I’ve seen two episodes of Stripperella and in both episodes they (slightly) mosaic out the nudity. I’m curious as to whether or not the cartoon was just made with the mosaic in, or they censored it afterward.
Think we might see an un-cut DVD in the future?
From Reuters:
Based on this, I would assume the mosaic is in place from the beginning, or at least, an uncensored version will never be released publicly.
One critic said there was actual nudity in the prints critics recieved, so I imagine it is added in as an after-effect. (You know how hard that would be to animate?)
The show is awful anyway. The animation is bad, the stories are trite, voice acting is stunted, and on top of all that theres no nudity in a show about a superhero that is a stripper. You watched twice as much as I would ever care to see of that show.
Thanks for that explanation, mobo85. I was wondering how the guy at Entertainment Weakly (pun intended) saw nudity in the show. And how he could actually like it. And whose ass he had to kiss to get his job when he is so obviously a moron.
Right. A show self-rated CFFA (Cartoons for F***ing Adults) [not my asterisks, but TNNs] that won’t show nipples on a cartoon stripper, even though Pamela Anderson has been going on talk shows to say that she insisted that one of Stripperella’s powers be nipples that can cut glass.
I couldn’t believe how awful the first episode was, and I haven’t seen any since.
I’m wondering why Stan Lee did this. Seriously. I Imagine with Spidey and Hulk he’s made a lot of money the last few years, so it couldn’t really be the money, could it?
And artistically it sucks. What is it? An adult parody of Scooby Doo? A parody of his own superheroes? It can’t be meant to be taken seriously, can it?
I hope it sinks fast and gets cancelled.
That refers to Erotica, Anderson’s character. Not the other strippers. Erotica will never be shown nude, even mosaicked.
The secondary characters are free, too.
And, Gaspode, of COURSE it’s not supposed to be taken seriously. It’s a send up of the Superhero and Secret Agent genres. And it’s a damned funny one, at that.
Er…please mentally edit that sentence so that it makes sense, thusly: ‘The secondary characters are free to.’
Nope. Although Lee gets a nice check from Marvel ($1 million every year), he has not received one extra dime from the X-Men, Spidey, Daredevil, Blade or Hulk movie money. Marvel owns all of these characters lock, stock & barrel and in general (especially for any character created before the mid-80’s) the creators are not entitled to any additional moneys no matter how successful the characters are in other venues.
Lee himself has his own deal with Marvel, negotiated in 1998 – in addition to the flat $1M noted above, he is entitled 10% of all profits (exclusive of licensing fees) which Marvel receives from any film or other use of Marvel characters. Despite the success of the various Marvel films in the last couple years, Marvel claims that it has not received any profits on these deals that fall within the terms of Lee’s contract and has not paid Lee any additional sums. Lee has sued Marvel over this, claiming that the company has gotten huge windfalls of movie money and that he’s owed 10% thereof. Marvel’s position is that any money it has received is a license fee under the agreement and that Lee is owed nothing but the annual $1M, which Marvel has paid. It’s up to the courts to decide the proper interpretation of the contract.
Note however that, as mentioned above, the majority of people who created comics for Marvel have no rights whatsoever to their characters and will receive nothing no matter how successful Marvel may be in the future in turning those characters into movie franchises.
–Cliffy
http://www.newsarama.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=635&highlight=Stan+Lee
Actually, I thought it was going to be dumb too, but it was a lot funnier than I expected. Casting John Lovit’s voice as Cheapo was perfect for that kind of character. Stan Lee’s cameo was funny too.