Showing posts with label completely inappropriate in every way. Show all posts
Showing posts with label completely inappropriate in every way. Show all posts

Wednesday, September 2, 2009

Comic 631: what the FUCK???

Good evening. welcome to the blog, those of you who are new. I know it's a tough day to be a reader of xkcd. Pull up a chair, why don't you? You may be here for a long time. I know I certainly have a lot to say today. Jay even got so upset that he went and wrote his own post about this comic! Why, even cranky old Rob came out of his shell and wrote a post. Emotions, it would seem, are running high. Let's talk, no?

gross oh oh god gross ew no no no no no gross make it stop make it stop UGH no one wants to LOOK AT THAT, god, christ lord NO ONE WANTS TO SEE THAT! ugh gross, no, ew.

OH. HOLY. CRAP. OH WHAT THE FUCK. WHAT THE FUCK, RANDALL? what is this supposed to be? Seriously, tell me what it is supposed to be. I don't have a fucking clue.

No? You aren't going to say anything? Well that sucks, because I'll tell you what the fuck this comic looks like to me.

It looks like the little story you are trying to tell is this.

Man (let's call him "Randy") and woman (conveniently labeled "Megan") walk into a restaurant.. They take off their clothes. They take pictures of themselves and label the various interesting parts of themselves that they see. They are asked to leave the restaurant.

Is that the story you are trying to tell, Randall? Because if so, YOU SUCK IN EVERY POSSIBLE WAY.

For one thing, EW GROSS. when we want to look at pictures of naked people, we have other websites for that. Your website is for giving us humor, or in my case, seething hatred. NOT NAKED PEOPLE. to repeat: WE HAVE ALREADY GOT GOOD SOURCES ON NAKED PEOPLE please do not feel the need to join them!

Now I know a lot of people are saying that I (and those like me) only object to this comic because of the GRAPHIC NUDITY. We are prudish medieval types who do not like to be reminded that people are naked sometimes. So let me reiterate: I don't object to graphic nudity. I object to it being in my webcomics. xkcd has a prissy disclaimer at the bottom, talking about how it sometimes has "strong language (which may be unsuitable for children)." Maybe it's time he adapts that to include the phrase "...and VAGINAS, which may be unsuitable for anyone NOT EXPECTING TO SEE VAGINAS AT THIS PARTICULAR MOMENT IN TIME."

the loud objecting to UP CLOSE VAGINAS may, unfortunately, distract people from the other terrible problems with this comic, such as, to chose one particular flaw, it makes no fucking sense.

Why the hell are these people taking such pictures in such a place? If you are going to have them be at a restaurant and tell us that they are there, we need a reason. Doesn't have to be perfect - maybe the lighting is just right there, maybe they want to make little food versions of their vaginas, maybe they just want to scare little kids or get revenge on a waiter - the point is, all we have now are two people gettin' crazy at a Friday's and that to me just suggests: Complete and horrible psychosis.

The alt-text ("For many of the anatomy pictures on Wikipedia, I think this is actually not far from reality. They only look all formal and professional due to careful cropping.") makes me wonder if the joke is supposed to be making fun of explicit photos on wikipedia, and their low quality. Maybe? The only little problem with that is: Making jokes about crappy porn will only entertain people very familiar with said porn (ie, creepy losers) and means that if you've spent enough time looking at those pictures, why, look at that! You are the king of the creepy losers!

--------------------

Randall Munroe, you must understand, is an artist. He must be, otherwise his graphic depictions of sex would basically be pornography, not art. And while he certainly visits the pornographic haven that is 4chan on a regular basis, surely he as a human is far above that level. Far above.

And you see, as an artist, Randall has to make artistic choices. So for example, whereas a lowly plebian like you or me would just draw some silly panels showing what happened in the story, Randall presents us with the finished product of our two heroes' adventure. They are creating illustrations, you see, of human anatomy, for a text of some kind. That is why they are so clearly labelled and numbered!

But there is more to it.

Because Randall Munroe, you must understand, is an idiot. He must be, otherwise his slides wouldn't fucking have speech bubbles on them. Also he wouldn't draw such a detailed fucking girl only to zoom out oh-so-slightly and have her revert to stick-figure-ness. Look: You can draw stick figures if you want, but don't expect us to believe that they are anatomically correct. They're stick figures! christ.

Also where, exactly, are these "plates" being shown? In a book? On an overhead projector? I know it seems trivial but I ask because why would they include plates 17 and 18, which are clearly not what they are labeled as (because Randall is not quite comfortable enough in his heterosexuality to draw male anatomy, just yet, though to be fair he is willing to talk about it an awful lot) and of course, there is the question of why these photographs have speech bubbles on them. Isn't that a good question? I wish I could take a picture of someone talking and have their words come out on the camera, but I cannot.

Hey HERE'S ANOTHER QUESTION: who took the picture in the last panel, and why?

why oh why did they want to do this in a restaurant?

----------
Who's got class? The dude who posted a blog post about urinals the same day he gave us this piece of shit comic! woooo! ps all your urinal-theorizing is OLD JOKES. very old.
----------

Lastly, there is one last little detail about this comic that I am sure most astute readers of the blog noticed instantly: Our good friend Megan has returned.

Megan, for those of you who do not know, is the generic girl in xkcd. She is often singled out by name. For a while she was just breaking up with Randall, then he started stalking her, so that was weird, and now we've got him drawing lots of GRAPHICALLY NUDE pictures of her on the internet. Why? Oh lord, why? I don't care if Megan is real or not (ok that's not true, I hope to god she is not real) but when Randall keeps using the same name all the danged time it feels creepy anyway. It feels like "I have not gotten over this girl so I will obsess about it inappropriately on the internet." To avoid it, there are two steps you can take: Use different names each time, or stop being SO GOD FUCKING DAMN INAPPROPRIATE. Hm? HM?

------------
Christ this comic is just so horrible in so many ways. Can people please, please please realize that xkcd is terrible now? Please? let's just end this collective nonsense and spend time with things that make sense and are funny, and most importantly, DO NOT INVOLVE A SINGLE CARTOON VAGINA.

is it so much to ask?


fun facts: this post had 175 comments before I even updated the placeholder with actual content. Also, 6000 people visited this blog today. DAMN! this comic seriously started the shitmost of shitstorms

Comic 631: the fuck?

[Jay could not wait for my rant, so he wrote his own. that is what is happening here.]

Hey, does the new comic seem weird to any of you? I can't quite put my finger on it.

Is it the font? No, that's not it...

The panels are gray? Still no...

Think one of you could help me out here?

:(

Oh right, it's the fucking breasts and vagina. OK then.

Obviously the breasts are in panel one. I can tell from the comments that I'm not the only one perturbed by them. I am male and straight and generally OK with breasts, but I was not expecting them, and honestly, I don't enjoy having them staring at me over my morning coffee. And they're such detailed breasts, like - almost like they don't belong to a stick figure at all...

In panel two we have the vagina! Thanks Randall, by the way, for labeling it so we know what it is. We have seen vaginas in xkcd before, actually, but this one is larger and harder to ignore. I guess we do have that speech bubble covering it, but you know what, it still makes me uncomfortable.

Look, I feel - I feel like for some reason I have to justify my dislike for this comic, like it makes me some fucking prude who thinks ugh vaginas too indecent to show on the internet. I'm not. There's nothing wrong with nudity. If I'd seen this in Sexy Losers I wouldn't bat an eye. That's not my problem here. My problem is that this comic is drawn by Randall fucking Munroe, the guy who once drew this, and until recently this comic would have been very out of character for him. It's shocking because it's xkcd.

I guess I'm supposed to like, summarize this for you or something, but fuck it. You can see what's going on. And it's weird. It's really weird, and fuck everyone who says it isn't. It's weird that when, for the first time in like 300 comics, Randall draws a non-stick figure, it's basically porn. It's weird that he spends enough time looking at nude photos on wikipedia to notice trends (I stole that one from the forums.) And is it just me or is the gray color he chose completely hideous? Like the breasts are dead. Dead breasts.

Aside from the obvious (the breasts and vagina - just making sure you hadn't forgotten them since I mentioned them one sentence ago), this comic sucks. It's not funny. It's not. This cheese is not burning me. It's not funny because it doesn't make sense. WHY THE FUCK are they doing this in a TGI Friday's? Are there customers there? Why not do it in their home? The whole situation is contrived. And speech doesn't show up in photos.

Ugh, what else.

My eyes keep returning to those fucking breasts.

Not sure why they bother me more than the vagina.

Oh yeah, there's Megan! Hello Megan! Again! I have already registered my thoughts on this subject, that Randall is fucking with us, because honestly c'mon. I know he avoids criticism but he must be aware of the jokes, right? I've seen them other places besides here. Rape Guy is going to have a field day with this over at xkcdcouldbebetter. Speaking of which, WAYS THIS COMIC COULD HAVE BEEN BETTER:

* He could have not drawn it.
* He could have not uploaded it.
* He could have drawn the first two panels as stick figures. It would have been funny because stick figures do not have genitals.
* He could have made the guy's dialogue less awkward in the last panel. He wouldn't say the restaurant's name, he'd say "this is a family establishment." And then Randall could have drawn a TGI Friday's sign. Picture it in your head - don't you think this version would have been funnier? And more natural?

Whatever. I don't know what the fuck went through Randall's head. "Gosh, do I ever have a hankering to draw some external female genitalia! No one will mind! It's not like they'll be viewing this at work or anything!"

You're losing it, Randall.

And to the people on the forums who were like, "you shouldn't have been slacking off at work anyway!" - you can piss off. That's a petty argument and you know it. Most offices are OK with someone taking a short break to browse the internet to look at appropriate sites. For years xkcd has been appropriate. Today it is not. It's not unreasonable that some people would be pissed about that.

Yeah, that's pretty much all I got. Sorry for stealing your thunder, Carl. I know this isn't exactly angriest rants material, but this comic is so fucked up I'm sure there are still lots of angry things for you to say.

Christ.

Jay out.