Talk:Old-Timey

From Homestar Runner Wiki

Revision as of 04:17, 8 September 2005

Anyone else out there think TBC may not exactly be movie history buffs? I mean, I'm definitely not, but I know this:

• The first successful talking picture, "The Jazz Singer", was released in 1927.
• "Steamboat Willie", the first suncessful cartoon with synchronized sound, was released in 1928.
• By 1933, the time when the silent Homestar cartoons were supposedly released, talking pictures were common, and by 1936, the time that the first talking H*R cartoon supposedly came out, silent films were on their swift way out, if they weren't already nonexistent.
• Using their current formula, any old-timey H*R cartoon released next year will be dated 1938... but in actuality, the next year, 1939, saw such movies as "Gone With the Wind" and "The Wizard of Oz", which would definitely be considered modern films, as compared to the more revolutionary, experimental days of the 1920s.

Thoughts? Comments? 209.221.24.137 01:09, 25 Nov 2004 (MST)

Excellent point. This kind of thing is absolutely "Fun Fact"-worthy IMHO. Please feel free to add this to the topic. Render 08:02, 25 Nov 2004 (MST)

-Well, we aren't sure that Parsnips A-Plenty IS supposed to be the first talking Homestar cartoon. Hey, maybe they'll start making color old-style cartoons. More like Looney Tunes.

Nineteen Thirty Ecks

Is it really appropriate to call them the "1936" characters when they've now moved on to 1937? In fact, given that 1936 apparently corresponded with 2003, wouldn't they be in 1938 by now? Shouldn't we start calling them the "Old-Timey" characters? --Jay 02:53, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)

1936 is inaccurate, and updating it every year would be a pain. I'm up to changing it to "Old-Timey" too. - Joshua

Um... opinions anyone? - Joshua

Agreed. The Chaps refer to them as "old-timey". — It's dot com 02:09, 24 Aug 2005 (UTC)

1930s Homsar?

Homsar appears to be the only main character without a 30s version. But I noticed that "The Bossman" in Mr. Shmallow has the same bowler hat as him. He also looks kinda like a big, fat version of our favourite song from the sixties. Could he be Homsar's Old-timey equivelant, or is it too much of a stretch?

Huge stretch. He doesn't look like Homsar at all, except for that hat. Nice work spotting that hat though. Kvb 21:14, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Cartoons? Films?

All of the Old-Timey flicks claim they are cartoons, which would mean that they are animated. However, they also feature editing mistakes (as pointed out) characteristic of films, most notably the slight movement of objects between reel changes. For example in Parsnips-A-Plenty, there is a flash when the camera shows the characters at the very beginning (indicating the reel change and splicing) and the characters are in slightly different positions after the flash than before. This would occur when actors take a break during reel change, and cannot move back into the exact same positions as before. However, cartoons would not be susceptible to this kind of glitch because the figures can be fixed on the cel, plus drawn figures would not need to take a break so they could be left in the exact position for however long it takes to change the reel. Even if they did move about (say the draught blows it), they wouldn't be different sizes because they'd only move on the surface of the paper but not closer to or further away from the camera. In many instances, however, characters do change size slightly (though it might just be me...) indicating that their distance from the camera changes, which would certainly have the implication that they are actual actors being filmed.

Sorry, this is kind of verbose, but I hope I'm getting my point across...

--Not a user yet :)

Really 67 years difference?

I noticed a discrepancy in the 'toons: the "first Homestar talkie" was Parsnips-a-Plenty, dated 1936... but the 'toon was released in 2002 (in the real world) which doesn't correspond to the 67-year rule. Similarly, 50 emails was released later (and contains speech) but, in the timeline on this page, it's listed earlier because it was also released in 2002. --Jay (Gobble) 03:50, 8 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Well, that seems to debunk the 67-year theory. Unless we expand it to be "just about" 67 years. I do bet, however, that if we got an Old-Timey toon this year, it would be dated 1938. The order of the toons on the article page definitely needs some work... It looks like Parsnips comes after all those that it comes before. On a side note: has it really been that long since 50 emails? I remember when it was new! — It's dot com 04:11, 8 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Eh, I started watching in 2002 and everything since then blurs together to me. --Jay (Gobble) 04:17, 8 Sep 2005 (UTC)