For a comic strip not generally* done in “realistic style”, this shows a lot of detail to convincingly set the scene!
[*] Though they occasionally go hyper-realistic by using a photo panel!
Suggested by Dirk the Daring, who notes “Me thinks David Sipress has never left the city. The cow and pig in the background aren’t too bad, but up front we seem to have a cow with pig nose and maybe a pig with a cow tail. Or maybe not.
The gag itself is pretty good though.”
As a commenter at GoComics hints, that Mr. Wilson better not be Dennis Mitchell’s neighbor!
Sometimes the intent and joke are clear, but you have the feeling there is a tiny bit of disappointment over a detail that is wrong, or at any rate could be improved.
Don’t you want the first panel to say “take requests” instead of “play requests”?
All right, a good point to be making. But it takes too much work to confirm that the two structureless and unparseable series of terms differ only in the first position, where one has senior and the other junior. Why can’t the series be more varied? Say, throw in a deputy or associate or adjunct. Go ask the second second assistant director (actual title on some film crews).
This Wrong Hands doesn’t quite work for me (==mitch). But maybe that’s because I don’t have the same vowel in fraud and frog. Is it better for someone who does?
My complaint here is trivial but it doesn’t stop bothering me, and distracting from the joke. The Joker is ALWAYS wild. Many times he is not included in the game, sure, but that doesn’t make him non-wild.
I wanted to pair this with a Bizarro I saw making almost the same joke, and with almost the same problem. It had both a Joker and a 2, and seemed to again attribute the part-time wildness to the Joker; when there was the opportunity to instead use our knowledge that “Deuces wild” is one of those dealer’s-choice options that would serve to make the 2 sometimes wild and sometimes not! The trouble is, that Bizarro was the June 2023 page on an official Bizarro hanging calendar on my wall, hence not so easily downloadable.
Well y’know what? That’s not an insuperable problem …
And, seeing it again, I should retract the claim that this one gets it wrong too. Here the Joker sometimes doesn’t feel like being wild, but is condemned to wildness always; and he is envious of the therapist deuce, for whom wildness is a sometime thing.
A pair from Maggiethecartoonist, who liked the recent Farcus and noted that it reminded her of the older Far Side.
… And Maggie asked the question which also reminded the editors of at least the title of They Shoot Horses, Don’t They? (1969), a film which made quite a splash in its time but isn’t much mentioned these days.
Speaking of Farcus, Targuman sent in this one, and asks “do you think he has written in the dust on the windshields or used a paint pen?”
Names given in first panel are maybe necessary, since we won’t see a face.
Some content on this page was disabled on February 22, 2024 as a result of a DMCA takedown notice from David Waisglass and Gordon Coulthart. You can learn more about the DMCA here:
https://wordpress.com/support/copyright-and-the-dmca/
Diamond Lil seems to do a pun every day. But that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t from time to time pick out some striking ones to recognize.
This OY-Ewww was suggested by Maggiethecartoonist, who points out that the apparent Ewww element is based on a misunderstanding of what happens in what the Romans termed a vomitorium.
Nice, the way the at-first-hidden generalized your makes the whole thing work.
We had marked “Unintended Arlo” but really now, how can that not be meant?
Just BTW, does “aggro” in casual speech these days mean aggressive or aggravating?
Dýou think this is well-positioned to become even more popular than the one about the land of the blind?
A fine line between pun and equivocation.
In the GoComics comments, Teresa Burritt (creator of Frog Applause) revealed that this was a CIDU for her! (Several commenters answered to provide the Stephen King reference.)
Comics I Don't Understand 