Talk:Jibblies Painting

From Homestar Runner Wiki

Contents 1 Stub 2 Rocoulm 3 Image Invasion 4 Definite Article 5 Voice 6 Category time? 7 Origin of "Rocoulm"

Stub

I think that we have all we know about the painting. I think we can remove it as a stub. Rogue Leader / (my talk)

• The stub has been removed.
• This is both scary and funny. It kinda creeped me out to think of it, but it instantly made me laugh. Espeacialy when Strong bad got the jibblies.

Rocoulm

The recent QotW has a file name of "rocoulm"... you suppose that signifies anything? Like, is that its name? --Shadow Hog 23:00, 6 Oct 2005 (UTC)

I've been wondering that myself... It seems fairly random, but I bet it means something. I just can't, for the life of me, work out what. --DorianGray

That could be a scary name. Or maybe it stands for something. Hopefully we haven't seen the last of our shadowed, er, friend. — It's dot com 23:15, 6 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Although slightly hard to pronounce, it sounds a tiny, tiny bit like 'Gollum', who bears a slight resemblance to this creature. The thing in the painting is sitting on a rock... Maybe it's a mishmash of 'rock' and 'Gollum'. Of course, this is all speculation... If we don't see more of it soon, maybe we can add it to that list of questions we'd like to ask the Brothers Chaps someday. --DorianGray

I added this question to Thunderbird's list. —THE PAPER ^PREEEOW 01:51, 7 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, I was gonna do that myself... I just figured I'd wait a little. Well, better to add it now than to forget to add it later. --DorianGray

Well, the XML file names this guy "Rocoulm." The same happened with 1-Up - we weren't sure if 1-Up was his name or not (since we were basing this on the XML file at the time), and bam - there, in the game, is 20x6 Homestar under the name 1-Up. I think we should trust the Weeklies XML and rename this guy "Rocoulm." —Gafaddict (Talk | Contribs.) 16:48, 7 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Agreed. This is most certainly the painting's name- Camalex(talk) 16:54, 7 Oct 2005 (UTC)

I agree too. But he'll always be 'The Horrible Painting' to me. --DorianGray

AGREE: Yes, it's most logical. He is now knowen as Rocoulm! H * R 7 0 0

Well, ummm, should we move the page? - Camalex(talk) 17:22, 7 Oct 2005 (UTC)

I don't think we should move the page. I think the note It's dot com put up will suffice. We don't know whether is name is actually "Rocoulm" or if that is an abbreviation for something else (like 1-Up isn't actually "1up", and The Homestar Runner is not "oldhomestar"). Homestar Coder 19:42, 7 Oct 2005 (UTC)

I concur, until we get something that proves his name is Rocoulm (what we have now is just speculation) the page should still be 'Horrible Painting'.The Pardack

(P.S. He always did remind me of Gollum)

Jibblies 2: "The Rocoulm" appears on the Painting's tarot card. -141.133.145.118 23:41, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Should we call the actual demon "Rocoulm" and give him his own page? Homestar is apparently in there for "eternity". Should we make this page just about the painting itself? StrongBadFan99998 03:18, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

I don't think there's enough info to make separate subjects on the two. --DorianGray 03:26, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

The painting is the painting and Rocoulm is the subject of the painting. Rocoulm has become a character in himself and therefore deserves a page as a character, and the Horrible Painting is both a significant object as a painting, and it has become a place, so clearly it deserves a page. Whether or not this can/should all be fit on the same page seems to be the question, and I vote for separate pages with an explanation at the top of each, i.e.:

This article is about the the painting itself. For the character, see Rocoulm. OptimisticFool 17:13, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

I know no one's going to like this, but I think the "most" official name of the painting is The Jibblies Painting. Until now, it had only been referred to as "horrible painting," but Strong Bad's line was "That horrible painting..." merely describing the painting. It has since been adapted as the name, because it's not named as anything else. But now it's been named by Homestar as the Jibblies Painting, not in description but as an actual name. Again, I'm sure everyone wants to stick to the name they're used to, but unfortunately I do think "Jibblies Painting" is more legitimate. — 71.65.13.62 (Talk | contribs) 20:06, 2 November 2007 (UTC) (left unsigned)

With the new Fanstuff coming out, doesn't this make 'Rocoulm' even more legitimate. I am in firm belief that a name-change should be forthcoming. Flashfight 02:05, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Image Invasion

How many images do we really need on this page? Seems a little overkill to me. OptimisticFool 17:13, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree. They overwhelm the reader. And also, the one on the bottom left has a capitalization error in the caption (I don't know how to fix that). Dementedc 02:39, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Definite Article

Does anyone else think that the thing's name should be "the rocoulm" since that's what the card says? 01:40, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Maybe just Rocoulm, or maybe The Jibblies Painting or something. Homestar-Winner (talk) 01:45, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

I do think the creature's name should contain the definite article, since the card does. And since for the most part, in H*R, the definite article is often an integral part of names (ex. The Cheat, The Stick, etc.).

somehow I think its name is simply "Rocoulm" without "The", where is it actually stated that it is officially "The Rocoulm" except for the tarot card. That instance doesnt count seeing as that would most likely be a reference to the tarot style, similar to "The Loading". Also I read that the quote of the week had just "rocoulm". Anyone know of any other mentions of its name? 82.168.116.166 21:05, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

The name on the xml does not conclusively establish the name without the article. Kingoftown and Uglyone, both normally having a definite article, are without one in the listing. I say we keep the article in place until some authoritative source establishes that the creature's designation does not have an article. And for clarification, the Painting or the Horrible Painting is the picture, and the Rocoulm is the creature that lives inside the painting.

Voice

Does anyone know who voices the Rocolum? Is it one of the brothers? Because it sounds a LOT like a voice used in some old film I've got on VHS somewhere - it is most obious when he says "I plan to redo the kitchen" MJN SEIFER 23:23, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm sure its Matt. They don't usually call in guests for voices, especially when its a lead-type role. DevonM(talk·cont-ribs)

Thanks for answering, I guess it was conincidence then MJN SEIFER 20:02, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Category time?

With Fan Costumes '09, this marks the 7th appearance of The Rocoulum, which is usually the signal for creating a filmography category. However, are we counting him as a pseudocharacter (thus no filmography), or a real character, since in just about every appearance he does speak (if it's only "Come on in here!")? wbwolf (t | ed) 02:09, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Origin of "Rocoulm"

From the bottom 10 Commentary:
--
MIKE: That was based on a, um, painting that, uh, my friend Jason Fields had in college that his mom did that he had on the wall of this weird creepy goblin.

MATT: Well and the thing that it says is the, uh, another, yet another thing we owe my friend Neil thousands of dollars for because it's idea number twenty-two that came from Neil. Uh, was— It's the voice of a rocoulm, which is a crook or a criminal and he's a creepy guy that hides in an alley and when you walk by, he says "Come on in here..."
--

So apparently it's a goblin, not a demon (or at least based on one), and a "rocoulm" is some word for a criminal, although I haven't found anything close to that in my "exhaustive" searches. Not sure how much is relevant, but since it's buried in a commentary I thought I'd just make people a little more aware. --TimMierz 21:43, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Except strong bad calls it a demon in Jibblies 2. — Defender1031*Talk 00:17, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

I would say it's a demon, because 'The Rocoulm' is just it's name. i don't think The Rocoulm is a criminal, and he does not live in an alleyway, so i think he is a demon, because he is not a criminal, as far as we know, and he definetly does not live in an alleyway, because he is a painting! and so, i think he is a DEMON. -Jibblejibblejibble

In name only, I'm sorry to say. Yes, his actions and name is based on a past experience of TBC, but he is a demon. It is stated that he is a demon, and we already know how the imagine goblins, and they look distinctly different. I agree with 3xJibblie.--Jellote wuz here 20:55, 15 December 2009 (UTC)