angelophile: (Beast - Hmmmm)
[personal profile] angelophile


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 [livejournal.com profile] 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.

Date: 2010-06-01 05:27 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] foxhack.livejournal.com
All those examples, at least, show a decidedly feline look.

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.

Date: 2010-06-01 05:29 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] foxhack.livejournal.com
(I say the SWORD version looks more canine because the muzzle is somewhat less thick, and appears to be much longer, than the original design by Quitely.)

Date: 2010-06-01 09:42 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] angelophile.livejournal.com
They look somewhat feline, but the majority are more house cat, mostly Himalayan, than big cat-esque. I don't really see canine there, but I mostly find the argument that it doesn't look like Beast to be somewhat redundant when, as you say yourself, the only thing that's been standard with his look since the Quitely redesign is that he's "somewhat feline".

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.

Date: 2010-06-01 10:05 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] foxhack.livejournal.com
Kinda like how certain artists are ignoring the kitty look and are making him look human again.

YES, ROMITA, I'M TALKING ABOUT YOU.

Date: 2010-06-01 06:21 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] newnumber6.livejournal.com
Well, a lot of people don't like Quietly's art in general either. So saying "his Beast looks more like Quietly's work than other artists!" isn't really much of an argument for them. (Although I think Quietly made it work better with the same general style, like Foxhack says, Beast in SWORD looks more canine than feline)

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)

Date: 2010-06-01 09:47 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] angelophile.livejournal.com
Different strokes, I guess. I didn't think Sanders' Hank looked stupid - in fact I really liked the art for the series as a whole. It was charming. Honestly, I actually found his Beast a lot more pleasing on the eye than Cassaday's design for Astonishing, for example. I love his art in general, but making Beast into a pug faced Himalayan house cat instead of lion-esque always struck me as an offputting design choice.

July 2020

S M T W T F S
   1234
56 7891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031 

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Feb. 12th, 2026 03:43 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios