I've been reading up on this comic, checking out page samples and giving it time to sink in. And for me, the bottom line is this:
There's LOADS of pure, professional Muppet fan cartoonists out there who could do a much better job at representing the characters visually. So why Langridge?
Look, I'm not knocking his talent. I love his drawing style, and his quirky writing is right up my alley. But that doesn't make him the best choice for creating Muppets comics. If you listen to the guy in interviews, he acts like he just heard of the Muppets yesterday, and heard of them from someone who heard of them from someone else who may never have really heard of them in the first place.
And doesn't this guy own a computer? There's loads of good, accurate reference material online. So why is he using one of the worst Muppet books from the 70's as a visual reference? And more so, I own that book, and if he is referencing it, he's doing it without opening the cover.
Guy and Brad Gilchrist, who created the Muppet comic strip in the 80's, may have taken slight liberties with the designs, but at its root, the comic was an accurate reflection of the show and characters, and their designs were totally recognizable as the Muppet gang. Bring those guys back, for Pete's sake. Langridge draws the Muppets like he's doing a bad parody for Mad Magazine. And the fact is, Jack Davis, who drew the Sesame Street parody for Mad in the early 70's, did a far better job with the Muppets! Even he knew how to use reference material!
What I want to know is, why hasn't anyone tracked down all the great cartoonists who worked on the Muppet comic bits in Muppet Magazine? Bruce McNally, for example, was a GREAT cartoonist. The work he did on E.C. The Extra Celestial in Muppet Magazine, and equally well written by Mad Magazine scribe Dick Debartolo (who coincidentally wrote the Sesame Street parody drawn by Jack Davis for Mad in the early 70's) was brilliant. Syndicated cartoonist Daryl Cagle, who drew the Rocky parody for Muppet Magazine, was sheer genius,
http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/muppet/images/f/fe/Comic_wocky01a.jpg and possibly the best Muppet cartoonist this side of Michael K. Frith. So why not use these guys? Seriously, it's not that hard to find worthy talent to bring the Muppets to the comics page.
Langridge claims Disney has encouraged him to draw the Muppets in this off model, caricaturey style because various cartoonists drew the Disney characters to that effect in Disney magazine, and supposedly it was successful. Well here's the difference: Disney's stock characters are BORING [with the exception of the work created by the great Carl Barks for various Disney comics, secifically Scrooge]. They needed that underground cartoonist tweak to make their stories and designs interesting to modern audiences.
Muppets, on the other hand, have always been wacky and irreverent, and have appealing looks that can be cartooned while still keeping with their lovable aesthetic. They don't need to be drawn in some off-kilter indie comic style to appeal to modern audiences.
Now, I could argue about if we even need another Muppet comic book, since Langridge's seems like it won't be any sort of improvement on what came before it. But really, if they're making the effort to do this, for Jim's sake, DO IT RIGHT!
At some point, I may submit my work to this publisher in the hopes of doing justice to these characters. But if what I read is true, and that Langridge's style is setting the precedent by which all future Muppet comics shall be judged, then it hardly seems worth the effort. I'm a fan and cartoonist, and I want the Muppets to be written and drawn as faithfully as can be. Disney, as usual, doesn't know what to do with the Muppets, and has put them in equally clueless hands. Sad, just so sad....
Welcome to the Muppet Central Forum!
Jim Henson Idea Man
Back to the Rock Season 2
Bear arrives on Disney+
Sam and Friends Book
though.
