Did anyone think the Inchworm sketch was ironic?
Here is an insectivorial animal (first it was a frog, then a lizard) sitting on a wall and minding his own bussiness when a little worm taps him and gets eaten. After it happens again, the worm turns out to be the nose a monster who is either hungry himself and eats the first muppet, or just eats him for the sake of eating something (this is up for debate).
The way I see it is that the insectivore lets his own confidence in his superiority and in the end bites the nose of a monster, who apparently stayed in hiding waiting for a chance to catch his prey. I suppose I am saying it is similar to a food chain.
Here is an insectivorial animal (first it was a frog, then a lizard) sitting on a wall and minding his own bussiness when a little worm taps him and gets eaten. After it happens again, the worm turns out to be the nose a monster who is either hungry himself and eats the first muppet, or just eats him for the sake of eating something (this is up for debate).
The way I see it is that the insectivore lets his own confidence in his superiority and in the end bites the nose of a monster, who apparently stayed in hiding waiting for a chance to catch his prey. I suppose I am saying it is similar to a food chain.