Talk:DNA Evidence (running gag)

From Homestar Runner Wiki

Revision as of 00:43, 17 April 2007 by Petros86 (Talk | contribs)
Jump to: navigation, search
This page is for discussing edits and content of the DNA Evidence (running gag) article. If you have a general comment on this cartoon, or speculation on the plot, please post it at the forum. Thanks!

Is there gonna be some kinda cryptic sub-plot behind this DNA evidence? --Das654 17:11, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Your guess is as good as ours. —BazookaJoe 17:33, 23 February 2007 (UTC)


Umm, this sounds like they all have to do with each other.

1. Strong Bad takes DNA evidence and tampers with it ("...and that's when I tampered with the DNA evidence!") 2. Movie character notices it's gone. ("...and that's when I noticed the DNA evidence was gone!") 3. Strong Bad puts it back and Marzipan suspects that it's been tampered with ("...and that's when I thought the DNA evidence had been tampered with!")

Now, before anyone tells me to go onto the forum, does anyone think this qualifies for a sub-plot page? --Mario2.PNG Super Martyo boing! 18:58, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

No, there's not enough going on for an actual plot, yet. Loafing 07:29, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
If there ever is enough, we can assume that in your funeral Homestar was trying to find the original evidence. Bad Bad Guy 21:59, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
Sounds like a plot to me. We do have 4 appearences, all seeming to have some sort of plot, in my opinion. I think if the next email has DNA evidence in it, maybe we should add a new section to the page about the sub-plot (although not neccessarily a new page altogether). CompGrl323 (talk · edits) 22:11, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
There may be a plot behind these occurrences, but it would only be guesswork for us right now. I'm sure we'll find out soon enough if there is an actual plot behind it or not. Patience! Loafing 22:14, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
I hope this isn't too forum-esque, but if there is an ending to this plot, I think a character will find the evidence and hold it above his head. "I found it! The DNA evidence!" --TheYellowDart(t/c) 22:26, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Imagine if they do it all year and it turns out the evidence was a vital piece of figuring out what happened to Decemberween 2005! Bad Bad Guy 02:53, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Decemberween 2005 was moved to July, right? Anyway, I'm hoping that this will happen in some form... --ComputerBox 13:39, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
Objection to myself! --ComputerBox 13:42, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
Decemberween in July was supposed to make up for the fact that there was no Dween special in 2003. Unless we count snowglobe or what i want, they still haven't done anything to make up for 2005 (probably the May-Jun hiatus again). Bad Bad Guy 00:03, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

I think it would be sheer brilliance if they were to continue this until email 173, culminating in The Paper's replacement somehow. Thunderbird 04:04, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

It could also build up to the departure of the Lappy. The Tandy lasted 1 year, the Compy 2, and this is the Lappy's 3rd year. Bad Bad Guy 17:29, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

If there is a subplot, it will be hard to work that guy from the movie into it, unless he was real like in this one theory I read at the forum. Bad Bad Guy 03:26, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Film Noir

I think it's also noteworthy that Homestar hangs up a trenchcoat and fedora when Marzipan asks if he's found the DNA evidence yet... -Cyndentia

Although trenchcoats and fedoras are a common theme among film noir, it's probably not related and could be any number of things. Knowing TBC, one would expect them to grossly exaggerate such a reference, such as reducing the entire scene to white on black and then having Homestar actually notice the change. — Lapper (talk) 21:23, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

All but one?

Bad Bad Guy brought up the fact that the only email of aught seven to not include a joke about the DNA evidence is looking old. I'm kinda iffy on this one, and would like to hear peoples opinions. In conclusion, should we add it or not? Bluebry 21:31, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Given that awrt-severn only has five emails so far, I say leave it off for now. --Jay v.2020 (Talk) 21:32, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Who Died?

Is it possible to determined who died?I know its not: Strong Bad, The Poopsmith, The Cheat, Coach Z, Homsar, Marzipan, Homestar Runner, Strong Mad, The Robot, Strong Sad(strong badathlon),Bubs, The King of Town, Pom Pom(unnatural),Senor Cardgage,The Knight, The Hornblower, The Blacksmith,(the movies), Old Lady, and Taranchula,(your funeral). There are alot of people left,so who could have died? — Spongemaster0 (Talk | contribs) 12:03, 11 April 2007 (UTC) (left unsigned)

Why would somebody need to die? --Mario2.PNG Super Martyo boing! 17:22, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Bug in DNA Evidence?

Anyone think the evidence Bubs is burning in Bug In Mouth Disease is DNA Evidence? I doubt it is, but I was wondering if anyone noticed it.— Bassbone (TALK Strong Mad Has a Posse CONT) 06:24, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, intewesting theowy. I'll take it! I'll take twelve! DeFender1031 06:30, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

DNA? no way!

I think we are getting some social satire from Homestar. I think Homestar is a spoof on the over zealous District Attorney Michael Nifong, who was in charge of prosecuting the Duke University lacrosse players for rape. Mr. Nifong found no DNA evidence connecting the players to the crime. I don’t think it is a coincidence that only 2 days after Nifong dropped the charges against the Duke players, Homestar, like Nifong, is lamenting over DNA evidence. I would guess we have heard the last of DNA evidence.

No, Homestar Runner is not a spoof on the Attorney guy. Nor is this. I gotta say, that is some massive stretching. It's simply a running gag (and a funny one) that they've kept up. I don't think it's a reference to anything. --TotalSpaceshipGirl3 19:31, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

DNA Evidence

This section is entirely too much information. A simple link to a wikipedia article on DNA would be sufficient. Seeing that sort of technical information on this site is inappropriate, I would think. 16 April 2007, at around 6:30 EST

I'm in agreement; there's no need for the technical 2nd paragraph. In fact, as I am reasonably certain no one will object, I'ma be bold and remove it. Anyone's free to raise an argument for its retention, of course. Qermaq - (T/C) Image:Qermaqsigpic.png 22:55, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Gag me.

For some reason, I'm not buying all this DNA evidence crap. It all feels too forced to me. My best guess is that the Brothers Chaps are simply messing with their audience and including some fun random factoid concerning DNA in emails just to keep our interest sparked. Call me an unbeliever if you want, but that's just what I think. --Petros86 00:43, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Personal tools