UPDATING OCCASIONALLY (FOR NOW)
12

12 thoughts on “540 – Trick Hello”

  1. Scarsdale

    Called it, she figured he’d do this, if by choice or by zombie voodoo. I’m sure the “friendlier” questioning will start soon, if she doesn’t just kill him out-right. Or just add him to the herd.

  2. Crazyman

    Gotcha! 😉

  3. Zombatar

    This turn of events is a surprise only to Eustace. And, maybe, Eustace’s subconscious. After all, this way he doesn’t have to actually risk actually attacking Suzie, which gives him a greater chance of survival than actually attacking her. I wonder what he was promised/threatened with?

  4. ConcordBob

    Not to nit-pick, but since sights are on target, finger should be on the trigger. Especially this close.
    The usual rule is “keep finger straight and off trigger until sights are on target”.

  5. Dr. Norman (not a real doctor)

    Not to nit-pick, but since that was current philosophies regarding trigger discipline have evolved.
    Of course, it will depend on who you get/got your training from.
    Experiments have determined that the fraction of a second to go from finger off the trigger to finger firing when appropriate is insignificant, and the risk of firing unintended is greatly reduced.

  6. Dr. Norman (not a real doctor)

    I did the google thing and I believe I saw how you reached this conclusion … but there are two parts to it – One should not omit the second part.
    “Trigger Finger Discipline: · The practice of keeping your finger “off the trigger” until your sights are on target AND YOU ARE READY TO DISCHARGE THE FIREARM.” (Caps are my own)

  7. Crazyman

    She wants him alive so she can question him; otherwise, he’d already be dead. 💀

  8. ConcordBob

    Good discussion on trigger discipline!
    His skin is very pale / gray. Is this malnourishment, or has he been poisoned with a mind-control drug? I would have to go back and look a t all various of skin tone.

    1. TKG

      On a prior page we discussed what he’s likely got running in his system. I suggested that it’s probably Borrochero (Brugmansia arbora) which is already used by Colombian cartels to eradicate the free will of their victims.

  9. ConcordBob

    Oh, the gray is just the dim light. Here is McCarthy eating dinner, and has the typical white dude flesh tone.
    https://www.zombieranchcomic.com/comic/531-inquisitional-etiquette/

    1. Dawn

      Yeah, I was trying to show that it was dark. But went with the old Hollywood method of adding a blue grey tint over everything.

  10. Dr. Norman (not a real doctor)

    Now can we satisfy my curiosity? Colt, Smith & Wesson, Ruger, or other timeline variant?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

 

540 – Trick Hello
Posted on February 26, 2025 by Dawn

Suzie hearkening back to the last time Eustace was faked out. She probably regrets not being able to sneak the Lawn Ranger into the bedcovers to be the victim of the stabbing.

And with that, it's Episode 23 time! Welcome back to the Ranch, everyone!

Have your cake, eat it, too, and don’t pay the baker.

Posted on February 4, 2015 by Clint
Well, so, there’s an old proverb most commonly expressed as “You can’t have your cake and eat it, too”, basically meaning you can’t have something both ways, especially when both those ways are favorable to you. One of the concrete examples of that would be commissioning a design job: if you tell the designer you want it done ultra-fast, low-cost, and high quality, they will, depending on their level of professionalism, respond with varying degrees of laughing in your face. At least one leg of that triangle is going to have to give. I realize that’s three things, so let’s do another example. You want to sell your car to a buyer and get the money for it, but still retain all ownership of your car. Doesn’t seem very logical, especially to the buyer who would be getting nothing out of the deal. It’s like deciding to stop paying your power bill, but still wanting your electricity. Well, that’s us. Apparently a recent court decision has the potential to declare major movie studios can do just that. http://www.tessgerritsen.com/gravity-lawsuit-affects-every-writer-sells-hollywood/ Now I’ve written before on the pitfalls artists can encounter when entering into deals involving their creative work, but Tess Gerritsen’s case seems like a whole new level of weird. If you didn’t read her post at the above link, the upshot is that in 1999 she published a novel entitled Gravity, and ended up optioning the rights to make a movie out of that book to New Line Cinema, of course with name recognition and compensation to her should it happen. She even did some script work on a screenplay, and the movie got far enough along she heard a director had been attached… but then the project was shelved. Now if you’re keeping track, you’ll realize a quite successful Warner Bros produced movie came out recently with the name Gravity. There were similarities to Gerritsen’s book, even moreso given the screenplay rewrites she did, but… eh, parallel evolution can happen. It wasn’t until her agent uncovered that the man who co-wrote the “original screenplay” for the 2013 movie was the same man who’d been attached as director on the earlier attempt, Alfonso Cuaron. Still, Warner had merged with New Line in 2008, gaining access to all its properties, so they had legal rights to use Gerritsen’s work. Sure. But that’s where it gets weird. Somewhere in 2008-2009 Cuaron writes his screenplay, the movie is developed and released, and not only does Gerritsen not see a dime of payment, she isn’t even credited. Outrageous? Unethical? Probably. Also not uncommon in Hollywood. Hell, my friend produced and showed off a short film at San Diego Comic-Con, and two years later Divergent was made and bore some really shady similarities to his work. Hard to prove these sorts of things, though. If it weren’t for Cuaron’s earlier involvement with the proto-Gravity, it probably wouldn’t have merited much more than an annoyed shrug from Gerritsen. The part that gets weird is that in the court case that was filed, Warner apparently didn’t argue that the eventual film wasn’t based on Gerritsen’s work, they just argued that because Gerritsen’s contract was with New Line, they didn’t have to honor it. That’s the eat the cake and still keep the cake part. Warner merged with New Line, meaning they got access to all of New Line’s properties and dealings, but Warner is arguing that they have the rights to make a movie involving a writer’s intellectual property, rights acquired as part of New Line’s contract with Gerritsen, but they don’t have to honor the part of the contract where they would be paying her and giving her credit. And apparently, the judge agreed with that reasoning. Some writers are worried this will set a nasty precedent, given how often mergers and buyouts occur these days. Are they correct? Maybe. We only really have Gerritsen’s side of the story, but if true, the line of reasoning doesn’t seem very logical at all. Certainly it’s a very, very good argument for making sure any optioning agreements a writer makes with any movie studio come with an expiration date. Hopefully the courts would at least consider that part of a contract to be something to be honored.