Jack Black Likes Grickle? o_O

This iconic design originated from a short video by Grickle illustrator Graham Annable. The video's good, the shirt's even better! Even Jack Black thinks so!

spacewolf_jackblack.jpg

Does Jack Black like Grickle? That's pretty cool, you'd think Telltale would feature that more prominently on the site!

Never mind, just realised that was shopped. I think.

Actually, now I don't think it was shopped.
«1

Comments

  • edited May 2010
    I know that shopped photos can be made to look very real, but this does look very real. So I'm guessing not shopped.
  • edited May 2010
    i thought it was shopped because of the white spots and the lightness and pointiness around Jack's left nipple, but I checked the store image and those spots are stars. I can't explain the pointy nipple, though.
  • edited May 2010
    i thought it was shopped because of the white spots and the lightness and pointiness around Jack's left nipple, but I checked the store image and those spots are stars. I can't explain the pointy nipple, though.

    Maybe it was cold?
  • edited May 2010
    Jack likes Grickle?! Sweeeeeet. My favorite actor is one with Telltale? Meh, you're all probably right. It's shopped, hell it even looks like it shopped; badly I might add.
  • JakeJake Telltale Alumni
    edited May 2010
    It's real!
  • edited May 2010
    Cool, mr. Black has good taste. I wonder if he has preordered puzzle agent? :)
  • JenniferJennifer Moderator
    edited May 2010
    I'm not a very big fan of Jack Black's films. I enjoyed The School of Rock though. But he's got good taste. He was spotted wearing a Whispering Rock Summer Camp T-shirt (from Psychonauts) too. :D
  • edited May 2010
    I liked Kung Fu Panda. But I probably won't go see the sequãl...
  • edited May 2010
    shopped
    jeeno0142 wrote: »
    shopped
    splash1 wrote: »
    shopped

    THAT'S FORBIDDEN!!!
  • edited May 2010

    Man, whoever came up with that had a stick up their ass or what?
  • edited May 2010
    The image was manipulated using Adobe® Photoshop® software!
  • edited May 2010

    I wonder why they care. Surely it just shows how well known they have become.
  • puzzleboxpuzzlebox Telltale Alumni
    edited May 2010

    Haha, that's ridiculous. Trying to control language? You'd have better luck trying to control an avalanche of cats.

    Anyway, I don't see Hoover, Xerox, or Google complaining. :rolleyes:
  • edited May 2010
    puzzlebox wrote: »
    Haha, that's ridiculous. Trying to control language? You'd have better luck trying to control an avalanche of cats.

    Anyway, I don't see Hoover, Xerox, or Google complaining. :rolleyes:
    See, I didn't even know 'to hoover' came from a company name.
    Maybe Adobe is on to something then, if people that use the verb start to forget the origins...
  • TorTor
    edited May 2010
    puzzlebox wrote: »
    Anyway, I don't see Hoover, Xerox, or Google complaining. :rolleyes:
    Google and Xerox have both tried it... not that it helps much, of course.
  • edited May 2010
    Jake wrote: »
    It's real!

    Wow, I wonder how many celebraties order from your game warehouse? I wonder if any are on the forums... Watching us :eek:.
  • edited May 2010
    If companies don't make attempts to protect and enforce their trademarks, then the marks fall into the public domain and are no longer the property of their owners/creators. Most companies get around this problem by creating a generic noun or phrase to describe their products, like Rollerblade inline skates, Kleenex facial tissue, and Xerox copiers.

    So Adobe has to make such warnings in order to legally protect the Photoshop trademark.
  • edited May 2010
    It's true. Adobe has to care, because if they did not show an "attempt to protect their trademark", the government could allow any image editing software to use the term "Photoshop". It of course seems horribly asinine for regular everyday life, but Kleenex used to be a trademark and now it's not.
  • edited May 2010
    It's true. Adobe has to care, because if they did not show an "attempt to protect their trademark", the government could allow any image editing software to use the term "Photoshop". It of course seems horribly asinine for regular everyday life, but Kleenex used to be a trademark and now it's not.
    The Kleenex mark is still valid, according to the US Patent & Trademark Office.

    A canonical example of a genericized trademark is escalator; most people don't know it was a trademark at one time.
  • puzzleboxpuzzlebox Telltale Alumni
    edited May 2010
    You're a lawyery-type person, aren't you Wap? Thanks for the explanation! It makes a lot more sense if the aim is legal protection of the trademark rather than trying to stop generic use of that trademark in everyday speech in any realistic way.

    I was under the impression that Microsoft actually wants "Bing" to become a verb. I heard it used on some TV show (as in, "Why don't you Bing it?"), and assumed it had to be product placement because it was so jarring. No one says "Bing it". I think they showed the webpage too. Would a company court common usage like that for the exposure, then whack up some legal stuff to the contrary to ensure the trademark remains protected?
  • PsyPsy
    edited May 2010
    puzzlebox wrote: »
    Haha, that's ridiculous. Trying to control language? You'd have better luck trying to control an avalanche of cats.

    To be fair, have you ever *tried* to control an avalanche of cats?
  • edited May 2010
    Psy wrote: »
    To be fair, have you ever *tried* to control an avalanche of cats?
    Wouldn't you be able to divert it with a ditch filled with mice or some sort of yarn-based solution?
  • edited May 2010
    Wouldn't you be able to divert it with a ditch filled with mice or some sort of yarn-based solution?

    I think a giant canister of canned air combined with an enormous vacuum cleaner would be the most reliable way to divert it.
  • edited May 2010
    We could also try some sort of equivalent attack dog force, though that solution may be somewhat messy.
  • puzzleboxpuzzlebox Telltale Alumni
    edited May 2010
    Psy wrote: »
    To be fair, have you ever *tried* to control an avalanche of cats?

    Psy totally called me out... I feel like such a poseur. :(
  • edited May 2010
    puzzlebox wrote: »
    You're a lawyery-type person, aren't you Wap?
    Yup. My last two years of law school were focused on intellectual property law (patent/trademark/copyright/unfair trade). I had originally wanted to be a patent attorney -- the problem was that you need an engineering or scientific bachelors degree to take the US patent bar exam, and I was a politicial science & sociology double-major. Oops. :-/
    puzzlebox wrote: »
    I was under the impression that Microsoft actually wants "Bing" to become a verb. I heard it used on some TV show (as in, "Why don't you Bing it?"), and assumed it had to be product placement because it was so jarring. No one says "Bing it". I think they showed the webpage too. Would a company court common usage like that for the exposure, then whack up some legal stuff to the contrary to ensure the trademark remains protected?
    Yup, I think you're right, though Microsoft is being a bit too blatant about it for my tastes. That's exactly the sort of evidence you would use to show that Microsoft failed to protect its rights in the mark. And yes, Microsoft is being sued for trademark infringement. The Bing trademark application hasn't been approved yet by the USPTO, either, and at least two companies have filed oppositions to Microsoft's application, claiming they used the term "bing" first.

    Google, of course, is now actively protecting its mark even though Larry Page, one of Google's founders, has used the phrase "keep googling" in the distant past.
  • edited May 2010
    puzzlebox wrote: »
    Psy totally called me out... I feel like such a poseur. :(

    Well, you could always test out your hypothesis...with science!

    Let's see, who on the forum has a large number of cats...
  • edited May 2010
    Pale Man wrote: »
    I think a giant canister of canned air combined with an enormous vacuum cleaner would be the most reliable way to divert it.

    Laser pointers, tons of them. Cats love them and would follow them over a cliff if necessary (not that I would want that, I love cats).

    cute%20cat.jpg
  • edited May 2010
    Jack Black surprised me. His favourite game of all time was Psychonauts.

    I'm guessing now it's Brutal Legend though...
  • JakeJake Telltale Alumni
    edited May 2010
    Xerox ran a series of ads in various magazines and journalism trades a couple years ago, about how they don't want writers using "Xerox" the way one uses "zipper" or "aspirin," as examples of trademarked names being unprotected enough that they are lost.
  • edited May 2010
    Jake wrote: »
    Xerox ran a series of ads in various magazines and journalism trades a couple years ago, about how they don't want writers using "Xerox" the way one uses "zipper" or "aspirin," as examples of trademarked names being unprotected enough that they are lost.
    Wow, that attorney actually got something wrong in his "Do's" column! You don't need to register a mark with the USPTO to use "TM" or "SM" with the mark. The "®" symbol is the only one used to indicate a mark has been registered.

    That's probably enough legal pedantry for now. :D
  • edited May 2010
    plrichard wrote: »
    Laser pointers, tons of them. Cats love them and would follow them over a cliff if necessary (not that I would want that, I love cats).

    I think we'd need an assortment. For instance, among my two cats, one goes for the 2D stuff (laser pointers, shadows..) but couldn't care less for 3D stuff, and the other doesn't care at all about 2D stuff but anything 3D (ball of paper, yarn, robe belt) will get him all worked up.

    So I think we need to create shadows on the left and throw crumpled paper on the right or something. This way they'll go one way or the other and we'll be fine in the middle.
  • edited May 2010
    Avistew wrote: »
    I think we'd need an assortment. For instance, among my two cats, one goes for the 2D stuff (laser pointers, shadows..) but couldn't care less for 3D stuff, and the other doesn't care at all about 2D stuff but anything 3D (ball of paper, yarn, robe belt) will get him all worked up.

    Oh no, I smell a 2D vs 3D war brewing.
  • edited May 2010
    Pale Man wrote: »
    Oh no, I smell a 2D vs 3D war brewing.

    No, no, I can be peaceable about this. Avistew is probably correct, cats are fickle creatures, they're also better than all of us and they know it. It's gonna take this whole forum to stop that avalanche! Who will help?!
  • edited May 2010
    I have to be honest, I still don't get why we'd want to stop an avalanche of cats.
  • edited May 2010
    Avistew wrote: »
    I have to be honest, I still don't get why we'd want to stop an avalanche of cats.

    To save them of course. If the cats are avalanche-ing, then it's clear that they won't be able to survive. Also, how could we play with them if they were avalanche-ing?
  • edited May 2010
    I think that the solution to the cat avalanche should definitely include copious amounts of Jell-O (R).



    This is the only way I can contribute to both conversations.:D
  • edited May 2010
    This_looks_shopped_rl.jpg

    I couldn't resist.
  • edited May 2010
    Wait, so we aren't trying to grind the cats into a fine paste? Because I thought we were going to make cat paste as a revolutionary new sandwich spread. If that's not the plan, I'm out.
  • edited May 2010
    Well, if we use the cat paste to make Jell-O (R)... then I'm in!:D
Sign in to comment in this discussion.