This is a platform for User Generated Content. G/O Media assumes no liability for content posted by Kinja users to this platform.

The monkey says

I’m starting to agree less and less with the sketch monkey. I don’t know why but lately all the stuff he does is looking less and less “better” to me.

This take I can’t abide. 3 reasons

1. The effect is terrible. It’s not unique in a good way

2. This is NOT a good representation of the original, it’s NOT call back in any way shape or form to the original in spirit or corporeally.


3. I completely disagree with the idea that the choices are between this melting frigidaire or something that blends into the automotive landscape. They could have made something interesting and not ugly.

I think this design and analysis are perfect examples of missing for the forest the for trees. I think designers are looking at things like detail symmetry, character lines, continuity, blah blah blah. They do all the individual things “right” and the end result is a harmonious mess.


It’s lovely from a designers point of view that it has matching face and butt mustaches and that the crease in the body goes from light to light...but the end effect just doesn’t work.

This is a “graphical” treatment over bad hardpoints like a “bummer” or “fuexrarri”. It “doesn’t look right” not because of some minor d pillar treatment, it doesn’t look right because it looks like they did the best they could with the shape they already had...only they didn’t already have a shape.

It’s a bad design for another large SUV. It’s a VERY bad design for something with the design weight of the Grand Wagoneer.

Share This Story

Get our newsletter