User blog:Awesomesix/My 3 Least Favorite non-conventional ERB suggestions feat. other people

So, one of the things I like most is discussion. The type where everyone's contributing and raising more points than just "Gay homo you suck!" and making their opinion more than "Well, well, you're... wrong and smelly!". And I decided, what's a better way to discuss something than bring up some ERB suggestions? So, here are the three ideas that aren't your typical battle that I dislike the most. Featuring MunKitteh. Yee.

A6
For starters, the idea of a sequel is something I do not like in the first place. The people have already had a battle, there are people who haven't even been mentioned yet I feel ERB needs to cover (Van Gogh, anyone culinary, more world leaders, hello?), and a sequel is bound to rehash some material. I don't personally like Vader vs Hitler 2, and many people seem to dislike Vader vs Hitler 3, and those were remade because they were popular, and, well, fucking Hitler. But now we get to the battle people suggest for a sequel.

Shakespeare vs Seuss, on it's own, is a rather mediocre battle. It starts with Shakespeare, then Cat in the Hat, then Shakespeare fast raps, and finally, the Things come in. Many people don't like the Things, and I'm on that page. Now that we've gone over the material of the original one, what new could a sequel bring to the plate? This is my problem; with battles like Goku vs Superman, not everything has been covered, so it's understandable; but with Shakespeare vs Seuss, they already went all out. They pulled out the team rappers, the fast rap, the backup, the weird paint in transitions, the one guy who doesn't rap, so he uses his creations. What, in any way, could freshen the battle? For Seuss's side, bringing back the Cat and Things would be boring, but bringing in someone new would feel somewhat rehash-y. Grinch and the Lorax, two of Seuss's other more popular (and half possible to portray) characters have some slight problems: The Lorax is a fucking walrus man and the Grinch is too Christmas-centric for any regular battle, but the battle as a whole wouldn't feel Christmas-y at all. The third option is Seuss raps himself. But this isn't great at all; the whole idea of the first battle is Seuss couldn't rap for himself, which is why the characters came in at all!

Finally, we get to Shakespeare. Yes, he's a Watsky character. So obviously he'll rap fast. But is that really new? Or, say he brings in his own characters... why? Why does Shakespeare, the guy who capably rapped and did so  fast  need to bring in his own backup? His only characters he could bring in that people would instantly recognize (not to say his other characters are obscure) are Romeo and Juliet, and they've been done already.

TL;DR: There is no way this could be done in any interesting way to make me like it.

Bantha:
I'd think Seuss vs Shakespeare 2, while perhaps not a brilliant idea, is among the better options for a sequel should ERB choose to make one, as there's lots of material left that could be utilized. On each side there're major characters that got only a namedrop (Horton, The Grinch indirectly) or not even mentioned at all (The Lorax, Hamlet). You could even have Shakespeare bring a character to rap for him this time if they so choose. I don't see someone like Hamlet getting his own battle, despite being one of the biggest and most recognizable names in theater, so having him here is an excellent compromise. Perhaps they could add another rhymer, maybe even an actual rapper, for a modern contrast that spices things up and deviates from the basic idea of a sequel we've gotten from the Hitler vs Vaders.

On the whole, I suppose I'd say I'm not opposed to the concept. I liked the original, so seeing another round of it would be something I would find interesting.

Tigger
Oh, yes. Dr. Seuss vs Shakespeare 2, the suggestion you either despise, don't give a shit about, or worship as a deity. I've much mixed feelings on this subject, but I'll say overall that I don't absolutely shun this idea; rather, I think there's both "potential" and "lack of potential" that I'll explain.

To begin with, Dr. Seuss vs Shakespeare 2 as an idea is, in reality, rather plausible. The original Seuss vs Shakespeare is one of the highlights of Season 1 and is regarded as a classic of that season, alongside others such as Einstein vs Stephen Hawking and Justin Bieber vs Beethoven. As a rather beloved installment in the series, it's not such a preposterous idea to create a direct sequel to it. Keep in mind that potential for future suggestions is not the only topic being kept in mind here; ERB being a comedy series with a devote following of many veterans, it'd be sensible to create a video that appealed to them. The argument here can be made with the same argument towards the Hitler vs Vader trilogy; you can call it "wasting future ideas" all you wish, but it pays homage to the many who enjoyed the original Hitler vs Vader. One last time: the series shouldn't simply revolve around new ideas, and if there's a cool idea for a sequel or prequel or whatever that would make viewers happy, then that should be taken into consideration as well. To sum that section up, I am of the opinion that Seuss vs Shakespeare 2 is a solid idea in theory.

The reality is, however, that some of the better punchlines have already been used in the initial installment as well as a solid proportion of the simple material on both characters. There'd be more subtle and harder-to-understand jokes, which is somewhat the opposite of the original, which consists of nothing but easy to understand lines. The Cat in the Hat and Things 1 & 2 were used, as well, and they are essentially the icons of Dr. Seuss; if they were used again, it would feel rather stale, and if new characters such as the Lorax and the Grinch were used, it'd feel like somewhat a rehash. In addition, the new characters aren't as representative of Seuss, and have major themes applied to them relating to completely different subjects, those for the Lorax and Grinch being the environment and Christmas, respectively.

The personal problem I have with a sequel is the structure; if Watsky is in a battle, it'd be somewhat mandatory for him to have a fast rap. As seen in Hitler vs Vader, however, the order changes through sequels, leaving Shakespeare the last verse. As the last verse is normally the one that leaves the greatest impression, a fast rapping last verse would be an unfair advantage.

Summarizing all I said, the idea of Seuss vs Shakespeare 2 is cool, but it'd be difficult to pull off decently without being stale to some degree.

A6
One thing the series has pretty much left out for a while (3 years to be exact) is video games. And to be fair, Peter and Lloyd don't seem all to interested in using them. I personally feel we could use them sparingly *coughcoughSNAKEVSROMMELcoughcough* just so they don't feel like they're being used too fast. But one suggestion people have that could seemingly tie up any lose video game characters is a royale using all of the video game characters (all, uh, 5...).

Let me start off by saying that before we get down to the more specific problems, that this is the opposite of what Peter and Lloyd think. Solving the issue that they don't really use video game characters by... shoving them all into one battle? I get that they did that with the Russians and directors, but the former was a joke and the latter are only suggested against each other anyways. It's clear some people hate the idea of video game vs video game, so making a royale of them doesn't solve the "they don't like to use video game characters" problem, but it also ruins potential battles. You see, the beauty (for lack of a better word) of video game characters is they're all different enough to the point where they can go up against not just each other, but anyone. Take Samus Aran and Laura Croft, for example. The two against each other is a pretty meh idea; but take them and say, have, Samus go up against Ellen Ripley, and Laura against someone like Indiana Jones, and you have at least two potential battles with a better than "video game girls!" connection instead of one battle for the sake of women and video games.

Now, for the next problem; who would you use? Unlike Russian leaders, where you just have five Russians pretty much set, and directors, who everyone can pretty much unanymously agree on (all of the directors used were wanted by at least a huge chunk of the wiki), video games have so many popular figures that you can't exactly put together a royale without some people getting upset that someone important was left out. Along with that, too many of them are animals/humanoids almost impossible to portray without CGI. Also, one other problem... the game mascot, Mario, was already used. And it wouldn't be the same without Mario.

TL;DR: A waste of characters and hard to cast.

Bantha
First off, in regards to video games in ERB, while I find both Mario Bros. vs Wright Bros. and Master Chief vs Leonidas to be quite enjoyable, and consider Link fairly high up on my list of characters I'd like to see, the fact that we've only seen 2 battles with them and Peter's now-infamous thoughts on Link's prospects in battle would suggest video games not being a particular priority for them, so to really discuss this idea at all we have to first ignore those factors and act like it's particularly plausible to begin with.

Second, my personal opinions on the idea of a video game royale, are, well, negative. I'm not really a fan of the concept. I don't think it's particularly good. If the royale's connection is just "vidya gaemz" it doesn't feel as if there's much substance to it, as well as it feeling as if it'd just be a bunch of video games put together for the sake of having a vg royale. What even would the characters be anyway? With the connection in mind just being video games, who do you choose and where do you go with that? That in itself feels like a debate to match that of Goku vs Superman in the comments (Team Supes btw :P ). And if the connection is less broad than just video games, say "adventure video games", well then you're limiting yourself by making it a niche of a subject to make a royale out of. They didn't do "horror directors". They couldn't have. It's too specific.

I see no realistic way that they can make it happen, and the whole idea just feels like an excuse for more vidya gaemz.

Tigger
To put it plain and simple, a video game royale is an absolute no. The connection of "video games" is so bland it makes me want to puke. You want a connection of "movie characters" too? No thanks. Video game characters have their own personalities, their own traits that make them unique, and wasting potential connections like these for a royale of just video game characters is just bad. I don't want to see many video game characters in the first place; people like Solid Snake who establish personalities that make them more than video game characters are those who I want to see. In addition to all of this, the representative of video games as a whole, Mario, was already used.

A6
Oh boy, I truly hate this idea.

So, to give you an idea why, I love the suggestion of Walt Disney vs Jim Henson feat. Mickey and Kermit. It's got animation and puppetry, something never used in and ERB (I don't count the LEGO as animation in this term, more stop motion). And Henson is one of my childhood idols, so having him in an ERB is a dream come true for me. Obviously, not very many people like the idea, which, as much as I think it's great, is understandable. Henson isn't the most well known guy, and he was bought by Disney. But some people think this idea can be fixed by a little thing I like to call "Rapper orgy!".

Disney vs Companies is horrible for many reasons. For starters, you ruin the suggestion and undermine Henson, and to an extent, Disney's potential. Henson, believe it or not, has quite a lot of room for material (his early commercials, Sam and Friends, all the anal fisting jokes, string jokes, song references, Sex and Violence, Muppet Show, Sesame Street, a bunch of character names being possible rhymes, etc.) and Disney does too. Bringing in Mickey and Kermit can squander the whole "They're too nice!" factor, as Kermit was Henson's way of letting out rage. Tacking on a bunch of other people not only overcrowds the battle, but, like the video game royale, wastes potential completely. This is besides the fact that I feel this is 6 too many characters. Let's go over everyone suggested:

Stan Lee- He's one of the two people to always come up in this. As much as I don't really care for him in a battle, he has more material than just Disney buying him that could make for a great battle.

Spiderman- Is he only in this because all of the other Marvel characters have a better suggestion than just "I guess he could work"? One word: Tarzan. (Peter thinks the idea is amazing, so point to anti-company).

George Lucas- The other guy people always suggest in this. Do we really need more Star Wars in ERB? It's been referenced as recently as RoboCop vs Terminator, not once, but twice in one verse, but Star Wars has also had not one, not two, but three battles focus directly on it. Sure, Lucas has more than just Star Wars, but that's pretty much what everyone knows him for. So pass.

Darth Vader- No.

Yoda- Ew, fuck no.

Someone from Pixar- Who exactly would they use? Lasseter, sure, but the problem is no one at Pixar is known by name; the company is.

Steve Jobs for Pixar- That's a worse idea than Yoda as a third party in East vs West.

Miyazaki- Eh, he's not owned by Disney technically, and, like Lee, I feel he'd fit better elsewhere.

Now, my main problem (besides the wasting of Henson) is that there's 10 people pretty much crammed into one battle. You could say, "What about Ghostbusters vs Mythbusters?" and to that, I say this: Ten people in that battle worked because the Mythbusters had five members who got about two lines each in the second verse, the the Ghostbusters are a team of four. Stay Puft was just a for the lulz third party. In Henson vs Disney, the 6 extra rappers are uneccesary because 1) they'll each be rapping 2 per verse, 2) they're not associated aside from Disney buying them, and 3) at least two of them (Lucas and his character) are overrepresenting one of the most represented things in ERB after Michael Jackson and his family (seriously, are they the go-to family to mock?). Want to know what I would like?

Henson and Disney start off with their respective verses, Disney drawing Mickey and Henson holding Kermit. When Mickey and Kermit come in, the battle gets a bit more hectic, Mickey and Kermit going off, while Henson and Disney struggle to keep things calm. All of the sudden, Disney's drawings and Henson's puppets get into an all out lyrical war: Disney's drawings coming off the paper behind Mickey while getting ready to fight the old 30s cartoon way, the Muppets singing disses together Muppet Show theme-song style, the battle getting louder and chaotic, but in an awesome way, while Henson and Disney look around shocked at what their creations are doing. After all, people say the companies idea has "never been done before", but neither has this.

Obviously that'd be a bit hard to do, but I'd love it.

TL;DR: The battle wastes Henson, Disney, everyone in it, would overrepresent Star Wars, is too big for it's own good, and ruins the potential for an equally unique battle.

Bantha
I love Disney. Pretty much everything about him to me is amazing. I absolutely adore the idea of him in an ERB (done right). But that's the thing: done right. When you have a figure so profound, so well-known, so beloved by millions, perhaps billions, of people, well, how do you give him a matchup deserving of that much figurative "power"? There have been many, many ideas: Stan Lee, Seth MacFarlane, Matt Groening, Shigeru Miyamoto. My personal favorite would probably be Jim Henson. But recently, a new idea has come into being, perhaps due to the interview with Peter I brought to the wiki's collective attention where he says there're 25 rappers that are going to appear this half of Season 4. That would be having Walt Disney go up against the "faces" of the companies his company has purchased, such as Jim Henson, Stan Lee, and George Lucas, and perhaps even having them get a creation of theirs to assist them.

Having Disney going up against not 1 but perhaps 3 creators, not even mentioning their creations, would certainly be a way to give Walt a matchup he'd deserve. But is it necessarily a good idea? Personally, I think it has potential to be amazing, featuring some of the fathers of modern pop culture. Plus, it gives ERB the opportunity to make the battle exceptionally unique, with one person of fame going up against people he's "faced" before, giving it a bit of a historical (in a sense) flair. The biggest argument I can think up against it at the moment is the potential for either "wasting" some of the characters who could warrant their own battles (Lee is probably the best example), or being downright cluttered with so many characters with so much material (that go doubly for if they bring along their creations as well). I can understand that fully. As for "wasting" characters, it's hard to see Henson or Lucas having other opportunities to appear, and for Lee, this is a good compromise with those who wanted Disney against Lee, as well as a worthy opponent on both sides. For the argument of over-complication, I have faith in ERB to do it right if that is actually what they're attempting.

Tigggwe Tigger
Before I delve into the suggestion of Walt Disney vs Companies, let me just say that I enjoy Walt Disney ft. Mickey Mouse vs Jim Henson ft. Kermit the Frog. That being said, I do not wish for Disney vs Companies to happen. I feel as if it is an immense waste of potential. Henson has an immense stash of material, Disney is himself and has sooo much material on him. George Lucas, I'm okay with wasting, but I'd prefer he just never appeared in an ERB. As for Stan Lee, he definitely deserves his own battle. The idea of back-ups for Lucas and Lee is also bad; bringing in Yoda/Vader is a definite "no thanks please no get out", and Spider-Man can be used for so much more than a third-party in a royale. That being said, I'm unsure as to what I'd prefer since Eastern Philosophers vs Western Philosophers is no longer a candidate for the finale. Perhaps just a completely different suggestion, but then it'd be pushing Disney back another season.

In review
Agree? Disagree? Comment below. I'd like to hear what you have to say, but no arguing. If an argument ensues, I'll just ask DWAS or someone to delete the comment chain before it continues.