Comments on: role

By: blaer

blaer — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 11:12:05 +0000

I say “It’s not about how they look, it’s about what they say!”

But i prefer Jesus’s old beard over his new one. The new one looks fake, de old one looked more authentic.

By: Treehouse on Mars

Treehouse on Mars — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 04:06:12 +0000

Re: New artwork. First, discovered Jesus and Mo last summer. Love them. Dislike the new artwork, especially the noses and the headwear. They look like a couple of old queens now (No offense meant. I am an old queen myself) However, as I recall, the new artwork showed up right after they made their (unseen) Hallowe’en costumes, so I am rationalizing that the boys liked their costumes so much they declined to take them off. Besides, they noticed they were getting old and, as Quentin Crisp said “It was time to force out the red and force in the blue!”
Still, I wouldn’t mind if you went back. And please, never show the barmaid! There is no way you could fulfill the fantasies of everyone.
Salaam

By: nevarmaor

nevarmaor — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 20:45:49 +0000

Been reading for a while without commenting. Generally liked the comic and had little use for the comments. FWIW the change in artwork makes this seem like a different (and inferior) comic. The old style was quirky and original. The new one is just generic and boring.

By: Ophelia Benson

Ophelia Benson — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 00:53:16 +0000

I’ll tell you what, author – old Jesus didn’t look inept but more like fuzzy in the style of Edward Koren. And fuzzy is right for Jesus! This new one is too definite and too kind of average looking.

Or let me put it this way – old Jesus looked loony, new Jesus just looks dim. Loony is better.

By: gobbycoot

gobbycoot — Sat, 14 Nov 2009 19:04:18 +0000

Thank you, Author, for taking the time to explain to us rabble why you needed the changes. I still love the old artwork (there was something about the imperfect drawings that I thought added to the sheer GENIUS of J&M), but I’m sure I’ll one day grow to love the new look. You’re the artiste; it’s your strip, and it’s not a democracy, so we’re lucky to have had any explanation at all! Keep it coming, whether we prefer the old art or not. Love you, dude/chick!
PS I quite like your crappy arms, elbows be damned!

By: Uncle Roger

Uncle Roger — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 19:53:21 +0000

Okay, I know I’m late to the party, but… I prefer the old art, especially when it comes to JC. I think his new beard is too short and all his hair is too, well, coifed. I liked the sort of washed-up, disheveled look he had before. It really suited his role in the world today. Kind of like a mangy dog that hadn’t been brushed in forever and had lost a lot of hair. But he still wants you to think he’s every bit as good as that shiny, science-y robot dog over there.

Mo didn’t change as much, but he looks too polished. It’s like (and honestly, I’m no fanboi!) in the matrix when Agent Smith says that the first version of the matrix was perfect and people didn’t like it? Or like early computer animation when it was just too clean and perfect. I like Van Gogh’s sloppy Starry Night over a precise photo.

All that said, it’s your comic and you can draw it how you like and, really, it’s the scripts that matter.

I will say, though, that the focus on the script gave me hope that my webcomic (when I get it set up and all) would be accepted given that your artwork looks like Da Vinci compared to mine. (Heck, my kindergarten daughter’s drawings look like masterpieces compared to mine.)

By: KrateKraig

KrateKraig — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 12:36:46 +0000

Author, Don’t worry about the artwork, it fits perfectly. As far as the slight style change, all comic strips change as the cartoon evolves. Take a look at any old Simpsons, Peanuts, Garfield…etc… Things change.
The content is what matters most. And it is great!
Keep up the great work.

By: Edz

Edz — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 09:52:20 +0000

Me, I’m just grateful for the strip. Ignore the focus group — this isn’t a bleeding Hollywood film.

By: CGHDFDF

CGHDFDF — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 06:01:16 +0000

NOOOOOOOO!!!! I WANT THE OLD ART-STYLE BACK!

By: Poor Richard

Poor Richard — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 02:12:25 +0000

Jizmo, I always thought these were actual photographs.

By the way, I have expanded my Christmas line this year: whereas previously you could get a personally autographed and authenticated (by me) photograph of Jesus, I now have two new offerings: one of Mo scowling and holding a liberated Uzi, and a nice triptych of Mary Magdelene in delicous poses. Only $25.00 & $35.00 each, an amost neglible increase over last year. Order now for Christmas!–your local Florida roadside souvenir stand will have, or can order, them for you.

As Po’ Rick says, “Money well invested will create good returns.” (Wut?)

By: fred

fred — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 00:25:32 +0000

If I hadn’t read this note, I would never have thought about the artwork or noticed any changes. For me, it’s always been about the dialog here.

By: C

Thu, 12 Nov 2009 20:06:57 +0000

Now that the eyes look more “human”, I don’t feel like I’m meeting the new uncanny valley. I enjoy the new look, and would not ask you to go back to the old one.
Ever.
This rocks.

Expressing my great appreciation for evolution AND design (at least on the internet),
C

By: nn

nn — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 19:35:16 +0000

‘S true, they do look better with their old eyes. I vote that Jee’s old nose be restored, too. A lot of character sits in the nose, you know. The present one just doesn’t suit him nearly as much as the previous did ;p

By: Roger

Roger — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 19:21:53 +0000

I looked up this Daniela woman and I think she’s an awful right-winger, but she is HOT!

By: Mike

Mike — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 15:13:14 +0000

I think the original artwork was so crappy that you didn’t notice how crappy it was. The “cleaned up” version just makes your drawing deficiencies more noticeable. Meaning, I never noticed Jesus’ lack of joints before.

You’re previous artwork was “stylized”. Like Cyanide and Happiness. Now you’re just another guy who’s not very good with MS Paint.

By: Wowbagger

Wowbagger — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 13:27:26 +0000

I *liked* the spindly/scratchy Jeebs and M…

By: Ubi Dubium

Ubi Dubium — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 12:57:16 +0000

I also prefer the old style. The sketchiness and bad artistic quality was part of the charm of the strip. I think it would be better if you put your artistic efforts into the backgrounds and props, to make the point that, while the world progresses, religion never does. You could make the rest of the strip detailed, beautifully drawn, or even rendered in realistic 3-D, but keep your two main characters as the original primitive sketches, please. Thanks.

By: cina murtad

cina murtad — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 11:22:53 +0000

not about the ugliness your authorness, but it’s about brand image. and as a brand developer i’m as sure as hell (don’t know sure about it though) that the previous style has burnt within our chest fellow followers. but i respect you effort nonetheless, so please no stoning.

By: simon

simon — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 09:39:17 +0000

Eugh! Mo now looks like my stepdad. Change it back!

By: Bobber

Bobber — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 07:19:07 +0000

You have GOT to at least change the eyes back to what it was before!! Those small dots have absolutely no characteristic at all… But otherwise I think it’s awesome with the new looks! xD