Talk:Trapped in the Closet (South Park)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] "Sue you in England" fan art
I'll make this as clear as I can... England does have its own laws. There is no such thing as 'UK law' apart from legislation from Westminster. The common law in England and Wales is distinct and separate from the law in Scotland - this was a key factor of the Act of Union. Also, the reason he says "I'll sue you in England!" is because of rich businesses and people using the Commercial and other courts in England due to its long history of international dispute resolution involving a LOT of money, something which Cruise has a lot of.
--Naylor182 13:49, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
The flag behind Cruise in this picture is the flag of the UK, not the English flag.
People from the USA often make this mistake. England is not the UK.
Then again, when Cruise said "I'll sue you in England", any action would have to be under UK law since England doesn't have its own laws. So maybe the image is correct?
- See above, --Naylor182 13:49, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
Thoughts? 81.5.150.113 10:21, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
- First, you are absolutely right: the image behind that of Cruise is the Union Jack, and indeed, England is not synonymous with the UK, as it is one of the United Kingdom's components. As for the "England doesn't have its own laws" bit, I don't know, but it seems to me that they do. Isn't there something called "English common law"? But I don't know for sure. -- Jalabi99 11:44, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
- See above, --Naylor182 13:49, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
English common law has a historical basis. England is part of Britain, it is not independant. It has similar power to the states in the united states. It's flag is a white background with a red cross. This is an encylepeida people, use it.
- It does not have similar powers to US states, as the USA is a federal state and the UK is unitary. England itself has as much powers as its constituencies. There is no such thing as an 'English' Parliament, so you're not correct.
It's called an encyclopedia. Maybe take some of your own medicine?
I know I'm being pendantic, but it's called the Union Flag. Also, England and Wales have different laws to Scotland. Sierra 1 20:30, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
- Don't you mean pedantic?
[edit] Song Lyrics?
Any chance of adding the lyrics from the R.kelly/cruise/travolta duet?
I think it may be valuable to note that Chef has been absent from -all- the recent episodes, not just this one. The trivia note is unneccesary.
- He was also more conspicuously absent in the Super Best Friends episode that made a more vague parody of Scientology, and Chef was the protagonist in Timmy 2000 where he fights against the use of Ritalin (the elimination of all psychiatric medication being a main goal of Scientology) so it looks like a pattern to me. --Wingsandsword 19:57, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Butters
The fact about Butters not being in this episode should either be altered or taken off. Butters appeared in the episode, "Ginger Kids," though only for one scene for a few seconds. He told Kyle he thought his speech was very informative.
-
- Good catch. I'm going to add that to the Ginger Kids article. Rast 21:11, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
[edit] President of Scientology
I'm don't know if the President in the episode was meant to be David Miscavige (picture at [1] ). If there is a resemblance it is pretty vague. Also, his title is Chairman of the Board of Religious Technology Center. Not that I think that there's anything wrong with the wiki-link, just pointing out that the character in the show probably isn't based on David Miscavige. Rast 01:17, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
- Well, job titles aside, Miscavige is the leader of Scientology, so he's probably who that character was (loosely) based on. I put it in because I think a link from the nameless fictional leader to his real world counterpart was warranted. --Wingsandsword 02:50, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
-
- I thought it odd that, unlike other South Park parodies, they stuck to everything very well (even the personality test[2]); which went beyond the normal social commentary and into quasi-documentary territory. But not to make fun of Miscavige was a missed opportunity. Should it be mentioned that the news media was following this episode and the fact that Matt and Trey were (supposedly) more nervous about this episode than others because of the litigious nature of the organization (thus Stan challenging them to sue him and the John and Jane Smith's in the credits)? And has anyone heard Scientology "comment" on the episode? Or do they want to avoid the publicity on this one, keeping in mind the fact that the OT-III doctrine has been ruled fair play in courts? Khiradtalk 05:34, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
-
-
- "But not to make fun of Miscavige was a missed opportunity" As far as I know, Miscavige isn't much of a target compared to Elrond Hubbard or Scientology in general. Rast 17:24, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- I'll agree with that, Miscavige has quirks and a reputation that could be subject to satire, but it would be a pretty obscure to most people watching the episode, they probably wanted to keep the focus more on shedding light on what Scientology really does/believes than making fun. Just like they didn't make up stuff that they didn't believe in, they also didn't want an ad hominem attack to derail things. Personally, in terms of missed opportunities I just wish they'd mentioned that in the Xenu tale, Psychiatrists were the ones who helped Xenu do all this, explaining why the CoS hates them and it's the "real history of psychiatry" Tom Cruise alludes to in his infamous rant. --Wingsandsword 19:59, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
-
-
- I was thinking maybe it was supposed to be Heber Jentzsch. Isn't he - officially - the President of the CoS? [3] (Entheta 22:24, 26 November 2005 (UTC))
[edit] Link
I added a link to the episode from passionofcruise.info. It can also be found at xenu.net. It is my understanding that Matt and Trey support fair use of their episodes being downloaded. If this is somehow in conflict with WP standards please do take it down and accept my apologies. Khiradtalk 05:34, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
- ([4]) The official site says "Matt and Trey do not mind when fans download their episodes off the Internet; they feel that it’s good when people watch the show no matter how they do it.". --Wingsandsword 19:59, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
_yes, but they've noted the legal problem with this.
[edit] Trivia
Kyle, Kenny and Cartman actually appear in two scenes in this episode. The first is the opening scene and their second appearance comes roughly halfway through, as noted with the "Stan, I just want you to know that I still hate Kyle more than you." quote. I'll fix the "one" to "two" accordingly.
I think it would be interesting to add that when aired in New Zealand it was followed directly by the song Trapped in the closet.
[edit] Personality test questions
The article states that Many of the questions given to Stan during the personality test are from the popular UNICRU automated interview system used by many job applications including Home Depot, Albertsons, Hollywood Video, Blockbuster, and Wal-Mart.
I have never seen that test, but if I remember correctly, the question in the episode are taken from the OCA personality test that the Church of Scientology uses. Can someone confirm this, or can someone who is familiar with both the OCA and this UNICRU test comment on this? (Entheta 18:21, 14 March 2006 (UTC))
- It's from the test. A copy of the test is at [5], and the questions Stan was asked was on it. Furthermore, Scientology has a site where you can take the test online (after filling out a lot of forms) at [6], if you want it directly from them. --Wingsandsword 18:29, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Point of Debate
This episode will reportedly not be shown on the UK channel Paramount Comedy 1, as it is believed that Tom Cruise has threatened to sue. [5] This threat was alluded to in the episode itself when Cruise shouted at Stan "I'll sue you in England!" Great Britain has much stricter laws regarding slander and libel than the United States.
Shouldn't this be the other way around? English law on libel favors the plantiff, the one making the accusation of libel, while in United States puts the burden of proof on the accuser to prove defamation. Many recent libel cases have been done through the English High Courts for this very reason, including Tom Cruise's libel cases and the David Irving vs. Deborah Lipstadt and Penguin Books. --YoungFreud 23:01, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
- You make a good point! I have changed Glen Stollery C T 08:31, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
We do need more information about why this episode has not been broadcast in the UK in the article. Atomic1609 19:23, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Scientology Template
Presumably, visitors to this page will be interested in other articles on Scientology and the related controversy. Does anyone else think Template:ScientologySeries would be good here? --Davidstrauss 02:47, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
I had added it, but someone removed it. -User:Sorry about your dog 01:37, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
- I added it back in. It's on the template, so it's a bit ridiculous to have the template not included in an article it links to.-- The ikiroid 00:25, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Scientology "lock in the closet" source
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Library/Shelf/wakefield/us-11.html
Think this'll do? TigerDigm 16:13, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Is the rerun reedited?
I'm wondering if this episode's second run was reedited or whatnot like the way they reedited "Passion of the Jew"--not having a copy of the original broadcast to compare it with, I can't really be a good judge of this. Sweetfreek 04:47, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
- I don't believe so- I saw it first run and I've seen it since, I didn't notice anything conspiculously absent. -66.226.105.98 07:01, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] R. Kelly bit
Needs to be changed somehow, all I got from it was that there's some in-joke I'm not aware of. --Aioth 07:55, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] GA Nomination on HOLD
I have placed this articles GA nomination of hold for the following reason(s)
- Lead section needs to expanded —The preceding unsigned comment was added by False Prophet (talk • contribs).
- Please be more specific; how should I expand it? What other topics should I write about? Michaelas10 (T|C) 16:06, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
- Expanded. Michaelas10 (T|C) 18:25, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks, I've passed this with the trust you'll fill in the missing ref tags i added in the into. Wikipedia's False Prophet holla at me Improve Me 18:58, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Anozinizng
Is this just a regular made-up word or a more specific reference? L. Ron Hubbard clearly made up lots of words, so it works as satire no matter what. But, interestingly, in Jon Atack's book on scientology, "A Piece of Blue Sky", there is a reference to thetans "not-is-ing" certain of their perceptions (so that they can get "game" or something). I wonder if anozinizing is some sort of intentional reference/corruption of this "word"? I noticed this correspondence while reading about the thetan in scientology here on Wikipedia. Does anyone have any insight into the meaning or genesis of anozinizing? -- Redpony 19:08, 16 Oct 2006 (UTC)
[edit] "controversy"
Look, that the episode made light of Scientology is a fact, and I didn't touch that. But that htis "caused controversy" among Scientologists is nothing but a quite self-explaining euphemism for the trivial fact that Scientologists don't like being mocked. IMHO this is a crystal clear case of weasel words. -- 790 11:15, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
- Assuming you're referring to the section title of the same name as the title of your comment, can you suggest an alternative label to describe the negative responses and publicity surrounding the episode? --DavidGC 18:08, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] kelly
shouldnt there be a more clear reference to r kellys Trapped in the Closet ? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.159.169.175 (talk) 04:27, 7 December 2006 (UTC).