Housepets!

One of us! One of us! One of us! One of us!
...
No?
I find it fun to think of the characters in relation to who they play.

Dissension wrote:A very long time ago, I was quite skilled at pots-and-pans percussion.[/color]

What about now, hmm?

Marvin is just so cool. His popularity has been really jamming lately.

Also, I really like how the text bubbles have shadows too. That's really neat there, Mr. Griffin. =3

Come on, Bailey, it's perfectly timed!

Those sound effects though

Um, wasn't our first victim here drinking cans?

The Doctor rules the roost
and tells of what he fears
as Marvin receives a boost
it's the most he's been seen for years.
Deductions point the way
and the guys follow clues.
With them going to save the day
how is it they can lose?
The Butler cleans the pans
because his lady is no more
but, if he interrupts their plans,
he'll end up on the floor...
Seven furry Indians, making complex ideas,
and guessing who'll be next; next to face their fears.

Haha, ya know, this reminds me of a time when i was watching Van Halen a few years ago, and amazingly, right before the movie stayed (like 20 minutes before) a big thunderstorm started (Big for Idaho Falls, Idaho...) and it was amazing, because the thunder and lightning would co off at perfect times to complement things that were happening in the movie, and it worked out perfectly through the WHOLE movie.I thought it made the movie much better, a bit darker, and funnier at times... I think that's also what happened too here, albeit with pots and pans, but still accidentally and perfectly timed; some things time amazingly well together.......

I THOUGHT that the red on the knife was too thick looking to be blood; mmmmmm jam

Also, what's that small silverish thing in the bottom right of the first panel...?

I hope they make a THUNDEROUS discovery soon
otherwise i may be BOO-ming this performance

RatHead wrote:Also, what's that small silverish thing in the bottom right of the first panel...?

I think that's the bottle of sleeping pills.

Welsh Halfwit wrote:

RatHead wrote:Also, what's that small silverish thing in the bottom right of the first panel...?

I think that's the bottle of sleeping pills.

Thanks.

"jam". heh.

Argent wrote:Oh, Tarot, you're not fooling anyone.

Unless she's fooling you...

Wait, Peanut got axed off?
NNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!

"Wait!!! This isn't jam.......it's punch! That can only mean that the killer is..... " (starts to choke) "J.....J.....J...." (Dies)
"Who, man,who?!?!? Jack?, Jata?, Joey?, Jessica?, Jeeves?, Jinx?, Jill, Jasper? Confound the fact that we know so many people whose name begins with J!"

Let's look at this optimistically, everything someone dies it makes your odds of guessing the killer that much better.

Wait, in your version General Macarthur was stabbed? In my version he was striked to dead.

GameCobra wrote:Also, I really like how the text bubbles have shadows too. That's really neat there, Mr. Griffin. =3

Except the first one. But that effect is great.

WhoElseButQuagmire wrote:"Wait!!! This isn't jam.......it's punch! That can only mean that the killer is..... "

(Note panel 2)
(panel 2)

WhoElseButQuagmire wrote: That can only mean that the killer is..... (starts to choke) "J.....J.....J...." (Dies)
"Who, man,who?!?!? Jack?, Jata?, Joey?, Jessica?, Jeeves?, Jinx?, Jill, Jasper? Confound the fact that we know so many people whose name begins with J!"

Jinkies! (Actually that would make sense because Tarot...*flees from angry mob of mods*)

EDIT:

the mods wrote: Spoiler text! Spoiler text!

I wrote:*flees*

If anyone is offended by my little joke, please understand it was intended only to be funny.

aaaannndddddd still lost with this arc, it seems like its a version of clue

It's a version of the book that created the genre that Clue was parodying.

Argent wrote:It's a version of the book that created the genre that Clue was parodying.

That's precisely why I figured out the last one remaining would be the murderer without even reading a single word of the book, save the title: Everyone has been stealing ideas from it as often as they've been spoofing "A Christmas Carol."

Iceheart wrote:Let's look at this optimistically, everything someone dies it makes your odds of guessing the killer that much better.

The question is, who is the killer?

There are ten different endings, each with a different killer.

You know, after seen how much spoilers people keeps spitting out strip by strip, I can't help but think that Rick is going to pull a totally unpredictable plot twist at the end of this arc.

WhoElseButQuagmire wrote:"Wait!!! This isn't jam.......it's punch! That can only mean that the killer is..... " (starts to choke) "J.....J.....J...." (Dies)
"Who, man,who?!?!? Jack?, Jata?, Joey?, Jessica?, Jeeves?, Jinx?, Jill, Jasper? Confound the fact that we know so many people whose name begins with J!"

I am surprised you didn't mention Joel in that long list.

Also, I love the way Joey remarks he at least was married while Bailey is an old maid (and I love even much the irony of the fact that she is the only one of the whole cast that is actually married). XD

Gren wrote:You know, after seen how much spoilers people keeps spitting out strip by strip, I can't help but think that Rick is going to pull a totally unpredictable plot twist at the end of this arc.

They're not 'spoilers', they're 'theories'.

Welsh Halfwit wrote:

Gren wrote:You know, after seen how much spoilers people keeps spitting out strip by strip, I can't help but think that Rick is going to pull a totally unpredictable plot twist at the end of this arc.

They're not 'spoilers', they're 'theories'.

They're not 'theories', they're 'Wikipedia'. (wait, what's the difference?) XD

Saturn381 wrote:

Iceheart wrote:Let's look at this optimistically, everything someone dies it makes your odds of guessing the killer that much better.

The question is, who is the killer?

The killer is *points to the viewers* you

Silly Zealot wrote:

Argent wrote:It's a version of the book that created the genre that Clue was parodying.

That's precisely why I figured out the last one remaining would be the murderer without even reading a single word of the book, save the title: Everyone has been stealing ideas from it as often as they've been spoofing "A Christmas Carol."

If it actually follows the book, you're mistaken about the murderer.

PS: █████████████████████████████.

Sleet wrote:There are ten different endings, each with a different killer.

Can't there be one where everyone gets along?

Argent wrote:

Silly Zealot wrote:

Argent wrote:It's a version of the book that created the genre that Clue was parodying.

That's precisely why I figured out the last one remaining would be the murderer without even reading a single word of the book, save the title: Everyone has been stealing ideas from it as often as they've been spoofing "A Christmas Carol."

If it actually follows the book, you're mistaken about the murderer.

Heck, that's true even if it follows (at least one of) the movie(s).

It's interesting that the characters don't decide to split into groups which would be together continuously at approximately this point. (Given the time period, the female characters wouldn't consider staying with the male ones.) The only reason the murderer keeps being able to kill them is because they're constantly splitting up so he can pick them off one by one. The first two murders are also the only ones in the book where the murderer would not have automatically been observable by anyone watching as the victim was killed. When things get tough, the best strategy is actually to band together, not to go into super-survivalist-let-everyone-else-die-in-the-name-of-self-preservation mode, but people (in the works in question and in the audiences) never seem to realize this.

Then again, you have to realize that Agatha Christie was roundly criticized by other mystery writers of the times for being unrealistic.

"My wife was the one who handled the kitchen."

O.o How on earth did Squeak...? Because mass of mouse versus cooking stuff... Y'know what, 'cuz comic, that's why! *chooses oblivious answer*

The Vicar wrote:heck, that's true even if it follows (at least one of) the movie(s).
It's interesting that the characters don't decide to split into groups which would be together continuously at approximately this point. (Given the time period, the female characters wouldn't consider staying with the male ones.) The only reason the murderer keeps being able to kill them is because they're constantly splitting up so he can pick them off one by one. The first two murders are also the only ones in the book where the murderer would not have automatically been observable by anyone watching as the victim was killed. When things get tough, the best strategy is actually to band together, not to go into super-survivalist-let-everyone-else-die-in-the-name-of-self-preservation mode, but people (in the works in question and in the audiences) never seem to realize this.
Then again, you have to realize that Agatha Christie was roundly criticized by other mystery writers of the times for being unrealistic.

Given that *anyone* among them may be the murderer, and that each and every one of them has a guilty conscience and bloody hands, and given that no one among them ever meat the other (except for the former two servants), if you were any of them, would *you* trust the people around you? Even worse, stick around with them?

valerio wrote:Given that *anyone* among them may be the murderer, and that each and every one of them has a guilty conscience and bloody hands, and given that no one among them ever meat the other (except for the former two servants), if you were any of them, would *you* trust the people around you? Even worse, stick around with them?

Truly, that's precisely the reason they are not working toghether: They have all killed before, they are all strangers to each other, and now one among them is killing the others while pretending be innocent: A killer standing before them, and yet hidden in plain sight.

Sure, each of them probably does take into consideration that eight out of the other nine guests are fellow potentialvictims, and that being distrstful of each other works on the murderer's favour, but how can you trust any of the others, knowing that can be your downfall?

HOW TO ORGANIZE YOUR SURVIVAL IN A BUNCH OF ETHICALLY QUESTIONABLE PETS PEOPLE AND ENJOY THE PLAY:

Bailey, looking at the plates of the lunch: "Uhm, how are we supposed to eat our dishes without cutlery?"
Joey: "Sorry, madam, the judge asked me to throw them into the sea, as a safety measure."
Every guest looks at each other. Nomming directly into the plates follows.

Marvin: "YOU KEEP THOSE HANDS AWAY FROM ME! I AM A DOCTOR, I KNOW HOW TO DECLAW!"

Peanut: "Wanna know how I offed all of those African tribesemen?" *brick'd*

Max: "AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!"
Grape: "You are dead, doofus!"
Max: "I know, but it's scary all the same!"

Funny, first I thought Bailey was serious

Yeah, Tarot, it's exactly how you're saying... Funny situation in the last panel, not only because of what's visible, but also because of this logical thinking: how can a small mouse manage an human-sized kitchen? Maybe she was extraordinary in doing that. Keep one thing per time, Joey.

Gren wrote:You know, after seen how much spoilers people keeps spitting out strip by strip, I can't help but think that Rick is going to pull a totally unpredictable plot twist at the end of this arc.

WhoElseButQuagmire wrote:"Wait!!! This isn't jam.......it's punch! That can only mean that the killer is..... " (starts to choke) "J.....J.....J...." (Dies)
"Who, man,who?!?!? Jack?, Jata?, Joey?, Jessica?, Jeeves?, Jinx?, Jill, Jasper? Confound the fact that we know so many people whose name begins with J!"

I am surprised you didn't mention Joel in that long list.

Actually I thought of it but was to lazy to edit it in

King: "Joel? Joel? Who's Joel? I don't know any Joel, anyone know a Joel around here, nope, nope, no Joel's here, nosiree bob. Heh, Joel what a silly name." ( Looks around nervously. )

Fido sure is looking Joey today, even Baily than usual!

I'm on a roll.

valerio wrote:Given that *anyone* among them may be the murderer, and that each and every one of them has a guilty conscience and bloody hands, and given that no one among them ever meat the other (except for the former two servants), if you were any of them, would *you* trust the people around you? Even worse, stick around with them?

Yes, actually. At this point in the book, there are 2 women and 5 men left. I'd say: "okay, all 5 of us men are going to stay in each other's sight 24/7 from now until the boat comes back, so that if one of us tries to kill anyone the other 4 can stop him, and all of you (the murderer excepted) have a vested interest in doing the same. And if there's some sort of booby trap set in advance, at least we'll know for certain that it was a booby trap and not waste time figuring out alibis." It's a bit more problematic for the women — they can't very well go to the bathroom with the men (not in that time period!), and if one of them were the murderer they could still manage to polish off the other and claim it was a booby trap set in advance. But it would still be better than doing nothing. And in the book, at least, this strategy would work, because there are no more surprises set in advance.

Gamewolf67 wrote:Fido sure is looking Joey today, even Baily than usual!

I'm on a roll.

"keep rolling rolling roling, and rolling rolling rolling..."