Not asking about story lines here, just aesthetics:
Not asking about story lines here, just aesthetics:
Jolson did it all first,
Crosby jazzed it up,
Sinatra perfected it.
that is still a question depending on point of view. I like Walt in his body but the look of Snowbird's Sasquatch form was a better look.
Orange, though I like the thought of AF fighting a villain that would require the strength of both Sasquatches to beat him/her.
I prefer the original Sas, but the cover to #23 remains one of my all time favourites.
Del
Driftwood: Well, I got about a foot and a half. Now, it says, uh, "The party of the second part shall be known in this contract as the party of the second part."
Fiorello: Well, I don't know about that...
Driftwood: Now what's the matter?
Fiorello: I no like-a the second party, either.
Driftwood: Well, you should've come to the first party. We didn't get home 'til around four in the morning... I was blind for three days!
I prefer Walter in the Orange look, tho have to admit, the Wanda stories lead a lot for possibilities... I know this would have been unheard of in the late 80's, early 90's, but they could have done so much with the sexuality aspects and ramifications of it, not to mention dealt more with being a woman from a man's perspective...
...Would that make Walt Marvel's first Transexual??
Allan 'HappyCanuck' Crocker
"Hey... Philosophers love wisdom, not mankind."
- Stephen Pastis, Pearls Before Swine
Aesthetically, I honestly prefer the white sasquatch. Not sure why, but there's just something about it. Not saying I liked the whole 'Wanda' thing...I like the alternate reality Sas with Heather being Sas.
Where are we going, and why are we in this hand-basket??
Orange, as when she/he was white Sasquatch looked like Wendigo sans a missing tail. All though I do like Wendigo
White. I like the Snowbird version of Sassy much better
(Average person + Internet Forum + Anonymity = Screaming Douchebag)
"This is why I don't post often, *wink*"
Am I the only one who noticed the wording in this post?Originally Posted by King Mungi
Sorry, Mungi, but the way you phrased that, Sasquatch has a tail ('sans' means 'minus', thus if he was 'minus' a missing tail, he'd have a tail...)
Love,
Your friendly neighbourhood grammar police :P
Allan 'HappyCanuck' Crocker
"Hey... Philosophers love wisdom, not mankind."
- Stephen Pastis, Pearls Before Swine
No, you're just the only one who felt the need to point it out.Am I the only one who noticed the wording in this post?
I have all but given up trying to correct people's grammar, spelling, etc. on discussion boards as not only does it piss people off half the time, it kinda makes ya look a little pompous. I think if you can understand the point someone's trying to make, that's all that really counts-- it's not like we're in school or even at work where such things matter.
If ya sweat the small stuff, yer gonna give yerself a Grammar Headache (cuz it's everywhere ya go, seriously). Be that as it may, a spell-check option wouldn't be a bad idea for those whose browsers do not feature one, as does Firefox. Probably be a pain to add one though.
Live, love, laugh & be happy,
Smikes
Jolson did it all first,
Crosby jazzed it up,
Sinatra perfected it.
*claps*....was that really necessary? Basically it was a goof, as I know what "sans" mean, but I put "missing" in after as a mistake.Originally Posted by HappyCanuck
yeah, I know. I do apologise, Mungi. I was in a nitpicky mood when I wrote that. it wasn't meant to insult or imply anything.Originally Posted by King Mungi
Allan 'HappyCanuck' Crocker
"Hey... Philosophers love wisdom, not mankind."
- Stephen Pastis, Pearls Before Swine
No harm done thenOriginally Posted by HappyCanuck
Originally Posted by S. Michael Simms
I don't mind if someone said my mistakes in a gentle and kind way. But I'm the obsessive with perfection kind of girl. And well, I must be doing tons of mistakes in my english, but I'm loosing it right now because I don't practice enough.
Quand l'appétit va, tout va!
-Obélix