/heathcliff/

>>82376049
>Heathcliff general


I filled the description of this strip for you:

Heathcliff wakes up as a black and white sketch.

>>82376095
I feel like it didn't deserve the usual minimalist description because there was actually a decent coherent joke involved.

>>82376049
if you think this is good then you've gone off the deep end. I've been browsing these threads for years. Welcome brother, we shall die soon hopefully.

>>82376120
So after the two-day Heathcliff thread (because of impatient shitposters bumping up that thread until yesterday's strip)... that's what happened to Heathcliff.

>>82376144
Here's to being deep in the shit

>>82376163
I guess Heathcliff can't handle that level of attention without his coffee.

>>82376216
And that coffee is an allegory to those shitposters I described.

I don't think cats can drink coffee

>>82376244
ngl I bumped that thread a bit while it was well beyond its prime. It's rare to see a Heathcliff thread amass for than a couple dozen comments, and it was a quality thread at large.

>>82376326
That thread is a comeback thread for me.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T0nS1wRaA64

>>82377095
Can't disagree with that

File: 1462087180663.jpg (89KB, 600x422px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 600x422px

>missed artistic opportunities

>>82376049
He should have been more abstract in the very beginning. Just two spheres.

>>82377701
Charlie is going to get the shits.

>>82376049
>>82378390
I'm pretty sure we've seen Pablo in a Kitty Korner before

>>82377701
what did heathcliff do to puck up so badly

File: 1442790072378.png (175KB, 258x389px) Image search: [Google]

175KB, 258x389px

>>82376049
Holy shit, actual joke. So this is what it feels like to laugh unironically again.

>>82382000
>ironically laughing at Heathcliff
>ever

>>82376386
It was a good thread

>>82376863

This is a pretty decent joke.

fuck you for making me love this /co/

>>82377095
Was hoping for Garfield to get ravaged by the GA

>>82377095
Good storytelling, but the production values are lacking.

File: image.png (81KB, 700x771px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 700x771px

Careful...

>>82387707
What happened to the previous tenants?

>>82387896
>"HEATHCLIFF"
>not "HAM"

>>82376049
Is this a rare insight into the artistic process of Gallagher?

>>82389214
Fun fact: Although they all seem to be very repetitive (fighting scenes, settings, etc) , almost as they were copypasted, every strip of Heathcliff is a unique drawing

>>82389022
It's meant to be a moderator watching a Heathcliff thread, I think.

File: pepecliff.jpg (55KB, 499x600px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 499x600px

Fresh Heathcliff off the presses!

>>82389550
It's a pretty sleek uniform, gotta say.

>>82389961
>pepe
Come on, man, Heathcliff doesn't deserve this

File: crhea150523.gif (90KB, 450x520px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 450x520px

>>82387928

>>82390165
Sorry :'(

>>82376049
This is the only multiple-panel Heathcliff comic I've seen that couldn't be condensed down into a single panel..

Still has about six panels too many, though.

>>82390173
>>82390208
These are just EVER so slightly less absurd than the randomly generated heathcliffs.

>>82377701
>Heathcliff waits in his puck shed for Sonja and Spike to finish.

>>82390255
The first three are the "throwaway" panels, that way in case it's printed in a newspaper that shrinks down too many comics, it can fit in by omitting those.

>>82390474
Huh, is that standard industry practice?

File: ultimate showdown.jpg (17KB, 400x139px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 400x139px

Who wears it better?

>>82390799
Heathcliff, he's the only one wearing anything after all

>>82390547
It is. Before Bill Watterson did the elaborate Calvin and Hobbes layouts, and just adhered to a regular panel format, the first two panels were the throwaway panels. Garfield also does the same in that the title panel and one panel can be safely omitted if neccesary.

And for Funky Winkerbean's Sundays, Tom Batiuk set it up so that the last four panels are the essential ones, papers could omit the top half of the Sunday (and they have) and it'd still make sense.

Amazing Spider-Man has the first two panels be a collage of Spider-Man and his friends and villains. Dick Tracy can omit the first three panels (title, factoid panel, filler panel) and it'd still work.

There's probably other examples but I can't remember right now.

>>82390547

Yes; comic space standards vary wildly from newspaper to newspaper. One of the reasons Calvin and Hobbes had such great sunday strip art was that Watterson insisted on having a full-sized block instead of dealing with throwaway panels.

File: image.gif (59KB, 300x351px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 300x351px

>>82390945
>>82390956
You learn something new every day!