Talk:from work - Revision history

Still Homsar: /* 4th wall break */

Still Homsar — Sat, 22 May 2010 10:28:24 GMT

4th wall break

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:28, 22 May 2010
Line 322:		Line 322:
	::What about "how come your imagination's working?" {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 05:06, 11 April 2010 (UTC)		::What about "how come your imagination's working?" {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 05:06, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
	:::I don't see how that's a fourth wall break. --[[User:Essence of Ghost Water\|Essence of Ghost Water]] 11:48, 11 April 2010 (UTC)		:::I don't see how that's a fourth wall break. --[[User:Essence of Ghost Water\|Essence of Ghost Water]] 11:48, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
-	::::To me, it's breaking the line between reality. We see his imagination, somehow, as if it is a program, hence "shouldn't we be seeing some of this now?" and "how come your imagination's working?". It could be a 4th wall break, but that usually constitutes him saying cartoon or like in Jibblies 2 when he said all the good/lame characters. You could add to the trivia "Strong Bad talks in 3rd person about his imagination working." or something. --[[User:Still Homsar\|Still Homsar]] 10:26, 22 May 2010 (UTC)	+	::::To me, it's breaking the line between reality. We see his imagination, somehow, as if it is a program, hence "shouldn't we be seeing some of this now?" and "how come your imagination's working?". It could be a 4th wall break, but that usually constitutes him saying cartoon or like in Jibblies 2 when he said all the good/lame characters. You could add to the trivia "Strong Bad talks in 3rd person about his imagination working." or something. --[[User:Still Homsar\|Still Homsar]] 10:26, 22 May 2010 (UTC) Oh yeah, and the start, that technically is one, because he's not just facing the camera but he talks to us. But it's not really breaking the wall that holds together the fact that it's in the mind-set of real life for them, it's just saying he acknowledges people are watching his show. As if it were like, recording someone on webcam and posting a series on YouTube or something.

Still Homsar: /* 4th wall break */

Still Homsar — Sat, 22 May 2010 10:26:34 GMT

4th wall break

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:26, 22 May 2010
Line 322:		Line 322:
	::What about "how come your imagination's working?" {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 05:06, 11 April 2010 (UTC)		::What about "how come your imagination's working?" {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 05:06, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
	:::I don't see how that's a fourth wall break. --[[User:Essence of Ghost Water\|Essence of Ghost Water]] 11:48, 11 April 2010 (UTC)		:::I don't see how that's a fourth wall break. --[[User:Essence of Ghost Water\|Essence of Ghost Water]] 11:48, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
		+	::::To me, it's breaking the line between reality. We see his imagination, somehow, as if it is a program, hence "shouldn't we be seeing some of this now?" and "how come your imagination's working?". It could be a 4th wall break, but that usually constitutes him saying cartoon or like in Jibblies 2 when he said all the good/lame characters. You could add to the trivia "Strong Bad talks in 3rd person about his imagination working." or something. --[[User:Still Homsar\|Still Homsar]] 10:26, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Essence of Ghost Water: /* 4th wall break */

Essence of Ghost Water — Sun, 11 Apr 2010 11:48:19 GMT

4th wall break

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:48, 11 April 2010
Line 321:		Line 321:
	:Nah, not quite. Strong Bad Emails are always played as if the viewer can see him. It's sort of a webcam show. Fourth wall breaks in emails are basically limited to when it's acknowledged they're being animated in a cartoon. --[[User:DorianGray\|DorianGray]] 05:04, 11 April 2010 (UTC)		:Nah, not quite. Strong Bad Emails are always played as if the viewer can see him. It's sort of a webcam show. Fourth wall breaks in emails are basically limited to when it's acknowledged they're being animated in a cartoon. --[[User:DorianGray\|DorianGray]] 05:04, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
	::What about "how come your imagination's working?" {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 05:06, 11 April 2010 (UTC)		::What about "how come your imagination's working?" {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 05:06, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
		+	:::I don't see how that's a fourth wall break. --[[User:Essence of Ghost Water\|Essence of Ghost Water]] 11:48, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Defender1031: /* 4th wall break */ imagination?

Defender1031 — Sun, 11 Apr 2010 05:06:10 GMT

4th wall break: imagination?

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:06, 11 April 2010
Line 320:		Line 320:
	Should it be noted that the intro to this email breaks the 4th wall?		Should it be noted that the intro to this email breaks the 4th wall?
	:Nah, not quite. Strong Bad Emails are always played as if the viewer can see him. It's sort of a webcam show. Fourth wall breaks in emails are basically limited to when it's acknowledged they're being animated in a cartoon. --[[User:DorianGray\|DorianGray]] 05:04, 11 April 2010 (UTC)		:Nah, not quite. Strong Bad Emails are always played as if the viewer can see him. It's sort of a webcam show. Fourth wall breaks in emails are basically limited to when it's acknowledged they're being animated in a cartoon. --[[User:DorianGray\|DorianGray]] 05:04, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
		+	::What about "how come your imagination's working?" {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 05:06, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

DorianGray: /* 4th wall break */ Reply

DorianGray — Sun, 11 Apr 2010 05:04:51 GMT

4th wall break: Reply

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:04, 11 April 2010
Line 319:		Line 319:

	Should it be noted that the intro to this email breaks the 4th wall?		Should it be noted that the intro to this email breaks the 4th wall?
		+	:Nah, not quite. Strong Bad Emails are always played as if the viewer can see him. It's sort of a webcam show. Fourth wall breaks in emails are basically limited to when it's acknowledged they're being animated in a cartoon. --[[User:DorianGray\|DorianGray]] 05:04, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Still This Guy: 4th wall break

Still This Guy — Sun, 11 Apr 2010 05:02:24 GMT

4th wall break

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:02, 11 April 2010
Line 315:		Line 315:

	Is there a page on the phrase "Your Bad Self"? {{User:C-Son-L Sweaters/sig}} 19:51, 30 December 2009 (UTC)		Is there a page on the phrase "Your Bad Self"? {{User:C-Son-L Sweaters/sig}} 19:51, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
		+
		+	== 4th wall break ==
		+
		+	Should it be noted that the intro to this email breaks the 4th wall?

C-Son-L Sweaters: /**/Your Bad Self

C-Son-L Sweaters — Wed, 30 Dec 2009 19:51:12 GMT

: Your Bad Self

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:51, 30 December 2009
Line 311:		Line 311:
	Well, in this wiki it's written as "clowns", so, wouldn't it make sense for this contradiction to be removed in the meantime? --[[User:Vegeta897\|Vegeta897]] 06:34, 19 November 2007 (UTC)		Well, in this wiki it's written as "clowns", so, wouldn't it make sense for this contradiction to be removed in the meantime? --[[User:Vegeta897\|Vegeta897]] 06:34, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
	:Poof! It's gone. {{User:OptimisticFool/sig}} 06:37, 19 November 2007 (UTC)		:Poof! It's gone. {{User:OptimisticFool/sig}} 06:37, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
		+
		+	== Your Bad Self ==
		+
		+	Is there a page on the phrase "Your Bad Self"? {{User:C-Son-L Sweaters/sig}} 19:51, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Jay: /* Wasn't 169 supposed to be special? */

Jay — Mon, 15 Jun 2009 23:11:46 GMT

Wasn't 169 supposed to be special?

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:11, 15 June 2009
Line 192:		Line 192:
	::::::Well, 169 is thirteen squared. That's cooler than some dumb ol' disappearance of The Paper, right? Yeah, just - well... no - not really... nothing. --[[User:Lux Acerbus\|Lux Acerbus]] 03:45, 28 April 2007 (UTC)		::::::Well, 169 is thirteen squared. That's cooler than some dumb ol' disappearance of The Paper, right? Yeah, just - well... no - not really... nothing. --[[User:Lux Acerbus\|Lux Acerbus]] 03:45, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
	:::::::If you look now, sbemail 173 is when the Paper "dies" and is replaced by the New Paper, being an inkjet printer, and in sbemail 200, the Paper comes back. So, 2 years is correct in showing the Paper, and montage is correct in saying that the Paper sticks around until 173. Man! TBC are well planned out people. [[Special:Contributions/99.144.244.101\|99.144.244.101]] 22:19, 15 June 2009 (UTC)		:::::::If you look now, sbemail 173 is when the Paper "dies" and is replaced by the New Paper, being an inkjet printer, and in sbemail 200, the Paper comes back. So, 2 years is correct in showing the Paper, and montage is correct in saying that the Paper sticks around until 173. Man! TBC are well planned out people. [[Special:Contributions/99.144.244.101\|99.144.244.101]] 22:19, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
		+	::::::::Please note that the above discussion took place over two years ago, and before [[the paper]] came out. --{{User:Jay/sig}} 23:11, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

	== Done and Done ==		== Done and Done ==

99.144.244.101: /* Wasn't 169 supposed to be special? */

99.144.244.101 — Mon, 15 Jun 2009 22:19:11 GMT

Wasn't 169 supposed to be special?

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:19, 15 June 2009
Line 191:		Line 191:
	:::::Or look at [[stunt double]]. 2 years were more of an abstract mental prediction from the brain of Strong Bad, and mile was from the brain of [[The Cheat]]. The commentary in montage was more of a retrospective look back from the future, and with a difinitive email number given, it's gonna be way too hard to just ignore that. They'll definently do something to aknowledge it, whether it actually results in [[The Paper]]'s demise or not is the real question. I'm still holding out for this [[DNA evidence (running gag)\|DNA Evidence]] running gag to climax at email #173... {{User:Thunderbird L17/Siggie}} 22:05, 11 April 2007 (UTC)		:::::Or look at [[stunt double]]. 2 years were more of an abstract mental prediction from the brain of Strong Bad, and mile was from the brain of [[The Cheat]]. The commentary in montage was more of a retrospective look back from the future, and with a difinitive email number given, it's gonna be way too hard to just ignore that. They'll definently do something to aknowledge it, whether it actually results in [[The Paper]]'s demise or not is the real question. I'm still holding out for this [[DNA evidence (running gag)\|DNA Evidence]] running gag to climax at email #173... {{User:Thunderbird L17/Siggie}} 22:05, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
	::::::Well, 169 is thirteen squared. That's cooler than some dumb ol' disappearance of The Paper, right? Yeah, just - well... no - not really... nothing. --[[User:Lux Acerbus\|Lux Acerbus]] 03:45, 28 April 2007 (UTC)		::::::Well, 169 is thirteen squared. That's cooler than some dumb ol' disappearance of The Paper, right? Yeah, just - well... no - not really... nothing. --[[User:Lux Acerbus\|Lux Acerbus]] 03:45, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
		+	:::::::If you look now, sbemail 173 is when the Paper "dies" and is replaced by the New Paper, being an inkjet printer, and in sbemail 200, the Paper comes back. So, 2 years is correct in showing the Paper, and montage is correct in saying that the Paper sticks around until 173. Man! TBC are well planned out people. [[Special:Contributions/99.144.244.101\|99.144.244.101]] 22:19, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

	== Done and Done ==		== Done and Done ==

152.228.225.34: /* DNA on your desk by five.... */

152.228.225.34 — Fri, 06 Feb 2009 22:51:47 GMT

DNA on your desk by five....

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:51, 6 February 2009
Line 57:		Line 57:
	{{User:ArchiveMaker/sig}}		{{User:ArchiveMaker/sig}}
	: It's already on the page. See "Inside References" or [[DNA Evidence (running gag)\|DNA Evidence]]. --{{User:Jay/sig}} 23:40, 9 April 2007 (UTC)		: It's already on the page. See "Inside References" or [[DNA Evidence (running gag)\|DNA Evidence]]. --{{User:Jay/sig}} 23:40, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
		+	Is there an official name for the place where Homestar and Strong Bad work? A company name?

	== Here are my thoughts on the situation ==		== Here are my thoughts on the situation ==