THE PACK Message Boards

I remember watching a wolf looking back to stare at the guy filming him, only to then walk into that tree he didn't see.

OMG Are you serouse? Here I am thinking that wolves are extra careful.

Silly wolf.

Shadow Wulf wrote:OMG Are you serious? Here I am thinking that wolves are extra careful.

Silly wolf.

Yes, deadly serious.
The clip was on this one animal-themed episode of a funny video show.

I'd say they should be capable of looking as cute/beautiful/majestic/etc as they want. Like wolves. One can be all majestic and regal looking one moment, all perched on a rock or something in some pose you'd expect out of a calendar or national geographic, then up in your face with a demonic snarl looking like he's about to rip your face off.

agreed

Sounds too Goldenwolfen too me, and that allready bored me out.

What an... odd poll. I voted other. <.< ~cough~ For sexay!

I go back to my old argument. The human body is beautiful. The wolf is beautiful. Why should a hybrid of the two look like crap?

Scott Gardener wrote:I go back to my old argument. The human body is beautiful. The wolf is beautiful. Why should a hybrid of the two look like crap?

Because the gestalt form was made via a committee?

Apokryltaros wrote:

Scott Gardener wrote:I go back to my old argument. The human body is beautiful. The wolf is beautiful. Why should a hybrid of the two look like crap?

Because the gestalt form was made via a committee?

Scott: Well... I agree that beautiful + beautiful should not = ugly, and do i think it would be a good idea to break usual werewolf convention and not make this werewolf a snarling, drooling sack of fur. It might be hard though, especally when we're dealing with soemthing as subjective as beauty

Apokryltaros: Yeah... it's unfortunate that for so long, werewolf fans have had to watch the image of the werewolf be toyed with by a board of movie producers that care more about making a quick doller then by making a movie that appeals to anyone Hopefully we can all change that in Freeborn

One thing I've never understood about this is the logic behind "making a quick dollar." Isn't a movie that's confirmed to be interesting to its fanbase more likely to profit?

Ralith wrote:One thing I've never understood about this is the logic behind "making a quick dollar." Isn't a movie that's confirmed to be interesting to its fanbase more likely to profit?

Yeah it is, but it requires alot of reaserch and time to look into a fanbase's intrestest's, therefor the doller they would end up making would be nowhere near as quick.

It's the basic idea of quantity over quality, they hope that if they realise lots of medocre-at-best movies that they came make roughtly the same amont of money as if they only realeased a few realy good movies, only with less effort.

I think they should be beautiful and cool. When they are on the normal mood they would look pretty calm and when someone is threating the werewolf, it should look dangerous and ferocious (teeth showing and growling).
I think there should be little bit cuteness too

Sometimes marketing dogma goes beyond profit and into just plain dogma. For example, the marketing of really expensive things, like cars, to teenagers and 20-year-olds. Marketing is so heavily geared towards a young audience. It would make economic sense to market to the people who actually can afford these expensive stuff. I dare you to name one person you know under the age of 35 who ever bought a Cadillac brand new. And, if per chance you can, did he or she buy it, or was it the parents?

Most 'Corvettes' I see have Age 50+ drivers behind the wheel.

...so yeah, I know what you mean...

I was just thinking the same thing as I wrote the article. Sure, a used Corvette might make its way in the hands of a guy in his thirties who loves tinkering with cars. (Even then it's likely only maybe an eighties model. Any newer and it hasn't depreciated enough, and any older and it's gained value as a collectable. Corvettes have among the lowest depreciation of regular market vehicles, in spite of a low track record of reliability, because of their raw power and huge cult following.)

I figure in ten years I can walk into a Chevy dealership and tell them I'm an upper middle class balding guy with a mid-life crisis, and they'll show me straight to the Corvettes.

I think the Gestalt forms should have the look of furred gods.

Impressive, powerful, beautiful, dangerous.

But we should also remember that they each contain a full and dynamic personality.

Further, they should always have tails. Nice, long, gloriously floofy tails.

Which when they should so choose, they can use for appropriate body language.

Such as being friendly .... aka .... wagging it .......

Everyone knows what that kind of body language means.

Right ?

Why do you think cute is an abomination? I mean it's all about genetics, if you get the "good" genes you look better so why wouldn't it be the same for the werewolves?

Fenrir wrote:Why do you think cute is an abomination?

If I am correct, I don't think Set actually thinks cute werewolves are an abomination. I'm pretty sure it was a barb directed at the line of thinking that werewolves must be uber-badasses.

Renorei wrote:

Fenrir wrote:Why do you think cute is an abomination?

If I am correct, I don't think Set actually thinks cute werewolves are an abomination. I'm pretty sure it was a barb directed at the line of thinking that werewolves must be uber-badasses.

ah i see i had a feeling that was it

Cuteness: http://www.flickr.com/photos/64937722@N00/56001911/

Ultraken wrote:Cuteness: http://www.flickr.com/photos/64937722@N00/56001911/

Super cute! The whole slide show is neat!

I think I have to disagree that a WW by committe looks like crap. The PACK seems to have come up with a pretty cool idea of a WW.

Do I think WWs can be cute? If Gorillas can be cute, then anything can.

Actually, there was this documentary(must be my night for 'em) about baby mammals and how they're genetically designed to appeal to ANY adult mammal. They ALL have big head for their body size, bigger eyes, bigger ears, etc. So they're designed to make even other mammal species hesitate to harm them. So baby ones, sure.

Adults ones - sure. Anyone who has a big dog can tell you that.

Silver wrote:I think I have to disagree that a WW by committe looks like crap. The PACK seems to have come up with a pretty cool idea of a WW.

Do I think WWs can be cute? If Gorillas can be cute, then anything can.

Actually, there was this documentary(must be my night for 'em) about baby mammals and how they're genetically designed to appeal to ANY adult mammal. They ALL have big head for their body size, bigger eyes, bigger ears, etc. So they're designed to make even other mammal species hesitate to harm them. So baby ones, sure.

Adults ones - sure. Anyone who has a big dog can tell you that.

We're not just any committee.
Technically, we're not a committee, even, given as how we know the subject, and yet, are not getting paid for being a committee.

well, remember that the WW apearance may be a mix of the human's original face and wolf. So, it can be anything, right? cute, beautiful, your worst nightmare...

Still, it will really depend of where the were will be. If it's something light, like cartoons of just stuff that does not terror, I will apreciate much more the WW as something beautiful or cute. If the intention is to cause terror or for action (like Van Helsing), I will never, ever, want to see a cute 2W. You know? It's just hard to mix these things.