Talk:Rejected

Sounds

I always was under the impression that it was not a vacuum cleaner in the "my spoon is too big" skit, but rather a blender. A blender would seem to fit the food theme of the skit more. Perhaps someone with the DVD can chime in if this is mentioned anywhere in the commentary? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.110.4.183 (talk) 02:55, 4 July 2005 (UTC)

It's not mentioned in the commentary (which is pretty hilariously awful), but it sounds more like a hair dryer to me. Slicing 22:12, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

Hair dryers have a higher sound. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.172.221.90 (talk) 00:39, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

No, it's a vacuum cleaner. (I have the Bitter Films DVD.)--71.35.158.73 00:21, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

From the Bitter Films volume 1 DVD it says in the trivia captions "rob also performed these vacuum cleaner sounds with a bottle and a pear". So, its a vacuum cleaner. --66.21.202.62 01:51, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

The above reply was made by me, i wasn't signed in, anyway i can change it? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Liquidfire3240 (talk • contribs) 01:55, 15 May 2007 (UTC).

The main characters are...

Why did someone previously change all occurances of "Puffball" to "Fishstick" under "My Anus is Bleeding"? Is it because they're seen in the Fishsticks ad? If so, that doesn't mean they're fishsticks. Fishsticks do not even look like puffballs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.172.221.90 (talk) 04:09, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

I don't know; they're definitely not fish sticks. See [1] (search for "fluffy" or "lamb") and [2] and [3] for Don Hertzfeldt's description of them. For that matter, I'm not sure why the people are referred to as "Balloon Figure #1" and "Balloon Figure #2" either. Slicing 04:45, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, my bad - sorry. Last time I checked the conventional wisdom was that they were fishsticks. Thanks for those links. I reverted again back to puffballs, as "fluffy lamb thing" is a little wordy. Kjl 06:39, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

I always thought they were clouds. Bertus 14:05, 5 September 2005 (UTC)

Notable Moments

Is this sectionr eally necessary? The movie is only 10 minutes long, and the only people who will enjoy these references are the individuals who have seen the film. DO we really need a list of quotes in this article? I think it would be a lot tidier without it. Shaggorama 19:03, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

Well, considering that most of the "Notable Moments" are also described in the synopsis, I think we should just delete the entire section. Slicing 05:17, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

As the one who created that section, I regretfully have to agree. I created it thinking it would be valuable to give the reader who hasn't seen the film the "flavor" of it via a few well-chosen quotes. What I wish I had foreseen is how many people would come across the article and say "I wish I had something to contribute to this article! Why, I know! I can add yet another scene from the movie!" There's no reason to think the transcription creep will ever die off. -- Antaeus Feldspar 23:21, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

I removed the section. Slicing 01:46, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

I just removed a newly added and poorly organized "Quotes" section because I can see it becoming just as bad as the old "Notable moments" section(basically a script for the entire short). If you want it added again perhaps you could propose an organized alternative(although I'm not sure that's possible with the whole script lending itself to strange/random quotes and scenes).  HeartofGold  ^(Searching) 22:30, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

A "wow!" to the editors of this article

I was passing through and read the synopsis for Rejected. I must say, that was one excellently written piece of work! A good work to all the editors to contributed to the final product! (Though in theory, the work is never done...) Kareeser|^Talk! 04:12, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

first scene

Though the first scene contains non sequitor I think it may be worth mentioning in the article that it starts with the semblance of accordance with the "Family Learning Channel" idea. The first character teaches us that his spoon is too big, the second identifies himself as a banana. Though it seems random it does fit the bill in a somewhat deranged way. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.213.183.243 (talk) 19:27, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

"my anus is bleeding"

seeing as that's probably the most widely-known scene, I uploaded an image of it

if anyone can reupload in higher quality, please do so.. i -ah- cant :P

--Froth 00:56, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

oscars

This isn't all that relevant as to improving the article. All I have to say is this: I really, really want to know what still or clip they played of Rejected at the Oscars. 66.41.66.213 06:15, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

I think they played the spoon/banana scene if memory serves  :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sleepyjuly (talk • contribs) 22:16, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Video

Where can I watch this? Are there any legal free versions on the internet? My friend has it on his iPod. 68.55.180.200 21:38, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

It's on DVD at www.bitterfilms.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sleepyjuly (talk • contribs) 22:16, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

You can see it on Youtube, but I'm not so sure of its legality and the quality is pretty naff. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.139.183.246 (talk) 15:07, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

'Very strong' and 'often' and 'many'?

As the article currently says, "It has achieved a very strong cult following ... fans often wear costumes and chant along with the film, and many have tattoos made of their favorite characters".

How strong is 'very strong' and how often is 'often' and how many is 'many'? Is this just one of those magical statements that will never have any actual numbers to back it up? MGlosenger 13:58, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Is this a joke? I'm not going to engage you in a conversation AFTER you vandalized the page and acted like a child. You apparently have a personal grudge against some of the other users here and I want none of it. Take your troll bait somewhere else.

Sleepyjuly — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sleepyjuly (talk • contribs) 16:51, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm not trolling. I am asking a legitimate question. Perhaps someone else can answer. MGlosenger 23:31, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh, and don't get me wrong, I'm a fan of Rejected and I think it's funny, but those statements seem highly hyperbolic to me. I would love to see some sort of numbers, a list of Rocky Horror-style gatherings, a list of people who have Rejected-inspired tattoos, a series of pictures of people in Rejected-inspired costumes, anything. MGlosenger 23:33, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

MGlosenger: If you're a fan of Rejected then you should know all this already. Go to the Bitter Films Myspace page (http://myspace.com/94002849). Click on "show-offs", a fan gallery. Observe tattoos and costumes and gatherings. Cite it somehow in the Wikipedia article if that will satisfy you. Realize this is merely the tip of the Rejected fan iceberg. The rest of us will wait patiently for the apology for your annoying behavior.

Sleepyjuly — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sleepyjuly (talk • contribs) 06:55, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

I count 39 pictures, and they're not all of people in costumes or with tattoos, but even if they were, I don't think this demonstrates a 'very strong' cult following and shows that fans 'often' wear costumes and 'many' have tattoos. Is there any other evidence? MGlosenger 23:49, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

LOL, isn't it amazing how trolls are never satisfied?  :) Don't waste your time on this jerk anymore Sleepy, you handily proved your point for my money. -JT — Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.246.253.181 (talk) 00:37, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

You're trolling me. MGlosenger 00:47, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

I just realized it doesn't matter.

R

E

J

E

C

T

E

D

MGlosenger 03:55, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Link to youtube

The full film can be found on youtube. Would it be ok to link? Divide 15:08, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

According to the www.bitterfilms.com FAQ, every video version of their work online is a bootleg. So I think linking to one would be against Wikipedia policy. Sleepyjuly 18:19, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Info box

Is that info box sidebar really necessary? It doesn't offer much information and right now it sort of creates a huge gap in the page. Sleepyjuly 21:17, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Exhibition History

I don't know if this rates a change to the text here, but I can tell you that Turner does not have a policy against using the word "Jesus". Not only the words but also a representation of Jesus have been used on Squidbillies and Robot Chicken. Whether this was the case back then or not I don't know, I've only watched Adult Swim for a couple years. If anyone else knows any more about this, please discuss here and/or put up a citation or something. Highonhendrix 04:30, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi there,

I don't know current Turner policy but yeah it must have been the case back then. I didn't write that part of the entry but I remember the "Jesus" problem being mentioned in several articles and interviews. It may be mentioned somewhere on bitterfilms.com too

Sleepyjuly 20:47, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

IMDB ranking

Rejected is ranked at number 37 on imdb not number 3 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.12.84.199 (talk) 07:20, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Athfepbroodwich.png

Image:Athfepbroodwich.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:53, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Plot summary

I've removed the plot summary because 1000 words for a 9-1/2 minute film is obscene. I've also trimmed out a lot of hype and unsourced stuff. --Tony Sidaway 17:53, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

I agree that whomever wrote the plot summary went overboard. I am undoing the rest of your gutting of the page though because now you are going overboard. DISCUSS before making such major, sweeping deletions. Sleepyjuly (talk) 00:04, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

RfC: Multiple issues

I've called a RFC since most of my bold edits here have been reverted. Here's a summary.  Below I'm describing the content removed while giving a link to User:Sleepyjuly's reverts.  I think Sleepjuly agrees with me that the article had problems.

• [4] Promotional treatment of a DVD, using language like "never before seen footage" etc. My approach was to remove what I regard as clutter while leaving "Rejected is also featured on the DVD, "Bitter Films Volume 1", a compilation of Don Hertzfeldt's short films from 1995-2005 that is available exclusively from the Bitter Films website." --Tony 07:26, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
  • I would welcome a rewrite to this section, however I feel that mentioning the special features related to this film on said DVD is important (deleted scenes, commentary, production materials, etc). People coming here interested in this film would benefit from that information. If you feel the way it is currently worded is "promotional", I would be happy to structure it in a more neutral fashion. Sleepyjuly (talk) 09:54, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
    • RfC response to issue #1: Needs re-writing surely, but the deleted portion contained content that just listed what was on the DVD. I have no problem with the actual content. It just needs copyediting.--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 19:09, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

• [5] A comparison of this film to Hard Day's Night, which is sourced from somebody's myspace page. My approach is to remove this poorly sourced (and frankly ridiculous) comparison. --Tony 07:26, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
  • This was not a Myspace source, this was sourced to a newspaper film critic's quote. I believe you got mixed up here. Sleepyjuly (talk) 09:54, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
    • RfC response to issue #2: Non-notable reference. Not a myspace page, but I would probably chuck it. Even it is was notable, it in no way belongs in the lead, which should include only the most universal of opinions.--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 19:09, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

• [6] Unsourced claim that it's a cult film, referring to pop culture section which is itself unsourced. I removed the claim. --Tony 07:26, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
  • It is very much a cult film. I do not believe this claim requires a source, but I'd be happy to find a quote from a magazine or newspaper critic if you feel it is required? Sleepyjuly (talk) 09:54, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
    • RfC response to issue #3: Considering it had virtually no commercial success, but has proliferated as a bootleg, there is some argument for it being a cult film. However, the level of eveidence to devoted to proving the claim is inappropriate for the lead section (only major bullet points should be in the lead) and definitely this fact should be substantiated with a reference. Just say its a cult film, fact tag it, and present the facts in the body.--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 19:09, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

• Four years later, there are still edit wars over this! I think this is pretty clear consensus that all the stuff about dressing up and sourcing it to myspace is NOT appropriate. I will continue to revert this edit without a clear change in consensus. GDallimore (Talk) 13:02, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

• [7] Claim that "in 2004 [it] was ranked by the Internet Movie Database as the 3rd best short film of all time." imdb does not to my knowledge make such determinations. It's certainly not the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences. Removed. --Tony 07:26, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
  • IMDB does in fact make these determinations, based on their user voting system. I can add a source to this claim, as this is mentioned on the Bitter Films website page for this film: www.bitterfilms.com/rejected.html Sleepyjuly (talk) 09:54, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
    • RfC response to issue #4: I think IMDB actually does keep a running tally based on user votes. I've seen pages like that there before, not for shorts, but for feature films. That can certainly be clarifed. What a actually question is whether the figure is still accurate. Since it is a running tally, I think that if it is not current now (I dont' know if it is or not) than it shouldn't be included. I guess that's for you two to decide.--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 19:09, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

• [8] Unsourced story about all kinds of broadcast problems. Left in "'Rejected was scheduled to air on Adult Swim in 2001 and 2002 but despite airing on the Cartoon Network in other countries as well as on other international television networks, it has to date never been broadcast on American television", removed the weird stuff. --Tony 07:26, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
  • This is a true story and I don't know why it was not sourced here. This story was a big deal in animation circles when it took place. I believe the story can be sourced to the Bitter Films page too: www.bitterfilms.com/rejected.html - I can add this source. Sleepyjuly (talk) 09:54, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
    • RfC response to issue #5: The fact that there was a broadcasting issue can be fact tagged. The rumors should be chucked. Speculation is just speculation.--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 19:09, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

• [9] Some exceptionally trivial references to the film (such as "The phrase "I am a banana!" is featured in the item description of a Banana in the MMORPG Kingdom of Loathing") and "Lemon Demon also paid tribute to the film with his song "Consumer Whore", which ends with the words "and how" spoken at the very end of the song. (The "how" is actually split into the first second of the next track on the album, "Between You And Me"; the combined phrase is unnoticeable unless one listens to both songs adjacently.)" Removed as tripe. --Tony 07:26, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
  • I was not the author of all of these, but I believe the majority are important to demonstrate the wide influence this film has had: its influence on Adult Swim, the "Superbad" filmmakers, video game creators, students, etc. I invite the original authors of these to provide their sources. Sleepyjuly (talk) 09:54, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
    • RfC response to issue #7: I would chuck the murals, and then reduce the rest to about one sentence. (ie - Rejected allusions are found in Superbad and Kingdom of Loathing, and also in songs by Lemon Demon and Dead Air.) Otherwise, this section is on a slippery slope to becoming a trivia section.--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 19:09, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
  • The "and how" bit should definitely be removed. "The phrase "and how" has become a popular internet meme." but the idea that this was started by Rejected is pure speculation. (In fact it's been a catchphrase in common use for the better part of a century, and was first recorded in 1924, as is explained at http://www.phrases.org.uk/bulletin_board/5/messages/119.html.) Though whether Lemon Demon was indeed paying tribute to the film or not, I don't know. --Thegooseking (talk) 12:18, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
• [10] I converted remaining item in popular culture section to prose.
  • RfC response to issue #7: Prose over lists always.--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 19:09, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Comments, discussion, ideas, welcome. --Tony 07:26, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

I have just added a bunch of references and rewrote some of the wordiage Tony took issue with. Thanks to Tony for pointing out these inconsistencies. Again, I invite the original authors of the rest of this article to add their own references; in the meantime I will seek them out myself and see what I can find and confirm  :) Sleepyjuly (talk) 10:25, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Pop-Tarts

Is this the same animator who did some ads for Pop-Tarts a few years back? 06:31, 22 November 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paula Bunion (talk • contribs)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Rejected. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080403010438/http://www.cbs.com:80/latenight/lateshow/wahoo/index/php/20080225.phtml to http://www.cbs.com/latenight/lateshow/wahoo/index/php/20080225.phtml

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 19:49, 11 February 2016 (UTC)