... This drawing makes me want to hunt you down and punch you in the face. Several times. But I won't, partially because I'm really lazy, and partially because I don't know how to. But seriously, why would you do this to this awesome film's characters? It's just awful. You completely sexualized them. One of the things I loved about this film was that the women weren't sexualized in anyway, they had flat chests and wore reasonable clothing, and you just threw all that out the window. It's absolutely disgusting.
They had very close to flat chests. In any case, they weren't big chested women. And this isn't their character, this is a character from someone else's movie. I don't care what they do to their own characters, but these weren't his creations to sexualize.
Then again, no other fictional characters were meant to be sexualized either and yet you choose NOW to complain about it. This artwork doesn't hurt the characters in any way, shape or form and neither does rule 34 hurt the characters and the same goes for any other franchise. I can understand that it disgusts you but instead of just shaming someone for doing artwork like this, why don't you do something better with your life like going out of your way to make sure that women are treated much more fairly instead of this. I understand that these aren't the artists characters but you know what. Many of the people here have seen the movie or at the very least its trailers so they understood that it wasn't owned by the artist but is that an excuse to shame someone? Hell no, in fact it is not an excuse at all and it never was. I hate it when people like you try to restrain creativity all because of your personal views.
If you reply to this, that is perfectly fine and I will listen to what you have to say as long as it is respectful. I just want to let you know that if you have this opinion then fine, but don't go complaining to the artist all because it doesn't match your views and most certainly don't pull that "They were never sexualized in the source" crap because you can apply that to practically any artwork and with a few changes to the wording, you can make it apply to any situation. So what if these women are in a sexual pose, so what if they have big breasts. Unless the creator did this and did intend to hurt the character's credibility and they were extremely prejudiced towards women then you got a reason to be upset but when the art involves just an artist doing a tribute to a certain bits of media in an unorthodox way like this then I'm sorry but you just look like a typical SJW to me then. Thanks to all who read this and feel free to reply.
Okay... I do understand what you're saying. And I'm probably in the wrong. I honestly probably am. But I saw this picture and it bothered me. It bothers me because when I saw this movie I saw an artist who was trying to make some beautiful female characters but at the same time trying not to make them "sexy". And I think it's wrong that this artist would just throw away that image of them and create his own. That honestly really bothers me. Especially since this movie is clearly specifically aimed for a younger audience... In my opinion you don't do this type of stuff to children's media. So yeah, I think this artist is sleezy and disgusting and I'm going to shame him. I'm sorry if you think that's not a good enough reason, but it is for me. And when you say I'm trying to "restrain creativity"... Really? I'm against tasteless interpretations of childrens media being made, so I'm against creativity? I'm also against porn movies, which by some is considered an art form. If I complained about that would you have a problem? I have no problem with sexy artwork being created, if it's done in a tasteful manner. I wouldn't even complain about it if it wasn't done in a tasteful manner, as long as it didn't touch children's media, which this one does. In summary, I get it, my argument isn't that strong and mabey I shouldn't be telling the artist what to do. But I really do think it's crossing a line to do this to children's media, and I'm not going to apologize for complaining about that. I didn't state my position well, as I have previously mentioned in other responses, and I'm sorry for that. I was disrespectful and I shouldn't have been. But I meant a lot of what I said, and if you think it's bs then so be it. That's your opinion.
And shaming is NOT the way to go. I get it that you meant what you said, but please keep in mind one distinct thing. This is an artist that we're talking about, an artist that you haven't personally talked to and in that regard, you do not know if he is sleazy or not. You just made an assumption because of artwork and because of this, the argument falls flat. One of the issues that I have with anyone that posts comments like yours is that they assume that because the artwork is a certain way, then the author must be that way. Take a look at someone like XJKenny, he does indeed post a lot of sexually charged images BUT after I talked with him myself, I found that he does respect women and that he just draw this stuff because he enjoys it, it also helps that he posts a lot of comedic art as well that more or less keeps the character's personality. Same thing with porn directors, say what you want about the content but after looking at some interviews with these guys, they do care for their female actors and some of them have EVEN said that they wouldn't make their star do anything that they can't or won't do.
Now onto your other points. First off, keep in mind that the movie, while being clearly marketed as something that is kid-friendly, I found that it was a lot more geared towards adults and teens that knew the Day of the Dead designs, story, style, and of course Mexican culture. I saw that most kids in the auditorium that I viewed the film in did not get the majority of the classic songs that were being played like Creep or Just a Friend, they only responded to the films comedic and action moments. Second, most children wouldn't even know about deviantART if you were honestly worried about children being affected by the artwork. They're very well-versed in technology but I don't think that they have as much interest in art and the couple that do, don't really care about sexual imagery because the majority that are looking at them are going through their hormonal phase. Third, artists create their own images all the damn time, they create fan characters, stories, designs and new forms for characters that clearly never had them before and this includes but not limited to, breast enhancements and sexual content that was not present in the original material and the reason why most people do this is sometimes as simple as they just found the characters attractive and that is it, no hidden plot to demean women or view them as sexual objects, they just found them attractive. Again, you don't know if the artist is honestly only viewing them as sexual objects, for all you know, the reason that they drew this artwork could be for the reason that I mentioned before. Now I'm not saying that there are no artists that are like this, I do know they exist and I find at least one to be particularly unlikeable to me and that is Tumiohax, an artist that admitted that when he did MLaaTR artwork, he didn't care for the series and only did the artwork off of sexual appeal alone and that is something I find detestable. This artist on the other hand hasn't said anything along those lines in this artwork and while I know this is only one piece of artwork and that doesn't really give me a good idea about what the artist is like, I'm still going to give him credit for not being a womanizing jackass like Tumio was. Another example of an artist that does sexual artwork but still isn't a pig is Cyber-Murph, he does plenty of bikini art and sexual images but he has plenty of other content as well such as mini comics, jokes and several other bits of artwork that are not sexual.
The main point I'm trying to make here is quite simple, as far as I can tell, you're judging someone off of ONE piece of artwork and not based on their actual feelings. Most of the time, the answer can be obtained through as simple of a means as just simply discussing with the author about this. If you were honestly that concerned about the artwork, then talk with the author about this, explain your reasoning in a respectful manner and most likely the author will explain about his personal feelings. You going out and saying that you want to punch him in the face is NOT a good conversation starter and is the main reason why I began to reply back as I found that you came off like a jackass right out the gate. I expect standard YouTube commenters to say stupid shit like that, not deviants as making threats is NOT the way to go when expressing your issues. This is basic critiquing 101 we're talking about and no where did it say in the metaphorical laws of critiquing one's work that threatening someone is a proper way to come out the gate because 1) It makes you look like a jackass as mentioned before and 2) People are less likely to take your words into consideration because the negative qualities are more prominent than the insightful qualities and therefore you will be most likely ignored. I generally understand what you were conveying in your original comment and that was you don't like artwork like this and I respect your opinion, what I did not respect was you essentially putting down an artist all because they drew something that you didn't like and you put out your opinion in a disrespectful manner. I hope you understand what I'm saying here.
I'm going to respond to the last bit of your response first if you don't mind. I do understand what you're saying, and as I have said in previous responses to my first comment, I am regretful of stating myself that way. Again, I was extremely adversely affected by this piece of artwork, and I should not have left a comment as soon as I did, because it's just one of those situations where you end up saying stupid things you don't mean. I said it before and I'll say it again, I regret, and am sorry that I began my criticism of his work in such a dick-headed way. I would ask for you to accept this apology, as well as the artist of this piece. Now that we got that out of the way, I do understand what you're saying about artists not being their art. You are wrong though in assuming that I am only judging him based on this drawing. I happen to find this one particularly... bothersome (?), but I have looked at a large bit of his gallery. Now, although not all of his artwork is like this piece, in fact a lot of it is not, there's a significant amount that is. I personally think that if somebody goes and sees that movie, "The Book of Life", and this is the inspiration that they come out with, they're probably kinda sleezy. Maybe not to the extent of the person that you described, Tumiohax, but still not someone I'd be particularly fond of. Again, I understand that before I made my judgments of him a lot more aggressive, and I shouldn't have done that. I don't think it's fair to say that you can't base any of your thoughts on someone solely by the art they make. No, you should not threaten to physically injure them based on it, as I did, but art does have a way of giving light to the mind of the artist. So again, my judgment of him before was extreme, but I don't think to assume that he may be kind of a sleezy, disguesting guy is going too far. I'm not saying he can't make chesty anime women, he can go right ahead and do that. I won't be a fan, but what does that matter? As I stated before, it's the content that he is depicting here, in this way, that mainly bothers me. Now, you say it's not childrens' media.. I'd have to disagree with you there. Although it may not be for people as young as 5 or 8, it is aimed at a younger audience. It clearly is supposed to be enjoyable for people of ages, and I think it does well in that, but I would say it is still a pre-teen age group movie that all can enjoy (apologies for being repetitive there). And I'm not exactly worried about kids seeing this. Hell, if kids are on the internet at all their gonna see stuff worse than this. I just don't think people should be making pieces like this out of any childrens' media, simply because of the content their messing with. I don't know how to explain it... But hey, why not try? Children are the image of innocence, right? So, making a piece for children, it should be innocent. "Book of Life", being our issue here, is innocent. Taking that innocent piece and using your actually quite impressive artistic skill to do THAT to it, is not cool. It's disgusting. But this is all my opinion. There's not fact behind it, it's just my brain. Sorry. Oh, and just one more time, I do sincerely feel bad about the way that I first addressed this piece, and this artist. I understand that it was disrespecful, and I know that it was below dA's standards. I really do regret it, no matter if I meant some of what I said or not. I shouldn't have said it, and I'm sorry.
You're right. He can. I just don't understand why he would want this. It honestly disgusts me, and kind of makes me angry. Like, he's obviously got talent, wish he would find something better to do with it instead of make girls with big tits.
It just kinda pisses me off that he has to do this to characters that were clearly not sexualized at all in the first place. It seems disrespectful to the artists who made them, like it's completely disregarding his/her intentions. And I know anyone can draw whatever they want, that doesn't mean that I have to keep my opinions about it to myself though. (That sounded really jerk-like, I didn't mean for it to, but I couldn't think of another way to say it)
Well I do. It pisses me off that he would do this to someone elses characters. I do honestly do feel like punching him. But, it was immature, and I'm sorry I angered you. It's one of those things you say and later, when you calm down, you regret it.