Talk:Freakazoid!

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

Contents

[edit] "Whilst"

Will an admin change the 'whilst' in the Trivia section to 'while'?


Does it matter?

[edit] Show Creators

Does anyone have information on the shows creators?

Bruce Timm designed the main character, but left early in development. More importantly, is there any source for that Jim Carrey film version thing? I very much doubt it, so I'll remove it. --Nick R 21:31, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Fatman and Blubber Boy

In the episode titles, one of the segments is a mini-feature called "Fatman and Boy Blubber". However, in the show, it's "Fatman and Blubber Boy". Correction?

[edit] On removing Boogieman

I have no idea where the "Boogieman" thing came from, or how it persisted so long, especially with the nonstandard spelling. I can only think that the author meant Candle Jack. I got rid of it and put in some interesting celebrity cameos.


---I reccomend a finger with not-short nail.

The person may have been referring to the Booger Beast who was in a fraction of an episode (threatened Steph, but Freakazoid wouldn't have anything to do with him).

--Happylobster 18:19, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

for those who do not know, here is the booger beast
http://youtube.com/watch?v=5YqPIA70oh0&search=freakazoid%20
oh he makes a one second shot at the link below
http://youtube.com/watch?v=f6ccJEjncUU&search=freakazoid%20
--felinoel

[edit] Theme song

Do we really have a use for theme song here? It's admittedly nifty but rather cumbersome and serves no clear purpose. I'd be in favor of moving it here, haven't done it myself yet because I don't know everything. -- Kizor 7 July 2005 07:42 (UTC)

I honestly agree, it, along with the raw lists of characters, makes the page look terribly unprofessional and downright hackneyed. I'd say it'd be a good idea to move at least the theme song here, but I haven't been around Wikipedia enough to know if this sort of article is acceptable. CaptainSpam actually remembered to sign it this time 7 July 2005 15:20 (UTC)
It's actually not. We could quote bits and pieces, but a full duplication of the song is a violation of the copyright of the publishing company that owns it. --FuriousFreddy 10:48, 19 August 2005 (UTC)
I would venture to say that the whole of Freakazoid serves no clear purpose. Does that mean it doesn’t belong on television? —Frungi 05:32, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

*Ahem*. Out of general consensus, we have decided to remove the theme song from the article from the mentioned reasons. Because I am a dyed-in-the-wool inclusitionist, we have moved it here for those interested to enjoy. --Kizor 9 July 2005 07:32 (UTC)

Like several other cartoons produced by Warner Bros. around the same time (such as Tiny Toon Adventures and Animaniacs), Freakazoid featured a theme song which simultaneously explained the basic premise of the show and provided a good feel for the show's humor.

Super-teen extraordinaire
Freakazoid! Freakazoid!
Runs around in underwear
Freakazoid! Freakazoid!
Rescues Washington D.C.
Freakazoid! Freakazoid!
Unless something better's on TV
Freakazoid! Freakazoid!
His brain's overloading
It has a chocolate coating
Textbook case for Sigmund Freud
Freakazoid! Freakazoid!
Check out Dexter Douglas
Nerd computer ace
Went surfing on the internet
And was zapped to cyberspace
He turned into the Freakazoid
He's strong and super-quick
He drives the villains crazy
Cause he's a lunatic
His home base is the Freakalair
Freakazoid! Fricassee!
Floyd the Barber cuts his hair
Freakazoid! Chimpanzee!
Rides around in the Freakmobile
Freakazoid! Freak-azoo!
Hopes to make a movie deal
Freak-a me! Freak-a you!
He's here to save the nation
So stay tuned to this station
If not, we'll be unemployed
Freakazoid! Freakazoid!
Freakazoid!

The opening animation had occasional variations from episode to episode; for instance, sometimes the image of Freakazoid in a cage ("Freakazoo") would be replaced with a kazoo labeled "Free!" ("Free kazoo").



I see absolutely no mention of the theme song on the entire article. There should at least be some mention of it. For example, how long was the song, who wrote it, et cetera. Allixpeeke 19:31, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] EWJ reference?

  • Real quick question for anyone who can help: I seem to remember an episode of Freakazoid! where the narrator was acting very childish, and Freakazoid threatened to "replace him with the narrator from Earthworm Jim." Can anyone telll me which episode this is? Thanks in advance. --68.229.103.250 14:43, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Episode 2x07 - Freak-A-Panel, Tomb Of Invisibo. --Selcouth 00:41, October 30, 2005
  • Thanks so much! I finally got to see this episode again. However, next time you should sign your comment so I can PROPERLY thank you for helping me.--Bottles98 18:51, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Fixed. I was a wikinoob. Selcouth 20:51, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] bug?

"The computer bug that gives Freakazoid his powers is a reference to the Pentium FDIV bug."

What similarities does the bug that gave him his powers have with that bug? TastemyHouse 21:53, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

By bug, they mean computer glitch. It's a joke based on an early version of the Pentium chip which had a mathematical flaw in its logic, potentially creating unstable results. --Happylobster 16:17, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
Yes, but how would the computer bug that gave Freakazoid his powers be at all a reference to, specifically, the Pentium FDIV bug? It's a reference to computer bugs, obviously, as it SAYS it's a computer bug, but I haven't seen anything that seems to imply it's a reference to the FDIV bug itself... 24.67.253.203 04:02, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
It's almost definitely indirectly referring to the FDIV bug, since if I'm not mistaken, at the time this aired the Pentium Bug was a big thing in the mainstream press. Furthering this idea is that it was called the "Pinacle Chip" which is similar enough to "Pentium" for the joke to work in the era the episode was originally broadcast. -- Fortyseven 21:57, 5 February 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Freakapooch?

why isnt that dog included as a nuisance

--felinoel, sorry for my total nubeness this is my first time adding something

Assuming you're talking about Foamy the Freakadog, probably because he was only in one short. --Darksasami 20:53, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
yeah thats him, but according to that one episode, foamy has been on Freakazoid's "end" for quite a while now, check out the episode at the link below
http://youtube.com/watch?v=KgsDOmj8rCA&search=freakazoid%20
--felinoel


[edit] Freakazoid's weakness?

what about his weakness, why isnt that listed? lol it was a negatively charged graphite cage that freakazoid helped in making --felinoel

[edit] Kaufman

Why isn't Dexter Douglas or his voice actor, David Kaufman, mentioned here? I'd put it in myself, but I don't know where. 75.21.95.107 02:24, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Deadpool?

While the Madman influence is fairly plausible (and actually recognized by Madman's creator), the Deadpool_(comics) parallels seem somewhat of a stretch. Check out the dates of the two series: Freakazoid! began its run in 1995, and Deadpool's long-running self-titled series, from which much of his 'zany' character development stems, appeared in 1997. The Freakazoid! article seems to imply that Deadpool was a possible influence on Freakazoid!, though, if anything, it was the other way around. If we can find any articles, interviews or otherwise, dealing with this to justify it, that'd be good, but otherwise, it just seems speculatory?--Totenkreuz 17:09, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Candle Jack doesn't abduct people who say his na--

That's ri

Fine. We get the joke. Would whoever keeps vandalizing the Candle Jack entry in the enemies list please stop? It only serves to confuse the uninitiated, and doesn't belong in a reference wor-- Jay Maynard 11:29, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
Please It makes sense to do as its part of the character's job. Maybe have it be after the statement that he abducts people who says his name. Such as 'Of course Everyone knows Candlejack is a fa' Would that be better? it illistrates the joke better. --216.19.115.116 16:17, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
No. We understand the joke, but Wikipedia's purpose isn't to tell or even relay jokes. When we write about Sherlock Holmes, we note that Sherlock Holmes was a fictional character whose adventures were narrated by the equally fictional John H. Watson but were actually written by Arthur Conan Doyle. There are Holmes fans who enjoy pretending that Holmes and Watson were both real people, and that Conan Doyle's role was merely that of a literary agent for Watson. But we don't tell the joke, even if it's a funny joke; we tell the facts. -- Antaeus Feldspar 17:28, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
I agree. It's a funny joke, but this is an encyclopedia. I'm sure there's a FreakaWiki! or something like that out there where it would be welcome and appropriate. Also, whoever sent me a message telling me I have no sense of humor - please sign your name or log in so I know who to respond to. Besides, I do so have a sense of humor. Laugh with me, Jocko!--Gradient 17:36, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
I restricted this joke to the talk page because I agree with all that, and have not edited the page whatsoever. But it would be nice if the joke could be worked in in an encyclopedic way because it's all kinds of funny. -Insomniac By Choice 00:03, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
Funny, yes, but it has no place in an encyclopedia. I rewrote the line to make it a little less inticing to vandals (fat lot of good that did). EVula 04:48, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Just a heads up, I've submitted a request for protection. Funny the first time, not so much the hundredth. EVula 19:50, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

And now the article is protected. Huzzah! EVula 01:52, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
About damned time. Jay Maynard 03:28, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
I just mentioned this to a friend on IRC, and he told me it's a 4chan in-joke. That would explain the persistence and multiple sources for this bit of vandalism, and would suggest that the semi-protection needs to be kept around for a while. Jay Maynard 03:33, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
Figures. Oh well. I don't have a particular problem reverting all the edits, though it does get a bit obnoxious. *shrug* EVula 03:42, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
Candle Jack is awesome and Wikipedia editors are all humourless fa —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.149.14.182 (talk • contribs)
This is a reference work. It's not supposed to be funny. Jay Maynard 15:18, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
This is Wikipedia, it's not supposed to be taken seriously. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.10.184.140 (talk • contribs)
If we don't, who will? Jay Maynard 22:44, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
Why don't we just put the Candle Jack joke under Trivia, it's not like it ISN'T trivial knowledge, oh and Banjooie 04:12, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
Guys, this Candlejack stuff isn't funny. Please, just cu --Captain Cornflake 20:30, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
Why is everyone getting so upset over this Candle Jack business? It's just innocent fun. What harm could co-- —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.11.243.129 (talk) 17:09, 19 December 2006 (UTC).

Can we at least have an example, in a sentence, perhaps? Such as: "Candlejack? Why can't I say his na" —Preceding unsigned comment added by Budtard (talk • contribs)

It wouldn't make any sense to those not in on the joke. and the joke doesn't belong in an encyclopedia. It might belong in a 4chan wiki, but not here. Jay Maynard 16:31, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
It would make sense to anyone who has seen the show, and would be appreciated by fans of the series. Freakazoid! is an old show, and I doubt many people are looking it up without being familiar with the series. Stop being so stuck up, and just appreciate the humor that Candle Jack has to off- —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.11.243.129 (talk) 18:04, 4 January 2007 (UTC).
Even if it's an old show and 'everyone' should know it, you can't assume that. Someone could be trying to research, say, past work of Bruce Timm, and find what otherwise appears to be a errantly left out line in the description for Candle Jack. As a result, that person may consider the WP not credible due to poor editing or poor writing, and would then move on to another source. That's the last think WP wants. The whole "abducted mid-sentence" thing is fine for other wikis, particularly those that cover internet memes, but since the joke is only coming from one source (4-chan) and not a net-wide phenomena (like the Star Wars Kid), there's no point to include it, even if treating it in a serious manner. --Masem 18:10, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

As Banjooie said, I think it should be added in a trivia section. the Fresh Prince of Bel-Air's trivia section mentions the joke on its song. 70.176.175.77

If that can pass in the FP article, then it makes PERFECT SENSE to add information or reference to the joke under the trivia section. Honestly, we have more inane and obscure information in other articles, so policing this is tantamount to just asking for people to vandalize the article. If you can't give it a place of its own, then you get it out there the best way possible. That's how the free exchange of information works. Hell, the article has been vandalized so frequently that it's merit enough to add it to the article. Chronomaster 02:36, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
But it's not really a far reaching internet meme. In addition, we already have enough problems with the one line about CJ and vandalism, adding a second line is going to make it twice as worse. --Masem 02:58, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
And thus you're only exacerbating the problem by not making a clear resolution! By refusing to at least acknowledge its existence is to only cause more disruptions to occur. In other words, because of the amount of policing on this issue, people are only more determined to edit the article. If people were to constantly deny your existence, even though clearly you exist, wouldn't you make motions to prove your existence, or would you rather allow yourself to fade out of memory? This is the same case. Chronomaster 19:41, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
Is there a reliable source to document the meme's existence? An inside joke on some message board does not a meme make. EVula // talk // ☯ // 19:45, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
I just took out a statement that made this meme connection to CJ, partially because we haven't come to a conclusion here about it, but the way it was written, and knowing the 4chan mentality, they would be all over it to "prove" themselves. That's really the other problem with putting that it. Not only are you acknowledging and feeding the trolls by just mentioning it, you're giving them more fodder to keep going after it. Unless WP decides to permanantly semi-protect the F! article (doubtful), I feel the less we say about it on the main page, the faster the problem will go away. --Masem 14:26, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
you guys are ridiculous. saying candle jack doesnt mean you will be kidna —Preceding unsigned comment added by The juggreserection (talk • contribs) 14:03, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

To those that don't take Wikipedia seriously, the site has become a referance for high school and college students alike. If you put in stupid joke stuff that don't really pertain to the actual scource of the article, you take away any credibility to the article. Not just putting a 4chan joke in a Freakazoid article, but anything else. -Kur 3-14-08 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.36.109.30 (talk) 02:39, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

What craptacular school do you go to that considers Wikipedia a reliable source? People have been kicked out of some of my classes for citing "Wikipedia" in papers. 76.89.149.99 (talk) 08:07, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
The fact that it can be freely edited made Wikipedia initially unreliable. Not every article is watched as closely as others. Take for example the Ford Mustang article. here is the revision difference - the article was protected before the vandalism could be reverted. Though it wasn't bad (just removal of some information), this is a real weakness in that something can be sneaked into an article before protection, and hence can't be fixed by the normal Wikipedia editors. It's not that I don't take it seriously, but not everything is cited. Now, as for what to do with the article, perhaps add in that it has become a meme? Instead of illustrating it on the page, just mention that people who say "Candlejack" usually can't fini Zchris87v 21:31, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Omitting part of a sentence just confuses people who don't already know the joke. This joke about candlejack stealing sentences won't make sen —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.183.132.192 (talk) 08:18, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Just to add my two bytes, trivia sections are known for containing total crap anyway, and if you look at the discussion page even legitimate editors are well aware of the joke. Noting that Candlejack is a meme is pretty likely to cause an end or at least depreciation of the vanda-82.24.113.160 (talk) 00:26, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Rescues Washington, DC...

I don't think it's correct that Freakazoid's hometown is Washington, DC. Aside from the fact that the streets of DC look quite different from whatever town Freakazoid calls home, none of the major DC landmarks have ever been portrayed in the show to be in the city that Freakazoid calls home. Sure, there's the line "rescues Washington DC" in the theme song, but that doesn't mean he lives there. It's the capital, after all - there's no reason to believe that he needs to live there in order to have a reason to save it.

Can someone provide evidence that Freakazoid and/or Dexter Douglas call Washington home? If not, I'm gonna delete the line. --Gradient 17:36, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

The original press releases announcing the show indicated that Dexter's accident happened "one snowy morning in Washington D.C." See http://users.california.com/~keeper/FzInfo.txt 68.186.48.252 10:06, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] About Guitierrez

Ehhh I don't know who make the mistake but the spell It's wrong.. The spanish last name It's "Gutiérrez" not "Guitierrez". See ya! —Preceding unsigned comment added by DunkelMeister (talk • contribs)

I believe it's spelled that (incorrect) way in the show's credits. When I get back home in a few days, I'll look. Jay Maynard 16:15, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Protection

Alrighty, hopefully the time that this was exceedingly funny has passed. I'm unprotecting the article (since I've been made an admin since this started); if it starts getting messed with again, I'll restore the protection. EVula // talk // ☯ // 05:34, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

  • *crossing fingers* I kinda doubt it, myself, but hope springs eternal... Jay Maynard 12:20, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
...so far, I've reverted one such edit. If it happens again, I'll lock it down again. *sigh* EVula // talk // ☯ // 22:13, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
I kind of figured this would happen. Even when it was protected, we had actual registered users doing it. --Darksasami 22:42, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
Protection restored. Damn. EVula // talk // ☯ // 16:24, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
Voice of All (talk · contribs) unprotected the article again, hoping that the vandals have died down. I just reverted some anon's edits, but I'll leave it unprotected a bit longer. If I run across more, I'll protect it again. *sigh* EVula // talk // ☯ // 17:01, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
While you were doing that, I was leaving a note on VoA's talk page about my believe that this article will need long-term semi-protection. Jay Maynard 17:12, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
Strike two... EVula // talk // ☯ // 06:32, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Article protected again. EVula // talk // ☯ // 16:57, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Just noting that due to a lot of vandalism in a short time, I requested and got semi-prot for the article though this was more than just Candle Jack vandalism. I can't see any obvious reasons why the page was being targeted. --Masem 17:37, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] {{blatantvandal}} tagging

I have been placing the {{blatantvandal}} tag on any user's page who commits CandleJack vandalism, and I recommend others do so, too. It's obviously vandalism, not a content dispute, and it's blatantly harmful to the article - especially the version that cuts off the entire article at that point. It cannot possibly have been made in good faith. Jay Maynard 13:35, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Good call. EVula // talk // ☯ // 17:28, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
why dont you change it so the enemies section is last and the candlejack is the last enemy, that way the article can be unfinished, and everyone is ha
Obviously the joke is still around, but a blatant vandal tag for this? I mean I have to rescue articles that are much more maliciously vandalized, such as the poor Ford Mustang article, whose deletion of material went unnoticed, and small things were replaced with intentionally wrong information, or something like "The Ford Mustang is a piece of shit car" instead of "Pony car", stuff like that, and then the article would get locked and that stuff would stay without being noticed. No one ever received a blatant vandal tag for something like that. But I agree, the joke is getting old and maybe one day we can lock certain sections of articles. But for now, I think the simple warning does it. Let's face it - people that vandalize much larger articles (George W. Bush, for example), still don't get the blatant vandal tag. Maybe we should just stick to the warning for anyone that vandalizes the Candlejack section of the ar Zchris87v 05:43, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Unfinished; more vandalism?

I noticed that the entire article is cut off mid-sentence during the section on villains. What happened? Did someone just cut out the rest of the article? Is this still more vandalism? MezzoMezzo 03:41, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

A quick look at the article's history does, indeed, show it to be vandalism. EVula // talk // ☯ // 04:20, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
I've just semi-protected the article again. What fun. EVula // talk // ☯ // 04:23, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
It's a meme. In the show, if you said Candlejack's name, he would come and kidnap you before you could finish you sent- —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Moberho (talk • contribs) 16:17, 12 April 2007 (UTC).

Interestingly enough, all in-show instances of Candle Jack kidnapping people would happen after they had finished their sentences. -66.245.196.119 00:04, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Gutiérrez - top villain

Gutiérrez should be the top villain, since he is Dexter/Freakazoid's arch-enemy, appears in the pilot, and directly relates to the bestowing of powers upon Dexter. I'll make the move after at least a week, if I hear no plausible objections. And saying Candlejack should be first is NOT a plausible obje- 205.201.141.146 20:04, 4 May 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Janos Ivnovals - Mission: Freakazoid

I'm only stopped by being at work and unable to confirm the names 100%, but the entire section refers to the bad guy and events of Mission: Freakazoid episode, not a "bogus" reference Cyckath 05:47, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Toby Danger

Just want to say as an old dude who remembers "Jonny Quest", I loved "Toby Danger". Especially loved Don Messick, the orginal Dr. Quest, voicing "Vernon Danger", as well as Scott Manville an old JQ voicer. The animation was perfect, as was the story-line (seemed just like a Jonny plot), as well as the in-jokes of "throw a barrel at it!"

[edit] Freakazette

It could be mentioned that a script for an episode introducing/creating Freakazette had been approved for season 3, but of course the green light for season 3 never came.

Perhaps also mention other villain characters that are presented in the first episode but never given an episode: Eye of Newt (a giant eyeball that somehow resembles Newt Gingrich), Booger Beast (well, it did have a brief segment). And maybe a mention of that skeletal gunfighter villain who appears a few times in the show but is never named. (Does anyone know what his name was going to be?) 68.186.48.252 10:16, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] adding Swedish article

I can't adding sv:Freakazoid, can somebody else do it? Egon Eagle 10 december 2007 8:19 PM (CEST) —Preceding comment was added at 19:18, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Done. Thanks. --Neo-Jay (talk) 19:23, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Freakazoid: The Movie

What about the live-action student film that supposedly had the full endorsment of the show's creator? I don't see any mention of it here. I am fairly certain it wasn't just a rumor but I can't find any evidence other than this http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Lab/2948/freakazoid.html (IRMacGuyver (talk) 12:01, 14 February 2008 (UTC))

[edit] DVDs

The only source for the fact the DVDs are coming out is an article on a site that was produced on April 1. Somehow, I don't think April Fools' Day is necessarily the best day to be citing sources from. Is there any OFFICIAL or confirming source on this? Lord Seth (talk) 05:37, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Looking at the site, it doesn't appear that they actually did anything for Tuesday; they've got several other announcements that are fairly run of the mill. I'd like to find another source just to confirm it, though... EVula // talk // ☯ // 13:23, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] ROFLCon

Tron guy (Jay Maynard) just mentioned this page in a question to Moot about 4chan vandalism —Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.109.6.9 (talk) 21:06, 26 April 2008 (UTC)