Talk:Tick (character)/Archives/2017

Nature of The Tick

It seems pretty clear from the animated series that The Tick isn't exactly a human in a body suit. The blue covering almost seems to be his skin, and his antennae seem to be real (e.g. his loss of balance when they're removed in at least one episode). I'm not sure how this was handled in the comics, but I rewrote the introductory line that calls him a man in a blue suit to make his nature slightly more ambiguous. I noticed the bit about the live-action series listing him as having black hair and blue eyes, but considering what I mentioned above about the antennae and such, unless someone has solid evidence to the contrary, I don't think he can be considered "a man in a suit" for the purposes of his overall character... -- Fru1tbat 15:33, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

I think you've got it exactly right. In the comic book, it is handled the same way, as several people try to remove the Tick's costume, but are unable. Also, at one point Arthur complains about having to clean the blue scum out of the bathtub, implying that the Tick showers with his suit on. So yes, the TIck is more than a man in a suit. As Dr. Lovecraft says in Luny Bin #3, "The Tick is the mask!!! The mask is the Tick!!!"Ballabosh 00:02, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Where did it say he has black hair and blue eyes in The Tick live action? If you're referring to his Superhero license, I don't think anything on that can be considered canon since it was all faked and under the name "I.P. Daley". Also, in that same episode it shows him at the Police station - his mugshot clearly shows him being well over 7 feet tall, not 6'6" like is stated in this article. Although of course Patrick Warburton is only 6'4" himself, so adding platform boots that brings him to about 6'6" and he's not that much taller than anyone he stands next to. But his height is shown to be much taller according to (the only?) frame of measurement present. -----Moe Hunter, 11.53pm 30 April 2007 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by WhiteLynxFlame (talk • contribs) 11:54, 30 April 2007 (UTC).

There is a lot of ambiguity about whether The Tick is human or not. Obviously, his super powers would suggest that he is not, and his suit is often treated as being a part of him. However, at the end of the ninja storyline, he discovers that he has pockets (on his suit). So it is certainly hinted at that he is wearing a suit, and his physical connection to the suit (the antennae) could simply be written off as psychological. None of this accounts for his powers, though. If it is a suit, perhaps the suit has the powers and has taken over his personality. Or perhaps it is just an extreme case of mind over matter.

I haven't seen the live-action series, so perhaps some of this is explained there. Is that where the comment about his hair and eye color comes from? -- John Denton 2:05 PM December 1, 2006

Although fans would like to believe The Tick to be a High invulnerable, bounding entity that has blue skin and an odd flesh colored chin, but as evidence states this just isn't so. As the previously mentioned "pocket discovery" statement supports the idea of him wearing a suit. There are other bits of evidence that he is wearing a suit and he is so insane that he himself didn't know it was a suit. A variant comic cover of the ticks comic series called "Tick, no more" (a spoof of the famous Spiderman story arch) shows tick walking away in the shadows as his 'BLUE SUIT' lay crumbling on a nearby chair. It isn't a mystery or an opinion, the Tick is an insane powerhouse inside of a big blue costume. The Antennae could be extensions of his mind. Perhaps they are shown "moving" because he believes them to be. ( not unlike the Watchmen's character Rorschach who had a morphing mask in his mind, however was simply a wet sock in reality) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rtrans (talk • contribs) 23:27, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Just a quick correction: you're mistaken regarding Rorshach's mask. It is portrayed in both the graphic novel and movie to be actually moving, a kind of material derived from Dr. Manhattan's designs. I'm unsure where you got the idea it was a "wet sock." Stormkith (talk) 21:10, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

I'm not convinced that just because he has pockets, that means it must be a suit. Marsupials have pockets, they must be in a costume! False logic. If he was in fact some sort of organism with some sort of semi-living hide with some sort of pockets, it doesn't necessarily mean that it is an inanimate or imagined-as-real suit that he is free to remove. Also, I think of the "maybe it's a suit, maybe it's alive, maybe it's psychological, maybe it's all of them", as a further spoof of Black Suit (Symbiote) Spiderman. It could also be partly or wholly mental illness and poor personal hygiene which has caused the suit to partially grow into his skin. The Tick is without a doubt absurdly deranged enough to make this plausible as well. Any statements as fact one way or another I think are patently false. I think it's best introduced and left as the intended ambiguity that is canon in almost every case the attention is given to the question, rather than cite one single instance where the suit was removed as THE ABSOLUTE proof. THAT case could have been the delusion, akin to the delusion to mental illness that you can just walk away from it and leave it behind. There's no way to know either way, so stop trying to nail it down as an absolute. Creative expression works best when such things are left to the minds of the readers an viewers.  ;-) Warp9pnt9 (talk) 23:44, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

Spoon!

In the article, the battle cry of Arthur is mentioned as, "Not in the face, not in the face!" However, nowhere does it mention the Tick's battle cry, "Spoon!" I think that if Arthur's battle cry can be mentioned, so too should the Tick's! Spoooon! Warp9pnt9 (talk) 23:47, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Tick (comics). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090908122919/http://tvcomedies.about.com/od/interviews/a/warburtonqa_2.htm to http://tvcomedies.about.com/od/interviews/a/warburtonqa_2.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:44, 7 December 2017 (UTC)