“Arthur”: Bottom Lining ‘Brüno’

COMMENTS (21)

• Has Arthur EVER created anything remotely funny or insightful? If so, I sure haven’t seen it here.

  Comment by tommy L. — Saturday July 18, 2009 @ 12:56pm PDT  Reply to this post

• the art works better if you just over state the CASH and leave out all stupid headings!

  Comment by george PGA member — Saturday July 18, 2009 @ 1:27pm PDT  Reply to this post

• Bingo!!!!

  Comment by ag — Saturday July 18, 2009 @ 1:35pm PDT  Reply to this post

• awful

  Comment by arthur is — Saturday July 18, 2009 @ 2:17pm PDT  Reply to this post

• Arthur’s work is his own and does not necessarily reflect talent.

  Comment by Anonymous — Saturday July 18, 2009 @ 2:25pm PDT  Reply to this post

• Whoah, Arthur! Come on, man – go easy on Hollywood!

  Nikki, how can you host such controversial and hard-hitting material?!

  Comment by Come on! — Saturday July 18, 2009 @ 2:38pm PDT  Reply to this post

• Oh, Arthur, where to begin. This cartoon reeks more than week-old Milk. You have absolutely no grasp of irony or nuance. I hope you’re some 14-year-old kid related to Nikki who can draw, because there’s otherwise no excuse for publishing your work.

  If you are a 14-year-old kid: Hey! Nice drawing! The message still sucks, but keep up the good work!

  Comment by Webster — Saturday July 18, 2009 @ 3:01pm PDT  Reply to this post

• Clever and very true.

  Comment by Captain Obvious — Saturday July 18, 2009 @ 3:07pm PDT  Reply to this post

• It’s just that he’s not funny. I do get his jokes – but they’re NOT FUNNY.

  His art is fine, he should be drawing something else.

  Comment by ghostface — Saturday July 18, 2009 @ 3:52pm PDT  Reply to this post

• OMG – this guy is awful. I see what he’s trying to say but, like his other work, he takes the wrong approach to get there. My creative license is saying that this guy sucks.

  Comment by JD — Saturday July 18, 2009 @ 6:33pm PDT  Reply to this post

• i don’t get it. what’s he trying to say

  Comment by nz — Saturday July 18, 2009 @ 8:39pm PDT  Reply to this post

• Why do you assume he was trying to be funny?

  Comment by Craig — Saturday July 18, 2009 @ 9:25pm PDT  Reply to this post

• When you have to label every element in your editorial cartoon you might just as well have used stick figures. Nikki, PLEASE take this person off your site, even if he/she is a relative.

  Comment by Bongo — Sunday July 19, 2009 @ 1:19am PDT  Reply to this post

• this is so stupid, i don’t get it at all. i’m not lying. is this supposed to be some ironic juxtoposition or is there a similarity. is sean penn’s smirk smirkier than bruno’s? wtf is he trying to say? please somebody explain to me.

  Comment by buck33 — Sunday July 19, 2009 @ 1:38am PDT  Reply to this post

• This guy needs an art director. His drawing is pretty good, but his concepts/ideas are terrible… often undecipherable.

  Comment by Djerbou Dbouti — Sunday July 19, 2009 @ 2:34am PDT  Reply to this post

• Basically, he is commenting on Hollywood’s obsession with forcing the gay agenda down our throats. One movie was catered to win awards and one movie was catered(although not successful) for the summer box office. Apparently, people still don’t want to see rated R comedy about homosexuals.

  Comment by kingsy — Sunday July 19, 2009 @ 6:58am PDT  Reply to this post

• Nope – I don’t get it…ugly gays get awards? prettier gays are for summer??? At least Arthur is consistent – absolutely awful every month.

  Comment by shootasdirected — Sunday July 19, 2009 @ 11:06am PDT  Reply to this post

• @ kingsy:

  There’s no such thing as “the gay agenda”, you stupid fucking bigot.

  Comment by Luzid — Sunday July 19, 2009 @ 9:51pm PDT  Reply to this post

• Perhaps the cartoon is intended to spur debate – to create more questions than answers. There are many ways to interpret this piece. Is the pro-Hollywood illiterati too gorged on Michael Bay movies to allow for a piece of artwork that has subtlety hiding behind the charade of obviousness?

  Comment by Please — Monday July 20, 2009 @ 7:42am PDT  Reply to this post

• The point Arthur attempts to make is that Bruno is primed to screw Milk (both Harvey and the film) and everything they sacrificed and achieved in the name of civil rights.

  Comment by Joe — Monday July 20, 2009 @ 10:20am PDT  Reply to this post

• oh this is pure hog wash

  Comment by jojo — Tuesday July 21, 2009 @ 2:10am PDT  Reply to this post