dogs and cats living together, mass hysteria
https://www.housepetscomic.com/forums/
*Raises hand!*Duster wrote:I could get used to this devious side of Tarot. Who knew what a great villain she would make?
I assume it was something of the sort of "every crime gets punished, no exceptions."copper wrote:Hey, the judge was right in the original story... All this explanation took place in a message in a bottle that the judge threw out to sea before killing himself because of reasons.
Yes I do!Welsh Halfwit wrote:You dare to give us the Wilhelm scream, GameCobra?
Spoiler tag just in case, but at this point the cat is more or less out of the bag:Silly Zealot wrote:I assume it was something of the sort of "every crime gets punished, no exceptions."copper wrote:Hey, the judge was right in the original story... All this explanation took place in a message in a bottle that the judge threw out to sea before killing himself because of reasons.
That's something I can get behind, really!
For the few wondering what the Wilhelm scream is, here's a non-exhaustive compilation. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cdbYsoEasioGameCobra wrote:Yes I do!Welsh Halfwit wrote:You dare to give us the Wilhelm scream, GameCobra?
But only because so many other good screams have no names to them. X3
It's fun and informative! *Rubs his chin* Though in a funny twist... Marvin being a cat and all... could not possibly sound like Goof~ *Bricked*Welsh Halfwit wrote:For the few wondering what the Wilhelm scream is, here's a non-exhaustive compilation. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cdbYsoEasio
I'm actually thinking it ended up a bit like this.GameCobra wrote:Yes I do!Welsh Halfwit wrote:You dare to give us the Wilhelm scream, GameCobra?
But only because so many other good screams have no names to them. X3
I thought the order of the deaths was fairly well explained. 1: Max because he was amoral and would never have felt the guilt this psychological game was supposed to inflict. 2: Squeak because she likely went along with the plan more at her husband's insistence. 3: Sabrina because (he) had pretty much come to the conclusion that what (he) did was wrong by (him)self and was prepared to die.The Vicar wrote:Spoiler tag just in case, but at this point the cat is more or less out of the bag:
In the book, the judge was suffering from a fatal illness. (One of those vague, hand-wave-y ones frombadnovels, where the symptoms are conveniently whatever would make the story work. So: he has only a few months left to live, he's just had surgery, but he's still active and energetic enough to set everything up and carry out a massive plan. Hey, if you want medical accuracy, you should be reading R. Austin Freeman instead of Agatha Christie anyway.) He says in his note-in-a-bottle that he has always had a sadistic streak and wanted to commit a murder, just for fun, but he has always restrained himself. Now that the doctors have told him he's going to die anyway, though, he decided to cut loose. But he had a scruple against hurting innocent people, so he decided to kill a bunch of people who he considered were murderers who were otherwise un-punishable. (Oh, and he also says that he killed the ones who he thought were least culpable first. Which tells you something about Agatha Christie's worldview, since Grape's character is the last one to die... after the corrupt detective, the careless vehicular homicide, and the guy who killed a whole bunch of foreigners, and at the time the book was published nobody, as far as I know, thought this was at all unusual.)
WRONG: The cat is GOING to get in the bag!The Vicar wrote:Spoiler tag just in case, but at this point the cat is more or less out of the bag:
That also made me giggle.copper wrote:I like how they refer to the paper bags in the explanation. Way to break character!
That's still the billard cue.copper wrote:What is tarot even holding? Is that a gigantic pencil?
Surprise, it's not a cat, it's a pomeranian!The Vicar wrote:Spoiler tag just in case, but at this point the cat is more or less out of the bag
You have no idea how much fun that you be, and who knows how far you can teleport with that power too.Iceheart wrote:Sometimes I wish I had serial-killer-teleport-behind-you powers but not to murder, just to jump scare people.
The Pomeranian's out of the bag! *bricked*Argent wrote:Surprise, it's not a cat, it's a pomeranian!The Vicar wrote:Spoiler tag just in case, but at this point the cat is more or less out of the bag
Duster wrote:I could get used to this devious side of Tarot. Who knew what a great villain she would make?
I prefer the Long Scream myself.Welsh Halfwit wrote:You dare to give us the Wilhelm scream, GameCobra?
It should be noted that the doctor did help him set the caper up. It's likely he assisted with anything the judge couldn't physically handle by himself.The Vicar wrote:Spoiler tag just in case, but at this point the cat is more or less out of the bag...
(spoiler redacted from this reply for space considerations)
Like trying to reach up to tie the hangmans noose as Tarot was too short to do it herself?Kitch wrote:It should be noted that the doctor did help him set the caper up. It's likely he assisted with anything the judge couldn't physically handle by himself.
*Drops anchor in to 'save' you.*Satsura wrote:*plop*
...
...
..."I'm Fine!!"
Remember to add a repeating line over the a, like in math.Dissension wrote:[ The Ol' Push-'Em-Off-A-Cliff ]
Title Text: AAAAAAAAAAAAAAᴬᴬᴬᴬᴬᴬᴬᴬᴬᴬᴬᴬᴬᴬᴬᴬᴬᴬᴬᴬᴬᴬᴬᵃᵃᵃᵃᵃᵃᵃᵃᵃᵃᵃᵃᵃᵃᵃᵃᵃᵃᵃᵃₐᵃₐᵃₐᵃₐᵃₐᵃₐᵃₐᵃₐᵃₐᵃₐᵃₐᵃₐ
It all makes perfect sense!
Okay seriously that was informative, thanks^^Obbl wrote:I thought the order of the deaths was fairly well explained. 1: Max because he was amoral and would never have felt the guilt this psychological game was supposed to inflict. 2: Squeak because she likely went along with the plan more at her husband's insistence. 3: Sabrina because (he) had pretty much come to the conclusion that what (he) did was wrong by (him)self and was prepared to die.The Vicar wrote:Spoiler tag just in case, but at this point the cat is more or less out of the bag:
In the book, the judge was suffering from a fatal illness. (One of those vague, hand-wave-y ones frombadnovels, where the symptoms are conveniently whatever would make the story work. So: he has only a few months left to live, he's just had surgery, but he's still active and energetic enough to set everything up and carry out a massive plan. Hey, if you want medical accuracy, you should be reading R. Austin Freeman instead of Agatha Christie anyway.) He says in his note-in-a-bottle that he has always had a sadistic streak and wanted to commit a murder, just for fun, but he has always restrained himself. Now that the doctors have told him he's going to die anyway, though, he decided to cut loose. But he had a scruple against hurting innocent people, so he decided to kill a bunch of people who he considered were murderers who were otherwise un-punishable. (Oh, and he also says that he killed the ones who he thought were least culpable first. Which tells you something about Agatha Christie's worldview, since Grape's character is the last one to die... after the corrupt detective, the careless vehicular homicide, and the guy who killed a whole bunch of foreigners, and at the time the book was published nobody, as far as I know, thought this was at all unusual.)
Now that the least culpable and the amoral are out, we move to the more culpable. 4: Joey because his was a crime of opportunity (and because he was easiest to get to). 5: Bailey because she believed she was in the right when she committed the crime but was finally starting to feel the guilt. 6: Tarot is the murderer though ends up being "innocent" of the original stated crime if not underhanded in (his) methods, and the murders on the island are deliberately left morally grey.
Now we are left with the most culpable. These are all about on the same level, though I think the order still works. 7: Marvin because the actual crime was due to drunkenness, which is not an excuse in any way. 8: Fido because he did not intend for the man to die, though this does not excuse his actions especially as he is an authority figure (being in law enforcement). 9: Peanut because he left many men to die in order to save himself -- morally grey cases similar to this have arisen over the years, but this one seems to lean to the morally wrong side. 10: Grape because she deliberately sent a child out to drown in the ocean so she could be with the man she loved.
So... yeah, this line up seems about right to me. It seems as though you could interchange Grape and Peanut, though the Judge seems to have the same mind in the end even though he did assume Grape would be the one to prevail (and then hang herself). I don't know what worldview you have, but to me having a child go out to sea knowing he will drown ranks pretty high up there.
Yeah, it's all pretty much wrapped up, but whatever. GIANT WALL OF REDACTED TEXT!!!
It would make for a very good Slender Man gig though.Iceheart wrote:Sometimes I wish I had serial-killer-teleport-behind-you powers but not to murder, just to jump scare people.
Like the Igors in Discworld.Cesco wrote:It's not all doctor's fault, the judge used him very well. Now, is really Grape feeling like in the judge's prediction and will really do like the nursery rhyme says? The serial killers have that sort of power? Actually, they always appear behind the victim at the last second. Another cliché, but it's too real...
Grape's character committed murder by encouraging a little boy who thought he was stronger than he actually was to try to swim out as far as he thought he could manage. That's certainly culpable behavior, but is that the same magnitude of, say, lying under oath to put an innocent man in prison, where he dies, leaving an unsupported wife and child (the detective's crime)? Someone who already has a bunch of driving violations but continues to drive recklessly and kills a couple of kids (the guy who died first)? Or someone who kills a bunch of people at once (Peanut's character)? Heck, for that matter, there's the murder not shown in this cartoon version, the guy who acted as an agent for the judge and bought the house, made the record, etc. etc. etc., who was an unrepentant criminal whose crimes included being a drug dealer with at least one client who committed suicide, and he actually died before anyone else in the book.Obbl wrote:So... yeah, this line up seems about right to me. It seems as though you could interchange Grape and Peanut, though the Judge seems to have the same mind in the end even though he did assume Grape would be the one to prevail (and then hang herself). I don't know what worldview you have, but to me having a child go out to sea knowing he will drown ranks pretty high up there.
Actually, the doctor only helped starting just before the judge's faked death, and died too soon to help with a lot of physical labor — the judge moves around chairs and sets up that noose and throws the heavy bear-shaped clock at the detective from an upper-story window. In the movie version I've seen — if I'm remembering correctly; I own a copy of the novel and have it right here with me now, but I haven't seen the movie in ages — the judge isn't particularly portrayed as enfeebled in any way at all.Kitch wrote:It should be noted that the doctor did help him set the caper up. It's likely he assisted with anything the judge couldn't physically handle by himself.
Yeah, not buying it. If Grape were to have tossed him in when he was incapable of swimming, I doubt you'd be singing quite the same tune. And to me it is the same mostly because he was still a child and didn't know any better. I agree that sometimes you have to let someone do the stupid thing they want to do before they will realize it's a stupid thing to do, and sometimes that can be detrimental to their life. But Grape had this idea for a while (premeditated) and with full knowledge that the child would die (murder). In fact, she was worried that by some miracle the child would survive and be able to tell the adults who it was that had sanctioned his perilous swim (full knowledge of consequences). So there's not much anyone could do to convince me otherwise.The Vicar wrote:Grape's character committed murder by encouraging a little boy who thought he was stronger than he actually was to try to swim out as far as he thought he could manage. That's certainly culpable behavior, but is that the same magnitude of, say, lying under oath to put an innocent man in prison, where he dies, leaving an unsupported wife and child (the detective's crime)? Someone who already has a bunch of driving violations but continues to drive recklessly and kills a couple of kids (the guy who died first)? Or someone who kills a bunch of people at once (Peanut's character)? Heck, for that matter, there's the murder not shown in this cartoon version, the guy who acted as an agent for the judge and bought the house, made the record, etc. etc. etc., who was an unrepentant criminal whose crimes included being a drug dealer with at least one client who committed suicide, and he actually died before anyone else in the book.
Frankly, I take the view that if you permit someone to do something stupid, which they wanted to do but which turns out to be fatal, it's certainly immoral, but it's definitely of a lesser magnitude than if you kill someone who doesn't want to die. After all, don't we comfort survivors with "that's the way (s)he would have wanted to go"? Were I to write this story, and attempt to keep the "later deaths are guiltier people" thing going, Grape would have died very early on. So would the butler.
(Wow, discussing a spoiler at length looks scary, doesn't it?)
It's safer pointing it at her than letting her take it...RedDagger wrote:Just casually holding a billiard cue...for...emphasis? Should probably get it out of Grape's face though, it's rude to point =P