Comic Discussion > QUESTIONABLE CONTENT
that adhesive blanket
bunnyThor:
Or possibly it has more to do with some of us really, really tired of certain tropes that cause immediate suspension of disbelief and throw the reader/viewer completely out of the story.
The Modesty Bedsheet is almost as unrealistic as people getting hit by bullets and flying thirty feet backwards, or the TV news always talking about the story the character is vitally interested in.
Jeff7:
--- Quote from: soatari on 20 Feb 2008, 00:02 ---
--- Quote from: Rocketman on 19 Feb 2008, 15:06 ---Prehensile nipples?
--- End quote ---
There's a sexy, if disturbing, thought. :wink:
--- End quote ---
Wow....how did I miss this commentary? :lol: :laugh:
--- Quote from: WriterofAllWrongs on 13 Mar 2008, 21:29 ---I love that this thread is being fueled entirely by some dude wanting to see a webcomic character's drawn tits.
Also, elbows. Duh.
--- End quote ---
Hey, without such dudes, the Internet as we know it probably wouldn't exist. Guess what helped fuel the VCR's initial popularity, too - yeah.
Hell, I bet you that there are plenty of dirty cave drawings that never get published in National Geographic. :angel:
"Hey Steve, I found another draw-!......oh, no, never mind, we can't publish this. It's just another dick and balls drawing. Dammit, didn't they make anything decent??"
"I found this sketch of some boobs-"
*slap*
"Oh would you just shut up."
Michael Nehora:
--- Quote from: bunnyThor on 13 Mar 2008, 22:52 ---The Modesty Bedsheet is almost as unrealistic as people getting hit by bullets and flying thirty feet backwards, or the TV news always talking about the story the character is vitally interested in.
--- End quote ---
I'm sure screenwriters and producers would agree it's unrealistic, but I'd wager they prefer eyerolls from audience members to crippling government fines. Or never showing people in bed at all, as if the characters live in an asexual universe.
As for Jeph not showing nudity in his comic, here's his explanation when someone was all "waah waah I wanted to see Raven's boobies" in reaction to Comic #519:
"I'd rather not get people in trouble at work or with their parents."
bunnyThor:
--- Quote from: Michael Nehora on 14 Mar 2008, 03:01 ---I'm sure screenwriters and producers would agree it's unrealistic, but I'd wager they prefer eyerolls from audience members to crippling government fines. Or never showing people in bed at all, as if the characters live in an asexual universe.
--- End quote ---
Assuming that we're talking about American network TV here (otherwise "crippling government fines" makes no sense) we are still talking about laziness on the part of the shows' producers. Don't want to show naughty bits? Then work around it artistically. Carefully choose camera angles. Change the staging. Hint and infer. Crop shots. Just do whatever it takes to avoid wrecking the verisimilitude.
--- Quote from: Michael Nehora on 14 Mar 2008, 03:01 ---As for Jeph not showing nudity in his comic, here's his explanation when someone was all "waah waah I wanted to see Raven's boobies" in reaction to Comic #519:
"I'd rather not get people in trouble at work or with their parents."
--- End quote ---
I respect the boundaries that Jeph has placed on his work regarding showing people's bits. (Though I must say that panel 5 of this strip was probably nearly as not-work-safe or not-parent-safe as Raven's nipples might have been, but I digress.)
Still, Jeph has made continued to make the commendable effort to constantly challenge himself and his art skills in an effort for growth. I would put to him that finding new angles to frame and stage panels to avoid the L-shaped sheet effect is another challenge worthy of tackling.
And as far as the obstructing beer bottles in #519 go, they were funny, and as such are a perfectly acceptable solution. (Much better than a floating black bar labeled "CENSORED" would have been. I'm looking at you, Randy Milholland!)
Michael Nehora:
--- Quote from: bunnyThor on 14 Mar 2008, 09:45 ---Assuming that we're talking about American network TV here (otherwise "crippling government fines" makes no sense)
--- End quote ---
I was talking about American network TV, yes. On channels like HBO and Showtime, there's obviously no need to avoid nudity in bedroom scenes unless the director or screenwriter has artistic reasons to do so. (In the moral panic following Janet Jackson's "wardrobe malfunction," there were voices in Congress calling for censorship even of cable TV, but fortunately reason prevailed.)
Another viable alternative to the Modesty (or L-shaped) Bedsheet is darkness, such that we see the actors only in near-silhouette. That's more difficult to do in a comic strip, however, given the lack of audio clues as to who's speaking. (Then one might end up resorting to the particularly annoying device where the characters unnecessarily call each other by name, as if they've just completed a "communication skills" course: "Wow, Bob, you were fantastic." --"So were you, Jane.") If one or both of the characters have distinct body shapes, this is of course less of an issue.
--- Quote ---(Though I must say that panel 5 of this strip was probably nearly as not-work-safe or not-parent-safe as Raven's nipples might have been, but I digress.)
--- End quote ---
I agree, particularly as the red of Dora's thong is essentially indistinguishable from the red of her fire tattoo, making it look as if she's--to quote The Simpsons--"wearing nothing at all! Nothing at all! Nothing at all!" (*Groan*...Stupid sexy Dora.)
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version