Part of me wants to believe the painstakingly detailed shots of male genitalia — shown from the front and from the rear (and slightly below) — in War Heroes #2 serve as some kind of statement on the double standard applied in popular entertainment to the depiction of the nude form. Women are frequently shown completely naked, while men rarely are.
But the more cynical part of me realizes they’re probably designed to draw an “OMG! WTF! Wang!” response from a (somewhat) shocked readership unaccustomed to seeing a penis and scrotum looming large in its comics.
If that wasn’t the intent of writer Mark Millar and artist Tony Harris, it seems to be the result — at least if the War Heroes #2 thread at Millarworld is any indication: More than half of the comments focus on the genitalia in question, and not all of them favorably.
“I kind of thought it was unnecessary, and by being so blatant it actually undercut the comedy of the scene, for me,” forum member Dave Wallace writes. “Imagine the same sequence, but shot from behind the guy who has had his pants burned off (with his bare cheeks in the foreground, and the shocked faces of the new recruits in the background). I think it’d be funnier – but wouldn’t be as shocking, and probably wouldn’t get the book talked about as much.”
Bruno dubbed it “a Millarism”: “… LOOK, BIG PENIS IN MY BOOK! LOOK WHAT I CAN GET AWAY WITH!!! PENIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIS! It was completely unnecessary.”
But Richard Brunelle III didn’t understand what the fuss was about.
“Everyone at my shop kept freaking out about it,” he wrote.”Yup, it’s a dick, it’s a chuckle moment, let’s move on.
However, my favorite comment to date comes in the form of Chris Sims’ not-so-subtle review of the issue.
On a related note, somebody at Scans Daily is asleep at the wheel. I had to scour the Internet for shots from the book.
September 22nd, 2008 at 5:33 pm
Kevin, that is the worst headline ever.
I love you.
September 22nd, 2008 at 7:28 pm
I feel like I owe you money for that headline. Flawless victory.
September 22nd, 2008 at 7:59 pm
taint misbehaving!
September 22nd, 2008 at 9:16 pm
Um, the “taint” is not the same thing as a full frontal.
Now I need to get this issue to see what the fuss is all about…
September 22nd, 2008 at 9:29 pm
“Um, the “taint” is not the same thing as a full frontal.”
Hence, “shown from the front and from the rear (and slightly below).”
September 23rd, 2008 at 2:46 am
It was a dumb panel to include and takes attention away from the direction of the story. Let’s move on.
September 23rd, 2008 at 3:15 am
How dare Millar objectify men like that. Not every guy has bulging penises like the soldiers of War Heroes. T_T
Kidding aside, big deal it’s a penis.
September 23rd, 2008 at 6:07 am
Kevin – this is not an argument that you should try to win.
September 23rd, 2008 at 6:13 am
T’aint misbehavin’…?
September 23rd, 2008 at 7:43 am
I don’t get the headline – am so thick. Just like . . .
September 23rd, 2008 at 8:25 am
“Mark Millar – what a dick!” Now that’s a headline the world’s waiting for.
September 23rd, 2008 at 10:01 am
Martin:
The “taint” is the area running from the base of the scrotum to the anus – because ‘taint your dick, and ‘taint your arse.
Yes, jokes are never funny once you’ve explained them. I believe the young people say “kthxbai”.
September 23rd, 2008 at 10:17 am
I’ve been an advocate for more penis in comic books since Watchmen made it cool to let your blue ding-a-ling hang out.
September 23rd, 2008 at 11:19 am
Steve Chung asked: “Hey, what’s this?
His friend replied: “Wang, Chung.”
September 23rd, 2008 at 3:22 pm
I find it hard to believe that any of the men bitching about this would have said one word (other than “cool, boobies” if it had been a full frontal shot of a woman. Double-standarditis hits again.
September 23rd, 2008 at 4:03 pm
Here ya go peeps!!
http://jollyrogerstudio.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=1178
OLD MAN HARRIS
September 23rd, 2008 at 8:39 pm
@Zla’od
Mr. Show is the best.