Some of you may notice that I’m using a particular technique, which I learned from a business consultant. He told me that the way to get people on board with your secret plan is to tell them as many details about it as you can. As a bonus, doing so also distracts them, allowing you turn on and destroy them. If you are able to put together a diorama as part of it, that can be particularly effective.
Now that I think of it, the business consultant might have actually been the movie Goldfinger. There’s a lot that you can learn from that movie, particularly about how to put together an evil master plan, and what to look for when hiring henchmen, and how fun and profitable irradiating stuff can be. I never understood why the filmmakers focussed so much on that disagreeable Scotsman, though. Also, I would have liked to see a few more cryptids – maybe a skunk ape in the Miami Beach scene, or a sky squid could have flown alongside one of the airplanes. It would have leant the film a little more verisimilitude. I don’t like to be critical, however.
Sounds like you went to EVIL business school and received an EMBA (like the leaders of ENRON). but yes – Bond movies from the 9so called) villans perspective would be quite cool. Hmm… something like that masterful movie “rosencrantz and guildenstern are dead”
I should think there are plenty of movies from the villain’s perspective already, but the audience always assumes that the protagonist can’t possibly be the villain.
The Dirty Harry series comes to mind, Disney’s Alladin, and all of Christopher Nolan’s Batman movies, just for the easy ones.
But Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are not the villains in Hamlet, Hamlet is.
It’s a great theory, but you’d have to explain why he appeared to Bernardo, Marcellus and Horatio as well. Which could be done, mind you, but you’d need to address that.
O, my offence is rank it smells to heaven;
It hath the primal eldest curse upon’t,
A brother’s murder.
I don’t think Shakespeare does the sort of unreliable-narrator thing where a character apparently says something that another character is imagining him saying. (This is when Hamlet decides not to kill him when he is apparently praying, so as not to send him to Heaven.)
To be, or not to be, that is the question.
I think, therefore I am. But can I know
That all this world is not some evil dream?
A genius malignus interposed
Between my baffled senses and the substance
That murmurs lies, and swaddles me in visions
And even through my touching fingers, lies.
Hamlet is not technically considered a villain in a literary sense. He is a “tragic hero” (a literary device originating in Greek drama, and defined and described by Aristotle in his work “Poetics.” Hamlet’s stepfather, Claudius, is the actual villain of the play. This does not mean Hamlet is a “good guy”, merely that he is the protagonist, i.e., the main character of the play.
Either that or a MEBA, from before the MEBA accreditation committee suffered a hostile takeover by the EMBA bunch. And by “hostile”, I mean “Slaver Wasps.”
Marcie looks really comfortable in that last panel, doesn’t she?
If it wasn’t for the obvious betrayal that’s coming, this might be a perfect match. Chris and Marcie have experience in creating unexpected mutants after all (and there are at least a dozen societies that can attest to this, some in opera form).
While I am more than capable of writing an entire story around a single stupid bit of wordplay, this one was not pre-planned. It just sorta happened mid-writing.
Betrayal is in the eye of the disloyal beholder. A man must first chose to elevate their own purposes above their friend’s, which is a terrible betrayal, before they can perceive betrayal in their friend’s actions A person who puts their friends, or rather their one friend, because a man cannot serve two masters — a minion who puts their one true friend first feels no betrayal unless his one friend betrays himself by subordinating himself to the needs of others.
Can it be a betrayal if you never trusted them in the first place? Like our fiat money, we never expect to actually get repaid in specie, yet we still find it useful.
Samson only died because Delilah betrayed him, though. Also because he was kind of an idiot. I mean, Delilah’s scheme was totally transparent (especially after the second time he told her his kryptonite factor in confidence and suddenly all his enemies knew to use it against him) and she didn’t even make a token attempt to disguise it, and he still fell for it like a chump.
Marcie might have to bite this guys hand. She does attract them doesn’t she?
I admit it, I’m a little rusty at hugging. All the more reason to take the opportunity to practice!
Some of you may notice that I’m using a particular technique, which I learned from a business consultant. He told me that the way to get people on board with your secret plan is to tell them as many details about it as you can. As a bonus, doing so also distracts them, allowing you turn on and destroy them. If you are able to put together a diorama as part of it, that can be particularly effective.
Now that I think of it, the business consultant might have actually been the movie Goldfinger. There’s a lot that you can learn from that movie, particularly about how to put together an evil master plan, and what to look for when hiring henchmen, and how fun and profitable irradiating stuff can be. I never understood why the filmmakers focussed so much on that disagreeable Scotsman, though. Also, I would have liked to see a few more cryptids – maybe a skunk ape in the Miami Beach scene, or a sky squid could have flown alongside one of the airplanes. It would have leant the film a little more verisimilitude. I don’t like to be critical, however.
Sounds like you went to EVIL business school and received an EMBA (like the leaders of ENRON). but yes – Bond movies from the 9so called) villans perspective would be quite cool. Hmm… something like that masterful movie “rosencrantz and guildenstern are dead”
I should think there are plenty of movies from the villain’s perspective already, but the audience always assumes that the protagonist can’t possibly be the villain.
The Dirty Harry series comes to mind, Disney’s Alladin, and all of Christopher Nolan’s Batman movies, just for the easy ones.
But Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are not the villains in Hamlet, Hamlet is.
It is interesting to consider that the entire murder—and the ghost that told him about it—could be in Hamlet’s head.
It’s a great theory, but you’d have to explain why he appeared to Bernardo, Marcellus and Horatio as well. Which could be done, mind you, but you’d need to address that.
There’s also a soliloquy by Claudius that begins:
O, my offence is rank it smells to heaven;
It hath the primal eldest curse upon’t,
A brother’s murder.
I don’t think Shakespeare does the sort of unreliable-narrator thing where a character apparently says something that another character is imagining him saying. (This is when Hamlet decides not to kill him when he is apparently praying, so as not to send him to Heaven.)
To be, or not to be, that is the question.
I think, therefore I am. But can I know
That all this world is not some evil dream?
A genius malignus interposed
Between my baffled senses and the substance
That murmurs lies, and swaddles me in visions
And even through my touching fingers, lies.
One movie where I think people don’t understand that the protagonist is the villain (until he redeems himself in the final scene) is Donnie Darko.
Hamlet is not technically considered a villain in a literary sense. He is a “tragic hero” (a literary device originating in Greek drama, and defined and described by Aristotle in his work “Poetics.” Hamlet’s stepfather, Claudius, is the actual villain of the play. This does not mean Hamlet is a “good guy”, merely that he is the protagonist, i.e., the main character of the play.
Skin Horse was an awesome webcomic, but the fans and their comments were pretty damn awesome too.
If you think Disney’s Aladdin is a bad guy, wait ’til you see the disreputable little shit from the original story.
Either that or a MEBA, from before the MEBA accreditation committee suffered a hostile takeover by the EMBA bunch. And by “hostile”, I mean “Slaver Wasps.”
You did hear when he said “nerds” right? Romanticising those pairings only works if you don’t know the story
I like the implication here that this web comic is a depiction of real events that the characters are commenting on in real time.
Cain and Mabel! Damon and Runyon! Stan and Laurel!
Whosis and Whatsisname at Tenagra!
Marcie looks really comfortable in that last panel, doesn’t she?
If it wasn’t for the obvious betrayal that’s coming, this might be a perfect match. Chris and Marcie have experience in creating unexpected mutants after all (and there are at least a dozen societies that can attest to this, some in opera form).
This entire storyline is just an excuse to use the word “Ersatzquatch”, isn’t it?
Don’t be ridiculous — it also lets me show off my cool green sweater.
That’s a sharp-looking jacket, too.
While I am more than capable of writing an entire story around a single stupid bit of wordplay, this one was not pre-planned. It just sorta happened mid-writing.
But wouldn’t an Ersatzquatch technically be a Bigfoot? Or are they freely ersatzable with each other?
Betrayal is in the eye of the disloyal beholder. A man must first chose to elevate their own purposes above their friend’s, which is a terrible betrayal, before they can perceive betrayal in their friend’s actions A person who puts their friends, or rather their one friend, because a man cannot serve two masters — a minion who puts their one true friend first feels no betrayal unless his one friend betrays himself by subordinating himself to the needs of others.
Can it be a betrayal if you never trusted them in the first place? Like our fiat money, we never expect to actually get repaid in specie, yet we still find it useful.
If I recall, neither Butch, Sundance, Bonnie or Clyde betrayed their counterpart. They just died in a hail of bullets.
Samson and Delilah both died in a hail, too. Rubble, not bullets, but eh, close enough. Admittedly she did betray him first.
Hmm, four commas in two short sentences. I might need to order a new box.
Samson only died because Delilah betrayed him, though. Also because he was kind of an idiot. I mean, Delilah’s scheme was totally transparent (especially after the second time he told her his kryptonite factor in confidence and suddenly all his enemies knew to use it against him) and she didn’t even make a token attempt to disguise it, and he still fell for it like a chump.
I thought he was just tired of being betrayed, so he just wanted it to be over with, since he loved her.
You know, that really is an admirable quality you’ve got there, always trying to see the best in people
Oh, yes, of course. This is a third-item-inversion joke with a secondary fourth-item-perpetuation style gag.
A plague upon it when thieves cannot be true one to another!