Can a werewolf be... cute?

KittyRose · Post by **KittyRose** » Mon Jul 09, 2007 7:47 am

Kwipper wrote:You as the question "Can a werewolf be cute"

I think this picture

http://www.deviantart.com/deviation/51782348/

and this one....

http://www.deviantart.com/deviation/47397431/

will answer that question with a resounding "YES"

I love this artist work. She draws a lot of great werewolves and her little weres are so adorable.

Rhuen · Post by **Rhuen** » Mon Jul 09, 2007 12:23 pm

A baby of almost any mammal is can be seen as cute.
But then again what definition of cute do we want.
Awww. its so adorible, type of cute.

or what a cute babe, type of cute.

The former is easier to acomplish with werewolves than the latter.

Silver · Post by **Silver** » Mon Jul 09, 2007 7:52 pm

mmmmarrrrgjh!

Okay, I stood it as long as I could. We have two Dobermen Pinschers. One weighs 100lbs, and is tall enought tiat it's a slim 100lbs. The other is 77lbs and is stocky enough that i's a solid 77 pounds. These are not puppies, and they certainly can be the vicious watch dogs of the movies if the wrong person comes to the door. Teeth, claws, adult strentgh - all there.

But they can be sooo cute. It's all in the attitude. when Nadia cocks her head sideways and stares at the floor, her tal wagging with excitement - she's waiting for tony to pull the laser out of his pocket so she can chase it. And she skips when Tony comes home. that's right, skips - doggie smile and prancing. It's cute. IT IS!

I could write novels on Chase being cute...but I'll be nice and leave it at Nadia.

Those of us that have big dogs can tell you that they can all be cute..It's in the attitude.

So can wolves be cute? I've seen it in wolves that friends have had. Can werewolves be cute?

If we can picture weres as normal beings, not horror filck monsters, then why not? If my daughters 120 pound Dobie can be cute, why not a were? Any were?

Morkulv · Post by **Morkulv** » Mon Jul 09, 2007 9:38 pm

Terastas wrote:
MattSullivan wrote:All her wolves look the same.
That's part of the reason I linked there. It's a great example of how a werewolf can be fearsome or cute all depending on their posture and/or facial expression. To make cute, just change the expression from "snarl" to "arou?"

Goldenwolfen's wolves are as fearsome a teddybear, sorry. Indeed her art looks good, but not timeless, so I have to agree with Matt and say that her art is very repetitive and a lot of drawings scream 'copy-paste' all over the place IMO.

RedEye · Post by **RedEye** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 1:28 am

Goldenwolf does use similar faces and body forms, but if you look, they are all related subjects.
Her Kiern (?) do look a lot alike, because they are all a specific type of creature.
Poses are similar, too for the same reason.
She's good enough to repeat figures so that they are identifiable as the same sort of critter, rather than giving us a dozen different images of the same thing.
THe appearance of "cut/paste" is actually consistancy: a good thing!

JoshuaMadoc · Post by **JoshuaMadoc** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 6:52 am

And then comes the question -- what's the fine line between consistency and stagnancy and/or repetitiveness?

Morkulv · Post by **Morkulv** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 3:42 pm

The thing that irritates me the most, is that people are saying that 'evil werewolves' have been done too many times. But IMO, I've never seen any good evil werewolf yet. A lot of werewolf-art I see on the net looks good, but never manages to make a deep impression on me. And thats why I prefer a realistic point of view over a anthromorphic/furry point of view. Because my theory is that how more realistic a werewolf gets, the more convincing, scary, and thus impressive it will be.

Rhuen · Post by **Rhuen** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 4:21 pm

Morkulv wrote:The thing that irritates me the most, is that people are saying that 'evil werewolves' have been done too many times. But IMO, I've never seen any good evil werewolf yet. A lot of werewolf-art I see on the net looks good, but never manages to make a deep impression on me. And thats why I prefer a realistic point of view over a anthromorphic/furry point of view. Because my theory is that how more realistic a werewolf gets, the more convincing, scary, and thus impressive it will be.

This is an opinion.
if a werewolf were to look "realistic" it would look like a humonoid wolf. Which unless its snarling or hunched over acting agressive, may to others simply look cute, beutiful, or in other words not scary at all.
the scary werewolf is in fact less realisitic in apperance, dagger teeth, overly long limbs, claws too big, red eyes, oversized eyes, un-natural ears, shaggy ape like fur, none-canine fur patterns, lack of a tail, ect...

A wolf is basically a large dog, make a werewolf that is realisitic looking and some may just see a dog person rather than a monster.

Rosiewolf · Post by **Rosiewolf** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 6:30 pm

A werewolf could be cute. I think that a werewolf that would be in human form would look like a regular (I don't really follow myths sometimes). And it just depends on the person of how they look. Some people are care free about how they look, and other care about every inch of themselves.

Morkulv · Post by **Morkulv** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 8:31 pm

lycan94 · Post by **lycan94** » Sat Jul 14, 2007 8:01 pm

Dee Wallece Stone, The Howling, last scene

ravaged_warrior · Post by **ravaged_warrior** » Sat Jul 14, 2007 8:13 pm

You mean the Chewbacca-looking werewolf?

Morkulv · Post by **Morkulv** » Sun Jul 15, 2007 5:39 pm

XD

Offtopic: why isn't there a 'XD'-smiley yet?

WerewolfKeeper3 · Post by **WerewolfKeeper3** » Fri Jul 27, 2007 6:51 pm

Agree.
Wolves ARE NOT dogs.
However, as everyone else seems to have already said, werewolves can be cute.
Just depends on the person in question viewing, or creating, it.
(We're back on topic. Yeah. Anyone think of a "bored to " icon?)

RedEye · Post by **RedEye** » Fri Jul 27, 2007 10:00 pm

I just flashed on a '60's icon: the big-eyed waif.
I imagined a big-eyed Werewolf waif.
Several strong drinks later......

Rhuen · Post by **Rhuen** » Sat Jul 28, 2007 11:21 am

ravaged_warrior · Post by **ravaged_warrior** » Sat Jul 28, 2007 2:07 pm

Rhuen wrote:(even if genetically speaking they are the same species)

I don't think they're the same species. Aren't they just in the same genetic family?

I can't say how many times I have gone by the wolf enclosure at a zoo and heard the surprised comments by people whose only references were werewolf movies and fairytales for wolves make the comment, "it looks like a large dog!?" They were expecting some fang faced long snouted cloth eared monster and what they got looks cute when its not growling.

That's hilarious. How does a person not know what a wolf looks like?

Midnight · Post by **Midnight** » Sat Jul 28, 2007 7:53 pm

ravaged_warrior wrote:That's hilarious. How does a person not know what a wolf looks like?

Easy. They could live somewhere that there's never been wolves, nor ever been wolves within thousands of miles (e.g here) and just not be interested enough in wolves in particular to do some quick googling before visiting a wildlife park on their big O.E.

ravaged_warrior · Post by **ravaged_warrior** » Sat Jul 28, 2007 8:03 pm

Midnight wrote:
ravaged_warrior wrote:That's hilarious. How does a person not know what a wolf looks like?
Easy. They could live somewhere that there's never been wolves, nor ever been wolves within thousands of miles (e.g here) and just not be interested enough in wolves in particular to do some quick googling before visiting a wildlife park on their big O.E.

When I was a kid, I had none of those things, but I still knew what a wolf looked like. Just me, though... I'm still a bit surprised by this lack of knowledge.

PariahPoet · Post by **PariahPoet** » Sat Jul 28, 2007 9:23 pm

ravaged_warrior wrote:Aren't they just in the same genetic family?

Yes, actually dogs and wolves are the same species. They have the exact same genetic material. That is one reason why it is hard to prevent people from owning wolves. There is no genetic test to tell whether it is a wolf or a dog because the dna is the same. So you can own a wolf as long as you call it a dog.

ravaged_warrior · Post by **ravaged_warrior** » Sat Jul 28, 2007 9:36 pm

*does some looking*

Well, damn, I guess they are. Huh.

RedEye · Post by **RedEye** » Sun Jul 29, 2007 6:05 pm

There is one major difference between dogs and wolves: Brains. Wolves have foreheads, and big brains; while dogs really don't...but then they really don't need them, do they?

PariahPoet · Post by **PariahPoet** » Sun Jul 29, 2007 7:20 pm

Yeah, a wolf's head is 30% larger in comparison to body size. They also have larger paws, but I don't think either is outside the standard deviation for dogs, so it's not a sure-fire distinguishing characteristic.
Wolves also have slightly different habits such as ripping meat off the bone with their front teeth instead of gnawing on it and usually sipping water rather than lapping it.

RedEye · Post by **RedEye** » Mon Aug 13, 2007 4:45 pm

A few pages later in "Honor", and I've come to a discovery...actually it's Faya; my long suffering Husky "Werewolf stand-in" that provided it.
IMHO....
Immediately after a shift, a Werewolf will look very frightening: their Fur has just grown in and hugs their face and body- they look angry and threatening because their Fur is flattened back and their features are still strained form the effort of shifting.

This is usually what the intrepid Werewolf hunter comes upon, and yes; they are anything but cute.
A littlt later, though, after they have fluffed out their Fur and recovered from changing form, they are a lot less frightening. In fact, they look like people now-not human; but definitely people.

So the suggestion is: It depends on the time and the situation they're in; not any specific set of appearances.

wolf4life · Post by **wolf4life** » Mon Aug 13, 2007 6:09 pm

im gunna need a picture before I can answer one of these questions...

You could tell if it was cute if you saw it...but if it was any pup then you couldnt exactly say