Amy Schumer seduces C3PO, R2D2 for GQ editorial: funny or disturbing?


Amy Schumer covers the August cover of GQ. It has a Star Wars theme, because of course it does. I actually wonder how GQ got permission from Disney/Lucasfilm to use Chewbacca, C3PO, R2D2 and stormtroopers in this shoot. Not only to use those characters, but to put them in heavily sexualized positions, like C3PO in bed with Amy in some kind of postcoital tableau. Do you think this is gross? Is it too much? I think it’s funny, but also slightly disturbing to sexualize the robots, you know?

You can see the full GQ slideshow here. GQ hasn’t released any excerpts from the cover story yet, but I’m sure it will be a pretty good piece. Love her or hate her, Schumer is turning out to be a great interview.

Schumer is getting major magazine covers these days because she’s promoting Trainwreck. The film is getting surprisingly good reviews – people think it’s funny, brash and feminist. Reviewers are praising Schumer in particular for the screenplay, which she wrote (of course).

Here’s a Funny or Die skit that Amy, Bill Hader, Judd Aptow and LeBron did together. LeBron is funny!


Photos courtesy of Mark Seliger/GQ.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

41 Responses to “Amy Schumer seduces C3PO, R2D2 for GQ editorial: funny or disturbing?”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. snusnud says:

    Disturbing and gross.

  2. smcollins says:

    A little of both? The light saber pic was a bit much, but the rest had a more fun vibe to them. Mostly…My brain is still processing it all.

  3. Josefa says:

    I think it’s funny. It’s a funny looking robot, not an animal or a kid. The shoot was clearly not meant to be taken seriously.

  4. Hawkeye says:

    Just to ask a related question: has anyone seen Trainwreck? Thoughts? From the trailer, it looks like a run-of-the-mill “romantic” “comedy” with an emotionally stunted, immature adult with a serious alcohol problem being influenced by a love interest, but with the man-woman roles reversed.

  5. Mia4S says:

    I laughed, not going to lie.

  6. Mmmhmm says:


  7. Kiddo says:

    The shoot is a direct contradiction of her mantra of being immune to Hollywood standards of sexy/pretty, no? The cover barely looks like her, although I know actors do not control the photoshop.

  8. vauvert says:

    I am not familiar with Amy’s comedy but I just read the other post on her not needing to be the skinny pretty woman… but then she does this editorial for GQ which is so try hard to be the sexy pretty one. I think what annoys me the most os proclaiming one’s stance and then immediately contradicting it by acting the opposite of what you just stated.

    I find it sad that female celebrities in general find that the only way to create interest is to capitalize on their sexuality in a provocative manner – whether it be the Kartrashians, or Caitlin Jenner or any given number of starlets or JLo… the list goes on.

    When has being elegant and classy and just talking about your work fallen out of style and why?? I mean, it is so incredibly easy to find sex/porn pics and articles nowadays, the Internet has made that available 24/7. Why do talented women feel the need to bring themselves to the lowest common denominator? You would rarely see men put themselves in that position, why do women do it? Even if it is suggested to them, how about standing up and saying no? How can you fight against being sen as a purely sexualized object if at every opportunity to sell a few extra magazine copies you are willing to put yourself out there in a flimsy getup and stage an erotic scene – never mind if it involves robots, aliens, etc. (yes, I know, I get it – it’s tongue in cheek and nerd-oriented blah blah blah.. but no. just like the corn rows debate yesterday was not just about hair.)

    • Don't kill me I'm French says:

      I think that since Amy doesn’t fit with Hollywood physical standard ,she likes to play with the Hollywood standards

    • Lilybugg says:

      Amy’s whole thing is that she doesn’t fit in with the stereotypical HW beauty standard, but that she is still an extremely sexy woman in her own right, and she plays to this point of view in all of her comedy. So I find that this photo shoot is right on par to what should be expected from her, and she is not dropping her own standards to sell a few extra magazines! This GQ cover plays right into her whole routine!

      • Lisa says:

        She’s kinda taking the piss, no? She’s doing the sexy photo shoot … with C3PO, yeah?

        Also woman are damned if they do and damned if they don’t. Might as well have a GQ shoot with two star wars robots and have fun with it!

        She might say that she doesn’t fit into an idealised Hollywood woman type but what does that mean? That she’s not allowed to wear makeup and make the best of herself? What’s wrong with her trying to look good and trying to sell her movie?

    • Otaku Fairy says:

      @Vauvert: Why do you feel that female entertainers are or should be obligated to limit themselves to presenting only in ways that others find ‘classy’, wholesome, or ladylike at all times? Why should going into porn for a living be a woman’s only option in society if she wants to deviate from modesty? When do we, as a society, get to a place where we can allow a female entertainer to take an open, carefree, and comical approach to sexuality without either saying ‘she might as well do porn then’ or telling her that she’s ‘lowering herself’? And why is it that you view a female entertainer’s rejection of modesty as her ‘lowering herself’, as if a modest, wholesome, ladylike image is what a person needs in order to have value? And yes, Amy can wear whatever she likes and be as open or private about things involving sexuality as she likes and still be against people being treated as ‘objects’, because ‘object’ does not mean ‘openly sexual.’

  9. Tiffany27 says:

    That cover is………..not a good look.

  10. Margareth says:

    Ridiculous and try-hard.

  11. Don't kill me I'm French says:

    It’s funny for me but the finger in the mouth is just a little gross to show

  12. Chris says:

    Disturbing. Not funny at all.

  13. Tough Cookie says:


  14. Tiffany says:

    She needs to be careful. Antics are over shadowing talent.

  15. Snerdly says:

    Amy is really funny; although, she is rapidly turning into Chelsea Handler.

  16. I Choose Me says:

    I’d like it without the whole finger in the mouth thing. Like ew Amy. Do you even know where that’s been?

    • Hawkeye says:

      I Choose Me, if you’re saying that you find the cover unhygienic, I love you.

      • I Choose Me says:

        I am. I loathe all finger in mouth poses. That it’s not even her own finger just adds an extra layer of yecch.

      • Kiddo says:

        Oh, too bad. I bought day old spittle doughnuts I was going to share with you. I heard they were Grande!

  17. Green Is Good says:

    Ick. No, just no.

  18. Illyra says:

    Cringeworthy, especially the cover.

  19. Happy21 says:

    I find it funny and fan girly. I don’t think she’s trying to be the hot one or crazy sexy. They wanted her to be a sexy Princess Lea type character being sexy with the characters. It is funny. She is funny. I see nothing wrong with it at all. There are a lot worse ways she could have posed in a men’s magazine.

  20. kimbers says:

    Good pr for the SW franchise since their panel and news of a prequel for han solo. Pic is cool. Not really a jaw dropper but cute and funny like a muppet.

    • vauvert says:

      As if the SW franchise needs PR, particularly of this kind?? Whoever had this idea – gross. And Amy, this is not funny or cool….

  21. Matador says:

    Actually, remember that Disney owns Lucasfilm – which makes this even weirder.

    Generally like Amy but this photoshoot is gross.

    Edit: See you updated the text to mention Disney, thanks!

  22. Luce says:

    She seems to try hard to be edgy, which would be fine if she really were funny. Comedy is very subjective, and her stuff doesn’t offend me; I just don’t find it even chuckle-worthy. I also am turned off by how it feels she is being forced down our throats as the “next greatest thing.”

  23. mary simon says:

    Rude. And funny.

  24. Jonathan says:

    Crass. Sexually fetishising characters mostly targeted at children (& those other delicates, nerds) diminishes the fidelity of your brand, Disney. Not appropriate.

    Amy though? What a coup- posing with the actual CP30 & R2D2 in the frickin Princess Leia Slave bikini top? Pop GOLD, congratulations, Amy! (claps, curtsies).

    • Lisa says:

      It’s also probably a reference to that chat show skit she did, where she said her favorite film was star wars.

  25. kris says:

    she comes across like a total bitch in that car ride with lebron, bill and judd

  26. Me too says:

    This is equivalent to a man licking the center of a taco. So tasteless and I am a bonafide SLUT.

  27. Carlottalove says:

    Seriously don’t get how people find this gross. So she poses sexily with robots. And…?!?! Why so pearl-clutchy, people? This is comedy. Even if it’s not your style, it’s meant to be a joke. Lighten up. Maybe even embrace someone who’s using comedy to point out the inequality in women’s rights? So much prudish nonsense on here. It bums me out.

  28. IfUSaySo says:

    What I love about Amy is that she is OK not being perfect, but doesnt go completely in the opposite direction like Lena Dunham, like purposely trying to make herself look bad. She looks like she enjoys food and wine and ALSO that she cares about looking good, having style, taking care of herself.

    A large part of Amy’s comedy is making fun of girls who try to pretend to be into Star Wars and comics so that nerd guys will love them. I think this shoot is just a play on that. It’s not supposed to be blatant, it goes hand in hand with the “Late Night Talk Show” sketch.

  29. George says:

    “Transhumanism” look it up… will have your mind blown if you like a good conspiracy.