Dublin, Ireland –– PopCap Games, maker of some of the world’s most popular video game franchises and a division of Electronic Arts, announced on August 20 that the underground growth of the sequel to Plants vs. Zombies, one of the world’s most popular video games, is germinating and advancing with rigor.

The sequel to Plants vs. Zombies is expected to launch by Spring 2013 and will include a bevy of new features, settings and situations designed to delight the franchise’s tens of millions of fans around the world. No other details of the highly anticipated new installment in the franchise are available at this time, beyond the following comments from some of the game’s denizens.

“Spring is crullest curlie ungood time, and plantz grow dull roots,” noted an unidentified spokesperson. “So, we are meating you for brainz at yore house. No worry to skedule schedlue plan… we’re freee anytime. We’ll find you.”

Known for its quirky, one-of-a-kind blend of art, humor, polish and attention to detail, PopCap has been a mainstay of casual, mobile and social gaming for more than a decade.  More than a billion people around the world have played PopCap’s video games, including the award-winning, blockbuster franchises Plants vs. Zombies, Bejeweled,  Zuma, Peggle and Bookworm. The breadth of PopCap’s audience is similarly impressive, as its games appeal equally to both genders and all ages.

“There was a time we relished a bracing, hearty blend of zombies, in the morning,” said Sonny F. Lower, a representative of the Flora Forever Foundation. “But first, a brisk shower and some strategic pruning are required. Tomorrow is near!”

The article Plants vs Zombies Returns in Spring 2013 appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

New York, U.S.A – The Committee to Protect Journalists condemns the campaign of harassment and intimidation against a newspaper in South Africa after it published a photo of a painting of President Jacob Zuma more than two weeks ago.

On May 13, local private weekly City Press published an art review of an exhibition in Johannesburg that featured a painting of a Soviet-era propaganda poster casting Zuma in the mold of Vladimir Lenin with exposed genitals, according to news reports. After a series of criticism and threats against the paper in the week of 28 May, the paper’s editor-in-chief, Ferial Haffajee, announced the removal of the photo from the website on Monday, she said in an op-ed.

Haffajee told CPJ 31 May 2012 that she had received a letter from a government official that said the paper’s coverage could instigate a race war if they continued to report on Zuma. Days before City Press removed the photo, news accounts reported that a City Press reporter was obstructed from covering a local union meeting on Saturday, while others said that on Sunday, protesters from Zuma’s ruling African National Congress (ANC) party had burned copies of the paper that featured the painting.

The ANC released a statement on May 24 saying that City Press had singled itself out as being against Zuma, the ANC, “our democracy, and the majority of South Africans.” Jackson Mthembu, a spokesman for the party, called the newspaper “a perpetrator of injustice and slander,” and told supporters “to indefinitely boycott buying the City Press Newspaper … until the removal of the insulting portrait of President Jacob Zuma from their website.”

On 31 May 2012, the Goodman Gallery announced that it had reached a deal with the ANC to remove the painting permanently, according to news reports.

“We condemn acts of intimidation and threats against City Press, as they undermine the rule of law in South Africa and curtail the freedom of the press to report on speech critical of the authorities,” said CPJ Africa Advocacy Coordinator Mohamed Keita. “As head of the ANC and the ruling coalition, President Jacob Zuma must call his supporters to restraint. We hold the government responsible for the safety of the staff of City Press.”

Zuma had filed a complaint at the Gauteng High Court on May 18 seeking the removal of the painting from both the gallery and the newspaper’s website, arguing that the artwork depicted him as a “philanderer, a womanizer, and one with no respect.” In court, City Press argued, as shown in an affidavit published online, that its decision to publish the photo was lawful and “amounted to the publication of legitimate criticism” in light of the president’s public admission of extramarital affairs and involvement in several sex scandals in office, the newspaper reported.

The Film and Publication Board also summoned City Press for a meeting, but then referred the case 30 May 2012 to the Press Ombudsman, who could take disciplinary action against the publication, according to news reports.

“It is a view I still live by and have never claimed that my or City Press’ freedom of expression is limitless. But our right to publish and to free expression is constitutional,” wrote Haffajee in an earlier Sunday op-ed.

The article South African Paper Forced to Remove Controversial Painting appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

A rather controversial painting recently went on display at the Goodman Gallery in Johannesburg, South Africa. The painting “The Spear” features the current president of South Africa, Jacob Zuma, with his genitals exposed. Considering South Africa’s history with apartheid and racism, this painting stirred emotions of fear and anger within the entire country at the apparent racism and disrespect behind it.

The artist of this painting, Brett Murray, is a prominent figure in the South African artistic world. Based in Cape Town, he established the sculpture department at the University of Stellenbosch, and he co-founded the Section 27 company known as ‘Public Eye’ which helps to increase the profile for public art in Cape Town.

He often curates shows and has his own solo shows. His works are also housed in a number of prestigious public collections in South Africa and abroad. What, then, could the motive be behind this prominent artist’s ‘inappropriate’ portrayal of the South African president?

Historical intersections of art and politics can testify to the role of some artists as powerful political commentators. The question is to what extent art is and should be free to express itself fully and in any way that it wishes? To what extent can it be accepted as ‘art for art’s sake’?

In the time of Stalin’s rule as Premier of the Soviet Union, there were various restrictions and rules on the nature of art and music created – music that did not follow these ‘rules’ were subsequently banned and/or their authors suffered major professional and personal consequences. It was only after Stalin’s death in 1953 that some Russian composers aired their feelings and opinions of this ruler.

For example, the brutal and savage second movement of Dmitri Shostakovich’s Tenth Symphony has been described as a ‘musical portrait of Stalin himself’. Although such anti-Stalin expressions were banned during Stalin’s rule, they could never be permanently excluded from the Russian arts.

An American equivalent of this controversial painting is the anti-Obama poster used by critics of the Obama administration, a poster also known as the Barack Obama ‘joker’ poster. This poster, which features Obama as ‘The Joker’ from the film ‘The Dark Knight’, has been described as racist, poisonous and mocking – but it has also been described as brilliant and artistic.

A challenge has been issued for the creator(s) of this image to come forward and explain themselves. The image seems to be infamous and to have created a stir, and yet is accepted as a mere form of protest against the current American government.

Could Murray’s supposedly ‘anti-Zuma’ painting then be considered a mere form of political protest against the current political party. Surely one cannot prevent art from being an expression of a culture, a nation and its thoughts: the problems of different eras.

Yes, ‘The Spear’ could be meant as political protest, but South Africa’s historical and current problems with racism makes this particular ‘political protest’ verge on the unacceptable. The president of the National Union of Mineworkers, Senzeni Zokwana, expressed the criticism that this painting is how white people ultimately regard and see black people in South Africa.

The painting might be infamous for its inappropriate depiciton of a prominent figure in South Africa, yet most criticism against ‘The Spear’ is not aimed at its deformation of the president’s character. In fact, most criticism seems to be aimed at the apparent racism implied through the painting.

The issue at stake, then, is not Murray’s motives behind creating this painting, nor is it whether such a depicition of the president should be accepted or even allowed. The issue is that this painting has highlighted the fear and possible remaining presence of racism in South Africa. As long as the issue of racism remains prominent in the country, any form of anti-stance to a political party or prominent figure could be ascribed to racism.

The article The War of ‘The Spear’ appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.