I still don't understand...you can see all her arms and legs and her face and whatnot; what's unclear??
Are you using the word 'anatomy' as a euphemism for 'boobs' or something? Because I guess that would make some sense...although she's kinda supposed to resemble a 14-year-old girl, so...
Okay, I think I see the problem here. And this might sound patronizing, but I really think it needs to be said: there's a difference between liking a character design and thinking it's right for the character; and it feels to me that you're conflating the two.
You can like the first one as much as you want; you can see potential in it that maybe I didn't see when I rejected it. That's just your opinion; a simple matter of taste.
But you really have no grounds to argue that the character in question would have been better off with it. especially when, again, you know nothing about them or the universe they belong to.
And the fact that I didn't give you context is kind of irrelevant, since I didn't actually ask you for a critique. It's not my job to write out character bios just in case someone wants to judge my design progression.
By the way, when faced with a situation like that where you don't have enough information to make an informed judgment, I believe the polite thing to do is to either (a) ask for the information if the situation is appropriate, or (b) not say anything. =/
Anyway, I think the weirdest part about all of this is that you DO understand what I was going for with the character. Only maybe you didn't realize it, because you're talking about those traits as if they're failings or shortcomings.
You say she "looks more like a liquid chemical than a person"? She's "unnecessarily edgy", "one dimensional"? Congratulations, you got out of the design exactly what I put in. She's a secondary cartoon villain who also happens to be a non-human alien from another dimension; based on your critique I think her design was even more perfect than I originally thought.
But in case you decide to speak like this in the future to someone more impressionable than I am, I'll conclude with this: please temper your assumptions. Don't just arbitrarily decide that what you see in a design is what is supposed to be there, and that any attempt to change it is a betrayal of a 'character' that doesn't actually exist outside of your imagination.
And if it's not too much trouble, please acknowledge the validity of character designs that are obvious, uncomplicated, predictable, even. They exist, and they have value; they're not just examples of 'what not to do'.