It's not about where, but when.
Halloween's their best bet for easy infiltration.
( ,
Wed 25 May 2011, 13:56,
archived)
My word, he gets fatter WHEN he's exercising!
And I guess the the Skunk's halfway there. No needing to bust out of clothes.
I suppose I should say this, but fat Art, flat Kat.
( ,
Wed 25 May 2011, 13:54,
archived)
I suppose I should say this, but fat Art, flat Kat.
Why is it always raining in your images?
Also, woo to Kat!
* I'll be back in a minute...
( ,
Wed 25 May 2011, 13:54,
archived)
* I'll be back in a minute...
You've done those complex backgrounds to make our job of art-without-cat even harder
FIEND!
( ,
Wed 25 May 2011, 14:15,
archived)
What's the thing next to the sign?
It looks like a cross between an old iPod and a petrol pump.
( ,
Wed 25 May 2011, 14:16,
archived)
Lovely shapes and pose on that kat pic.
Chloe's head is a third of the size of one of her tits though!
( ,
Wed 25 May 2011, 14:18,
archived)
Whatever *did* happen to Ogilvy the astronomer?
Did he die of embarrassment? Or lose everything he owned in a million-to-one accident?
( ,
Wed 25 May 2011, 14:26,
archived)
He had a cremation.
Surrounded by friends and onlookers.
And Martians.
( ,
Wed 25 May 2011, 14:29,
archived)
And Martians.
You're just adding backgrounds so I can't edit out the cat/woman hybrid thing now
Though truth be told I'm wanking meself daft over that picture of Chloe
while trying to work out what sort of animal she's crossed with
( ,
Wed 25 May 2011, 14:28,
archived)
while trying to work out what sort of animal she's crossed with
Skunk!
she smells somthing rotten down there.
he has a peg on his nose.
( ,
Wed 25 May 2011, 14:40,
archived)
he has a peg on his nose.
see, my perfect woman would be crossed with skunk
just not the animal kind
( ,
Wed 25 May 2011, 14:45,
archived)
don't know if you'd have ever come across this
but i was browsing through webcomic review sites earlier and came across this:
webcomicoverlook.com/2008/06/23/the-webcomic-overlook-46-sequential-art/
he gave you 3/5 but then you were defended by people in the comments...
( ,
Wed 25 May 2011, 14:57,
archived)
webcomicoverlook.com/2008/06/23/the-webcomic-overlook-46-sequential-art/
he gave you 3/5 but then you were defended by people in the comments...
"It may be because Art, the main character, is obviously a self-insert of the author. This is an opinion, not a definitive statement, by the way, and it may turn out to be baseless. After all, Sequential Art does include a character by the name of “Phillip H. Jackson.” Sequential Phil, however, is a tiny hamster who rides around in a woman’s bosom. (How does this work out, anyway, when every other species is depicted to be human size?) Art, on the other hand, is a harried graphics designer who crashes on the couch and plays video games at home. I suspect Real World Phil might have more experience with the latter … though more power to him if he turns out to be the former."
You have to give him credit, he's right on the money
( ,
Wed 25 May 2011, 15:02,
archived)
You have to give him credit, he's right on the money
I actually like that guy's reviews
I wasted an hour or so at work reading through them, mainly because I'm a massive nerd.
To be fair to JJ, I seem to remember him once commenting that if he were turned on by the furry stuff he draws he'd never be able to get anything done, or words to that effect.
( ,
Wed 25 May 2011, 15:04,
archived)
To be fair to JJ, I seem to remember him once commenting that if he were turned on by the furry stuff he draws he'd never be able to get anything done, or words to that effect.
that review is way too idiosyncratic
and bizarrely over critical. I doubt anyone will take it seriously
the strip speaks for itself, getting verbose and critical about it is missing the point
( ,
Wed 25 May 2011, 15:44,
archived)
the strip speaks for itself, getting verbose and critical about it is missing the point
Something tells me you wouldn't have been a fan of xkcdsucks then
getting over-critical and verbose about it was the entire point of that website.
( ,
Wed 25 May 2011, 16:38,
archived)
Spewing for a couple of thousand words is what a blogger does.
Some wierd pet peeve on how brand names are used? Someone unable to even see the charm in details like that doesn't deserve to have an opinion on webcomics at all. Garbage.
( ,
Wed 25 May 2011, 15:50,
archived)