1036: "Reviews"

This forum is for the individual discussion thread that goes with each new comic.

Moderators: Magistrates, Prelates, Moderators General

Re: 1036: "Reviews"

Postby Sarcose » Fri Mar 30, 2012 12:48 pm UTC

[quote=toadpipe]I can think of nothing at all that I would ever consider buying that fits that description. Not a single thing. Never in my life have I ever paid money for something that was expected to break in less than a year by any means other than trying to break it[/quote]

How many ways can I reply to this?

1. Is it because you read reviews for them that said they didn't break within 8 months?
2. Is it because you've never bought a kitchen appliance, every single function of which is notorious for being unreliable?
3. Is it because you've never bought a washing machine / dryer / replaced another absolutely integral piece of your home's systems?
4. Do you shop at the Illuminati Mall, for which all the top quality products are reserved?

Consumer products are notorious for not working and it is unrealistic to go in with the expectation that everything is not snake oil. You NEED a filter.
Sarcose
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2010 9:56 am UTC

Re: 1036: "Reviews"

Postby dp2 » Fri Mar 30, 2012 12:55 pm UTC

Reading comics before online forums: "Heh heh. Yeah, that's true."

Reading comics after online forums: "I liked this. I bet there are people who didn't like it and are going to be all cocky about it. I'd better go put them in their place. Also, perhaps there is some meta-joke that I completely missed because I didn't start reading this comic until last week. Also, before I really laugh at this, I'd better make certain that this joke hasn't been used in other comics before."
dp2
 
Posts: 285
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 3:06 pm UTC

Re: 1036: "Reviews"

Postby dp2 » Fri Mar 30, 2012 1:00 pm UTC

Annihilist wrote:I'm only 17 and I find it hard to get my head around that.

You probably also have no idea who Winger is, much less why your post made me think of him/them.
dp2
 
Posts: 285
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 3:06 pm UTC

Re: 1036: "Reviews"

Postby arthurd006_5 » Fri Mar 30, 2012 1:10 pm UTC

Reviews all say to avoid that brand.

This presumes that brand-names on Chinese goods mean something more than how inventive the middle-man was this morning.

In particular, they probably don't mean that it was made in the same factory as when the brand-name was last used.
arthurd006_5
 
Posts: 98
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2010 9:49 am UTC

Re: 1036: "Reviews"

Postby Red Hal » Fri Mar 30, 2012 1:31 pm UTC

dp2 wrote:
Annihilist wrote:I'm only 17 and I find it hard to get my head around that.

You probably also have no idea who Winger is, much less why your post made me think of him/them.

/digs out old v21 modem.
/looks at it wistfully

Good times, man; good times.
Lost Greatest Silent Baby X Y Z. "There is no one who loves pain itself, who seeks after it and wants to have it, simply because it is pain..."
User avatar
Red Hal
Magically Delicious
 
Posts: 1381
Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2007 2:42 pm UTC

Re: 1036: "Reviews"

Postby Loadstone » Fri Mar 30, 2012 2:34 pm UTC

Seems relevant... http://xkcd.com/958/
"The only people who think children are carefree are the ones who've forgotten their own childhood." - OSC (who else?)
User avatar
Loadstone
 
Posts: 21
Joined: Wed Aug 24, 2011 5:21 pm UTC
Location: TX, USA

Re: 1036: "Reviews"

Postby xquared » Fri Mar 30, 2012 2:41 pm UTC

I started doing this to restaurants.
It used to be just going up to the restaurant and look at its menu at the front and awkwardly walk away when you realize you are too poor for it or go in and realize that you are just paying to sit in some overly pretentious ambiance.
Now I spot a restaurant and immediately go on yelp or urbanspoon or other similar site from the safety of the sidewalk, across the street. :D
X_x² ... ò_Ô
User avatar
xquared
 
Posts: 32
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 4:03 am UTC
Location: canada, but would like to be in the town of Fucking

Re: 1036: "Reviews"

Postby darasen » Fri Mar 30, 2012 2:45 pm UTC

Problem with online reviews: Some people are just really dumb.

Newegg has a plethora of reviews, usually low, for products where the review makes zero sense. A good example is the processor I bought is a 3 core from AMD. Some reviews rated it low since the reviewer couldn't get the processor to become a 4 core despite knowing they bought a 3 core one. the worst was the bad review from from the user who claimed a high level of tech expertise. He couldn't get his AMD chip to work because he was trying to put it in an Intel socket.
darasen
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2010 6:03 pm UTC

Re: 1036: "Reviews"

Postby pkcommando » Fri Mar 30, 2012 2:58 pm UTC

thesingingaccountant wrote:It's comforting to know that I'm not the only person left who cares not one whit for online reviews of anything. I buy very little, and my tastes are (unfortunately) rather limited, so it's pretty useless for me to consider other people's opinions of things, especially books and movies.

Still, I've heard good things about the Uterus Lamp...

I was reading a news story about the growing use of online reviews for more and more things. People kept trying to counter my arguments (and being totally serious) with, "but nobody would post a bad review unless they really had a bad experience." I felt as if I should study those people, the Lost Tribe of the Internet, totally isolated, even in 2012, from Trolls. The best of it could be distilled to: "While people do lie on the Internet, all the time, they would NEVER lie about something that could hurt somebody's livelihood." :roll:
"The Universe is for raptors now!" say Raptors, as they take over all of Universe.
pkcommando
 
Posts: 213
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2012 3:22 pm UTC
Location: Allston, MA

Re: 1036: "Reviews"

Postby cellocgw » Fri Mar 30, 2012 3:17 pm UTC

1190 Forever!
Vote cellocgw for President 2016. #ScienceintheWhiteHouse http://cellocgw.wordpress.com
"A man's got to know his limitations." -- Harry Callahan
"A man's got to know his limits." -- L'Hopital
User avatar
cellocgw
 
Posts: 953
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2008 7:40 pm UTC

Re: 1036: "Reviews"

Postby SerMufasa » Fri Mar 30, 2012 3:38 pm UTC

jpk wrote:Shopping in Boston on the first of September: "Oh, man, that's an awesome bookshelf, and it's just sitting on the side of the road! With awesome books already in it! Pull the truck over!"


Ahh, good ol' September 1st shopping in Boston. That was awesome.
"Winter is Coming, Simba"
User avatar
SerMufasa
 
Posts: 155
Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2012 2:00 pm UTC
Location: Casterley Rock

Re: 1036: "Reviews"

Postby bigcatrik » Fri Mar 30, 2012 3:55 pm UTC

jpk wrote:Secondary joke: I plugged in this lamp and my dog went rigid, spoke a sentence of perfect Akkadian, and then was hurled sideways through the picture window. Even worse, it's one of those lamps where the switch is on the cord.


Long-time reader but I HAD to register to say that they already made that movie and it's called Amityville 4: The Evil Escapes. It's an NBC made-for-TV movie from 1989 starring Patty Duke and Jane Wyatt (original Spock's mother!) and features an EVIL FLOOR LAMP (!?!) FedEx-ed as a gag gift (!?!) across country from the Amityville house's yard sale (!?!) to a lovely, seaside town in California where it proceeds to wreak havoc in the way that only an evil floor lamp can. Yes, it's awesome. And surprisingly gory for a 1989 TV movie.

Rik
bigcatrik
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2012 3:37 pm UTC

Re: 1036: "Reviews"

Postby Sprocket » Fri Mar 30, 2012 4:22 pm UTC

<3
"She’s a free spirit, a wind-rider, she’s at one with nature, and walks with the kodama eidolons”
ImageImageImageImage
User avatar
Sprocket
Seymour
 
Posts: 5736
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 6:04 pm UTC
Location: impaled on Beck's boney hips.

Re: 1036: "Reviews"

Postby lesmith11 » Fri Mar 30, 2012 7:13 pm UTC

Haven't checked to see if someone else posted this... but a link MUST be made to this: http://www.amazon.com/dp/B000J36XR2/

The reviews are fantastic; my personal favourite is

"We live underground. We speak with our hands. We wear the earplugs all our lives.
PLEASE! You must listen! We cannot maintain the link for long... I will type as fast as I can.
DO NOT USE THE CABLES!"
lesmith11
 
Posts: 43
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 8:39 pm UTC

Re: 1036: "Reviews"

Postby bmonk » Fri Mar 30, 2012 8:41 pm UTC

Eternal Density wrote:Expected lamp, received bobcat.

In accordance with prophecy.
"The position was well put indeed in a famous speech by Jzbl to the graduates of the Central Saturnian University, when he said that it was a source of great pride to him that although hardly anybody knew anything any longer, everybody now knew how to find out everything."
User avatar
bmonk
 
Posts: 622
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2010 10:14 pm UTC

Re: 1036: "Reviews"

Postby Someguy945 » Fri Mar 30, 2012 8:43 pm UTC

JimsMaher wrote:check out Consumer Reports, and be done with it. I hear CR is online now. .... or you could ignore your interlink tether attached to your palm, and just think for yourself every now and again, no big deal.


Came to this thread to say Consumer Reports is awesome.

Thinking for yourself is perfectly fine for a lamp. I look to CR for the things I really don't want to screw up - refrigerator, dishwasher, etc. Actually, even with CR there is a fair bit of thinking/decision making involved. They just provide the facts necessary to turn a decision into an informed decision.
User avatar
Someguy945
 
Posts: 176
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2011 5:09 am UTC

Re: 1036: "Reviews"

Postby Pfhorrest » Fri Mar 30, 2012 8:57 pm UTC

bmonk wrote:
Eternal Density wrote:Expected lamp, received bobcat.

In accordance with prophecy.

So. It has come to this.
Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of All Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
The Codex Quaerendae (my philosophy) - The Chronicles of Quelouva (my fiction)
User avatar
Pfhorrest
 
Posts: 2112
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:11 am UTC

Re: 1036: "Reviews"

Postby SHISHKABOB » Fri Mar 30, 2012 9:51 pm UTC

Pfhorrest wrote:
bmonk wrote:
Eternal Density wrote:Expected lamp, received bobcat.

In accordance with prophecy.

So. It has come to this.


every time I see this it makes me cringe, forced meme is forced

inb4, etc.
SHISHKABOB
 
Posts: 27
Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 3:14 pm UTC

Re: 1036: "Reviews"

Postby project2051 » Fri Mar 30, 2012 10:19 pm UTC

Must of been a Dodge Ram lamp.
User avatar
project2051
 
Posts: 156
Joined: Fri Jan 29, 2010 2:20 pm UTC

Re: 1036: "Reviews"

Postby Djehutynakht » Sat Mar 31, 2012 12:05 am UTC

I'd be willing to go for a couple of those Swiss lamps.



As long as we're talking about reviews, I suppose I'll post the link to the Amazon reviews for yellowcake Uranium.

http://www.amazon.com/Images-SI-Inc-Ura ... Descending
User avatar
Djehutynakht
 
Posts: 910
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 1:37 am UTC

Re: 1036: "Reviews"

Postby careyhammer » Sat Mar 31, 2012 2:50 am UTC

Djehutynakht wrote:As long as we're talking about reviews, I suppose I'll post the link to the Amazon reviews for yellowcake Uranium.

http://www.amazon.com/Images-SI-Inc-Ura ... Descending


Also, check out unicorn meat linked from there. Good stuff.
User avatar
careyhammer
 
Posts: 8
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 1:15 am UTC
Location: California

Re: 1036: "Reviews"

Postby RogueCynic » Sat Mar 31, 2012 3:15 am UTC

Sarcose wrote:[quote=toadpipe]I can think of nothing at all that I would ever consider buying that fits that description. Not a single thing. Never in my life have I ever paid money for something that was expected to break in less than a year by any means other than trying to break it


How many ways can I reply to this?

1. Is it because you read reviews for them that said they didn't break within 8 months?
2. Is it because you've never bought a kitchen appliance, every single function of which is notorious for being unreliable?
3. Is it because you've never bought a washing machine / dryer / replaced another absolutely integral piece of your home's systems?
4. Do you shop at the Illuminati Mall, for which all the top quality products are reserved?

Consumer products are notorious for not working and it is unrealistic to go in with the expectation that everything is not snake oil. You NEED a filter.[/quote]
I have another theory: The original poster has never read Mad magazine. More specifically, planned obsolescence.
I am Lord Titanius Englesmith, Fancyman of Cornwood.
See 1 Kings 7:23 for pi.
If you put a prune in a juicer, what would you get?
RogueCynic
 
Posts: 186
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 10:23 pm UTC

Re: 1036: "Reviews"

Postby PatrickRsGhost » Sat Mar 31, 2012 3:31 am UTC

Someguy945 wrote:
JimsMaher wrote:check out Consumer Reports, and be done with it. I hear CR is online now. .... or you could ignore your interlink tether attached to your palm, and just think for yourself every now and again, no big deal.


Came to this thread to say Consumer Reports is awesome.

Thinking for yourself is perfectly fine for a lamp. I look to CR for the things I really don't want to screw up - refrigerator, dishwasher, etc. Actually, even with CR there is a fair bit of thinking/decision making involved. They just provide the facts necessary to turn a decision into an informed decision.


The issue with Consumer Reports is that in order to access most of their content, you need to have a paid subscription. That's fine, if you intend to check out every single thing on the planet before you buy it. If, however, you're like most normal consumers, and only check reviews on products you're not too familiar with, it's a waste of money.

That's the only time I really look at reviews. If I'm not all that familiar with the product as a whole, or how well different brands of the same kind of product hold up, then I'll check out the reviews.

There are two categories of reviews I look at: Reviews of consumer electronics, especially more modern electronics (smart phones, mp3 players, GPS systems, etc.), and sellers through a major online conglomerate.

Whenever I'm buying something, especially personal electronics, I check for four things:

1. Price
2. Features
3. Brand
4. Rating

In that order.

I will sort first by price, then by the features, and after I've identified a brand I'm familiar with (not just by name; by personal experience), then I look at the reviews. I try to look for consistencies in reviews. If a user gave a product only 3 out of 5 stars, I want to know why. Will it be a big problem in the overall functionality of the product? Will that default interrupt my intentions of the product's usage? If the answer is "Yes", I move on to the next model. If it's something that's easy to overcome (might be discussed in another review further on down the list), then I'll go ahead and get it.

After I've used the item for a while, and have encountered the problem, but found a way to overcome it, I'll post my own review and solution to the problem everyone encountered.

AvatarIII wrote:this exact thing has ruined shopping for DVDs and Games, I used to read a blurb and look at a cover to decide whether to buy it, now I pull out my phone and go to metacritic or RT, it's probably saved me money and a few shit movies and games, but still, it's ruined me discovering those facts for myself.


Most of the movies I've bought were ones I'd seen in the theater, or else saw on TV. On the rare occasion I buy a movie I've never seen, I might go ahead and buy it, after reading the blurb and checking out the cover art, but I don't unwrap it until I go online and check the reviews. Also, there's this thing called "You Tube", where people share personal videos with friends and family. Sometimes people might upload clips from movies or TV shows, or else the studio that produced the movie might upload a preview or clip.

Same goes with CDs. If I buy a CD, it's because I (A) recognize the artist, and (B) recognize most if not all of the tracks on the album. One thing I've done recently is preview the tracks on Amazon's mp3 site. If I like the samples, then I'll either download the tracks, or else go out and buy the CD. Or order the CD online and have it shipped.

Same could be said about books. When I would buy books in the bookstore, I would read the description on the back cover, or inside flaps. Then I might open to a couple of pages somewhere in the middle. If I like what I'd read so far, then I'll get it.

In short, I only read reviews for personal electronics and other physical items. Media? No.
PRG

An important message for you:

010000100110010100100000011100110
111010101110010011001010010000001
110100011011110010000001100101011
000010111010000100000011110010110
111101110101011100100010000001100
010011000010110001101101111011011
1000101110
User avatar
PatrickRsGhost
 
Posts: 2278
Joined: Fri May 04, 2007 5:43 pm UTC
Location: ZZ9PluralZAlpha

Re: 1036: "Reviews"

Postby SpringLoaded12 » Sat Mar 31, 2012 4:07 am UTC

cellocgw wrote:http://leasthelpful.com/
Just sayin' ...

I read several pages of reviews. I haven't laughed that hard in a long time. Much applause and kudos to you, sir.
"It's easy to forget what a sin is in the middle of a battlefield." "Opposite over hypotenuse, dipshit."
User avatar
SpringLoaded12
 
Posts: 336
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2008 1:58 am UTC
Location: Guarding the Super Missile

Re: 1036: "Reviews"

Postby myrcutio » Sat Mar 31, 2012 4:57 am UTC

It's interesting that several people mentioned sites with vastly different standards of reviews. Most sites moderate their reviews based on a set of guidelines, and some guidelines are really, really bad. Newegg is one of the bad ones, Consumer Reports is not. In fact, Best Buy is a huge proponent of online reviews, even in the brick and mortar stores.

Point is, lumping all online reviews together is a poor generalization, it's like lumping all spam filters together and saying, "I still get spam, filtering is worthless!"
"Lightning must have hit it, and now it won't work in anything but Windows 95."

Faustus runs afoul of Microsoft.
myrcutio
 
Posts: 41
Joined: Wed Dec 30, 2009 7:28 pm UTC

Re: 1036: "Reviews"

Postby J L » Sat Mar 31, 2012 6:35 am UTC

I find reviews quite useful when it comes to consumer electronics, or any product where it's obvious even to people who know nothing about it (like me) if the reviewer knows what he's talking about or not.

Worst are books. Reviewers hide behind empty judgments like "thrilling", "boring", "great characters", "couldn't stop", without ever giving any reasons or facts. Or if they give reasons, it's something like "this book has foxes, but I prefer bobcats. One star off."
User avatar
J L
 
Posts: 226
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2010 11:03 am UTC
Location: Germany

Re: 1036: "Reviews"

Postby PatrickRsGhost » Sat Mar 31, 2012 1:00 pm UTC

pkcommando wrote:I was reading a news story about the growing use of online reviews for more and more things. People kept trying to counter my arguments (and being totally serious) with, "but nobody would post a bad review unless they really had a bad experience." I felt as if I should study those people, the Lost Tribe of the Internet, totally isolated, even in 2012, from Trolls. The best of it could be distilled to: "While people do lie on the Internet, all the time, they would NEVER lie about something that could hurt somebody's livelihood." :roll:


I was listening to consumer adviser Clark Howard a few days ago, and he had said to be wary of some online reviews of products. He said one thing that was trending was that companies will pay people to post good reviews of their products, instructed to give 5 stars or whatever the highest rating is, and told to give their competitors' products low ratings and scathing reviews.
PRG

An important message for you:

010000100110010100100000011100110
111010101110010011001010010000001
110100011011110010000001100101011
000010111010000100000011110010110
111101110101011100100010000001100
010011000010110001101101111011011
1000101110
User avatar
PatrickRsGhost
 
Posts: 2278
Joined: Fri May 04, 2007 5:43 pm UTC
Location: ZZ9PluralZAlpha

Re: 1036: "Reviews"

Postby jpk » Sat Mar 31, 2012 2:44 pm UTC

PatrickRsGhost wrote:I was listening to consumer adviser Clark Howard a few days ago, and he had said to be wary of some online reviews of products. He said one thing that was trending was that companies will pay people to post good reviews of their products, instructed to give 5 stars or whatever the highest rating is, and told to give their competitors' products low ratings and scathing reviews.


Next up on Clark Howard: an expose of the Craig Shergold hoax. Before you send that postcard, think again!
jpk
 
Posts: 536
Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2010 7:33 am UTC

Re: 1036: "Reviews"

Postby JimsMaher » Sat Mar 31, 2012 6:51 pm UTC

PatrickRsGhost wrote:
Someguy945 wrote:
JimsMaher wrote:check out Consumer Reports, and be done with it. I hear CR is online now. .... or you could ignore your interlink tether attached to your palm, and just think for yourself every now and again, no big deal.

Came to this thread to say Consumer Reports is awesome.

Thinking for yourself is perfectly fine for a lamp. I look to CR for the things I really don't want to screw up - refrigerator, dishwasher, etc. Actually, even with CR there is a fair bit of thinking/decision making involved. They just provide the facts necessary to turn a decision into an informed decision.

The issue with Consumer Reports is that in order to access most of their content, you need to have a paid subscription. That's fine, if you intend to check out every single thing on the planet before you buy it. If, however, you're like most normal consumers, and only check reviews on products you're not too familiar with, it's a waste of money.

That's the only time I really look at reviews. If I'm not all that familiar with the product as a whole, or how well different brands of the same kind of product hold up, then I'll check out the reviews.

Informed decisions ! ! !

That is all.
"I would therefore take the liberty of suggesting that, in the next edition of your excellent poem, the erroneous calculation to which I refer should be corrected ... "
JimsMaher
 
Posts: 105
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 5:14 pm UTC

Re: 1036: "Reviews"

Postby JediMaster012 » Sat Mar 31, 2012 9:50 pm UTC

Let me begin by saying that I'm a very picky consumer who, when purchasing, strives for quality.

Before Online Reviews:

I'd drive from store to store, looking at different options. Asking friends for advice, who half time time had no useful info. Most expensive objects I buy, even holding/seeing them in person, or worse, holding them in the packaging, can tell you little to nothing about how it actually performs. And most importantly, how long it lasts. For examples, checking the performance of most electronic components is hard without actually owning it, and appliances are hard to know the quality of.

After Online Reviews:

I now pull up a list of products on say Amazon, look at the best reviewed, and see why the one's who gave it negative reviews. Oftentimes, there are valid negative reviews that are just irrelevant. Using the top reviewed products, most of the time it immediately narrows my search down to a handful of items all in the same place (on my computer screen). For me, having online reviews makes purchasin a much quicker process. A great recent example of a time when reviews are useful is purchasing my espresso machine. The have moving components, deal with high heat and pressure, and have components designed to be replaced over time. There are definitely ones out that that would be great for a few months, but costly in time and resources to upkeep.


On a random note, I find the time I spend researching a product is roughly proportional to it's cost.
JediMaster012
 
Posts: 12
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2011 11:56 am UTC

Re: 1036: "Reviews"

Postby webdude » Sun Apr 01, 2012 4:55 am UTC

Randall, are you dissing online reviews? That's ridiculous! Everything you read online is true, including blogs, webcomics, forum entries, and reviews. I know, because I read it somewhere.

:)
webdude
 
Posts: 49
Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2011 6:11 am UTC

Re: 1036: "Reviews"

Postby eviloatmeal » Sun Apr 01, 2012 4:59 am UTC

From Amazon:

"I thought I was getting a deal with this USB lamp, but the light from it made my leopard explode. I'll also have to dock a point for the poor color selection. I would have preferred it in bubble-gum pink rather than lavender. 3/5"
*** FREE SHIPPING ENABLED ***
Image
Riddles are abound tonightImage
User avatar
eviloatmeal
 
Posts: 316
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 9:39 am UTC
Location: Upside down in space!

Re: 1036: "Reviews"

Postby danix » Mon Apr 02, 2012 3:04 pm UTC

bigcatrik wrote:
jpk wrote:Secondary joke: I plugged in this lamp and my dog went rigid, spoke a sentence of perfect Akkadian, and then was hurled sideways through the picture window. Even worse, it's one of those lamps where the switch is on the cord.


Long-time reader but I HAD to register to say that they already made that movie and it's called Amityville 4: The Evil Escapes. It's an NBC made-for-TV movie from 1989 starring Patty Duke and Jane Wyatt (original Spock's mother!) and features an EVIL FLOOR LAMP (!?!) FedEx-ed as a gag gift (!?!) across country from the Amityville house's yard sale (!?!) to a lovely, seaside town in California where it proceeds to wreak havoc in the way that only an evil floor lamp can. Yes, it's awesome. And surprisingly gory for a 1989 TV movie.

Rik


I knew I had seen an Amityville "evil lamp" movie! :twisted: It is also the first thing I thought when I read that alt-text.
danix
 
Posts: 33
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2008 6:51 pm UTC

Re: 1036: "Reviews"

Postby webdude » Tue Apr 03, 2012 3:54 am UTC

danix wrote:
bigcatrik wrote:
jpk wrote:Secondary joke: I plugged in this lamp and my dog went rigid, spoke a sentence of perfect Akkadian, and then was hurled sideways through the picture window. Even worse, it's one of those lamps where the switch is on the cord.


Long-time reader but I HAD to register to say that they already made that movie and it's called Amityville 4: The Evil Escapes. It's an NBC made-for-TV movie from 1989 starring Patty Duke and Jane Wyatt (original Spock's mother!) and features an EVIL FLOOR LAMP (!?!) FedEx-ed as a gag gift (!?!) across country from the Amityville house's yard sale (!?!) to a lovely, seaside town in California where it proceeds to wreak havoc in the way that only an evil floor lamp can. Yes, it's awesome. And surprisingly gory for a 1989 TV movie.

Rik


I knew I had seen an Amityville "evil lamp" movie! :twisted: It is also the first thing I thought when I read that alt-text.



The Urban Dictionary's Rule 666 is okay, but should be assigned another number, e.g. Rule 8088. I propose a NEW RULE 666:
IF IT EXISTS, IT CAN BE EVIL!

Evil dogs! Evil cars! Evil dolls! Evil... damn! Hollywood has already done all those! How about evil angels? Done. Evil babies? Done. Evil saints? Done. What hasn't been done?

How about evil toiletries? Movie proposal: Bathroom of Terror! Suffocating shaving cream! Torturous tampons! Murderous medicine! Do you dare to go?
webdude
 
Posts: 49
Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2011 6:11 am UTC

Re: 1036: "Reviews"

Postby bmonk » Wed May 16, 2012 3:53 pm UTC

SHISHKABOB wrote:
Pfhorrest wrote:
bmonk wrote:
Eternal Density wrote:Expected lamp, received bobcat.

In accordance with prophecy.

So. It has come to this.


every time I see this it makes me cringe, forced meme is forced

inb4, etc.

What if we belong to Tautology club?
"The position was well put indeed in a famous speech by Jzbl to the graduates of the Central Saturnian University, when he said that it was a source of great pride to him that although hardly anybody knew anything any longer, everybody now knew how to find out everything."
User avatar
bmonk
 
Posts: 622
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2010 10:14 pm UTC

Previous

Return to Individual XKCD Comic Threads

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], broarbape and 16 guests

cron