This is kind of a pet peeve of mine, but I see that quite often even in art schools. It always bothers me when someone draws the skeleton and forgetting about the other stuff in the body, like muscles, fat, and sometimes even the skin. It even looks for a cartoon character really weird, especially when artists try to add realism into the mix. Examples: http://tdc-images.s3.amazonaws.com/.....n-drawings.jpg https://i.pinimg.com/736x/7d/5c/6d/.....characters.jpg
Another example is an experience I made at a day in art school. One of the tasks was doing (a realistic approach)of the anatomy of Charlie(from "All Dogs go to Heaven). Everyone, including the teacher, were drawing the muscles into the parts where his fluffy fur is. When I pointed out that there technically can't be any muscles because those areas have longer fur, they said I was wrong.
I know in some case things in cartoons get exaggerated for the sake of a joke, but in that case, people are trying the realistic approach. Any particular reason for that?

Since Merlock fits perfectly for that example; I tried to draw what I keep seeing(A) and how I would draw it(B) and ©.
Also tried to add some canine aspects into the skeleton. :P




Merlock belongs to Disney