When I was in my local comic store this weekend I was talking about the Bristol Comic Expo with my LCS guy, who was there as well, and exchanging notes. Somehow we got onto the subject of S.W.O.R.D.'s cancellation and how I'd run into Kieron and he, inexplicably (to me at least) came out with the line "Did he admit that it might have had something with the way Beast was drawn?"
Now, quite apart from the idea being boggling to me (a book cancelled because it didn't sell because of the way one particular character was drawn. Really?) and Kieron Gillen already noting that the book was on unsteady ground based on pre-orders alone before the art had annoyed anyone, but the main thing for me is that it was said as if post-Morrison Beast had had some kind of consistent design.
Not only that, but let's take a look. Here's Quitely Beast. The way the look was originally established. A long-muzzled feline.
And here, in a scan ruthlessly stolen from
aliasjack is Beast in S.W.O.R.D.
Now, to me, they look pretty similar. Similar enough, in fact, that I'd say that Steven Sander's Beast design is a lot truer to the original design than, say:
I mean, they can't seem to decide whether Beast's a lion, a house cat, a pug, or back to the primate design between issues, even when the same artist's involved. At least Sanders picked a look, one close to the original design, I might say, and stuck with it.
In fact Sanders talks about basing the design on the Quitely look and mentions reading Bone at the time and dropping elements of Jeff Smith's design of the Dragon in there too, but he seems as bemused by the vitriol as I am.
If people are going bang on about "Beast looking like Beast" I wish they'd be damn well consistent about it.
no subject
Date: 2010-06-01 05:27 pm (UTC)The SWORD version looks more like a canine.
That said, anyone who said they didn't buy the book because Hank kinda looks like a dog needs their head checked. Sheesh.
no subject
Date: 2010-06-01 05:29 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-06-01 09:42 pm (UTC)I'm not all over Sanders' design myself, but I think there's a greater issue - the lack of consistency for Beast's look as a whole - than one artist "getting it wrong".
The fact that presumably some people did let it bother them and missed out on one of the best, of not the best, books of the last year just strikes me as ridiculous.
no subject
Date: 2010-06-01 10:05 pm (UTC)YES, ROMITA, I'M TALKING ABOUT YOU.
no subject
Date: 2010-06-01 06:21 pm (UTC)Still, the argument isn't so much "He's drawn Beast differently than other artists have", it's "he's drawn Beast so that it looks stupid." And I would have to agree with that, regardless of any consistency issues. (The rest of the book's art looks fairly good, but Beast's probably the main character people are familiar with, if he looks stupid, he's the one everyone's going to notice)
no subject
Date: 2010-06-01 09:47 pm (UTC)