Such as, purely as a hypothetical example, using a character design that is elegant, classic (in all senses of the word), evocative, and unique, rather than one that is ugly, awkward, and that ninety percent of their artists can't seem to draw properly.

Just, y'know, as an example. (And no, I'm not boycotting Marvel until they fix the Beast's look. But it is symptomatic of the prima donna-esque belief at Marvel that the opinions of their customers don't matter.)

One positive note about the feline McCoy- look at how much play time he has in the comics, he's in as many comics (or maybe more) as Wolverine! The transformation made the character the x-men icon in writers eyes.

Cambert kind of opens himself up to criticism by saying Beasts premise is supposed to be "devolving". This was a dramatic plot line established by Morrison and picked up by Whedon.

"Devolving" is supposed to be how Hank feels.

If Marvel Comics truly devolves Beast into an ape form then it will prove that they disagree with risk, fun, and new ideas; regardless of an opportune plot device or not.

Marvel should treat new designs how they would "like" to treat character deaths- by suggesting fans go back and look at the hundreds of previous appearances of the character if they enjoyed that version so much.

It's cool because I'm apart of a different generation of Marvel fans. I watched the t.v. series X-Men, and I read them when I was a kid.

I just loved feline Beast from Quitely that I automaticaly think that any artist that draws him afterwards is trying to live up to that- even if they don't make it.

The BEST part of Quitely's design? The legs. Go back and look at them. They looked like cat legs and bent backwards. I wish that a writer would pick up on the original design and have Hank bend his legs backwards like a feral cat and then just mention that he never uses them like he's supposed to.

While I like his character in the Avengers, I don't care for the way he was drawn back then. I much prefer the early 90's style, with big hair and sideburns. Bachalo did a great Beast, as did Mad and Larocca.

Beast is still one of my all time favourite Marvel characters, so I am warming up to Cat Beast, but when I picture him, I see the classic furball.

PS. The best version of Cat Beast was in Power Pack / X-Men, which also showed Cyclops new costume in the best representation I have seen.

His hair in the ape-form was really ugly, though.

And does anyone other than me just love the sheer, unadulterated hucksterism of that first Daredevil comic? Putting both Spider-Man and the Fantastic Four on the cover, just because the same people published them? Classic Stan Lee.

Ape-beast. Easy. The new one just looks silly.

I guess with Amazing Spider-Man going to 3x month, it should surpass FF pretty quickly as Marvel's highest-numbered title and be the first Marvel title to hit #600. Heck, Spidey could even catch up with Batman or Superman before long. (Although he'd have awhile before catching up with Action or Detective.)

*sighs* Happy days.

Cassaday's cat-Beast is good, too, I must admit - and Kelsey Grammar as Beast was about the only good thing in X3 (IMHO)...

Definitely prefer Ape-Beast. I just don't life the look of cat-beast.