Charmander/Charmeleon/Charizard
moltres93:
Okay, now this one is going to be difficult. The Charmander line is arguably the most popular/well known/overrated line in Pokémon history. However, our aim is to look past this and give an unbiased overview of their designs.
Yelsha42:
To be quite honest, I really don't think much of Charmander. Its design, while realistic, is quite plain. The change in belly colour fits, but over all quite boring and reminds me somewhat of Barney the Dinosaur. It's only real selling point is the flame on its tail which was a reasonably unique idea at the time. Interesting that like the other two starters, Charmander is also reptilian.
moltres93:
While I somewhat agree that Charmander's overall appearance is a little plain (especially after doing a review on Bulbasaur), this might not be such a bad thing. Pokémon are supposed to start off simple and become more complex as they evolve. While Charmander might not be the most exciting Pokémon ever, I honestly can't think of anything they could have added/changed to make it more interesting without completely killing it.
Yelsha42:
To be honest, I think some sort of skin texture would have been nice, sort of like the pimples on Venusaur or something. I mean if you took away its tail it would be completely generic.
moltres93:
While a skin texture is an interesting idea, it just wouldn't be the same. It would look a LOT less cute (another of Charmander’s selling points). I agree that without the tail it would look generic.... but the tail IS there and i don't think anyone’s going to take it away! XD As a basic Pokémon, I don't think it needs more than one trademark, and since at the time a flame on the tip of the tail was quite original, I think that's all it needed.
Yelsha42:
True, I just feel compared to Bulbasaur and Squirtle, Charmander got left behind a bit in terms of design. That said, its evolutions do get better. The addition of a horn to Charmeleon really adds character. The darker colouring is also a good move in my opinion.
moltres93:
Yes, one thing I like about the Charmander line is that the number of horns increases as it evolves. One thing that changes about Charmeleon is that its arms grow longer. This makes it look less like a stubby cartoon lizard and more like something you would actually send into battle. As for the colour change, yes I think it's a good idea, but what the hell happened to Charizard? By all theory, Charmander should get darker as it evolves- but when it becomes a Charizard it ends up even lighter than it started out!
Yelsha42:
I agree that that is incredibly stupid. However when we look at shiny Charizard we find an interesting occurrence. Charizard is darker (in fact it's black), whereas the shiny forms of Charmander and Charmeleon are a lot lighter. The fact that shiny Charizard’s wings are the red colour of Charmeleon leads me to believe that it should have been the logical continuation of the line, and the normal Charizard should have been shiny.
moltres93:
I agree. I think that the shiny Charizard colour scheme is among- if not THE- best of shiny Pokémon. Had the shiny version been the original design, I think that a black dragon would have gone down just as well as, or perhaps even better, than the Charizard we know today.
Yelsha42:
So true. And now that we are onto the design of Charizard, we may as well discuss the other aspects of its design. You've already mentioned the horns which look more traditional than Charmeleon's singular horn. Its snout is more defined as well. And the addition of wings makes it a real dragon.
moltres93:
As with the colour changes, I think it's also interesting that Charizard’s arms becomes smaller and more 'useless' looking (like a t-rex's) once evolved from Charmeleon. If anything, the arms should have become stronger as the Pokémon evolved. Apart from that, Charizard is interesting to us because it is close to what we recognise as a dragon- a creature that has been both worshiped and feared for thousands of years. However, it is still unique enough that it can be distinguished from any other depiction of a dragon. For a start, its round body shape makes it feel more like a lowly animal than any majestic creature of legend.
Yelsha42:
Agreed. Charizard is certainly well built and I believe this is part of the reason the arms got smaller. As Charizard became more round and its tail became thicker, it needed its arms less for balance and used its weight and tail to balance itself. Long arms would have also presented resistance when flying.
moltres93:
Strong points. It’s clear that the designers studied animal biology well whilst coming up with Pokémon designs. Final thoughts on the evolution line as a whole?
Yelsha42:
In terms of design it starts off weakly but gains tremendous strength towards the end, in what is one of the most popular Pokémon, outside of legendaries. 8/10.
moltres93:
I’m giving it the same, 8/10. I think as you said, Charmander’s mild generic-ness was the evolution line's weakness. While the design of this line is extremely good compared to a lot of other Pokémon, I think the reason for its hype stems more from the fact Ash evolved his Charmander into a Charizard in the anime, and also for the sheer fact that Charizard is based on a dragon.
