=====
From AzChip@aol.com:
Outstanding!  Hilarious!  I didn't wretch!  Very cute, interesting rendering
style.  Clever story.  



=====
From boomerkuwanger@aol.com:
The style is really cool -- looks like a cell-animation cartoon.  The relevance
is a little bit of a stretch, but the quality of the animation more than makes
up for it.  Great job!      



=====
From husakm@vscht.cz:
I did not catch the idea without your explanation ...
=====
From uwe.post@online.de:
Great. Lovely. Funny. Original. You'll win!

=====
From lou_bruce@yahoo.com:
This was your category. Your space stuff before was really good. Why did you go
this route? I can see your headed towards character animation and dialogue and
it's an honorable endeavor, but the story here needed a little more work. The
sound track was very good. However the story wasn't funny or gross and/or I
didn't get it.

=====
From gregj56590@aol.com:
Kudos for entertaining story, trying a groundbreaking image technique, a
believably "real" though toony setting.
The fact that the plot depends so much on the sound (which I cannot hear on some
of the PC's I use) prevents you from getting a 20-20-20.

=====
From mark.wagner17@gte.net:
The introduction text goes by far too quickly.  Since things like static text
compress extremely well with MPEG, you should probably increase the length of
the intro to at least twelve seconds.

The connection to the topic is very weak.


=====
From file:
This doesn't seem to make much sense, especially for someone with no sound
card.


=====
From file:
Notable for originality