August 20, 2007
Touch Up D.C. #7
Flickr contributor easement whipped up a few choice entries for our August Touch Up D.C. feature, but this one won hands down as the favorite of our editorial staff. We're sure Apollo Creed is furious. Don't forget to flex those photo editing muscles before the end of the month, and send in your entries either by emailing them to sommer (at) dcist.com or tagging them with "touchupdc" on Flickr.
|
Advertisement: DCist Continues Below!
Post a comment (Comment Policy)
I usually hate when people get uptight about things that are only meant as a joke, but I can't help but want to kick the crap out of the asshole who did this "touch up". While the raising might have been "staged", it still stands for something that should not have been messed with. You might as well paint grafitti on the statue.
MOST DISHONORABLE TOUCH UP EVAR!!!!
i bet there are a few thousand wwii vets who'd be REAL happy to see this one. but hey, they'll all be dead soon so who gives a fat rat's fart about them or their sacrifices?
I honestly and truly cannot understand why DCist continues with this miserable feature. True, most of your regular features are of incredibly low quality (see your overheard things), but this is just so painfully unfunny that it really needs to be put out to pasture. And shot, over and over and over again.
It'd be funny if someone took a photo of Bush speaking during the start of the war in Iraq, and added a banner to sarcastically claim that the US had achieved a "Mission Accomplished."
That reminds me, I've got this great picture where I put a Hitler moustache and tits on the Lincoln Memorial! Everyone in my 9th Grade AP Civics class thougth it was HIGH-larious, and those guys know funny! It's actually a sly comment on Northern mercantilism and antebellum gender roles, as well as a po-mo critique of the statue-ness of the statue.
I've also got a Calvin peeing on the Old Glory, if that's worth anything.
yeah, this is pretty much tasteless.
i wouldn't even say bad taste.
i don't the monument was all that tasteful on its own ... i mean, a monument to a staged event ... and quite frankly, planting an american flag on liberated land is imperialistic. and when (as it happened in some cases -- not this one) it becomes an american territory, its not just imperialistic, its imperial.
but i digress: this is just cheap.
Oh, please. Lighten up. This is pure frivolity, and you just know Tojo woulda hated it.
Oh, and AI #6, you do realize you used a monument to our liberation of Iwo Jima from... uh... Imperial Japan as a vehicle to randomly comment on US imperialism? Don't you?
Creativity, folks. Deal with it.
I agree, this crossed the line. Disrespectful indeed, Shame on you DCist. I sentence you to spend the next weekend watching "Flags of our Fathers" and "Letters from Iwo Jima" on a continuous loop.
monkeyerotica -- WTF is that?
Some of you people are too much --- all that humus must be going to your heads.
Both of my late grandfathers served in the Pacific in WWII and my brother is currently a 2nd Lt. in the United States Marine Corps.
His commissiong ceremoney this May was in the shadow of the Iwo Jima Memorial. There were about 100 young men and women commissioned and a fair amount of healthy veterans there.
I challenge you to say that to any WWII vet or these young folk. They have tact and would probably just laugh at you but in an ideal world they would bust you upside your head -- maybe put some sense in you.
That is an awful insensitive evil comment. How dare you -- you ungrateful liberal communist Yoga humus eating spoiled trust fund brat.
DCist with all due respect -- creativity is one thing but this is not respectful and you know it.
I can Photoshop skidmarks on those shorts. Does that make me "creative," or an asshole? When you start mocking monuments to dead people, when survivors are still alive, that's just weak. This is about as dumb as Photoshopping snocones on the Titanic memorial, or submarine sandwiches on the Lusitania memorial.
You must be ever mindful of the living Snark, young padewan. I see this and sense dcist moving to the Dark Side.
Wow. We've really become a stiff-necked, uptight society, haven't we? And prone to great bluster and finger-wagging over the denigration of our sacred symbols. No wonder Kurt Vonnegut was so bitter at the end of his life. I'm bitter right now, and I'm not even dying.
Show of hands: who here enjoys having their particularly favorite Symbol of America shown with underwear dangling from it?
Now excuse me, but I have to go back to Photoshopping the Washington Monument into a tampon applicator.
I have to agree that this is kind of an abortion of a feature. Unfunny ideas and piss-poor execution (the TIE fighter on 395 and the horsehoe around the monument come to mind).
Although I did rather like the sea monster in the tidal basin. It's all been downhill from there, though.
Hasn't it been shown that the raising of the flag at Iwo Jima was in fact not staged? As in, there's film that shows the event taking place, several frames of which essentially duplicate the famous photograph? I seem to recall some light being shed on its authenticity around the time of the release of "Letters from Iwo Jima" and "Flags of our Fathers."
#1: The scene in the Iwo Jima memorial was NOT staged. There was a second flag raising on Iwo Jima that was indeed staged for the cameras. But this flag raising was filmed as it was actually happening.
#2: This feature is just plain ol' dumb.
#3: This particular photoshop is also plain ol' dumb.
@17,
Saying the second raising was staged is not correct.
"As the flag went up(the original raising), Secretary of the Navy James Forrestal decided that he wanted the flag as a souvenir. He sent Sergeant Mike Strank (who was photographed in the Flag Raising picture) to take a second flag up the volcano to replace the first. As the first flag came down, the second went up, and it was then that Associated Press photographer Joe Rosenthal took the famous photograph "Raising the Flag on Iwo Jima" of the replacement flag being planted on the mountain's summit.
The second raising was not a staged event, since the purpose of the second raising was to replace the flag, not to take the picture.
disrespectful
This is horrible.
Please stop this.
You wipe comments, you should wipe this.
Wow how original. I don't think anyone has use the Marine Corps War Memorial in such a way. I mean this must be the first time right?
This is in such bad taste and shows a juvenile and immature sense of humor by the person who made it and the staff at DCIST.
Its not just s statue. It represents six men all who have passed now. Three who died on Iwo Jima never having seen the picture that would make them famous.
They are:
The front four are (left to right) Ira Hayes, Franklin Sousley, John Bradley and Harlon Block.
The back two are Michael Strank (behind Sousley) and Rene Gagnon (behind Bradley).
So lets look at it not as making fun of a War Memorial but as using the image of these brave and wonderful men as the punch line for joke. Thats what makes this disgusting.
I think the most offensive part is the association of the memorial with Sylvester Stallone. That's really unforgiveable.
I know I'm going to get killed for this, but I actually thought this one was kind of funny.
I certainly understand, appreciate, and agree with the strong feelings of those who feel this is disrespectful, because it definitely is. Maybe I wouldn't find this slightly amusing if it was the Vietnam Veterans memorial (PoppaRat is a 32 yr Army vet), but somehow I doubt it.
You know what's really sad? Londonist has been doing this feature for months, without any of the whinging about it being unfunny or amateurish (though most of theirs display just as rudimentary photoshop skills as a lot of these). People just sit back and enjoy the silliness.
Additionally, they've had images that are potentially offensive to the church, to the Union Jack, and to the Queen without anyone getting their knickers in a bunch.
Way to reinforce people's perceptions that Washingtonians are uptight, humorless, politically correct assholes, people. Get the hell over yourselves.
I think the most offensive part is the association of the memorial with Sylvester Stallone. That's really unforgiveable.
Actually I thought it was a nice tribute to America's love affair with fake boxing.
Relax, folks. Seeing the humor in this doesn't mean you hate veterans. The Iwo Jima memorial has surpassed its original intention and has become an iconic statue just like the Lincoln Memorial and Washington Monument (both tributes to dead presidents that are used in advertising for the Washington Nationals). To me, once something has become iconic, it is fair game for humor.
People love to feel offended; it gives them a sense of superiority to the offender.
Given how many people have expressed disgust at this, does DCist plan on offering an official apology and retraction?
@26
There is a difference between Presidents and War Memorials. Presidents had a choice in their fate, dead soldiers and vets didn't.
If we use your theory: I feel it hasn't been long enough, Vets are still alive, family member still feel the lost and pain of that battle. Sure it was over 60 years, but the pain is still there. Also, this statue isn't about Iwo Jima itself it is about those who have died and suffered for the Marine Corp. With Marines still coming home in body bags from Iraq and Afghanistan, this memorial deserves more reverence than a cheap Photoshop. If you disagree, let saunter over there with a blown up picture and see what response you will get.
#26 - hillrat's point is the one I'm making: there are no Civil War or Revolutionary War veterans to be offended. The least we can do is wait until the WWII vets are dead before posting unfunny pastiches of their memorials.
I am getting a real kick out of the anonymous "this is funny, you're all uptight assholes" posts. There isn't even any basic acknowledgement of why anyone wouldn't find this funny. It's like the Borf thread, only less funny, if such a thing is possible. Now, speaking as an asshole, I'm the first to admit that DC has a higher asshole-per-square-foot ratio of any place outside Simi Valley or Park Slope. I used to think this was a function of our unusually high lawyer/master's degree population. But looking at this thread, I have to conclude it's because there's a generation of people who never had to sacrifice anything, so they have no clue as to what that even means to people who did sacrifice.
Sorry if I'm sounding like Tom F***ing Brokaw, but his leaves the same nasty taste in my mouth as the christian nutjobs that protest at Iraqi veteran funerals.
RJ - If you took this photo to the memorial, I'd wager you'd get a few chuckles out of a few teenagers, but anyone past the age of consent would ask, "WTF is your problem?"
Needless to say, any Marine would beat the living s**t out anyone unfortunate enough to be carrying a blowup of this. Even the ones in wheelchairs.
Now, that would be funny.
Can't wait to hear your positions on flagburning! Chill.
ok, first of all, to those getting upset over this, let's examine the nature of the contest, take well-known DC icons and add something that would NEVER appear with said icon in real life.
In a town that is stuffed full of nothing but monuments to this country's leaders and honored heros, hm... is it really such a surprise that 1. a world famous war memorial was chosen and 2. something light hearted was done with the great blank canvas of an empty flagpole?
surely you can recognize the light hearted nature of the contest and that no disrespect is meant to any specific person or cause/beliefs the monuments were erected for.
i'm wondering if you're not just more offended to see a pair of men's underwear (uhm, i mean fighting trunks) attached to a monument than oh say godzilla stomping on one. maybe next time it will be a pair of godzilla's underwear.
OMG i love boxing!! I hate this touchup!! I'd send a touchup back if only i could get these fat abused fists of mine around a mouse.
Can't wait to hear your positions on flagburning!
I have no problem with this. It's the only way to get rid of an old flag anyway. As a political "statement" though, it's pretty weak. What are you trying to say by burning a flag anyway? And why can't you articulate that in words? Flagburning is basically dropping an F bomb, and about as shocking.
I'd like to see the feminist response to my Photoshop of the blindfolded statue of Justice on all fours with a ballgag and tit clamps, and being mounted from behind by Ed Meese.
ah. yes. Thank God that there are people here getting offended on behalf of marines everywhere because we all know that marines don't have a sense of humor, or can speak for themselves.
#27-
I count thirteen separate commenters who are expressing offense in this thread. That's assuming that there is no repetition in any of the offended guests.
There were eight people who enjoyed it enough to hit the "recommend" button, plus a number of commenters who obviously enjoyed it (who I'm not counting, since they may have also hit "recommend").
Since we all know that people are far more likely to raise their voice when they're complaining than when they like something (the consensus of comment cards at even a great restaurant will skew to the negative), I think it's safe to assume that at least as many people enjoyed this as hated it, with probabaly a whole lot of people not particularly moved either way.
God love the PC brigade, who think that anyone, anywhere, who is ever in any way offended, deserves an apology.
funny
I love those boxers. I want to be married in them.
To a war hero.
wow, I don't know how to use photoshop, but I love telling people who use it how they did it wrong.
its much more satisfying than doing something myself.
dumb.
never have so few, whined for so long, about so little.
and YES I ALWAYS listen to people who choose usernames based on animal porn.
bad form.
@34
I've always felt that burning the American flag in protest really pays homage to the right of free speech that the flag stands for.
Not particularly funny, and not particulalry offensive. Move along folks, nothing to see here...
And by saying this Touch Up D.C. was worse than Hitler, we can now end this thread, and hopefully this feature.
I was the first poster - I was offended because my great uncles fought in the Pacific, one of them being at Iwo Jima. My father served in Vietnam and Desert Storm. I have other family and friends serving in the military now.
I could care less about the trunks instead of flag part - that's fine. BUT - it bothers me to see the soldiers, the common grunts, being a part of the joke. That's why I don't like it and that's why I think it's wrong.
My opinion.