What do you think of the characters' looks?

[Weredog]

Discuss about any thoughts you have about any character depicted in the comics.

I think Jeanty did a great job. Although in some instances, he seems to struggle with Buffy's face. In issue 6 when Buffy was talking to Xander in the training room, I thought she looked 12 years old.

And as much as I love Jo Chen's covers -- honestly, they're amazing -- I find Xander on issue 2 looks more like Christian Bale than Nicholas Brendan.

[KingofCretins]

Joss gave very specific instructions -- draw the characters, not the actors. The only asterisk there is that SMG has likeness rights and she or her people have to approve anyone that draws the Buffy character for publication.

I think Chen is simply a genius -- I don't think she'll do many of the "portrait" style covers as we go on, unless it's a character's first real appearance.

Jeanty's pencils have been improving steadily. I mean, he's not bad, he's clearly a professional, but I think he's become more comfortable with these characters and their expressions. The Jeanty cover for 8.11 is awesome.

[Enisy]

I'm not huge on Jeanty's art. I think it's hit-or-miss, generally speaking. I'll look at one panel and go "Wow, that is Xander!" and I'll look at the next and stab my eyes out.

Oh, and I voted for Faith.

[sueworld]

Personally I don't think he does any of them very well really.

Joss gave very specific instructions -- draw the characters, not the actors.

Why? What on earth is the point fof that? I imagine that the reason that there is such high praise of Chen's artwork is that they actually look like the characters they are meant too be.

What on earth are they all meant to look like if not the actors that used to play the rolls? I don't see the point of reading a comic which is first and foremost based on a TV show, not the other way around, being populated with a cast a strangers.

[KingofCretins]

The actors aren't the characters, and in a manner of speaking, they are drawn out of flesh into the characters just as the ones on the page are drawn out of ink.

Sarah Michelle Gellar? Not blonde.

Alyson Hannigan? Not a redhead.

James Marsters? Not british, not a bleacher, prefers a nice tan.

They were turned into the characters, they aren't the whole story on the characters.

Giselle Loren is a brilliant voice actress who voiced Buffy in both the 2000 X-Box game "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" and the 2003 multi-console game "Buffy the Vampire Slayer: Chaos Bleeds", and was also going to voice her on the animated series.

I think Jeanty's been doing a very good job. I can't think of a panel of 8.08, certainly, that I didn't think the characters were just right.

[sueworld]

Sarah Michelle Gellar? Not blonde.

Alyson Hannigan? Not a redhead.

James Marsters? Not british, not a bleacher, prefers a nice tan.

With great respect that isn't the same thing is it. We're talking about how they appeared in the show, and this comic is a spin of of that, not the other way around.

We as viewers/readers associate Spike looking like JM and Xander looking like NB, etc, etc. To play it any other way is just plain daft.

[KingofCretins]

Hardly. In fact, that line of thinking would permanently close the door on any and all enduring franchises in a live-action medium. Call JJ Abrams, the new "Star Trek" movie is off. As are all planned Superman, Batman, and Justice League movies. As is any Buffy movie that brings the series to a new generation of fans in another decade or so. Further, it basically overrules any cross-media work -- novel to screen, screen to comic, comic to movie, animated to live action. After all, there might be someone out there unhappy with the result aesthetically.

I'd say it's a pretty ridiculous standard, one that feels contrarian for the sake of being contrary.

[sueworld]

Thats got nothing to do with the artwork though has it love.

You're now talking about spin-offs that will probaly never happen, and even if they do will be years down the line, and yes, with probaly a new cast.

The comic only came out a few years after the show was finished , and that means that the memory of the original it is still very strong in the eyes of the reader, and they are playing off that no end to sell it.

Would you then go for a 7 foot high ginger haired Xander then?

[redrevo]

Hardly. In fact, that line of thinking would permanently close the door on any and all enduring franchises in a live-action medium. Call JJ Abrams, the new "Star Trek" movie is off. As are all planned Superman, Batman, and Justice League movies. As is any Buffy movie that brings the series to a new generation of fans in another decade or so. Further, it basically overrules any cross-media work -- novel to screen, screen to comic, comic to movie, animated to live action. After all, there might be someone out there unhappy with the result aesthetically.

I'd say it's a pretty ridiculous standard, one that feels contrarian for the sake of being contrary.

Part of the difference is that you can't have actors that look exactly like comic drawings.

Also, there is no "Buffy canon" that is separate from the TV show. There is no story to draw from except that which appears on the screen, and like it or not, that picture will include actors. It would be like starting a season with a different house - same script, different story. Suspension of disbelief can only go so far until it's really different people doing different things.

Regarding Justice League: All the movies they make out of these are standalones - the comics are not treated as canon except to provide character templates. It's not said that there's only one Justice League/Superman story and this is a continuation of it. If someone did say that I'd expect the characters and setting to resemble their comic forms - otherwise it amounts to a retcon.

[Veverka]

Well, we already saw both Kristy Swanson and SMG play Buffy.

That said, to me Buffy bears an uncanny resemblance to SMG in my head, so I appreciate the comic incarnation sharing many features. I agree that the characters and actors are different, but those actors did play the characters for up to seven years, so the idea that they wouldn't have a huge influence is silly.

Nevertheless, characters evolve and so changes happen... we shouldn't be surprised if the comic Buffy in ten years doesn't look like SMG.

Also, Michelle Trachtenberg isn't a giant. So they either got that wrong or took a leap. I amuse me, anyway...

[KingofCretins]

And, if you go back to the Buffy movie... Kristy Swanson doesn't do a bad job. Maybe it comes from seeing the movie in a favorable light looking back through the series, but I think she understood the character fairly well. She and SMG don't look hardly a thing alike, but I can find the Buffy in them both, same as I have had no trouble finding her in Jeanty's pencils.

[Weredog]

Joss gave very specific instructions -- draw the characters, not the actors.

Are you sure about that? Cause if that's so, how come Jo Chen's covers (save issue 2 IMO) are spitting images of the actors?

[sueworld]

Exactly.

And the movie doesn't figure in this. Joss himself really didn't like it, and the comic is based on the TV series, not the film.

[alexa]

I'm slowly turning into a Jeanty fan. He's not always spot on, but very talented. The only other pencils I've seen better was from the crew who made Fray.. but this is coming from someone who only reads Whedonverse comics.

I voted for Xander, he always looks the most accurate to me.. if he went back to his season 5 and before with his buff self Was going to say Willow, but there's one particular point where she just looks way off, and this only bothered me because it was an emotional moment till I payed too much attention to her face.

Spoiler:

in #7 when she touches Dawn's check. Anyone else notice that?

[Sosa lola]

I voted Willow.

Jo Chen had captured them all very well. My least favorite of hers was Buffy in Issue One, but she still did a great job with it. Jeanty captured Willow, Giles and Dawn amazingly but not the other characters, especially Andrew. Sometimes I recognize Xander, in his scene with Buffy in #7 he looked like Nicholas Brendon, as well as in his scene with Renee in #3.

And as much as I love Jo Chen's covers -- honestly, they're amazing -- I find Xander on issue 2 looks more like Christian Bale than Nicholas Brendan.

You mean the one in my icon?

[Weredog]

You mean the one in my icon?

Yup. I find he looks a little too chiseled and his eyes aren't as dark and beady as Brendan's are.

[BlasterBoy]

Honestly? I think Jeanty does a pretty bad job I think Jo Chen is fabulous and her covers just amaze me! I can stare at them for hours!

Jeanty, on the other hand, I can try to figure out who the characters are for hours. When Andrew appeared, I wasn't sure it was him. I thought it was some random person. Buffy is not that good, imo, too. The person I think he does well, but sometimes doesn't, is Faith....also, Giles.

[Sosa lola]

Yup. I find he looks a little too chiseled and his eyes aren't as dark and beady as Brendan's are.

What does "beady eyes" mean? I've been confused about that since OMWF.

I thought he looked like Nicholas Brendon, especially that was copied from a a real Nicholas Brendon photo. I get he looks tough, I guess it just shows how Xander had changed physically since S7.

[Koos]

I find the resemblence with Faith horrible. I would have voted for Willow if it weren't for her blue eyes. So I settled for Xander. The rest of the cast are all way off.

[Weredog]

What does "beady eyes" mean? I've been confused about that since OMWF.

Small round eyes.

If Xander on Issue#2 had a darker eye colour, I think it would've looked more like NB.

Look at my avatar. Jeanty captured the dark, small round eyes that none of the other characters have (everyone else has big light coloured eyes.)