home authors guest shorts graphical shorts


After breakdancing for a while, a teenage Karol Wojtyla took a breather, practically inhaling one of his mother’s Fantas.
Grape Fanta, Karol thought. Most things in life just aren't this good.
His home boys, Pablo and Jose, were practicing elbow spins on his kitchen floor, trying to blend them seamlessly into knee spins.
"Hey Karol", Pablo said, watching Jose revolve furiously, "How's that movie you writing?"
"Cool, cool", Karol said, trying to mask his Polish accent.
“What’s it about?” Jose asked.
“It’s about these three home boys trying to get out of the hood.” Karol said. He pulled up his tube socks so that they showed clearly his participation in the American social mores of the early eighties.
“So what happens”, Pablo said, cracking an Orange Fanta.
“They end up", Karol began, "trying to rob a deli, but they get sent to jail for murder.”
“Shit”, said Pablo. “Then what?”
“Then one of them finds God in jail, and the other two, the Latinos, start a riot and get killed by the prison guards.”
Pablo and Jose looked at Karol. The Herbie Hancock played on robotically while Jose fixed the Velcro straps on his fingerless gloves. Finally Pablo said something.
“Yo, why you gotta kill the two Latinos?”
“Iowno." Karol said. "That’s just how it ends.” He took one last sip from his Grape Fanta and took his turn on the linoleum. He worked on a few moves with his usual intensity, his backspin and windmill graceful, powerful. Later, Jose and Pablo went to see Krull. It was there that they agreed to stop hanging out with Karol. Though they didn't want to admit it, they both knew he somehow exceeded them.

Date Written: April 08, 2005
Author: Benny Maniacs
Average Vote: 3.875

04/21/2005 The Rid: Incendiary.
04/21/2005 Will Disney: It's pretty good for a RACIST short, no?
04/21/2005 Turgid: Why is he drinking Fanta in the beginning and Shasta at the end?
04/21/2005 Klause Muppet (4):
04/21/2005 Litcube: Who really used incendiary ammunition in X-Com?
04/21/2005 Mr. Pony (5): This is short is very enjoyable to me.
04/21/2005 qualcomm: what's the point of it being the pope? seems kinda random to no effect over here.
04/21/2005 Ewan Snow (3):
04/21/2005 Ewan Snow: O topical short! O topical, topical short!
04/21/2005 Streifenbeuteldachs (4): Qualcomm, I'm surprised. Clearly the plot of this short parallels the Catholic church's abandonment of the browner, more AIDS-enridden folk of the earth.
04/21/2005 Front: Seriously, why is this good?
04/21/2005 John Slocum: Well asked, Front. 3's and 4's I can see, this is enjoyable pretty well written, but you, Mr. Pony, have some explaining to do (that is to say, if you feel like it I'd be curious why you gave this a 5).
04/21/2005 Mr. Pony: I'm glad you asked, Slocum; Front. I like the tone of this one. I like that it's trying to be serious and meaningful in a silly and light-hearted and sleep-drunk way. It's like the short just woke up or something. The short continues this thought though the content, slipping the teen Pope (a very serious dude usually surrounded by very serious things) into the mediocre trappings of the 80's. This sort of thing has been done before, but this time it seems especially ridiculous because we're talking about the Pope, and not, like, Dylan. The obviously silly anachronism (the Pope being a teen in the 1980's) is another example, dumb in a good way, of the author shoehorning in elements of a story he just wants to tell for some dumb reason. I think the Pope trying to be cool by masking his accent is pretty funny. As for the short's topicality, I think that there have been a lot of explorations of the Dead Pope as a person, as a man, in the "Media"; that this springs directly out of. I have a hard time seeing what, if anything, is wrong with that. Pleasantly Dumb, I find this short.
04/21/2005 anonymous: The 1880s would've been a funnier setting.
04/21/2005 Mr. Pony: Author: was the Fanta/Shasta thing intentional?
04/21/2005 qualcomm: see, now me, i think any 80s joke at this late stage is an error. perhaps if the author had come up with some new things to make fun of about that time, but i seriously doubt that's possible, and this short seems to confirm my dubiousity.
04/21/2005 Mr. Pony: I agree with what you say, but what if this short is making fun of the practice of making 80's references, as I believe it to be doing?
04/21/2005 qualcomm: i don't think it's doing that.
04/21/2005 John Slocum: Whoever betvited Matza (I'll look in a second) is either stupid or a lunatic. Unless matza is the author (which he isn't), in which case I'll take on the mantle of being either stupid or a lunatic. Thank you.
04/21/2005 Mr. Pony: Maybe it's not doing that. On the other hand, Krull?
04/21/2005 Turgid: Krull's got nothing on Enemy Mine.
04/21/2005 anonymous: Shasta was a fuck up. I'll fix it.
04/21/2005 Jon Matza: OK, which of you AIDS-enridden folk betvited me? Whoever it was, your HIV-positive intuition has betrayed you.
04/21/2005 anonymous: Wait. So now the entire decade of the eighties is passé? Are we cliché if we write about the time period we grew up in? This claim, while having some legitimacy, equals stupid.
04/21/2005 qualcomm: no, it's not a cliche to write about the 80s, author. i think it's a cliche to try to get laughs merely by mentioning 80s artifacts (fanta, krull) by name. or were those not intended to be humorous/amusing? just props, to add a note of realism?
04/21/2005 qualcomm: because they come off like moe rocca bit props from an outtake of vh1's i love the eighties
04/21/2005 Mr. Pony: you have to stop relating everything to that stupid show
04/21/2005 anonymous: Yeah, no you're probably right about those references. But don't be cunty about it.
04/22/2005 Litcube (4): Nicely done Benny. I don't think you're retarded.
04/22/2005 Litcube: I mean it. I don't think you're retarded.
04/22/2005 Litcube: I mean it. I don't think you're retarded.
04/22/2005 Litcube: I'll say it again, if you don't believe me.
04/22/2005 John Slocum (4): Nicely done Benny. I think you're retarded.
04/22/2005 qualcomm (2): you deserved it (see your second to last comment).
04/23/2005 Benny Maniacs: Qualcomm = cunty about it.
04/23/2005 Dylan Danko: 5 stars to correct for QC's typically unprincipled vote.
04/23/2005 Dylan Danko (5):
04/23/2005 qualcomm: a meaningless and unsupported comment to add to dylan's typically meaningless and unsupported comment.
04/23/2005 Dylan Danko: What about Benny's second to last comment led to your two star vote?
04/24/2005 qualcomm: my vote had nothing to do with benny's comment. i gave this short two stars because i didn't like it (see my 3:01 comment). when i said "you deserved it (see your second to last comment)," that was an answer to benny's 8:33 comment, that i was being "cunty" about explaining why 80s memorabilia jokes suck. i was saying that he deserved my cunty tone because of his 7:15 comment, which i thought had a defensive and snotty ring to it, and made me go through the trouble of explaining something i thought should be pretty obvious to any person of substance: that jokes about tube socks and pac man were old by the early 90s.
04/24/2005 Dylan Danko: Fair enough. But you can see how a fella could have thought your vote related to your comment. Also, because race is a protected category, this short must pass the strictest level of scrutiny. Nowhere in the short is there evidence of a compelling authorial interest and therefore this short is facially unconsitutional.
04/30/2005 scoop: Don't be cunty, danko.