Talk:Hremail 62
From Homestar Runner Wiki
Arturo 9000
Based on the loading screen, and the physical design when we see it in full, the Arturo 9000 actually looks more like a microfiche viewer than a computer. User:kyojikasshu 10:09, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
- And, sure enough, the article gets edited as such, possibly even before I completed this post. User:kyojikasshu 10:11, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
- What about Arturo being a reference to Dr. Arturo from Sliders? It's not a terribly common last name, and it's certainly the first thing a lot of people would think of. 139.78.10.24 16:00, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
- Arturo is a first name too, the Spanish equivalent of "Arthur." As such, it's pretty common. —Guard Duck talk 17:08, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
- In the US, "Arturo" is a more common last name than "Chaps" :) --SDSpivey 17:11, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
- What about Arturo being a reference to Dr. Arturo from Sliders? It's not a terribly common last name, and it's certainly the first thing a lot of people would think of. 139.78.10.24 16:00, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
Homestar's Homestars
i'm wondering, should there be a note on the Homestar "Clothing" section that Homestar calls his stars Homestars?
-Lachlan
these sure get up fast
blink?
Could someone explain why Homestar's picture blinking is considered a "goof"? To me, it is something to be noted, since it is unusual, but how do we know it was not done intentionally? Clearly, TBC used a movie clip of H*R, and it gives the picture a funny Harry Potter feel. It doesn't seem like an error. wbwolf (t | ed) 17:55, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
- If they wanted to give it a "funny Harry Potter feel", the whole picture would have moved. Meanwhile, the "Homestar" object they use is always rigged to blink, and sometimes they've been known to forget when showing Homestar in in-universe photographs. If the sheep chewing grass in the paused KoT video is a Goof, then so is this. --Jay (Gobble) 18:03, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
- With that explanation, it's more make-sense. wbwolf (t | ed) 18:05, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
- (PS. Actually, modeling would have been a better example, as the KoT's page doesn't split its facts, but yeah. --Jay (Gobble) 18:07, 26 January 2009 (UTC))
- I say it's not a goof, but a mystery. I watch Homestar flash movies with Firefox with a "pause flash" extension I use sometimes. And, bizarrely, Homestar's eyes blink even when the flash is paused. --Hexagonal, an unregistered user.
- Yeah, it's because the loop of Homestar's Eyes blinking is a Flash movie clip, which animates continuously. (See this for more information) —Guard Duck talk 23:54, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
- I say it's not a goof, but a mystery. I watch Homestar flash movies with Firefox with a "pause flash" extension I use sometimes. And, bizarrely, Homestar's eyes blink even when the flash is paused. --Hexagonal, an unregistered user.
- (PS. Actually, modeling would have been a better example, as the KoT's page doesn't split its facts, but yeah. --Jay (Gobble) 18:07, 26 January 2009 (UTC))
- With that explanation, it's more make-sense. wbwolf (t | ed) 18:05, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
its just like the wiki's homestar
- If TBC do something notable by accident, it's a goof. If TBC do something notable on purpose, then it's a remark. To me, using a blinking Homestar in a photo is clearly a deliberate attempt by TBC to slip in a little humour that most of their viewers won't spot straight away (since their attention is on something else). Hence, I'd describe it as a remark, not a goof. In fact, if I was allowed to be supreme emperor of the wiki for just one day, I would move all these blinking facts to Remarks. Please explain to me how TBC are "known to forget" about leaving this Flash movie clip in inappropiate places. Considering the amount of time they spend creating each animation, they'd easily notice this blinking movie clip and could simply swap it for a static image of Homestar's eyes if so desired. Do you have any transcripts of interviews where they specifically mention their habit of making this so-called mistake? If so, fine. If not, I stand by my rant. – The Chort 18:44, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- I see no humor in them doing it on purpose. It's a lot more believable and frankly, more likely that they forgot to swap out the animation, as it just uses the same flash object. Also, if you were supreme emperor for one day, then the day after that, there'd be a lot of reverting going on. But i digress. The point is, it's more likely unintentional, so unless we have an interview that says it's on PURPOSE, i think it should remain a goof. — Defender1031*Talk 20:47, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- I can see where it'd be humorous. A better question, I think is, are there instances of Homestar being in static pictures where he doesn't blink? (I don't know the answer) If so, it's likely that this is a goof, but if he blinks every time he's in a picture, I think that that's evidence for it being intentional. I don't think they'd forget so often. Essentially, my question is, which happens more often: Pictures of Homestar blink, or they do not? -140.247.11.38 22:18, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- And, having just checked the modeling example, since he blinks at one point, but not another, it's probably a goof. -140.247.11.38 22:19, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- I can see where it'd be humorous. A better question, I think is, are there instances of Homestar being in static pictures where he doesn't blink? (I don't know the answer) If so, it's likely that this is a goof, but if he blinks every time he's in a picture, I think that that's evidence for it being intentional. I don't think they'd forget so often. Essentially, my question is, which happens more often: Pictures of Homestar blink, or they do not? -140.247.11.38 22:18, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- I see no humor in them doing it on purpose. It's a lot more believable and frankly, more likely that they forgot to swap out the animation, as it just uses the same flash object. Also, if you were supreme emperor for one day, then the day after that, there'd be a lot of reverting going on. But i digress. The point is, it's more likely unintentional, so unless we have an interview that says it's on PURPOSE, i think it should remain a goof. — Defender1031*Talk 20:47, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
The Canadian Couple?
I wonder if that refers to the weekly fan stuff from Aug 05, the wedding invitation? That came from a Canadian couple. I hope so. That was me!
dweeoooowwwww
Would dweeoooowwwww be a reference to the the sound that the original paper made?--Shaggy | talk 20:20, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
- Not really, The Paper says Preeeow. That doesn't sound anything like that.--
Record307 Talk/Contribs 20:45, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
Oh, Yellow Crayon...
Is it just me, or did the "brellow crown" incident happen directly after the end of DNA Evidence? As Strong Sad walks in, he says to his crayon, "Oh, yellow crayon, only you know what REALLY happened!" (Maybe he means the crayon knows why the site was non-updated for so long, I don't know.) This just seems like a ref to me. Probably not though. User:WeirdAl 22:14, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
- Uh, no, and I have no idea what you're talking about, frankly. — MichaelXX2
22:15, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
- He's saying that maybe Homsar and Strong Sad weren't the only ones who knew the truth behind the DNA Evidence. But even then, that's a stretch. --69.150.85.66 22:19, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
- Mmm... seems unlikely to me. Seems just like standard Strong Sad for him to talk to inanimate objects about his secrets. Homestar-Winner (talk) 22:21, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
- Do we have an article on that? --69.150.85.66 22:22, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
- {Edit Conflict twice} I would call it a reference if there was even the slightest mention of crayons in DNA evidence, but there is not. As such, I'd just explain it like the Exhibit A/B stuff in Bug in Mouth Disease. Just more curious insights from the Brothers Chaps. —Guard Duck talk 22:23, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
- Mmm... seems unlikely to me. Seems just like standard Strong Sad for him to talk to inanimate objects about his secrets. Homestar-Winner (talk) 22:21, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
- He's saying that maybe Homsar and Strong Sad weren't the only ones who knew the truth behind the DNA Evidence. But even then, that's a stretch. --69.150.85.66 22:19, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
Lumper?
I realize it's ambiguous, but am I the only person who heard "lumple" ? It rhymes with dumple, and sounds adorable. I'm imagining a wee pre-duckshirt Homestar being positively cute and doing what a lumple does.
The "lack of visible arms" mystery perhaps deepens
Homestar demonstrates the primary uses of the brellow crown, and when the sheets of paper appear on screen, they come from the bottom and he waves the crown around them as though they're really in front of him, rather than them just being animated in front of him "in post".
So that's four objects total, manipulated at once, which I would think notable enough to be a "Remark" if we're all in agreement that he is in fact manipulating those objects. It breaks his record of three objects (is that his record?) in the show. (For those who don't feel like checking, he holds a mic, requiring one arm, and manipulates a small deck of cards, requiring two more.)
What does everybody else think? Psi 01:15, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- Everything you say is true (Well, the show isn't the only time he's manipulated 3 things. See the gross old wig). Still, I dunno if it's notable enough. -128.103.10.17 01:17, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- Well, I think that it's possible for him to use only three arms, by doing this:
- Holding the brœllow crayon with one arm.
- Picking up the toast drawing with another.
- Picking up the "zornets" drawing with the third.
- Transferring the "zornets" drawing from the third arm to the second (by using his... fingers?).
- Doing the same with the sun drawing.
- But still, he could be using four arms, to save him the trouble of shuffling the papers a bit. But he doesn't appear to have much trouble holding his papers, so I guess he's using four arms. So... never mind. But it's possible that he only used three arms! — fuchsiania 03:19, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
- Well, I think that it's possible for him to use only three arms, by doing this:
Homestar's email address
I remember seeing homestar's email address in another toon, but I don't remember which. His character page doesn't mention his email address either. What is the significance of the dj-whatever? Should it be a fun fact in this article? --67.161.16.203 03:24, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- Have a look at email thunder; that's the other place you saw it. Heimstern Läufer
03:25, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
Mumbling
I'm not sure if this should be added to the page, but it seemed to me that Homestar's mumbling in the colonial days scene was similar to the noises Homestar made when demonstrating the secret handshake of the Broternal Order of Different Helmets.--151.197.125.35 05:52, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- It's just mumbling, really. Can't say there's enough similarity. --Jay (Gobble) 06:46, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
Crowns
Homestar isn't really calling crayons "crowns," he's just pronouncing the word that way. The crown spelling is probably most accurate for the transcript, but other references should be spelled properly (crayon). That is, he says, "brellow crown," but he has a brellow crayon. This is a somewhat common pronunciation of the word in certain areas of the US. Google 'pronounce crayons crowns' (no quotes) and you'll see plenty of evidence.
- Agree. No one calls crayons "crowns", but apparently a significant number of people (a few I've known personally) pronounce "crayon" such that it sounds that way. -132.183.151.94 16:32, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- Yes. This is definately "crayons" pronounced with HR's accent. There's even a syllable in the making the finished word sound "cwou-ons" If it was "crowns" I would'nt have put that hyphen there. Strongking
homsarsmith 00:26, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
- I think it's just Homestar being Homestar. Not really makes a lot of sense, but to Homestar... <_< >_> — MichaelXX2 00:28, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
- I think it's just Homestar being Homestar. Not really makes a lot of sense, but to Homestar... <_< >_> — MichaelXX2
- Yes. This is definately "crayons" pronounced with HR's accent. There's even a syllable in the making the finished word sound "cwou-ons" If it was "crowns" I would'nt have put that hyphen there. Strongking
smooth mouth
I noticed that sometimes Homestar's mouth closes more smoothly. Does this count as a character design update?
20:33, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- I was going to mention that too. I also noticed that the shadow on the soles of his feet is lighter now. Omnisweater 20:41, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- It's not entirely new. It's been around at least since Coach Z's 110%, reportedly. As you can see by checking the history of that page, a new mouth animation doesn't really count as a design. --DorianGray 21:02, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
Homestar's Computer
I distinctly remember in email thunder that Homestar had the Happy8600 for a computer. Why does he now have the Arturo 9000? Did anyone else notice this?
- Do you also recall that Strong Bad poured Mountain Dew all over it, causing sparks? I think that's all that needs to be said. --DorianGray 22:13, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- But didn't that happen to Strong Bad's Computer in the hremail disguised as a sbemail? It worked. One of the very few spots where the old acts like the new. Meaty85203 04:17, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
"Grammatically Incorrect" Remark
Beside this being unnecessary, wouldn't the proper one BE "Marzipan and I"? –24.118.124.166 22:22, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- Nope. (though it is kinda unnecessary. "Fun" facts, and all.) -140.247.11.38 22:25, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- We've discussed this in another toon, and it's just as incorrect here as it was then. Rule of thumb:
- If you can replace "[person] and I" with "us", then it should be "me". If with "we", then it should be "I". ("Last up on the tour is this photo of we"???)
- If you remove "person" from the sentence, then the pronoun will remain the same. ("Last up on the tour is this photo of I"???)
- "[person] and I" is more correct than "me and [person]" in the subject of a sentence, but not the object. --Jay (Gobble) 22:48, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- We've discussed this in another toon, and it's just as incorrect here as it was then. Rule of thumb:
DNA Evidence reference?
Strong Sad's quote "only you know what really happened" is a reference to DNA Evidence. StarFox 04:17, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
- Not necessarily... -YK
04:20, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
Twenty Twelve
It's been added to the page at least twice, so let me just squish this annoying little "fact": first of all, there's no evidence that the Mayans believed the world would end in 2012; that's just how far their calendar went (for reasons similar to the fact 2000 is significant; ie. numerical reasons, not actual significance reasons.) Secondly, the calendar ends in December of 2012, not July! And one more thing: it has nothing to do with this toon. They could have picked 2011 or 2020 or whatever and the joke (such that there was one) would have been the same. --Jay (Gobble) 10:35, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
- I agree, it's just a coincidence. --71.58.29.180 13:05, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
