Not signed in (Sign In)

Freakangels: FREAKANGELS Episode 0063

Bottom of Page

81 to 100 of 100

  1. <
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. >
  1.  (6480.81)
    IMO Luke's little master race spiel is enough to have the sub-nietzchian shit took out the back ad shot in the head anyway. Ironically enough his sort ARE the cockroaches of humanity and want sorting.
  2.  (6480.82)
    @ergogrrl

    Marvelous thinking.
    • CommentAuthorGilgurth
    • CommentTimeAug 2nd 2009
     (6480.83)
    Anyone else take Luke's comment to also mean 'We can plunder and she can erase not only the memory, but the very physical act'?
    • CommentAuthorPooka
    • CommentTimeAug 3rd 2009
     (6480.84)
    Luke totally derserved that second shot..

    heh..
    my week? utter chaos of stressful houseguests...then I go to a friends to get a break and he starts hitting on me...again..the last time he did that I stopped seeing him for about three years...you think he'd learn his lesson...god dammit. I did get some good news though. I found out a very good friend of mine is hosting Scarefest in Lexington this year, and Mr. Doug Bradley is going to be the guest star, WOOT! I love me some pinhead...;) Last year I went as a vendor but I don't have the merch to do it this year, so i'll actually be able to wander about and enjoy myself a little more.
  5.  (6480.85)
    sheesh people, 5 pages of comments & no one has figured this out yet..

    mark is in alice..because like we've just seen with luke, freakangels <em>get better looking when we are supposed to start caring about them</em>

    this happened with alice & i refuse to believe this is just a general characteristic of the freakangels universe.

    don't even get me started on the sandworms. :)
    •  
      CommentAuthorcurb
    • CommentTimeAug 3rd 2009
     (6480.86)
    @Orwellseyes

    Agreed, and like I said I don't think that Sirkka is using her powers to manipulate her boys and girls. As you say, why would she need to when good old fashioned desire works just fine? However, I still think it's pertinant that she could do so any time she wanted, and that they've been left in the dark about that fact.
    •  
      CommentAuthortaphead
    • CommentTimeAug 3rd 2009
     (6480.87)
    From the Department of Long Shots and Weird Cons:

    I've been thinking about numbers. What if Luke manages to turn the trial into a question of whether or not the FA's have a moral authority to go ahead and take... let's say a more active role in things; be it in the form of performing emergency memorywork, going off to assisinate exiled FA's without knowledge from the others, etc.? Possible votes:

    For: Jack, Kirk, Karl, Sirkka, Kait
    Against: Miki, Caz, KK, Connor, Arkady

    And Alice as the tiebreaker?
    • CommentAuthorSarahK
    • CommentTimeAug 3rd 2009
     (6480.88)
    @taphead
    I'm not sure Jack would go along with the "more active" agenda. The way I read his conversation with Alice, the whole idea of mucking about in other people's heads makes him uncomfortable, and he seems more desirous of removing himself from the discussion ("I like it on my boat") than in taking a stand, much less getting involved in an endeavor that would require that much interpersonal contact.

    And I'd also gathered from Kirk's monologue back in ep 62 that everyone -- or at least almost everyone -- had been involved in "cleaning up" after Mark's Drone Army operation -- he talks about Miki convincing them they'd all had a 24-hour stomach flu to patch over the break in memory continuity. Although I suppose in that instance their primary goal was to keep their cover from being blown, the event does show that in certain circumstances, they've all been willing in the past to take the active role. And Arkady did a quiet but effective "patch job" on Janine, convincing her that she had simply fallen asleep on the couch and Luke had broken in.

    And Karl, with his tin hat? Seems to me he'd be the least interested in using their collective mental powers of any of them.
    •  
      CommentAuthorrickiep00h
    • CommentTimeAug 3rd 2009
     (6480.89)
    @taphead - interesting idea. However, Luke is obviously "for", although for his own reasons, and Alice is obviously against, so there's no real tiebreak. I think such a subject would be hotly debated, though, and I would definitely welcome some sort of 12 Angry Men scene. Though Luke's no Henry Fonda.
    •  
      CommentAuthortaphead
    • CommentTimeAug 3rd 2009 edited
     (6480.90)
    @rickiep00h: I'm thinking Luke won't get a vote.

    @SarahK

    Good points, although Jack was the one to give Kirk the pistol and here the silencer is pretty noteworty. As for Karl, he was in on the assassination with Kirk.
    •  
      CommentAuthorrickiep00h
    • CommentTimeAug 3rd 2009
     (6480.91)
    @taphead - I suppose I'm probably thinking of this too literally... I doubt there would be a straight-up vote. The discussion, if it is there, will be a good one, though. While everyone still considers Luke an absolute shit, his charisma and logic will probably get his foot in the door, so to speak.
    • CommentAuthorDee_Noir
    • CommentTimeAug 4th 2009
     (6480.92)
    I'm having a time out until I can learn some manners.
    Sirkka could ride me like a pony. A dirty sweaty pony.

    Two words for you: Survivors Guilt.
  13.  (6480.93)
    @ Dee

    ...Ewwwwwww...
    • CommentAuthorFan
    • CommentTimeAug 4th 2009
     (6480.94)
    > I would definitely welcome some sort of 12 Angry Men scene ... Luke's charisma and logic will probably get his foot in the door

    In 12 Angry Men it was one of the jurors, not the accused, who said "let's think about it."

    In this case, that might be ... Kait: saying, "I am busy, and you all need to be less hysterical before we do this".
    •  
      CommentAuthorrickiep00h
    • CommentTimeAug 4th 2009
     (6480.95)
    In 12 Angry Men it was one of the jurors, not the accused, who said "let's think about it."
    Point. But, I was going from a stylistic angle more than a direct analogy. Regardless of being the accused or not, I think Luke could very well be persuasive enough logically argumentative enough to cast doubt on their place in their society, as well as their actions.

    Also, I said "Luke's no Henry Fonda." I don't think his motivations would be nearly as pure as figuring out the "right" thing to do, so much as finding what they could get away with. Oh, and saving his own skin.
    • CommentAuthorFan
    • CommentTimeAug 4th 2009 edited
     (6480.96)
    > Point. But, I was going from a stylistic angle more than a direct analogy.

    Yes: but it works better if somebody else will plead your case for you; after all, the last time he tried to plead, he got a bullet in the other thigh by way of reply.

    Anyway, I thought it was a bit funny to see Kait (previously famous for "anyone who tries to hug me will be shot dead", and for the "lethal force on flightless birds" incident) telling the others not to be too extreme. But it was she (and previously Mikki) who pointed out that the last time they had agreed on anything they destroyed the world.
  17.  (6480.97)
    I finally caught up with Freakangels... I love this (web)comic. Each episode reveals more about these fucked up people and their fucked up world.
  18.  (6480.98)
    Luke's downward spiral is pretty prototypically sociopathic. Sociopaths are incredibly convincing for a while, very smooth, very charismatic, but once things start falling apart they crack at every possible seam.

    Example: Ted Bundy, especially in the midst of his trial.

    I think we've seen and will continue to see similar cracks, breaks, and furious face-shots (there's an incredibly famous one of Bundy) from Luke until they kill him, or he kills himself in some fantastic way. A sort of "I know where this is going, and I'm going to go out on my own terms and screw with you guys as much as I can" move. The only thing in the way of that right now is his whole "master race" ideology; too much ego to off himself until he knows it's coming.
    •  
      CommentAuthormister hex
    • CommentTimeAug 4th 2009
     (6480.99)
    Was it Himmler who had the suicide tooth? Or a measure of cyanide secreted upon his uh, person? Rudolf Hess never thought that far in advance.

    Goebbels shot himself and his family. Including the dog. (And not a moment too soon! The Russians were at the doorstep and the carpets were ruined!)

    Rudolf HOESS, on the other hand, (former commandant of Auschwitz) was given a chance by the British to write his autobiography before they hanged him. (Guess what? It wasn't his fault.) Then they hanged him. I don't imagine anyone cheered but no one cried, either.
  20.  (6480.100)
    hahahahah last panel made my day.

81 to 100 of 100

  1. <
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. >