HOME | DD
FriendlyChestnut — Quirrell and Snape (and Voldy) sketch dump
Published: 2013-06-13 00:06:49 +0000 UTC; Views: 7433; Favourites: 109; Downloads: 13
Redirect to original
Description
"Yes, Severus does seem the type, doesn't he? So useful to have him swooping around like an overgrown bat. Next to him, who would suspect p-p-poor st-stuttering P-Professor Quirrell?"__________________________________________
So. I realized that Ian Hart has the most AMAZING ears, and I've decided that Quirrell has them as well because. He is Quirrell. Too bad they are usually hidden under that turban, though. Which means I'll have to draw many a pre-Voldy Quirrell in the near future. *sigh*
Anyway, have this sketch dump to document my slow descent into madness.
Related content
Comments: 9
These are perfect.
Oh God, where to even BEGIN? So...much...awesomeness! I keep telling myself I need to comment only when I have something meaningful to say, but then I go and look at it again and my brain goes into awesomeness overload.
Okay, I know where to start. The Quirrell one in the topmost righthand corner. That's the one that I keep looking at the most. I guess because I'm drawn to strong emotion, especially pain. He looks so...scared. And alone. And weary, and in pain, and lost. I would give so much to be able to reach through my screen into the picture and give him a hug.
I also adore the one of young Quirrell in Ravenclaw uniform (left side, third down), for exactly the opposite reasons. He looks so innocent and adorkable and happy. And oh my GAWD yes, you're so right about the ears! (Though for me, his best feature will always be his eyes...they're so wide and beautiful and emotive.)
And the one in the bottom right makes me cringe, of course. *shudder*
I'm running into that brain overloaded state again, so I'd best move on to Snape.
I don't know Snape as intimately as I know Quirrell, so I'll just mention my top favorite. It's the one in the top middle. Snape is always cold, sneering, poised and in control...but underneath that, he is deeply human. And sometimes the human bits slip through. I feel I can see the man most clearly in that one. He looks...thoughtful, and a bit surprised, and just so damn human, that rare side of Snape we almost never see.
I know I've just briefly touched on a few, but they're ALL just complete perfection. From a technical sense, they're wonderful...they're beautifully emotive...each one tells its own story...and they're all 100% in charcter. Each one could be its own portrait, and I could write a book about each. I adore your art style so much...it seamlessly merges realism with a more cartoony style. It reminds me a lot of the really excellent Disney films. (Yes, that is most definitely a compliment! 
Oh, and er...stupid question, maybe, but I'm assuming the snake is Voldy?
And now excuse me while I go fangirl over look at Quirrell some more...omigod, how can anyone NOT fall for that face??? 
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Oh wow, you are saying so many meaningful things, though~ I don't even know how to properly thank you, just... Thank you! Your comments are always so wonderful and well thought out.
And yeah, don't you just wish you could hug Voldemort out of Quirrell? X'D
Disney, though? Whaaaat? Haha, no way, still a long way to go before I reach that level. 
And yes, the snake is Voldy. : D Though, if you want to see those two sketches as something that actually happened or as a purely symbolic representation... that's up to you. We do know that Voldy took possession of snakes, and I did base that snake on the horned viper which can be found in Albania, but... I'm not even sure myself, haha. I wonder how that first meeting between Quirrell and Voldy really went.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
But your art deserves really meaningful comments! It's so wonderful!!!
Yes...yes I do.
No, really! This isn't flattery, it's just true! If Disney had made the Harry Potter films, you could've been lead animator for Quirrell, I kid you not! (Oh gawd, that's such a funny idea, Disney doing an animated Harry Potter! LOL)
Yeah, I was wondering if those were symbolism or not...I'm honestly not sure which way I'm leaning right now. And yes, I've often wondered that as well.
BTW, thanks for the 
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Haha, why thank you! ^_^ I can't really animate, though, but now I kinda want to try and animate Quirrell
I really wouldn't mind seeing those characters animated by Disney! Would be pretty cool, actually. I just don't trust them to write a decent story. XD
And you're welcome. 
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I really wish you would!
Yeah, I'd like to see them Disneyfied as well! But WHAT was that about not trusting Disney to write a decent story?!? 
Mind you, that's not to say that I believe they could do Harry Potter right...they'd have to make it more kid-friendly. And that would ruin the original idea of the books. So I'm glad they didn't get their hands on the Potterverse. At the same time, however, Disney has told some of the most beautiful stories of all time, and yeah, not a lot of 'em are original, but you know, most of Shakespeare's work wasn't original either. He took a plot that already existed and made it his own by spinning beautiful words around it, and fleshing out the characters...Disney does much the same, only instead of words they use animation.
I'm really sick of all the crap Disney gets. They're really not doing all that badly, and though yes, the quality has gone downhill generally, there have been true gems in recent years, among the mediocre work. (I like Enchanted better than most classic Disney, for example.) Besides, Disney always will come back. So I'm waiting, patiently, for the second Disney Renaissance, which I feel is neigh. But even if it's not...I will always be loyal to my first love.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Aaaaaaaaaaah, oh no, don't worry I LOVE Disney! I should've been more specific. I DID mean to say that I don't trust Disney to write a decent story for Harry Potter. Disney writes beatiful and simple stories that are beautiful because they are simple. Harry Potter would be way too complex for them. And yeah, they'd make it more "kid-friendly" which is something that bogs down many actual Disney movies, too. Well, not the kid-friendliness I should say, the Disney movies are meant for children after all, which isn't a bad thing. I'm talking about these awfully annoying comic relief characters that are mainly there so that Disney can sell merchandise of them. How disruptive they are usually depends on the tone of the movie, but take 'The Hunchback of Notre Dame' for example. You have this great movie that has the potential to be something truly amazing... But then here come the gargoyles and completely pull you out of the story! : D Ugh, I hate them. There are other examples, but these are definitely the worst. Now imagine, say, Hedwig or Dobby being forced into these kinds of roles. Nope nope nope...
But yeah, you named 'The Lion King' and 'Lilo and Stich', which are probably my favorite Disney movies. When it comes to their newer stuff, I think I like Wreck-it-Ralph best. (Unless you're only counting their traditionally animated movies) 'The Princess and The Frog' and 'Tangled' were ok movies, I guess, but... Looking at 'Frozen', I feel that they finally need to retire their Disney princesses. I won't judge the movie before I've seen it, of course, but it just seems like more of the same, you know? :/
In recent years Pixar movies were just a little better. Dreamworks, too, but not always, lol.
But OMG yes, Enchanted! I never ever would have expected to love this movie as much as I did. I need to watch it again, haven't seen it in years.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
(Sorry for the late reply.)
Ah, yes, I understand completely. It's funny that you mentioned HoND, as it is my favorite Disney film. *complete Frollophile* And yes, the gargoyles are glaringly incompatible with the tone of the film. Ugh, I never even thought of that! Hedwig or Dobby being turned into cutesy comic relief...the thought makes me want to retch. I wish that Disney would make a separate line of animated films, specifically for adults...keeping the animation and storytelling style, but dealing with darker, more complex characters and plotlines. (That’s actually not a bad idea…unfortunately, in America animation is viewed as a “childish” medium, so it’d never work. I hear that in Japan, animation is actually considered a higher art form than live action, which, IMO, makes way more sense.)
And TLK and Lilo and Stitch are my 2nd and 3rd favorites! TLK is utterly breathtaking, and, unlike Hunchback (which is, in my personal opinion, ultimately a better story, but does have flaws like the gargoyles), it has absolutely nothing wrong with it. Timon and Pumbaa are genuinely funny in their minor roles (though an entire sequel centered around them should never have been made). The story is dark, but has a wider appeal than HoND. Aso, every single frame of that film could be framed and hung on the wall. In a word…perfection.
Lilo and Stitch, meanwhile, is so wonderfully unique. There are no real “villains”; the Nani/David romance is a small subplot, not a central theme; the art style beautiful in its simplicity, and is very different from other Disney films; it has a strong sci-fi element, though Disney normally deals almost exclusively in fantasy; and despite that element, the heart of the film centers around real life: Lilo and Nani’s relationship as sisters, Nani trying to get a job, etc. Also, it’s set in Hawaii, which is wonderful. But my favorite thing about it is how it celebrates weirdness. I was Lilo as a kid. Hyper, highly imaginative, a little insane, a lot different, and very outcast. One scene especially always gets to me:
LILO: I hit Mertle Edmonds today.
NANI: You hit her?
LILO: Before I bit her.
NANI: You…bit…her. Lilo, you shouldn’t—
LILO: People treat me different.
NANI: They just don’t know what to say.
ME: *sobbing*
I personally quite liked “The Princess and the Frog.” I thought it was fantastic, actually. Right up there with Beauty and the Beast. And Dr. Facilier is a wonderful villain, truly one of the great Disney baddies.
And, as much as I like Wreck-It Ralph and Finding Nemo, etc., I just can never bring myself to like that animation style as much, or the different storytelling that accompanies it. I wish Disney would concentrate more on traditional animation, and leave the computer animation to Dreamworks and other companies, who, I think, can do it much better. It’s just not Disney’s forte, IMO. I loved RoTG, though, and The Lorax, so I have no problem with the animation itself. Just not something that I feel works for Disney specifically.
I personally am quite sad they’re retiring the princesses. I wish they’d return to the golden age of Disney with stuff like Rescuers, Hunchback, Lion King, and Beauty and the Beast. I was so psyched when Princess and the Frog came out, because I thought they were doing just that. But then they announced that would be the last film of its kind, and I almost screamed.
(Oh, and Frozen does look silly and recycled to me, too. Though I’m trying hard not to judge, either.)
At least we can agree on Enchanted, which was a stroke of sheer brilliance, especially in the face of the Shrek movies. A film which was BOTH a satire and an homage to classic Disney. And Amy Adams as Giselle…favorite Disney princess right there. And the way that she taught him to be more open to imagination and belief without proof, and he taught her to be more practical and down-to-earth, and somewhere along the way they fell in love…
~END RANT~
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
