or like to cater to nostalgia etc.

I don't see Aggie selling anything to yuppies. But her guerilla approach might work with selling things to the angry youth.

It's... hipster D:

Anyway, what was shown on the reel wasn't too promising. 500 hand-painted logos, that's a lot. But ultimately, not really that interesting.
Power Nap: Wake up and smell the FUTURE.

http://www.powernapcomic.com
User avatar
maritza
 
Posts: 175
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 12:27 am
Location: MX

Re: [29 July 11] Stan Larson?

Postby Drascus » Thu Jul 28, 2011 11:08 pm

JackFairy wrote:
Aaron wrote:Well it's not like they know LiStan (Stansa?) are banging. Why would anybody blow up over this? They'd probably be slightly annoyed they have to put Stan's name on the work, but really, I don't know why this is shit-fit worthy.


I don't even understand WHY Stan would want his name on the work. As Penny pointed out, this video is damaging if you ever want to work for any one of the companies highlighted there (or its subsidiaries). And Stan WANTS to be a corporate whore.

It would actually be kind of funny if Stan had no idea what the project really entailed and was just pushing for credit in his usual smarmy yuppie ambition way, only to later have it bite him in the ass.


Eh, the companies won't really care. And this is Stan we're talking about. If anyone ever brought up the content of that film he would say, "Oh MAN, yeah, those girls were crazy. I lent them my camera, and that's what came out? Man, talk about your early education into needing to control a director!" And then they'd all laugh and have another beer.
Drascus
 
Posts: 10
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2011 1:33 pm

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 4 guests

cron