Mister Grim takes on full frontal male nudity…
Ladies and Gentelmen, please welcome a new contributor to BOPsy – his name might be decieving, believe me, he’s a happy guy on the inside. Without further adieu, Mister Grim…..
by Mister Grim
So, my li’l chickies, the world is dimming and there’s a deep dark future in store for all of us and our posterity. Now, gentle reader, brace yourself for a bit of the truth as only Mr. Grim can dole out. The culprit for our nearing destruction…full frontal male nudity is coming back! And believe me, it ain’t really that funny.
Sitting there in the movie theater years ago, when “There’s Something About Mary” came out, I caught a glimpse of the future…that future was the sight of Ben Stiller’s clenched, purple testicles zipped up in his prom trousers. While the scene was funny and certainly unexpected (mostly because of the hyperbole of the situation –and that they obviously weren’t Stiller’s balls) it served as a harbinger for today when parts of the male apparatus would be shown for no reason, except to shock.
I think “Borat” has probably most recently set the standard (although, I believe there was a penis sighting in one of the “Scary Movie” films as well). While the scene in the hotel featuring Borat and his rotund producer posited itself as a critique of American insecurity about hot, no holds barred man on man action (thus setting Sacha Baron Cohen on course for his next character Bruno movie), for me the moment rang false. Oh, I give both those guys kudos for their bravery. I gave Halle Berry kudos for exposing herself in “Monster’s Ball” and letting Billy Bob Thornton ride her pony, that doesn’t mean that I felt that the scene was necessary (or the Academy Award, but that’s another story).
So now “I Hate You Sarah Marshall” is coming out and so another dolphin takes to the sky. While the pee pee in question is supposedly bared to illustrate the awkward, nakedness of being broken up with (and it’s derived from the writer/star’s actual biography), it will undoubtedly be one of the few scenes that people talk about with regards to the movie…no matter how funny everything else is.
Not that that’s a problem, especially not if the flick makes bank. The real problem is the slew of imitators that are waiting in development…all the half assed, not funny bastards waiting to unveil their skinflute just to funny up their unfunny shenanigans. Oh I can hear you. “Hey, Mister Grim, that’s a slippery slope argument, just ’cause a couple guys bare all doesn’t mean that we should grip ourselves for an impending tsunami of dick.” If there’s anything I’ve learned from Hollywood, gentle reader, it’s that Hollywood functions on the slipperiest of slopes. Once somebody does it, it’s up for grabs, even if the grabber shouldn’t be grabbing in the first place.
There’s something to be left up to the imagination…not that I like to spend my time filling my thoughts with penis pictures…(okay, not all the time), but imagine “the” scene in “American Pie” when the pie is penetrated…it was funny on it’s own merits…the expression on Jason Biggs’ face tells the story a whole lot better than a johnson dripping with pie goo can.
I hear you talking again. “Maybe it’s your strained relationship with your own pecker that’s really the issue, Mister Grim.” I don’t dispute that. You’re probably right. But, trust me it’s probably more comedic to IMAGINE me having issues with my middle member rather than SEEING me have issues with it. That’s not comedy…that’s tragedy.
![[Post to Twitter]](http://www.boxofficepsychics.com/wp-content/plugins/tweet-this/icons/tt-twitter.png){kind=icon}
You should also check out:
3 Comments, Comment or Ping
Alex
I completely agree with you and I have written similar blogs. Women and homosexuals have been calling for full frontal male nudity for many years, even picketing at the Grammy’s for it. They claim that women have gone nude forever and men never do. I have never seen a vagina shown graphically in any movie in my life. Breasts are not comparable to a penis and neither is pubic hair. The MPAA and the studios need to put an end to showing genitals, male or female, on the bigscreen. I will not go see these movies and there are a lot of people who feel the same way. Theses movies have gone too far and it is uncomfortable watching these types of movies. I have read there were many people who walked out on this movie and Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox Story. Judd Apatow is a big culprit with this new phenomenon and many movies are folowing suit.
May 5th, 2008
CK
Gender bias against men is actually rampant in society, but it has been overlooked and treated with apathy for so long that it is no longer even recognized. That is dangerous.
This forum allows for a good jumping off point to examine how prevalent it is. Since this is a topic of concern, I would enjoy going into detail, but I will be brief. This discussion is about privacy issues concerning the way a female’s privacy is protected and a man’s is not. It is not limited to the locker room issue. Our scrutiny must also turn to the mainstream media. There is blatant bias in Hollywood and film. The amazing thing is most feminist will argue that women are the objectified gender when the opposite is true.
Inequality is easily seen. Although I could go into a tirade about how much full-frontal male exposure is present on virtually every HBO and discuss the way male rear exposure is acceptable on comedy central, MTV, FX channel, and many more; the point is better illustrated by a simple litmus test for comparison – replace the male lead with a female lead and logically conclude whether such a visual would then be accepted.
Examine the recent films of Hostel 2, Walk Hard, and Eastern Promises. Hostel 2 shows, in graphic detail, the male member being severed and fed to a dog. What if the gender were reversed here and it were graphic female mutilation? There would be a definite outcry. Then there is the prolonged scene of male frontal exposure in Walk Hard for “comedic” effect. What if it were graphic exposure of a female sitting down on full display? Would that be allowed? Finally, consider Eastern Promises with a graphic steam sauna fight, exposing the male lead to an extent that nothing is left to the imagination, but deemed acceptable for its “dramatic effect”. Can anyone imagine if that scene were changed with a woman spin-kicking and sprawled about? The movie would be considered exploitive trash.
Replacing the man in each of these roles with a woman allows the casual viewer to see just how blatant and gratuitous these scenes are. The contrast is laughable. These types of depictions should not be allowed at all. In fact, they are not allowed by the MPAA when the graphic depiction concerns a women.
A little art film from Britain came out awhile back about an artist that could freeze time and used this ability to disrobe the women who were shopping at his grocery store in order to draw them. It was quite popular at Cannes and Toronto Film festival and was a hit with the critics. The buzz led to its transformation into a full length feature film called Cashback. In order to be released with an R rating, the female figures were digitally altered to cover some of the more revealing areas. Having watched the original film short, the amount of female flesh on display was far less than that currently shown by men in current film and cable television. Why was the prominent display of the men in the above listed films allowed while the women’s privacy was kept sacrosanct?
This discussion is relevant because it shows, again, how women are protected and respected while men are flaunted. Keep it analogous; women enjoy a nice looking male chest as much as men enjoy a nice looking female chest. Please do not compare a female upper body to a man’s lower. Neither genders genitalia should be shown, but if it is, it should be equal.
Bare flesh always leads to vibrant discussion, but more disturbing than the disproportionate amount of male flesh displayed on cable and movies is the general depiction of men on television. On the average sitcom, take a look at the male figures and compare them to their female counterparts. How often is the man a bumbling, unintelligent buffoon who requires the saving grace of his well rounded wife in order to make it through the episode? Now imagine we had a show where the man new what was best and the woman was a moron. Imagine the feminist outcry! Yet, it is perfectly acceptable for male bashing to occur without so much as a batted eyelash – it is business as usual.
Be careful of what this may teach the future generations of men in our society.
Jun 4th, 2008
Eric
I fully agree that the visuals of male nudity is just wrong. However the issue at stake here is actual female respect towards men. Do a quick survey among guys and see how many of them were dumped by their girlfriends as opposed to the other way around. Women clearly has no respect left and it is right to see and do anything they want – not the picture mr right would want to see from a women. The overall result WILL as i see it be to have explicit female nudity. Then things are as bad as it can get.
Jun 19th, 2008
Reply to “Mister Grim takes on full frontal male nudity…”