Add a comment

Crusher8576 1ed it as I typed my post. LOL! What c*nts.

Korf, maybe you should pay a bit more attention to your nuevo slop sh*t art sites and less time trying to convince everyone what YOU think makes for a YTMND.

Yeah, unlike all the other media on this site that's made especially for YTMND? Right? All 0.024% of original art on this f*ggot infested site? "Not deserving of the rating it has" reeks of "Im made this simple site is rated as high as the site I took long to make" Maybe that's not what you mean, but it's how you and Korf are coming off. Not every YTMND has to be a Kubrick film you know.

I disagree with a number of the things said here. There is a difference between recontextualizing a clip and merely stealing someone else's work. I like this clip especially because it is a post-modern moment in animation recontextualized to a post-modern moment in web design. Sorry to use art speak, but that's what it is.

Thank you to those defending this site. Downvoters: you should know my intention in creating this site was simply to entertain people for a few seconds. I wasn't thinking this would be rated highly, or reach the top-viewed (although I am pleasantly surprised it did). I am simply trying to make sites that will entertain other YTMND users. That's the difference between me and users like Korf41, who focus on criticizing instead of focusing on providing to the YTMND community.

Besides, if you want proof at originality, take a look at some of my other sites. I have the capacity to create original/innovative sites; and I have. On the other hand, most downvoters have not. They just don’t like the success I’ve had with this YTMND. Well they can eat it. Simply put, it's filth like you that degrade this site; you should put more effort into providing to the YTMND community in a proactive way. Then maybe your opinion will consist of more than the feigned authority it currently holds.

Who the f*ck is korf?

lol, internet debate in comments

To evilregal, I think you're being too literal: it's Sisyphus here, versus a toss-off site gag (though a great one). To Mikey, it's art, but it ain't great art ;]. To Xalisae, I hope to god you never write for Art Forum, October, etc with thinking like that. If what max did can't be added as a new direction, a new possibility in art, then you deserve the Monet and Rockwell posters hanging in your proverbial dorm room.

I understand where you're coming from Mikey, with only the lol in mind, but I'm thinking of a bigger picture. I do respect you for sticking up for yourself with a few paragraphs, so you get a proverbial thumbs up from me.

well i wouldnt go so far as to say they are both elite, nutnics maybe, not korf...no offense korf, i dont consider myself elite or anything either, i just would put nutnics higher up, proof is in the sites...nonetheless, everyone does have the right to their own opinion at least

"art", and I simply cannot understand why art itself is forced to be anything more than a persuit of beauty. Why does everything have to be so damned profound?

It's all just a buch of people who think they're smarter than everyone else looking up at the clouds in the sky and arguing with each other over what the "images" they see "mean", and I wouldn't be caught dead wasting my time with such a futile and misguided occupation. P.S. Jackson Pollock was an overrated hack.

Oh, but that attempt at somewhat of a personal attack on me through insinuating ignorance was cute.

" it's filth like you that degrade this site; you should put more effort into providing to the YTMND community in a proactive way" What are you talking about, if it werent for downvoters more sh*t like this would flood the top 15. I think thats providing a lot.

However this does beg the question: Why did Xalisae vote 4 on this site? Daffy Duck does not look at all like a real duck. The artists who drew him were seriously limited in their photorealistic artistic skills, and those are the only skills that matter in art, so this site should be a 2 at best if he's basing his votes only on the realism of the images. What a hypocrite.

orator, or read a book or article or some other detailed work.) As far the trouble you're having trying to reconcile my personal views and the content of this ytmnd, there are a few reasons. Firstly, animation has limitations put on it from the start, considering it's not just one image, but many. That's just naturally going to take away from the realism which will be able to be achieved, and I accept that, and judge accordingly. Secondly, Daffy Duck is hardly a serious artistic persuit. It's entertainment only. (This fact, for all intents and purposes, really does make your entire point moot, but I'll humor you.) Thirdly, this is a perfect example of what I said earlier, i.e., the imagery being supplemental to what is said outrightly. This is a comedic site, complete with all the information the creator has presented. It's comedy, and I laughed. And last, but certainly not least, I'm a woman. Sorry to disappoint you by not being some giggling imbecile. I understand your confusion.

"I strive to create with my hands exactly what my eyes see and nothing more." Find me an artist that says that, and I'll find you a candidate for depression.

actually exist.

rofl ^ Mrs. Lake ftw

To say art is anything profound is to admit that us humans are anything more than just big brained monkeys.

Art as simply the pursuit of sublime beauty is: 1. an antiquated, 100+ year old notion killed off by everything from DuChamp, the Futurists, Warhol, Koons, etc to even the beloved Impressionists 2. a romanticized, revisionist, false premise that completely denies the fact that Art has always been an institution controlled by either the market place, the state, or religion.

Dave Hickey said it best when he noted that "Art is just an after-hours joint for rich people".

I was introduced to that conversation, and it sounded like something utterly beneath me. It was the chittering of large-headed beasts, all droning on about their various adventures in their pastime of pissing into the wind. "Yes, but what does it all MEAN?" I don't know, and why should I care?! I'd gather more from just asking the f*cking artist what he or she thought, felt, or meant in real and obvious terms and indisputable language. Why waste all the f*cking time and effort having discussion after discussion after discussion amongst yourselves about something which is pretty much indeterminate? Wild conjecturing and pointless postulating makes no sense to me. Why bother in a class where every answer is both the right and wrong answer? Why play a game with no rules?

For the record I yelled at the Empire State Building one time, but that was because the pay-binoculars stole my f*cking quarter.

i like this line of comments, it's empirical proof that there are ytmnd'ers who actually know how to think and debate intellectually...anyway, all i want to say is that i think art is relative. everyone obviously has their own personal definition of 'art.' in my opinion, in the most general terms, art is some product intended to stimulate mind and senses, made with some sort of human creativity. the more a person relates to or feels stimulated by the 'artwork' the more quality it possesses for them.

I know, and I was further using that analogy to help illustrate my point of view. But, in retrospect, this whole thing seems funny and rather useless, considering the entire ordeal can be summed up as follows: "Art should be ____." "Well, I disagree, and further more, you're stupid." You feel that art should be governed more by intellect as a dynamic and thinking creature, and I feel that intellect is better served elsewhere. As a matter of fact, that's the one piece of life that I feel shouldn't be, mostly because I see it as somewhat of a respite from being forced to apply intellect and deep thinking to every other issue in the world in my waking life. But I digress. Thank you for the lively debate, at the very least. You honestly cannot know how much I appreciate something like this.

So in conclusion, that's how I spent my summer vacation.

Argument over.