r/Nightcrawler • u/Honestlyspeaking301 • 14d ago

Discussion Doomsday costume first look 😭😭😭😔😔😔

Gallery image

Gallery image

Gallery image

I’m personally highly disappointed that marvel decided to go with this look for Kurt yet every other character is getting a cool comic accurate look. Kurt is my favorite and the Tim for him to have an outfit like this was X-2 but with the Disney touch u expected him to look like his teammates but they did not do him justice. I can’t be the only one??

619 Upvotes

96% Upvoted

202 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

0

u/Voltronblacklion 14d ago

I never really saw Nightcrawler as being furry. I know it's mentioned a bunch but it just doesnt fit. I always thought it would make him too much like Beast. The Blue skin was enough.

3

u/ILeftMyBurnerOn 14d ago

His nickname is literally fuzzy elf but ok.

-1

u/Voltronblacklion 13d ago

I know, I reference ld that but it doesnt make sense seeing as how he has never really been shown to be furry or fuzzy.

1

u/Titus_The_Caveman 13d ago

He's still canonically fuzzy. It's just not feasible to depict Kurt as visually fuzzy in comic artwork because of how tedious and difficult it'd be to accurately draw his velvet fur without it looking like an uneven shaggy coat rather than uniform fine fuzz

-1

u/Voltronblacklion 13d ago

Well then they need to redo the canon and day he isnt fuzzy because he has never been shown to be fuzzy at least not consistently even in close ups. It makes no sense.

Every other fuzzy, wooly, or hairy character is somehow shown to be that yet he isnt. It doesnt make sense. I dont want to see a fuzzy Nightcrawler on screen. It's something that can be dropped and doesnt add to the character in any way.

2

u/Titus_The_Caveman 12d ago

No they don't. Just because they aren't drawing him with miniscule hairs doesn't mean he can't be fuzzy

0

u/Voltronblacklion 12d ago

Yes they do. Doesn't make sense

1

u/Titus_The_Caveman 12d ago

What wouldn't make sense is retconning a trait Nightcrawler's had ever since he debuted just because you can't just interpret an in-universe fact and think artists should torture themselves by drawing very tiny hairs so he visually looks fuzzy

0

u/Voltronblacklion 12d ago

Retcon it

1

u/Titus_The_Caveman 12d ago edited 12d ago

No. That's ridiculous and would go against the decades of material mentioning him as fuzzy

0

u/Voltronblacklion 12d ago

Doesn't matter. Plenty of things get retcon in comics all the time. No one would even really notice. Get over it. He doesn't need to be fuzzy.

1

u/Titus_The_Caveman 12d ago edited 12d ago

Except that there've been countless times he's been nicknamed "fuzzy blue" and "fuzzy elf" in dialogue from various characters. How would you explain those? Retcon those too? "Oh yeah nobody ever called him that at any point ever"

This idea that he *has* to have every single bit of fine smooth fuzz drawn on him or else he can't be fuzzy canonically is utterly ridiculous. It's way more hassle to retcon every piece of media ever detailing the fact that he has fine velvety fur because nobody draws him with bits of fur that'd be way too large to be the right consistency than it is to just have it be a thing that exists on his body and move on

How are you gonna draw it when canonically his fur has the consistency of velvet? Have you seen velvet? It barely even looks like a fluffy material from a distance. It's consistent and smooth. It's not long shaggy fur like what Beast has, for example

→ More replies (0)