Should i run this banner?

[mapfi]

Originally posted by MarkG
did you see me claim originality or doing anything amazingly funny?

I'd think anybody who creates something would. Otherwise why even create it? Are you trying to say your out of good ideas for banners?

I don't think that it's really surprising that so many say they'd be offended. It's the overall spreading of political correctness which sometimes has it's value (eg. in a country's politics) but is in my opinion highly overvalued in everyday life. Why can't I put a picture of Hitler on a site to make a joke? Why can't I tell a joke about a concentration camp but when a movie that wins an oscar does it, it is ok?
So what I think is more out of line is some of the reactions to your question.

Originally posted by Spiffor
Such a picture will not help Poly's image towards newcomers ; publishing it would really be an error.

That however is also definetely true.

[Jules]

Would this be offensive?

[SpencerH]

You can tell a joke about a concentration camp?

[mapfi]

I could tell you one, but if you've seen "La vita è bella", there you'll have hundreds of jokes about them. Now what I wonder did all those, that now say how offended they are, not laugh one time seeing that movie? Or did just nobody feel the need to go and watch it because it wasn't American...?

And if you PM me with your email adress I'll send you a pic that makes good fun of it. I'll translate the German message and the context - but you might not think it's funny after all then.

[monolith94]

the reason Life Is Beautiful worked is because it was done WITH taste. In addition to this, it was a situation, rather than the EVENT that september 11th was.
Life Is Beautiful was told from the viewpoint of the oppresed, and was done with class and, truly, beauty. That is why it worked. Also it was filmed 50 years after the fact…

[mapfi]

You're right about the movie even though I can't see why 9/11 has to come into this. Those are different threads you want to be posting in.
That's what I'm trying to get through as a message here. Good fun has no limits - so there should actually noone critisize this banner as offensive but just as not good fun (apart from the fact that instead of using Hitler it uses Chaplin in order not to be as offensive after all - problem is, that's violating Chaplin's work!)

And thanks for adding the English title of the movie so people actually get what I'm talking about here. I didn't know they felt the need to translate the title.

edit:typos

[Chris 62]

Still isn't clicking, eh Mark?

Chaplin made that movie BEFORE the holocaust, when Hitler was thought to be just another goofy dictator, Chaplin was horrified in 45 at what Hitler did in the second world war.

You see obcessed with wanting to offend somebody on this.
Your site, your crap, run the ad, we can't stop you, just don't be surprissed if people's opinions of you and your stuff drop as a result.

[mapfi]

Well Chris, you're wrong. Actually when Chaplin released the movie the world was already realizing what Hitler was doing and he almost put it to the ashes, but then he remembered his primary goal and released it after all. And it's a good thing he did and he never regretted it, not in 1940 and not in 1945.

[Chris 62]

No sir, YOU are.

The picture was made in 1940, the holocaust was ordered by Hitler in 1941, the western general public had no idea it happened untill 1945.

Chaplin, a Jew, suffered severe damage to his reputation by making "The Great Dictator".

http://wso.williams.edu/~dgerstei/chaplin/nazi.html

[mapfi]

I'm not but part of the info was missing. While the "Endlösung" (the final solution) was ordered at the Wannsee-Conference which took place Jan 20 1942 things started earlier:
Nov 9 1938 Reichskristallnacht -> the sentiment towards the Jews is now action, 26000 Jews in concentration camps
Sept 1 1939 It's decided to put the Jews into the Ghettos
Heydrich systematically starts having Jews executed in the Soviet campaign
July 31 1941 Heydrich gets the order from Hitler to start working on a plan to get rid off all Jews and he immeadetly intensifies the killing.

skip this one:
"The release date of the movie is after the beginning of the Soviet Campaign."
Chaplin even changed some parts of the movie inlight of the new information.

It's true though, that Chaplin suffered a great loss in reputation. First because Hitler's war against the Communist Soviet Union was actually approved - and after that when he tried to get American citizenship by Jews. Even though, as you point out, Chaplin was a Jew. He lived in Switzerland until his death...

I think that proves my point, Chris. Let it rest.

Edit:
Just adding this:
Begin of the Soviet campaign where the Jews systematically get murdered when conquering the land: June 1940 ahem no 1941...
Release of The Great Dictator: Oct 1940

and The Great Dictator was Chaplins greatest finacial success, but his last - damage to reputation...

[Chris 62]

You sir, should let it rest, you seem to be cronilogically challenged, the Nazis invaded the Soviet Union on June 22 1941, not 1940.

[mapfi]

Ooops, Chris, you're right there.
Nevertheless, as I said, that's not when it started. Maybe the total effect of millions of deads wasn't perceptible yet, but Chaplin knew, the whole world knew what was happening to Jews under Hitler and nobody wanted to see. And that's why Chaplin released the movie after all. And I just know this for a fact - also the thing with the alterations - because they just ran a documentary a few months ago on TV. I even talked with a friend who saw it too just to make sure. So I might get something wrong from the History book but my message stays true:

Chaplin did not feel bad for releasing the movie and he did it with knowing part of the Holocaust already.

[Chris 62]

I'm not going to debate with you, but the fact is VERY few knew what was happening in Germany at the time, and when the info was leaked, it was NOT believed.

At any rate, it is irelivant, Mark's excedingly poor taste is at issue.

You may find nothing wrong with Hitler look alikes, if you look at the poll, a far number do find such a problem.

[mapfi]

I only wanted to correct you on the statement that Chaplin regretted the release of the movie, which wasn't the case. So please, don't be offended by my argueing.
Now if some people read this, it might do them some good because I only made a mistakes from 1940 to 1941 but most don't event know anything about WWII. I spent half a year in 12th grade in Pennsylvania and we covered WW2. I saw how interested students today are! That's pretty sad. But as soon as somebody comes up with anything satiric related to the third Reich he's banned because he offends. People would do better to get their history right and actually learn from history in order not to make the same mistakes again. Banning humour isn't going to help in that. Eg. look at that other satiric thread about 9/11 being the best disaster ever, another one getting banned there for making a valuable point - that 9/11 is one of hundreds of disasters taking place everyyear, just happening to be the one with the most news coverage and the greatest impact on world history but surely not being the most terrible one.

So that's why I think Markos didn't do anything bad when creating that banner. It just wouldn't be sensible to put it up because it's not well made and creative, has a flaw using Chaplin and just seriously offends people, unfortunately I want to say.

Edit: Trying to make myself more clear and typos

[SpencerH]

No one said anything about our wanting to "ban" the banner. Certainly not myself, and I dont think chris either. The title of this thread is "should I run this banner?". Its a question, and we've given our opinions, mostly NO. While you may disagree, I dont find anything funny about Hitler and his ilk.

[Jules]

I still say if you want to lampoon someone, use my idea.

[mapfi]

I used ban equivalant to 'being told that one has lousy taste' and for the 9/11 thread equivalant to 'you jackass'. You're right nobody is actually banning but it's more or less equivalant or not?
It's perfectly ok if you don't find the stuff funny but are you actually offended and would like to ban such stuff if you could. Some certainly would. That's what's bothering me. Finding something funny or not is up to each one himself.

[SpencerH]

Some of us take it more seriously than that. I dont see anything obviously humourous about a picture of Chaplin satirizing Hitler. The movie yes, this picture no. Given my perspective, I find the notion of constantly looking at a representation of Hitler in banner ads (even a false one) offensive. If Markos runs it I'll leave. Other than voicing my opinion, its all I can do to show my displeasure with the proposal.

[Jules]

I doubt he'll use it anyway given all the negative feedback it's generated.

[SpencerH]

I doubt it too. Clearly he thought something might not sit right.

[Traianvs]

this banner is a great piece of humor

i mean we laugh with the disabled, with the dead, with blondes, with old ppl with this and that.. if you brighten up and laugh about things you'll feel a lot better mates :d

[Jules]

My latest and greatest.