Spongebob Porn Parody & Rule 34
January 18, 2013 
24 Comments
Finally, we can watch a squirrel blow a sea-sponge in this porn parody
Woodrocket.com announced today that they will be releasing a SpongeBob SquarePants porn parody as a free five-part series called SpongeKnob SquareNuts. Director Lee Roy Myers, who you may remember from such porn parodies as The Simpsons Porn Parody, Family Guy Porn Parody, and The Big Lebowski Porn Parody, described his latest work as, “something much funnier, sexier, and we’re going to hell-ier.”
The good people of WoodRocket said they are proud to present a movie that fully embraces Rule 34, one that proves even the weirdest porn parody can still be filled with hot sex.
For those of you who don’t know, Rule 34 is the concept that if something exists there is a porn of it. This is especially true nowadays with the whole parody genre. But do we as pornographers have to obey Rule 34?
Parodies do their best to recreate their source material. It’s the attention to detail that makes them successful. Case in point: Axel Braun. He just won pretty much every award he could for his Star Wars XXX parody because his sets, costumes, and casting choices were as close as possible to the real thing. This then poses a problem for anyone trying to direct a parody of an animated TV show or movie because recreating the animation-style with live actors is bound to fall into the uncanny valley.
The uncanny valley is a hypothesis applied to robotics but we can make it work.
Basically, the uncanny valley occurs if you were to chart a person’s emotional response to an anthropomorphized thing. More often than not the human observer’s emotional response to the anthropomorphized thing will become increasingly empathetic until a point is reached where it resembles a human but is not fully human. A feeling of strong revulsion replaces the feeling of empathy, which is the uncanny valley. Look at this graph if you’re lost:
Now let’s apply this hypothesis to porn parodies, specifically porn parodies of animated shows.
Scooby Doo Porn Parody is one that works because the show uses a real world (although slightly spookier) color palette and character design. Because they are fully human animated characters their transition to being portrayed by fully human porn actors is seamless.
The gang
The porn parody gang (minus Scooby, thankfully)
They are human characters that as a cartoon we can empathize with and thanks to the show’s real world aesthetic, a transition to being portrayed by humans is accomplished. It does not fall into the uncanny valley, it is a delightful little sex romp.
Now let’s look at America’s favorite homemaker, Marge Simpson.
Marge!
As you can see (you should already know this however), Marge’s skin and hair tones do not occur naturally in humans. Though she her character is human we know that by design she is not. Still, Marge’s character is human enough that in spite of the askew color scheme, we can still empathize with her. Marge in the porn parody however passes the point of empathy and falls into the uncanny valley (sorry Andy San Dimas, who played Marge in the parody).
Andy San Dimas as Marge
The porn parody pays attention to detail but that is its failure. Marge’s skin and hair transposed to real life now becomes unsettling because she resembles a human (because Andy San Dimas is a real human) but the colors keep her from being “fully human”. This then evokes the sense of revulsion and Andy San Dimas/Marge falls into the uncanny valley.
Now back to SpongeBob.
SpongeBob SquarePants is an anthropomorphized sea-sponge in the original show. So already he is not human but acts human but it’s a cartoon so it’s ok.
We as an audience can empathize with SpongeBob (unless you’re that old grump Squidward). But in the porn parody, you have Anthony Rosano (a human) portraying an anthropomorphized sea-sponge, which immediately puts it into the uncanny valley because an anthropomorphized character now portrayed by a human makes the character too human yet not full human. A feeling of revulsion is evoked almost instantly.
Lee Roy Myers and Woodrocket have pushed Rule 34 to the limit but in doing so they’ve made something that can only trigger revulsion in the viewers because it was taken from the wrong source material. SpongeBob is not meant to be portrayed in live-action because the aesthetic and the character design can’t be empathized with unless he’s animated. Otherwise, it’s too deep in the uncanny valley.
So in conclusion, Rule 34 is true. If you have money, cameras, and actors, you can make a porn out of anything…but it’s not always a good idea.
Of course, this is just my opinion. If you think otherwise, please feel free to comment. Just make sure you watch Part 1 of SpongeKnob here.
I will say this though, Skin Diamond is great in Part 1.
00
Author Info
hi, who like to date in kajang?
No one, thank you.
I will am a boy
Will.I.Am? Of Black Eyed Peas?
GOAT
I luh dat shit
skin diamond hot ass
This man/woman speaks the truth.
andy san dimas nice tits
Yes, very good.
Ido’tn understand
Can you be more specific on what you don’t understand? I’d love to help.
I’d watch the Simpsons one but not the Spongebob.
How come? They’re pretty much the same thing.
i might watch the spongeknob film for shits and giggles. and i know if my ex-girlfriend watched this shed have a kanipshit lol
Haha. Kanipshit.
If you do watch it for shits and giggles, let us know what you think! I couldn’t get through it. It was too weird.
I think the Simpsons one is more palatable (read: less disgusting) than the Spongebob one because the Spongebob one lies deeper in the uncanny valley. Marge is much more human-like than Spongebob and Sandy are.
This article was ok but http://www.nemesiscomplex.com/5-porn-parodies-to-ruin-your-childhood-18.html
Has so many more… Love these paroodies they crack me up…