Teenage boys.
The original X-Men cartoon was for teenage boys.
The sequel is trying to capitalize on the nostalgia of those now grown-ass men.
Making the designs less sexual is just typical nu-media prudish sensibility.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>typical nu-media prudish sensibility
3 months ago
Anonymous
You are either too stupid or unwilling to understand that the context of this being a direct sequel is what makes such change in character design so noticeable and egregious.
3 months ago
Anonymous
But Rouge was inconsistent as frick in the original show, and was drawn just as flat as the new images as often as she was drawn curvy.
3 months ago
Anonymous
Bull. You can easily find character sheets and reference art used for the X-men cartoon.
Rogue was wearing a "painted on" costume in them and was very curvy.
The normal character design wasn't like this flattened Disney-approved toned down 3d model.
3 months ago
Anonymous
So post them.
3 months ago
Anonymous
First result, literally on Marvel's website.
https://www.marvel.com/articles/tv-shows/the-making-of-x-men-the-animated-series
>NOOOO DUDE YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND! I MUST COOM WHILE WATCHING CARTOONS FOR CHILDEN OKAY
Again, who is served by this prudish attitude to art?
3 months ago
Anonymous
Those pictures don't look OP's. Since the animation was so inconsistent.
3 months ago
Anonymous
You have eyes but do not see.
Do you see no difference between a drawing in which both breasts are individually contoured and a 3d model in which they are not?
3 months ago
Anonymous
It's what the original would do, yeah. Because the animation was inconsistent.
3 months ago
Anonymous
There's a big difference between key frames and random frames. In all important art like the intro, muscles, breasts and legs are well defined.
But lets cut the crap.
Do you think it is possible that Disney "desexified" the XMen cartoon character designs like they have been doing since they took over the brand?
Because that's what it looks they did to these 3d models
3 months ago
Anonymous
Yeah, I notice. I'm just not a goddamn snowflake about it.
3 months ago
Anonymous
You are literally being a huge contrarian just to defend the honor of Disney's newest disappointment.
Believe me, that makes you quite special in some circles.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>You are literally being a huge contrarian
I thought that was the point of this whole site. Was I lied to?
3 months ago
Anonymous
The site allows for stupid debates, it doesn't make the participants less moronic.
You have me in a position of having to protest the denigration of sexual beauty in favor of prudish values while you hop around like a monkey and defend it.
It is a stupid debate wasting our time but at least I'm nowhere near as stupid as you coming to the defense of a corporate product, for free.
>Who do you think is interested in a sequel to a cartoon that is 30 years old? >Who do you think this is trying to appeal to?
You do know it can appeal to both adults who remember watching it and kids who can get into X-Men, right?
Teenage boys.
The original X-Men cartoon was for teenage boys.
The sequel is trying to capitalize on the nostalgia of those now grown-ass men.
Making the designs less sexual is just typical nu-media prudish sensibility.
>Teenage boys. >The original X-Men cartoon was for teenage boys.
Yeah sure bud, I'm sure ALL the high schoolers were just rearing to get home and watch the latest episode of X-Men.
>You do know it can appeal to both adults who remember watching it and kids who can get into X-Men, right?
You could have used less words to tell me you don't understand what a "target audience" is or how nostalgia is used for marketing.
>Yeah sure bud, I'm sure ALL the high schoolers were just rearing to get home and watch the latest episode of X-Men.
Are you a foreigner? Teenage years start in middle school.
REAL
>Kate Upton leaks
>Big heafty breasts with some decent sag
>The pic of ropes being shot across her back
It's a shame she doesn't have any hips
WOMEN
EXIST!
STOP
OBSESSING
OVER
DRAWINGS!
Maybe she touched a flatette?
Go away schizo
I'M the schizo here?
I'll show you an actual schizo.
Real women don't exist for you to obsess over, chuddie
Anon do you think art shouldn't strive to imitate natural beauty?
Do you think art should be coy and censored to hide it?
This is a show literally aimed for 30+ year olds with nostalgia. There's no reason it should be this shy about sexual beauty.
Since when are children's cartoons aimed for 30+ year olds?
Who do you think is interested in a sequel to a cartoon that is 30 years old?
Who do you think this is trying to appeal to?
Who do you think said 30 year old cartoon was made for?
Who do you think the X-Men are made for?
Who do you think capeshit in general is made for?
Teenage boys.
The original X-Men cartoon was for teenage boys.
The sequel is trying to capitalize on the nostalgia of those now grown-ass men.
Making the designs less sexual is just typical nu-media prudish sensibility.
>typical nu-media prudish sensibility
You are either too stupid or unwilling to understand that the context of this being a direct sequel is what makes such change in character design so noticeable and egregious.
But Rouge was inconsistent as frick in the original show, and was drawn just as flat as the new images as often as she was drawn curvy.
Bull. You can easily find character sheets and reference art used for the X-men cartoon.
Rogue was wearing a "painted on" costume in them and was very curvy.
The normal character design wasn't like this flattened Disney-approved toned down 3d model.
So post them.
First result, literally on Marvel's website.
https://www.marvel.com/articles/tv-shows/the-making-of-x-men-the-animated-series
Again, who is served by this prudish attitude to art?
Those pictures don't look OP's. Since the animation was so inconsistent.
You have eyes but do not see.
Do you see no difference between a drawing in which both breasts are individually contoured and a 3d model in which they are not?
It's what the original would do, yeah. Because the animation was inconsistent.
There's a big difference between key frames and random frames. In all important art like the intro, muscles, breasts and legs are well defined.
But lets cut the crap.
Do you think it is possible that Disney "desexified" the XMen cartoon character designs like they have been doing since they took over the brand?
Because that's what it looks they did to these 3d models
Yeah, I notice. I'm just not a goddamn snowflake about it.
You are literally being a huge contrarian just to defend the honor of Disney's newest disappointment.
Believe me, that makes you quite special in some circles.
>You are literally being a huge contrarian
I thought that was the point of this whole site. Was I lied to?
The site allows for stupid debates, it doesn't make the participants less moronic.
You have me in a position of having to protest the denigration of sexual beauty in favor of prudish values while you hop around like a monkey and defend it.
It is a stupid debate wasting our time but at least I'm nowhere near as stupid as you coming to the defense of a corporate product, for free.
>Who do you think is interested in a sequel to a cartoon that is 30 years old?
>Who do you think this is trying to appeal to?
You do know it can appeal to both adults who remember watching it and kids who can get into X-Men, right?
>Teenage boys.
>The original X-Men cartoon was for teenage boys.
Yeah sure bud, I'm sure ALL the high schoolers were just rearing to get home and watch the latest episode of X-Men.
>You do know it can appeal to both adults who remember watching it and kids who can get into X-Men, right?
You could have used less words to tell me you don't understand what a "target audience" is or how nostalgia is used for marketing.
>Yeah sure bud, I'm sure ALL the high schoolers were just rearing to get home and watch the latest episode of X-Men.
Are you a foreigner? Teenage years start in middle school.
Go back to Twitter, tourist
i prefer drawings. my oc waifu is far more beautiful than those meatbags and much funnier and more intelligent
go away autist
>the new design isn't woke, the old one is just sexist
Most original bugman video essayist opinion
>NOOOO DUDE YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND! I MUST COOM WHILE WATCHING CARTOONS FOR CHILDEN OKAY
This cartoon is for the 30 years olds that grew up with the original, not for others
Kids don't watch cartoons
bump