- 15,917
- 11,179
Realistic Anatomy isnt a sign of good or bad art, Araki alone should tell you this, let alone some of the most culturally significant and influential comics that influenced people like Tezuka the god father of manga himself. a lot of these you can call ugly myself included but they not objectively bad for not appealing to whats conventionally "nice looking art"
Nor do i think theres any meaningful way to say whether or not Ikemoto would survive given we never got a a weekly solo manga from Ikemoto
nor do i think its a fair comparison to compare a nearly 50 year old man who even prior to Boruto had spent 15 years on naruto on a week to week basis drawing backgrounds, including some of the most celebrated in the series, nor does a monthly schedule change that, because artist do not have 30 days to draw, especially when the work is divided by the writers and supervisors where scripts are approved and discussed and early genga is made. thats also ignoring the fact that monthly manga on average do have double the amount of pages a weekly series has,being very generous to weekly here because while the standard is generally 20ish page if you followed any long running series for a long enough you know as the pace of the work slowly catches up to these artist the number is closer 12-15 on average.
but even if we did steelman this and say everything Ikemoto touches was a 2/10 that wouldnt be indicative of whether he would be successful or not, given theres plenty of manga with amazing art, paneling and even storytelling that routinely get axed and the inverse is true theres series that last for years that have conventionally "bad" art and in some recent cases have atrocious paneling that makes Ikemoto look like the second Murata.
What Ultimately decides what series stays or goes is whether or not the readers resonate with it for some reason or another, and what readers resonate with depends on demographics, culture and environment. even in Japan itself. theres some very successful manga that likely would not have lasted in today shonen jump in the same way some successful series of today likely would not have caught on in the 80's or 90's.
Attack on Titan blew up as a manga with this art, not the better stuff we have from Isayama today.
some other fun examples
but i dont like this idea of saying he was just handed a franchise out of nothing as if he wasn't part of Naruto since the first arc, contributing to character designs, art and not art as in just trees or buildings but key characters as well. and the only other instance of Ikemoto not working on the Naruto franchise was his own one shot which was highly successful and won him awards. Would he be successful today? who knows probably not given his writing is very much rooted in stuff you would find in the 90s and early 2000's.
In the end I think Ikemoto is an okay artist with an artstyle i dont like who happens to be drawing a sequel to a series drawn by one of the best mangaka from a franchise im deeply invested in.
Nor do i think theres any meaningful way to say whether or not Ikemoto would survive given we never got a a weekly solo manga from Ikemoto
nor do i think its a fair comparison to compare a nearly 50 year old man who even prior to Boruto had spent 15 years on naruto on a week to week basis drawing backgrounds, including some of the most celebrated in the series, nor does a monthly schedule change that, because artist do not have 30 days to draw, especially when the work is divided by the writers and supervisors where scripts are approved and discussed and early genga is made. thats also ignoring the fact that monthly manga on average do have double the amount of pages a weekly series has,being very generous to weekly here because while the standard is generally 20ish page if you followed any long running series for a long enough you know as the pace of the work slowly catches up to these artist the number is closer 12-15 on average.
but even if we did steelman this and say everything Ikemoto touches was a 2/10 that wouldnt be indicative of whether he would be successful or not, given theres plenty of manga with amazing art, paneling and even storytelling that routinely get axed and the inverse is true theres series that last for years that have conventionally "bad" art and in some recent cases have atrocious paneling that makes Ikemoto look like the second Murata.
What Ultimately decides what series stays or goes is whether or not the readers resonate with it for some reason or another, and what readers resonate with depends on demographics, culture and environment. even in Japan itself. theres some very successful manga that likely would not have lasted in today shonen jump in the same way some successful series of today likely would not have caught on in the 80's or 90's.
Attack on Titan blew up as a manga with this art, not the better stuff we have from Isayama today.
some other fun examples
but i dont like this idea of saying he was just handed a franchise out of nothing as if he wasn't part of Naruto since the first arc, contributing to character designs, art and not art as in just trees or buildings but key characters as well. and the only other instance of Ikemoto not working on the Naruto franchise was his own one shot which was highly successful and won him awards. Would he be successful today? who knows probably not given his writing is very much rooted in stuff you would find in the 90s and early 2000's.
In the end I think Ikemoto is an okay artist with an artstyle i dont like who happens to be drawing a sequel to a series drawn by one of the best mangaka from a franchise im deeply invested in.
Last edited:
