- Joined
- Jan 10, 2025
- Messages
- 2,844
- Level up in
- 2156 posts
- Solutions
- 2
- Reaction score
- 15,649
- Points
- 6,077
- Location
- Overworld
I’d say that it’s what’s ”not strange” that’s the good part. They look like regular people for the mostpart. They’re cute and not unnecessarily ”sexy”, while the anime adaptation gave them identical and much more sexualised bodies (boogeyman word I know, but I think it’s applicable here). I don’t have a problem with sexy characters but I don’t like when they change the style when adapting a manga to have more ”eye candy”, it’s like reverse censorship.I don't really see what's strange about the way he draws bodies, it's the faces that always stood out for me: I'm not really a fan but it's what separates him from other Jump mangakas I'd say, it's what makes it art instantly recognizable.
Still, I don’t really care for MHA very much, but I love Horikoshi’s style. My post was more about the idea of ”fixing” an mangaka’s art for TV.
And even then I know he started drawing them differently later on, but I like when they don’t look identical is all.
Sorry for rambling :)
Post automatically merged:
It's common in the west for people to consider shonen (and other demographics) a genre first, and a demographic second, which is wrong but it's usually how streaming sites categorize stuff.Speaking on the shonen part, thats just kinda objectively wrong? I think people keep using that term without knowing what it actually means. Its not a genre, it just means the manga was published in a young boys magazine. Thats why K-On is Seinen, because of the magazine it was in, not because of its actual content.
Hajime no Ippo is somehow only sports and not shonen, but Dragon Ball is only shonen and not superheroes. Both are, in fact, both.
I have a friend who once claimed that "if your story has teamwork, it's shonen"
.
Last edited:
)