May 9, 2011 by comelookatmychesthair
I don’t usually give a rat’s ass about gentlemen not having chest hair in the “moving pictures” industry. It’s been a grooming movement for years now, one that’s sort of receded more recently with the likes of Jason Statham and even, to a degree, Jake Gyllenhaal in Prince of Persia. My point is, whatever. Some folk like it, some folk don’t. To each his/her own.
And then there’s: The Mighty Thor.
I say again, I usually don’t care about fellows who decide to shave their chests to the point of being bare like baby-ass. But this isn’t a typical fellow we’re talking about here. This is Thor, the Norse God of Thunder, born of barbarian warrior bastards in the realm of the magical Asgard. He’s one of the greatest, most brutal, most manly of deities worshipped by my dear departed Norwegian ancestors. And according to Marvel Entertainment, his chestual area is so clean-shaven it’s depressing. I’m legitimately depressed.
Thor, directed by Kenneth Branagh (otherwise known as Gilderoy Lockhart) and starring Chris Hemsworth (otherwise known as Star Trek’s dad), was just released stateside to better-than-deserved reviews and pretty good monetary returns. I don’t take issue with the quality of the film, the Power Ranger production values of said film, the so-called “dialogue,” the atrocious, weightless, bland-as-fuck action scenes, Hawkeye’s dumbass cameo that just took me completely out of the film, or even the fact that the titular character both learns a valuable life lesson and falls in love with Natalie Portman (playing Natalie Portman) all within a single weekend. At least, I’m not taking issue with all that shit in this particular blog-post.*
No, my issue is with the filmmakers’ insistance on portraying Thor the mighty Viking god of thunder hammers as a typical modern Joe sans any and all chest hairs. Any. And all. Chest hairs.
Just look at that fucking chest! Look at how soft and bare and blemish-less it is! Like the chest of a gigantic, steroid-fueled baby. Frankly, it’s disgusting, because it’s a total betrayal of what it means to be A) a Norse god, B) a barbarian warrior who wields a death hammer, and C) a Norse god turned fictional superhero named Thor the god of Thunder. Thor smashes brains, shoots earth-shattering lightning, and even beat up Galactus, devourer of worlds, with his bare fucking hands, and you’re telling me he doesn’t have (literally) a single solitary body hair?
Well, Thor from 1996 (as drawn by Adam Kubert) begs to differ:
Totally chest-haired Thor and his girlfriend at the time, Storm
This isn’t the only time Marvel has removed chest hair from someone I would expect to have at least some of the stuff. They’re doing the same with Chris Evans (#7 on CLAMCH’s Top 10 Chest Hairs of All Time!!! list) in Captain America: The First Avenger. See below for comparison:
Sure, Hemsworth won the bulk contest, but Evans won the definition contest
Don’t get me wrong — they have impressive pectorals that I’m mildly (very mildly) jealous of. But wouldn’t those torals be, like, five times more impressive with all kinds of chest hair decorations? The answer is an unequivocal yessiree. Having said that, at least the character of Captain America is more suited to being chest-hair-less, as he is far more lady-like and good-natured than the vicious, Viking Odinson.
And yes, I’m well aware that Chris Hemsworth himself doesn’t have chest hair. All you’ve gotta do is Google "Chris Hemsworth" + "shirtless" to come to the hilarious conclusion that the man was born with the same amount of chest hair that he has to this day. Boo hoo. Sad for him and all that. But I don’t fucking care! First of all, it’s more important that the cinematic Thor have chest hair out the wazoo than that Chris Hemsworth play cinematic Thor. Secondly — what, they couldn’t craft Hemsworth some sort of chest merkin? They couldn’t CG up some chest hair to adorn his two hundred foot long/wide breasts? They’ve spent trillions upon trillions of dollars CG-ing up a stupid costume and mask for Green Lantern, so why couldn’t they do the same with regard to Thor’s equally essential chest hairs ?
Just to prove that it’s doable, I digitally drew up some Thor chest hairs in almost no time at all (click to enlarge, as the girl said):
That or they could’ve just used my chest (below) in place of Hemsworth’s:
Now, I’m not suggesting that I should’ve been cast as Thor. Obviously, I’m not blonde enough, though I am Norwegian enough (like ten percent or something!), tall enough (a whole two inches taller than Hemsy himself), and could definitely be suitably massive with the proper steroid injections. What I am suggesting, however, is that Kenneth Branagh could’ve superimposed my chest hairs over Hemsworth’s hairlessness for a pittance worth of cashola. (I’m talking one hundred, two hundred thousand dollars at most here—practically nothing for a Disney subsidiary.)
Thunder gods should have chest hair, people. That’s all I’m saying. That’s all there is to it. Especially when they have magic death hammers, especially when they’re Norse viking warriors, and especially when they’ve beaten up Galactus with their bare fucking hands.
Chest Hair You On the Flip Side.
*I bet you didn’t know that the Thor movie is actually a remake of 1987’s classic Star Wars rip-off Masters of the Universe, did you? Sadly, it’s not nearly as good.