Sunday, January 18, 2009

Peter is the Wolf: The Most CONTROVERSIAL Review Yet!

A werewolf
In the Light of a Full Moon, Sarah Hazen Transforms into an Atrocious Webcomic.
There is nothing more reprehensible than a smutty porn comic that tries to pass itself off as something for all ages. Comics often attempt to pull this off by taking their pornographic material, and covering up small naughty bits or just removing completely graphic scenes. Unfortunately this usually results in a second-rate product for general audiences, since all of the creator's effort is being poured into the purely erotic bits. I'm not convinced that a comic can exist where two equal versions exist, where one is for scum-sucking sleazebags and the other is for the more decent population. The odds are very slim. Peter is the Wolf, (from White Lightning Productions) is the prime example of just how unlikely a concept this is. And since furries are being thrown into the mix, the odds are ever-narrowing. NOTE: I will only be discussing and linking the general version of this comic, because the porn pages are so mind-shreddingly vile that I would be charged with war crimes if I inflicted them upon you. You can switch to the adult version (at your own peril) by replacing 'general' in the URL with 'adult'.

Peter is the Wolf (written by Kris Overstreet and drawn by Benjamin "BAR-1" Rodriguez) is, at its core, a tale about werewolfs. Werewolfs, it turns out, are simply the furry equivalent of vampires, which we all know is simply a ploy to seem more mysterious. Furries have an amazingly difficult time separating their professional life from their sex life, so it goes without saying that anything I link, despite being from the general audiences version, is probably not safe to view at work, lest you get fired from your job as an actuary/test pilot/terrible webcomic reviewer. Peter is the Wolf chronicles the adventures of a werewolf, not surprisingly named Peter, who unsuspectingly turns his girlfriend into a werewolf via unprotected sex. Invariably, she turns into a 12-foot-tall werewolfess, and since this is first and foremost a porn comic, her breasts are larger than seven of her heads. Peter, an abnormally small werewolf, has the only crotch in the world capable of calming her and reverting her to her mousy human form.

Yes, that's right, the most common way to turn a ten-ton titan back to a meek, minuscule maiden is through sexual intercourse. Granted, this is a furry porn comic, so I can't say I'm that surprised, but there IS a difference between writing a porn comic for your readers, and writing one for yourself. And if anyone is the intended audience for Peter is the Wolf, it's Overstreet and Rodriguez.

A creepy smile from a creepy guy.
This Guy Knows Something You Don't
Since werewolfs (or lycanthropes, as the most anal of nerds would insist) are indicative of a transformation fetish, this comic is laden with instances of characters switching from their "wolf form" and "human form" frequently, and require the reader to make a mental note of what both forms look like for a character, and realize that they are, for the most part, interchangeable. Seriously, there are pages where a character can switch back and forth about ten times. Since there's no discernable reason for this, such behavior can come off as confusing and befuddling to the reader. Some pages are also peppered with a dramatic shot of someone spying on our pair of protagonists, but this doesn't really bear any fruit, since we have no idea who these antagonistic spies are, what their motives are, or why we should care that our dynamic duo is even being watched to begin with.

As usual, there is nothing great to say about the art. Characters are wildly inconsistent, and that's just when they try to stay on model. When BAR-1 attempts a tense, wide-eyed shot, it only serves to creep readers right out. The intended expression of shock is submerged in a sea of distorted faces and strange viewing angles. The artist takes most of his artistic cues from popular anime characters, but it's obvious that he is more comfortable drawing wolf-men than humans, judging from how skewed his people end up looking. Again, I should not act surprised. The inconsistency of human characters could also be explained by the artist's excessive cribbing of 'manga' and anime sources, since comic characters will often change proportions, but only between different artists. If this artist is trying to emulate this effect, then he is decidedly worse than the ones who draw their comic right-to-left with tall skinny speech balloons, despite the native language being English. If this is not his intent, then a study of anatomy would be the standard prescription.

Whoa jeeze that's freaky.
Yes, It's Very, Very Wrong
There a few other oddities involved with PitW's composition. On several occasions, the creators have felt it necessary to write, in large letters, "SPIELBERG" behind a surprised character. I would hazard a guess that they are trying to indicate a "spielberg moment," but I guess no one told them that a spielberg moment only occurs in film, and not comics. If you can't indicate surprise without referencing an occurrence in another medium, you really have no business making comics. Additionally, there are times when, instead of drawing backgrounds, Rodriguez has decided to simply use photographic backgrounds. This, ladies and gentlemen, is the epitome of laziness in webcomics. Using photographs for backgrounds is like using actual cardboard as the crust of a pizza. No one is gonna like that pizza.

The porn is blatantly obvious when you run into it, even in the "all-ages" version. Because the artist is lazy, he takes a shortcut--scaling the original image so that the "naughty bits" are out of frame, would work if not for one issue. Changes in resolution within an image are painfully obvious, and this kind of scaling creates a massive neon sign that says "THIS IS NOT RIGHT. SOMETHING IS WEIRD HERE." If the creators are committed to providing two versions of the comic, then they should be willing to redraw panels when necessary, instead of moving things around in Microsoft Picture Editor. While the writer could easily pull apart the important stuff and separate it from the smut, it really falls on both creators to treat both versions of their comic with the dignity it deserves. Why bother putting this stuff out there on the web if you're not going to put your best effort into it?

Personally I promised myself I would never review a porn comic, since its goals are generally not in line with my own. But when a webcomic makes an attempt to be both porn and not-porn, it has committed a violation so egregious that deserves ten times as much ridicule as it will ever receive. The use of furries is merely a giant fluorescent target painted on the webcomic, garnering even more ridicule, as it highlights the creators' flaws and shortcomings. Peter is the Wolf is the most condemnable and wretched implementation of a webcomic I have ever been witness to. Sergei Prokofiev is rolling in his grave.

25 comments:

  1. fuck you. thats all i have to say

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Fuck you, too, you tasteless furfag.

      Delete
  2. Just because you cant make your own comic is not a reason to bitch about someone elses

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's not neural surgery, it's webcomics. Anyone can do it, which is exactly the problem.

      Try an argument that isn't stupid and useless next time...if you can get your two working synapses to fire enough to make it possible, that is.

      Delete
    2. riiiiiiiiight, riiiiiiiiiiight, just like how so many movie critics the WORLD over have to have at least a couple billion dollar blockbusters under their belt before they've earned the RIGHT to call a michael bay movie a steaming pile of horseshit with sparklers stuck in it, right? anyone who even ATTEMPTS to use this holier-than-thou fallacious dodge of just because someone isn't an artist/writer/director/architect/whatever they're not ALLOWED to give honest, obvious critiques needs to be shot in the ass and strapped into an unpadded chair. those who are immune to shameless cronyism/fanboyism and thus CAN offer often harsh criticism that oft-times an artist of what-ever medium NEEDS to hear in order to be well, GOOD, are offering their OPINION and these very often valid dangerous words are not automatically defeated by the mystical powers of the white-knight, so please, go. perhaps you're needed somewhere on DA where no doubt some crazy-bitch with the skills of a spastic 5 year old with a box of broken crayolas has just been told their derivative pablum sucks harder than an electro-lux too.

      Delete
  3. Hey, lay off the reviewer. Just because they didn't like it doesn't mean that you can't like it.

    They have a right to an opinion just the same as you do.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I personally agree with the reviewer. Peter is the Wolf is just one of those comics that if you like big werewolf sex with oversized genitals and huge boobs then you like it. But if every page of oversized out of perportion tits and cocks just makes you want to gack, where the storyline doesn't talk about anything other than werewolf sex, and you find that these things make you want to rech: Don't read it.
    Why review it then? Somebody has to.

    ReplyDelete
  5. "Just because you cant make your own comic is not a reason to bitch about someone elses."

    Just because they can make a comic doesn't make it a reason not to exercise my fourth amendment rights to bitch about it, you dumbfuck furry porn pervert.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Bro, the fourth amendment has to do with searches and seizures. I think you're thinking of the first.

    Otherwise, I agree with this review. I found this comic, and thought, "Hey, a well-drawn comic about werewolves!" Then... I was sorely disappointed...

    ReplyDelete
  7. It tries to be both a comic and a porn, but all that it manages to do is fail at both. The plot isn't interesting enough to keep readers satisfied, so really only the porn is worth watching. The porn is weak from the story distractions, therefore that too becomes disappointing.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. what fucking plot? one has to -have- a plot before it can be advanced. they've just managed a half a decade of NOTHING, barely cohesive, gary-stu self inserts strung together by nuggets of shit they fell in love with back in the days when they played games from white wolf too much. this "comic" has no plot despite the fact every other page is TL;DR text bombs, no character evolution, no drama, no action to speak of and no porn to speak of past a garbled handful of panels that peter out (no pun intended) when the artist gets too excited and has to go calm the one eyed clown down. the "story" jumps around so much it's like a kid with ADD flipping channels on the television, they can't even keep shit together enough to carry a story-arc for more than half a dozen pages in a row but their schedule of "updates when-ever we fucking feel like it" as opposed to "every Wednesday!".

      Delete
  8. Just wanted to chime in unsolicited to mention that I think the mention of "SPEILBERG" is supposed to be a straight reference to MST3K, which would be "a scene of people looking at something." In MST3K's Summer Blockbuster Review special, and a few of their movies, they made several jokes about Speilberg's "trademark scenes of people looking at things." Pretty sure Summer Blockbuster Review is actually on youtube too, where they did a preview of The Lost World.

    Not that this even needed to be corrected or anything, especially seeing as this blog has been dead for a few years now, but I dunno, I just felt like bringing it up.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I'm sorry, but you are an idiot, and for a number of reasons. First of all this isn't a smutty porn comic. You've clearly failed to read past that one fucking sex scene in the first book which does NOT try and pander to all audiences, you'd have to be fucking blind to think that. It has two options when you go to the site. There is a SFW version of the comic called "Mature Audiences" and another NSFW version called "Adults Only". Clearly neither panders to "all audiences" despite the STAGGERINGLY confusing (this is sarcasm) text that reads "Family Safe Version" under the "all audiences" option, which you'd have to be really retarded to even wonder why it says it's for mature audiences yet family safe at the same time. And as for the SFW version, you clearly did not even look at it, as it does an impeccable job at vanishing the naughty bits from wandering young pup's eyes.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Next, the "scum-sucking sleazebags" that you are talking about who enjoy this comic are many, both furry and otherwise, but we'll get to that later. You don't like the comic? No one gives a shit, because your pathetic "review" on it is biased and non-factual, not to mention little research has been done at all to keep any semblance of the actual truth. And if the so-called "decent people" are exactly like you in the fact that they are extremely biased and ignorant, then I'd rather be a sleazebag.

    Thirdly, yes, FURRIES! "Teh icky furz be takin' over all our interwebzez!" Seriously, that's how you sound. The creators of the comic are obviously furry, if not only affiliated with furries and/or highly involved with the fandom. That much is clear before you even start reading. THAT SHOULD TELL YOU SOMETHING. This entire damn rant against this comic has an air of fursecution. It seems it's simply an excuse so you can rag on what limited and most likely wrong information you have on furries. Well I can guarantee you that a furry could do a better job at reviewing this comic, or in fact breaking this pathetic "review" apart. Wait a minute...a furry is doing that right now!

    ReplyDelete
  11. Next. This is your quote: "the porn pages are so mind-shreddingly vile that I would be charged with war crimes if I inflicted them upon you." ...Really? So you're trying to tell me that when you watch porn (don't deny it, you fucking do you liar), it isn't "mind-shreddingly vile"? How much more fucking hypocritical can you get? You can watch human porn, but if teh icky furz iz doin' teh nasty secks, it's just VILE! If you are seriously trying to make the argument that "furry porn bad, hooman porn good" then I'm sorry, but you are even more of an idiot than I thought. Furry porn and human porn aren't that different at all. In fact, the ONLY thing difference between the two is the fact that there are different, intelligent species. If you have a problem with that, then you may as well try and boycott a few books, movies and games such as Mass Effect 1, 2 AND 3, though you don't really strike me as the gamer type so I doubt you'd know what that is.

    Moving onto this AMAZING (sarcasm) quote: "Furries have an amazingly difficult time separating their professional life from their sex life". First of all, fuck you. Secondly, you couldn't be FURTHER from the truth. The majority of us have no hard times separating our sex lives from our professional ones, and likewise our furry lives from our professional lives, though it seems to me that you're trying to make that statement as well. If so, I say again: Fuck you. We obviously aren't going to go to work in fursuit, bark at our bosses or glomp fellow co-workers in anger because they got us miffed. Though when not working, expect whatever the fuck we want.


    ReplyDelete
  12. Now I've already mentioned and proven that this is not a comic for all ages, nor does it pander to be so, so any of your pathetic attempts at jabs to try and make it look bad by referencing it's "mind-shreddingly vile" content will be ignored, as I already shot every one of your stupid attempts down in the very first part. However I'd just like to note again that this is CLEARLY NOT for young readers as per the warning page, so it very OBVIOUSLY will have adult themes and content. The only reason they have an alternate version is so tits and cock aren't visibly flying everywhere around young and innocent children who are too young to even make out what they are such as yourself. Just keep that in mind for your next "review".

    Next. "Since werewolfs" *facepaw* It's spelled werewolves. Your lack of basic English knowledge is even more proof to the fact that you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Secondly, judging from your entire fourth paragraph I can see just why your "review" is so damn stupid. You can barely even grasp the concept of a werewolf and you lack the simple ability to keep track of a couple characters who look different from time to time by changing their forms because it's apparently so "confusing" for you. "You have to keep track of who people are and pay attention to the plot in a COMIC? That's too hard!" Seriously, it's not that fucking hard. I bet a 5 year old could do it, though on the "Family Safe" version of course. (Again, that was sarcasm, I already explained why this comic is not for all ages).

    Now onto your fifth paragraph. Don't like the art? Good for you! Don't like the plot? Good for you! Can't comprehend that an artist can use whatever medium in their comic and can change their characters whenever to which that somehow utterly baffles and confuses you and gives you a stupid sense of urgency to "review" said comic in which you only make yourself out to be a biased and ignorant idiot to which a lot of the commentators on said "review" hold that very same view as clearly expressed in what they say? GOOD FOR YOU!

    ReplyDelete
  14. Sixth paragraph. About the Spielberg. You r b dumb. I suggest you do research into that matter. Secondly, the backgrounds? Really? You're going to complain about a few goddamn backgrounds here and there that are actually pictures? Need I REMIND you yet again that --the artist can do whatever the fuck he wants--? If it works, it works, and it does. And even when he does use actual pictures, he clearly messes with them a bit to give it the feel as if it belongs in the comic. It's not like he just slaps them in there like a pair of balls up against a tight tailhole here and there without even doing much and expects us to think he did, because that's not what's happening here. (And thinking back, that may have been a little too semi-relevant scenario descriptive, though you get my point, at least I hope.)

    Seventh paragraph. Your quote: "The porn is blatantly obvious when you run into it". *chokes* Really?! The porn...is blatantly obvious...No fucking shit?! It's PORN you moron, of course it's obvious, this is not a comic for "all-ages" despite you inaccurately saying that it is. Nowhere on the site does it say it is for all ages, in fact it clearly expresses the exact opposite position. And this isn't simply a porn comic, it has vastly more story than it does eebil furry yiff. And you're complaining that the creator doesn't edit the "smut" out right, and that he should redraw entire fucking panels. You so very clearly don't know how comics are made. Besides that fact however, the creator does a fine job editing out the smut. It serves it's purpose, which is NOT so young readers can read the comic, but so adults who DO read the comic can know that said young readers won't put two and two together, not that they could.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Last pathetic paragraph. You did not review a porn comic. In fact, you didn't "review" anything at all. You only read the first 20 pages of a three part book and when the icky porn got too much for you to handle you decided to come here and post your ignorant and biased thoughts. This is not a porn comic. YES, it has porn. But it isn't strictly a porn comic. It has story more than it has porn. It is not focused on porn, but the story. Do you get that? And if you think that simple pictures of naked anthropomorphic characters who aren't even having secks (AKA the occasional nipple or cock shot here and there) is porn, then you need to pick up a dictionary.

    This "review" is the most condemnable and wretched implementation of Blogger I have ever been witness to. Intelligent dead people are rolling in their graves.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Oh a butthurt furry how about that

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for letting us all know that you didn't even READ anything he said. You are a moron my friend.

      Delete
    2. Oh a butthurt furry how about that

      Delete
    3. Oh, a "reviewer" who doesn't know any better. How about that?

      Delete
  17. i agree with matt malone. i read this comic a lot of times and i like it a lot,but if you dont like the porn there is a family safe verisoin. also Piratezim any one can pu anything on the web and if you dont like it becuse you didnt read the firt 20 pages that your fault.

    also to other readers i think the person Piratezim is singing as a anonimious to make it seem like other agree with him/her

    ReplyDelete
  18. Doctor! I have bad news! I'm afraid... the diagnosis... for this... patient... is...

    ...butthurt.

    ReplyDelete