The OFFICIAL Unofficial Achewood Message Board

Achewood => Achewood => Topic started by: guns and cigarettes on October 20, 2006, 04:51:39 am

Title: 20 October 2006 - Can knights disagree with policemen?
Post by: guns and cigarettes on October 20, 2006, 04:51:39 am
http://www.achewood.com/index.php?date=10202006

Only in Iceland.

Title: Re: 20 October 2006 - Can knights disagree with policemen?
Post by: robot_god on October 20, 2006, 05:04:12 am
BOOYAH, YEAH, PHILLIPE TIMES FOR LIFE, SON.  Was sick wit it, too.
Title: Re: 20 October 2006 - Can knights disagree with policemen?
Post by: AugustWest on October 20, 2006, 05:19:54 am
meh.
Title: Re: 20 October 2006 - Can knights disagree with policemen?
Post by: scrimp on October 20, 2006, 05:22:27 am
don't say meh
Title: Re: 20 October 2006 - Can knights disagree with policemen?
Post by: Drygioni on October 20, 2006, 08:54:27 am
I did enjoy Phillipe describing Lyle as 'the opposite of a church'. That only makes me love Lyle more; not necessarily 'cause I hate churches* but because being the opposite of one is pretty badass. We all love a badass.

Apart from this, I didn't enjoy it too much, but can't complain, what.

(Also, the Achewood site has been down for ages. Is this the case for anyone else?)

*I was playing the bass guitar for Joseph at this really old church and the stage took goddamn ages to set up and none of the fuck*ng 'proper' instrumentalists were around, it was me and the drummer, and then it turns out the musician's pit was too small but we didn't have time to move the stage again so I was crushed between the guitarist and a smelly flautist and the guitar pegs kept hooking me in the face and it was so goddamned cold I could have puked and a draught knocked all my pages off goddamn I vowed never to go in a church ever again etc.
Title: Re: 20 October 2006 - Can knights disagree with policemen?
Post by: MrCB on October 20, 2006, 08:55:38 am
don't say meh

No, this one really is kinda Meh.

Though I did like the line about light not needing to go faster than a Dodge Neon.
Title: Re: 20 October 2006 - Can knights disagree with policemen?
Post by: wombat on October 20, 2006, 12:35:51 pm
The site is not working for me so I am hoping the 'meh' is right and I am not missing anything exciting.
Title: Re: 20 October 2006 - Can knights disagree with policemen?
Post by: sensate on October 20, 2006, 02:51:10 pm
Site is down. Boo to that.
Title: Re: 20 October 2006 - Can knights disagree with policemen?
Post by: CortJstr on October 20, 2006, 04:33:37 pm
Back up.

The Lyle as the opposite of church line was easily the best part. And church is powerless against him. He's like Green Lantern's enemy guy who was all yellow.
Title: Re: 20 October 2006 - Can knights disagree with policemen?
Post by: Ben-San on October 20, 2006, 04:57:23 pm
The Lyle as the opposite of church line was easily the best part. And church is powerless against him. He's like Green Lantern's enemy guy who was all yellow.

This narrows things down very little. When your hero is nigh-omnipotent with only one weakness, his recurring villains will tend by a process not unlike that of evolution to all develop a certain common factor.

(Probably Sinestro, though.)
Title: Re: 20 October 2006 - Can knights disagree with policemen?
Post by: CortJstr on October 20, 2006, 05:04:09 pm
This narrows things down very little. When your hero is nigh-omnipotent with only one weakness, his recurring villains will tend by a process not unlike that of evolution to all develop a certain common factor.

(Probably Sinestro, though.)

That is who I meant. Although he's apparently purple with a huge forehead (http://www.bookofratings.com/legionofdoom.html). I guess it was the yellow power ring that I was remembering.
Title: Re: 20 October 2006 - Can knights disagree with policemen?
Post by: wombat on October 20, 2006, 05:04:52 pm
More like mouth edges - exactly.

That Chris is one cranky fellow.  He probably says 'meh' to each installment of Friday Facts, too.
Title: Re: 20 October 2006 - Can knights disagree with policemen?
Post by: Beatrice on October 20, 2006, 05:10:19 pm
considering my current god-take-me-now! state of mind, this one made me laugh three times.  dogs, knights and churches.  certainly not 'meh'.
Title: Re: 20 October 2006 - Can knights disagree with policemen?
Post by: littlefallsmets on October 20, 2006, 05:25:29 pm
The question presents itself: why didn't The Green Lantern just carry around a certain amount of paint, some colour other than yellow?

He wouldn't even have needed to... like... carry around a can of paint with a green-powered boxing glove.

Maybe just a utility belt of paint. I'm sure Batman would've hooked him up.

"You need... whacha need on this, Hal? Grappling hook? Shark repellent? Emergency raft?"

"Nah... just a lot of... paint, Bruce. Any colour but yellow."

"Just paint?"

"Yeah, like.... paint. Spray paint would be nice. Supercompressed paint so that, like, I could have a lot of it? Even better."

"...but just paint."

"Yeah. Paint."

"...can it at least be BLACK paint? It's sorta my... thing."

"Black ain't yellow, that's all that matters."

"Awesome."

These days, there's some sort of complicated explanation of the yellow weakness involving an immortal yellow fear demon that lives trapped in the main power source of the Green Lanterns and... overcoming it by overcoming fear and then the power works on anything which... seems about as creatively interesting as Superman being able to overcome kryptonite if enough of the children in the audience clap their hands but... like... perhaps I'm old and cynical now.

Comics have re-written their realities so many times that now they're, like, putting all the goofy crap from the 50s and 60s back in... just in needlessly complicated ways that make them awkwardly fit into a more "real" world. If you wanna take out all the goofy stuff and create a hard-science-fiction kinda take on the superhero thing, fine. If you wanna take a wacky child-like fantasy take on the whole superhero thing, fine as well.

But when you do your once-a-decade total reboot... you know... pick one.

Don't go like "Green Lanterns are weak against yellow? That's dumb." and then, like, say "Well, it still happened but there's this demon Parallax and, like, it took over the Green Lantern for a while and tried to destroy the world and... HE was in the power thing forever, we just never mentioned him and... now he's back in the battery and rookie Green Lanterns are weak against yellow because of his connection to the colour and... etc."

If it's dumb, you just reset your universe, throw it out. Don't make up some long weird confusing thing that manages to BOTH piss off old readers AND confuse new ones. If a million colours of kryptonite are dumb, write 'em out, don't... say that there's only the usual stuff and then slowly... Batman invents red kryptonite again and then Mr. Mixedpickles magics blue kryptonite back into reality and on and on.

If it's dumb and you don't want dumb, you can write it out.

Don't... try and smart dumb up just enough where it's too smart for people who want dumb and too confusingly arbitrary for people who want smart. Because I'm still gonna say "Well, why don't the ROOKIE Green Lanterns just carry around paint?" and we're back at square one, guys. Seriously.

Anyway... for some reason, it's very funny to me that the child otter confuses Iceland with Switzerland.

I've no idea why.
Title: Re: 20 October 2006 - Can knights disagree with policemen?
Post by: V-Adore on October 20, 2006, 05:40:06 pm
This strip is worth it for the idea of Lyle being the opposite of a church, although nothing else made me do anything other than "heh." The picture of Philippe in black and white was pleasingly meta, though.
Title: Re: 20 October 2006 - Can knights disagree with policemen?
Post by: CortJstr on October 20, 2006, 06:13:21 pm
These days, there's some sort of complicated explanation of the yellow weakness involving an immortal yellow fear demon that lives trapped in the main power source of the Green Lanterns and... overcoming it by overcoming fear and then the power works on anything which... seems about as creatively interesting as Superman being able to overcome kryptonite if enough of the children in the audience clap their hands but... like... perhaps I'm old and cynical now.

They should go the Tick route and just give everybody Drama Power. His powers are directly proportional to how dramatic using them is. Which is how he gets his ass kicked for 12 pages before suddenly coming back and beating the bad guy while still having enough breath to crack wise. Kind of like in sci-fi movies all spaceships fly at the speed of plot.
Title: Re: 20 October 2006 - Can knights disagree with policemen?
Post by: MattFish on October 20, 2006, 08:34:24 pm
Also: Jewish.
Title: Re: 20 October 2006 - Can knights disagree with policemen?
Post by: theinevitable on October 20, 2006, 09:10:34 pm
yeah, for real. slap in the face, jewish people! even otters are subtly anti-semitic.

(why does Anti-Semitic mean Anti-Jewish, if Arabs are also Semitic? Or at least, Arabic and Hebrew are both Semitic Languages...)
Title: Re: 20 October 2006 - Can knights disagree with policemen?
Post by: Ben-San on October 21, 2006, 02:31:03 am
(why does Anti-Semitic mean Anti-Jewish, if Arabs are also Semitic? Or at least, Arabic and Hebrew are both Semitic Languages...)

Originally anti-Semitism did also refer to Arabs, as it was coined in reference to eugenic ideas about the inferiority of the "Semitic races" to the "Aryan race". The key point, though, is that in most of Europe before the World Wars, if you were hating on the Semitic races you were actually hating on Jews because those were the Semites who were available to blame your woes on - Arabs were just too far away to be properly persecuted.

Later, "anti-Semitic measures" were taken to purify the Aryan gene pool. Now, if there's anything that permanently dysphemizes a word, it's being utilized in the context of the highest-profile act of genocide and most destructive war of the modern era. Just as "concentration camp" was intended as a euphemism (see, we're just concentrating their population in one place!), "anti-Semitism" was a term intended to euphemize the killing and sterilization of Jews and so forth. Also like "concentration camp", the result was that the term ended up permanently associated with that use of it - in this case, Jew-hatin'. Or, on the Internet, Jew-h8in'.
Title: Re: 20 October 2006 - Can knights disagree with policemen?
Post by: littlefallsmets on October 21, 2006, 06:27:09 am
If I was against making up euphemisms for unpleasant topics, would you call me anti-semantic?

Or would you make up a nicer word for it?
Title: Re: 20 October 2006 - Can knights disagree with policemen?
Post by: MattFish on October 21, 2006, 02:48:23 pm
If I was against making up euphemisms for unpleasant topics, would you call me anti-semantic?

oh my god I almost barfed on the ground
Title: Re: 20 October 2006 - Can knights disagree with policemen?
Post by: Fooker on October 22, 2006, 09:48:52 pm
What kind of bullets does Chris buy? Because, $50 could buy you a lot, especially if he's just shooting Tic-Tac.
Title: Re: 20 October 2006 - Can knights disagree with policemen?
Post by: stringph on October 22, 2006, 09:57:33 pm

I am intrigued by Philippe's "caramel" disillusion.

Did he believe that caramel was an elemental substance that could not be broken down into simpler constituents? ... that it fell from the sky like manna?

He's got a shock to come if he ever learns about sausages.
Title: Re: 20 October 2006 - Can knights disagree with policemen?
Post by: innes on October 23, 2006, 10:06:28 am
Originally anti-Semitism did also refer to Arabs
 
Actually, anti-semitism was invented as a term specifically to refer to hatred of Jews. I believe it may have been intended as a less nasty-sounding term by some european who was in favour of hating Jews but wanted a euphemism.

It's a more recent thing to quibble with the Semitic/Jewish terminology.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Semitic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Semitic)

I feel I should now push my figurative milk-bottle-thick spectacles up the bridge of my nose at this point, and sniffle adenoidally like the wordnerd I so obviously am.

(Oh and my post is probably a complete load of rubbish anyway)
Title: Re: 20 October 2006 - Can knights disagree with policemen?
Post by: wombat on October 23, 2006, 12:22:42 pm
I can understand thinking caramel is an element. I used to feel the same way about mayonnaise.  I couldn't imagine what you could put together to make it.  And see, for both caramel and mayonnaise it kind of makes sense, because they are the products of kind of fancy chemical reactions.  Alton Brown would get to use props to discuss them whereas for sausage he'd have to do one of those shows where he just makes food like a normal person.
Title: Re: 20 October 2006 - Can knights disagree with policemen?
Post by: CortJstr on October 23, 2006, 01:07:14 pm
I can understand thinking caramel is an element. I used to feel the same way about mayonnaise.  I couldn't imagine what you could put together to make it.  And see, for both caramel and mayonnaise it kind of makes sense, because they are the products of kind of fancy chemical reactions.  Alton Brown would get to use props to discuss them whereas for sausage he'd have to do one of those shows where he just makes food like a normal person.

Mayo is white styrofoam balls with silver pushpins in them.
Title: Re: 20 October 2006 - Can knights disagree with policemen?
Post by: nuero on October 23, 2006, 02:32:33 pm
does a lot of this just sound a lot like not philippe to anyone else
Title: Re: 20 October 2006 - Can knights disagree with policemen?
Post by: Ben-San on October 25, 2006, 11:27:05 pm
some stuff reiterating things I said in my post

Yeah. As I said, if you said "Jews and Arabs out of the gene pool" in Europe, what you really meant was Jews because there were so few Arabs in the central European gene pool at the time. However, Arabs were left in the initial definition for, as I also said, euphemistic purposes.