Talk:The Animated Adventures of Puppet Homestar

From Homestar Runner Wiki

Revision as of 07:53, 19 September 2009 by (Talk)
Jump to: navigation, search

I believe strong sad actually says: "Once upon a time, here's the type of thing that happened."

I think what Shark Tooth Bubs says is "or a beach resort pile?"

Maybe he did! I wasn't listening to it loud enough! --FangoriouslyFotoshopStar.png 14:36, 15 September 2009 (UTC)


Non-Integral Article

This toon is listed as "Animated Adventures of Puppet Homestar" (no the) on the toons menu. The "the" only appears in the title screen, which is why my initial links to it lacked the "the". I am of the opinion we should go by the toons menu (Quality Time, for example). What says everyone else? --DorianGray 20:31, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. Some toons don't even display the title. NMRodo 22:56, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
I think it needs the "The". The "The" is given equal weight on the title card as the rest of the words. Furthermore, it sounds better to say such and such happened in The Animated Adventures of Puppet Homestar versus such and such happened in Animated Adventures of Puppet Homestar. — It's dot com 16:06, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Piles upon Piles?

Is it time for a "Pile" running joke article? There've been hideous piles, directions to piles, etc. Is this enough for a new article or should it go into Nondescript Nouns?— Bassbone (TALK Strong Mad Has a Posse CONT) 23:50, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

And let's not forget "What a pile!" in Trogday 08. I think the page could work. --Jay stuck at home (Talk) 00:25, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
"Leg up on the pile", "pile of electronics state", pile of swe-atshirts, KoT eating a pile of salt... — Defender1031*Talk 00:29, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
"Leg up on the pile" works, but all the rest seem to be very specific piles. I was aiming more towards nonspecific piles, such as The Cheat's disguise in bike thief.— Bassbone (TALK Strong Mad Has a Posse CONT) 01:14, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
Done. As per Bassbone's suggestion, I only included piles that weren't followed by "...of X". Might have missed a few. --Jay stuck at home (Talk) 19:04, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
I might still suggest separate sections for piles as nondescript objects, and for specific piles. — Defender1031*Talk 19:34, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
Do a search on the word "pile" and tell me how feasible that would be. Hint: not at all. The word is used in normal contexts everywhere. --Jay stuck at home (Talk) 19:42, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
I did a search. However, they do have an above average number of piles appearing in their toons, and i think it should be documented. — Defender1031*Talk 19:46, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Fourth Wall Breaks? Really?

Puppet Homestar breaks the fourth wall by both showing disgust over Puppet Strong Sad's line "-until he finally went." and with the line "You guys got to help me! You're the only puppets left!"

According to our article, a Fourth Wall Break is when a character displays awareness that he or she is in an Internet cartoon. Bearing this in mind, I do not believe these are really fourth wall breaks. First of all, Puppet Homestar talks to the narrator, Puppet Strong Sad, at the end of the cartoon. Because both characters are in the same cartoon, which is about a group of puppets performing a play, they can interact with each other without realising they're fictional characters. In fact, characters talk back to the narrator all the time in cartoons; another example is in Teen Girl Squad Issue 14 when the Team Manager complains after Strong Bad describes him as a Towel Boy. Is that a fourth wall break too? Or is it just interaction between characters? I say the latter. Secondly, I always thought that all the puppets already knew that they're puppets all the time; Strong Sad even calls Puppet Homestar "the Animated Adventures of Puppet Homestar". However, just because they know that they are puppets, it doesn't necessarily mean that they know that they're in an Internet cartoon too. It's not like in Jibblies 2 when Strong Bad describes themselves as characters rather than residents of Free Town Country, USA. Of course, I could be wrong about all this, and if I am, then please explain if these really are indeed fourth wall breaks. – The Chort 20:21, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

I disagree. By common definition, a fourth wall break occurs when the characters of any work acknowledge the work in any way. At the very least, there is acknowledgment that they are part of a puppet show, and therefore that constitutes a fourth wall break. Whether they break a fifth wall in acknowledging that the puppet show is part of an internet cartoon is irrelevant. 05:43, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
I still don't agree. The way I see it, all the puppets have decided to put together a play and we get to watch it. Responding to Strong Sad's narration isn't a fourth wall break, because if it was, so too would be talking to Strong Sad at the end of the toon. More strictly, a Fourth Wall Break is when the characters either realize their world is fictitious or show their awareness of the audience in such a way that the only explanation is that they know they aren't real. Talking to the narrator, who happens to be another puppet in the same cartoon, doesn't really count in my book, nor does puppets referring to each other as such because Marshie and Doreauxgard are the only puppets left to appear in the play. It might be worth looking at this talk page to see how our definition of a Fourth Wall Break has been narrowed down from the general definition of any form of acknowlegment (otherwise, every Sbemail would have to be included on that article). – The Chort 12:39, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
No, it's definitely a fourth wall break. They know they're puppets and they acknowledge being in a show. What more do you need? — Defender1031*Talk 17:32, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
I can't say for certain if this is a fourth wall break or not. I'm not familiar with the definition. But, The Chort is explaining his reasoning and he seems to have pretty good reasons. If you want to convince anyone to your position you need to give your reasons. So far, The Chort is the only one that's doing that. Philip8o 01:04, 19 September 2009 (UTC)


An IP added a line stating that Homestar (being a glove) refers to Micheal Jackson's glove. I know that is going to be removed, but I want to say I agree. Don't remove it till we have a consensus, please. I think it is a good idea.--Jellote wuz here 20:21, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

I don't see a real connection. Michael Jackson wore the glove to conceal his skin disorder. Homestar simply shed his puppet body, revealing the hand manipulating him. StarFox 06:19, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
Agree, no connection. - 14:03, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
Puppet Homestar is not a glove. He is a puppet. So what's the connection? I have no idea why Marshie called him "Jackson", but I highly doubt it had anything to do with the late King of Pop. – The Chort 14:54, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
I think it's valid actually. The hand/glove thing is enough of a connection IMO. — Defender1031*Talk 17:31, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
I'm split, but leaning no. --Jay stuck at home (Talk) 19:15, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
I would also have been split normally, but his relatively recent death put it over the top for me. — Defender1031*Talk 19:33, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

To clarify, people that support the fact so far: Defender, Jellote, IP who added it
People who disagree: StarFox, myself, The Chort, Jay, Bad Graphics Ghost.
So, pending further support, I think it should stay removed, for the time being. - 22:02, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

I'll also vouch support for this fun fact, it does explain why Marshie called him Jackson. So, it's 4 Yes, 5 No.-- 07:53, 19 September 2009 (UTC)


Is it notable that the "Puppet Homestar" hanging from strings at the beginning is in the same font as the title screen from City (comma) state? cash money tc 20:54, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Yes, but only in one place. — Defender1031*Talk 23:01, 17 September 2009 (UTC)


Strong Sad's hand looks like it is Computer Generated. Anyone else notice? --Jellote wuz here 00:02, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Gray latex glove? — User:ACupOfCoffee@ 00:33, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
Glove, yes. But I doubt it was gray. They probably desaturated the image in post. — It's dot com 01:57, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
I don't think it's a glove. I think it's simply a CGI rendering of Strong Sad's hand, although it seems to be drawn differently than Strong Sad's normal hand. StarFox 06:16, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Also, since it's animated, its appearance in front of a puppet video would make it appear strange. StarFox 06:17, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
Personal tools