Talk:your funeral

From Homestar Runner Wiki

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(Breaking References??: reply)
(Egg - future SB: Read Max Brooks' "The Zombie Survival Guide" if you don't believe me.)
Line 44: Line 44:
:While I see where you all are coming from, in my opinion, SB acts more like a zombie in the easter egg than in the e-mail.  That is, in the e-mail proper, he has complete and full consciousness, while such presumably cannot be said for egg SB.  [[User:EYanyo|EYanyo]] 05:02, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
:While I see where you all are coming from, in my opinion, SB acts more like a zombie in the easter egg than in the e-mail.  That is, in the e-mail proper, he has complete and full consciousness, while such presumably cannot be said for egg SB.  [[User:EYanyo|EYanyo]] 05:02, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
::Yes, he ''acts'' like a zombie, anyone can spit out jelly while saying "Blarg". - [[User:Quolnok|Quolnok]]
::Yes, he ''acts'' like a zombie, anyone can spit out jelly while saying "Blarg". - [[User:Quolnok|Quolnok]]
 +
:::I don't exactly follow.  It's true that ''anyone'' can spit out jelly and say, "Blarg."  My point is that it would be unthinkable, or at least improbable, that a zombie would speak coherently and recognize people, as Strong Bad does when he sreaks out of the jar.  I was merely pointing out that easter egg SB seems more zombie-esque (by merit of being less human-esque) than he does in the e-mail itself.  It also seems likely that he's just pretending to be a zombie, as this is hinted at in the end of the e-mail.  So, in my opinion, he's not really a zombie in either scenario. [[User:EYanyo|EYanyo]] 19:21, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
== References in future characters? ==
== References in future characters? ==

Revision as of 19:21, 13 March 2007

Contents

Can I help?

can I help with trying to find some glitches? -The Denzel 01:46, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

You don't have ask. Do whatever you want to help. —BazookaJoe 01:49, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

the email is down right now.

This probably means it will soon be updated in a way that will be of interest for the 'glitch/trivia' section.168.156.44.101 02:11, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

...uh, no. It's not. --TheYellowDart(t/c) 02:12, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
(if you are getting a 404'd from it, hold down the shift key and hit the reload button) BryanCTC 02:47, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
It perhaps wasn't gone for long, I reloaded it SEVERAL during a few minutes when it wouldn't seem to appear.24.22.145.14 05:41, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
This is unremarkable, it happens all the time. It's on your end. You need to clear your cache or force a reload using the aforementioned trick. BryanCTC 05:45, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Homestar lip dot?

When Homestar is reading from the phone book, one of the mouth frames has a black dot on it, and shows up whenever that particular frame is up. 69.105.202.40 (talk • contribs) {{{2}}} (left unsigned)

- Check please. --Addict 2006 03:24, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Too far?

O_O Too... i dunno. Definitely not for kids. More PG-13 rated.

Everybody! 14:54, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Uh... Why? Because there's corpses? --TotalSpaceshipGirl3 02:37, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
It's all pretty cartoony, expecially how Strong Bad continues to fail staying dead. Strong Bad waking up with an exposed ribcage creeped me out a little, but I wouldn't say the email went too far. - Joshua 02:42, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
I think they were in danger of going too far, given the rather morbid question, but I have to say they handled it quite nicely. I mean, Homestar reading from the phone book at a eulogy? Genius! Has Matt? (talk) 02:48, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
Got it! Everybody! 14:54, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
Getting a bit forumy here. Let's keep this page about the content. Thanks. Heimstern Läufer 02:50, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
No one ever made the claim that Homestar Runner was a cartoon for children. (In fact, in the email "For kids," Strong Bad is quite opposed to the idea, heh.) I didn't see you complaining when one of the members of Blue Laser got a fork jammed in his eye. Stop taking it so seriously. 0rion
Read this thread. I don't know if the person who started this section complained about it, but some people have. Shwoo 07:59, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
I agree... I think this is crossing a line into morbidity... 194.80.32.12 10:25, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

50th Lappy-mail

This is the 50th Lappy e-mail. Sweet. Here's hoping it'll outlive the Compy! --Color Printer 02:43, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Only if the quality and humor in the Lapp-e-mails can reach that of the Compy era... ::rolls eyes:: EYanyo 04:53, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
Don't worry, it has. ::rolls eyes:: - Joshua 12:55, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Egg - future SB

Are you sure he's a zombie in the egg? When he came out of the jar as a zombie he had black eyes and a visible rib. In the egg it looks like he's just stuck somethng to his head, put on some tattered jeans and is spitting out a mouthful of grape jelly. - Quolnok 03:14, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree. I think he's still alive there.Shwoo 03:22, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
Which would agree with what he said at the end of the email. How he hoped the zombies would let him be on their side, even though he was alive. Heimstern Läufer 03:23, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
While I see where you all are coming from, in my opinion, SB acts more like a zombie in the easter egg than in the e-mail. That is, in the e-mail proper, he has complete and full consciousness, while such presumably cannot be said for egg SB. EYanyo 05:02, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
Yes, he acts like a zombie, anyone can spit out jelly while saying "Blarg". - Quolnok
I don't exactly follow. It's true that anyone can spit out jelly and say, "Blarg." My point is that it would be unthinkable, or at least improbable, that a zombie would speak coherently and recognize people, as Strong Bad does when he sreaks out of the jar. I was merely pointing out that easter egg SB seems more zombie-esque (by merit of being less human-esque) than he does in the e-mail itself. It also seems likely that he's just pretending to be a zombie, as this is hinted at in the end of the e-mail. So, in my opinion, he's not really a zombie in either scenario. EYanyo 19:21, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

References in future characters?

Do you think Future Pom Pom and Future Strong Sad are references in themselves? Future Pom Pom looks a lot like Duke Nukem... 68.44.220.232 (talk • contribs) {{{2}}} (left unsigned)

By their faces, beards, cigars, and ammo belts, I am willing to wager that it is a reference to the Contra series of video games and the 2 main chracters from the original game in that series. See the picture located here for confirmation purposes.~DanZero 06:31, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
Interesting — I wonder if there's a closer reference though, only because Contra doesn't have anything like zombies in it. Or maybe it's just a general reference to that style of gritty '80s action hero... Trey56 05:36, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
Sure does seem to look a lot like contra... hard to piece together why they'd use that tho. other than the fact that it was like the best game ever --JamesDean 07:06, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
I just thought they were the archetype of futuristic survivors. I didn't see a particular reference, it's endemic to the genre. Qermaq - (T/C) Image:Qermaqsigpic.png 08:50, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
I thought Strong Sad was a bit reminiscent of Snake Plissken from the film "Escape From New York", but it might just be me. Klarsh 16:14, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

screaming yellow

Is there any evidence that this is really a reference to the candy, and not say, to the car? Either seems pretty much arbitrary to me. Perhaps the candy is a bit more in "TBC style" as far as references go (so retro). BryanCTC 05:15, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

But TBC didn't make the reference... --Jay o'Lantern (Haunt) 05:17, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
yes, of course, since this is in the body of the email received, it should be assumed that TBC are refering to nothing at all, and it's simply word for word the email they received. At any rate, it feels like speculation to me. Though, there are only 2 or 3 things in the popular lexicon that I can imagine the author of the email intended. BryanCTC 05:20, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
Perhaps it was a faulty reference to Dripping Yellow Madness. - Quolnok 05:44, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
Although I have no problems in keeping the reference out (since any reference made by a fan is borderline as it is), I don't think it's a matter of TTATOT. I'm almost certain that it's a reference to Screamin' Yellow Zonkers. If this gets taken to a vote, I'll green light it, but as of right now, I have no problems with it being left out. - 0rion

Removed as speculation, we have no idea what the author intended and there is more than one possiblity BryanCTC:

*'Screaming Yellow Strong Bad' is presumably a reference to the snack food Screaming Yellow Zonkers.

Ideas in the email itself are not TBC created, and as such are not notable references in nearly all cases. Qermaq - (T/C) Image:Qermaqsigpic.png 08:52, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

I think they should have continued the joke...I mean, Screaming Yellow Zonkers? Screaming Yellow Zombie? I'm not sayings it's comedic gold,like commas, but it's definitely the same style humor as this website. ~ Shadix

In my mind, I thought it was a reference to Dripping Yellow Madness from Cool Things, but since it was part of the e-mail rather than something that's within the toon inself, I didn't bother mentioning anything. - Ren Foxx 15:42, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Vocal Effect

What effect did they put on Strong bads Voice when he was "zombiefied" its Awesome, and being the Avant-Garde Musician, it would help a lot (music wise). Thanks.

Passion Reference??

Am I the only one who sees a ridiculous amount of Passion of the Christ references? Strong Sad carrying the jar like the cross while being whipped, Strong Bad's exposed ribcage, references to the repeatedly changed day of prophecy that the souls of the dead will come back as zombies and attack the living? Am I crazy or just the only one morbid enough to see it?

  • You're crazy and unsigned. DeFender1031 11:32, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
Ah, very good then. Thought: Baleeted.
And you're still unsigned. DeFender1031 11:45, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

The first two I could kind of understand, though I would call them more coincidental. The last one makes no sense: when in Mel Gibson's film did anyone refer to a repeatedly changed day of a prophecy that souls of the dead will come back and attack the living? pensivepoet.babblingbard

Never seen the movie, but when in this email did anyone refer to a repeatedly changed date that souls of the dead would come back? Strong Bad didn't change the date of the zombie revolution; he just got more and more specific as to the time. --Jay o'Lantern (Haunt) 16:39, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

2046? 20X6?

Could this be a reference? I know it means that 2046 is NOT 20X6 (as the characters look completely different from their 20X6 forms) but could the similarity of the years be a reference? You know, a nudge from TBC, baiting us, telling us "Hey, here's one that it's NOT, good luck figuring out which one it IS." DeFender1031 11:37, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

I think that 20X6 is actually one year, or else last year would also be 20X6. When Sam (from Concord, California) who asked the e-mail in time capsule said it would be opened in X0 years, I think Strong Bad took X0 as an actual way to calculate time in years. Drippingyellowmadness CoolS.png talk 12:58, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
That does not directly address the question I brought up in any way. DeFender1031 14:18, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Isn't the year "2046" often used in some comicbooks to depict a future alternate reality? I know there's a movie called 2046, but I don't recall zombies in that. - Ren Foxx 14:41, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Fourth wall Break?

Marzipan just leaned over the edge of the left side of the frame. Is this a fourth wall break? Drippingyellowmadness CoolS.png talk 12:52, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

You're joking right? BryanCTC 13:16, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
Don't be mean. Now, I can see what you're trying to say. If she physically manipulated the frame (which we wouldn't be able to see anyway), THEN it would be a fourth wall break. As far as we're concerned, it's like someone leaning away from they're cooking to talk to their relative, or something. --TotalSpaceshipGirl3 14:45, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Addendum

An addendum is "something added or to be added, especially a supplement to a book". Retromaniac 16:57, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Breaking References??

I'm against listing "So Cold" by Breaking Benjamin as a reference for the funeral procession. I just watched the video again on Youtube, and there's nothing there to link it as a reference, beyond the fact that they're both funeral processions, which is far from unique. At the very least, I think the wording should be changed, "oddly reminiscent" is too vague and seems to me to be an admission that it's not really a reference. Either re-word it into a definite, specific reference or get rid of it completely. Some kind of scientist 17:20, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't think it's a reference either. I say, go ahead and remove it, and if anyone thinks it should stay they can STUFF it. Trey56 17:23, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
Personal tools