We here have a "newsletter" type dealie.
Noone reads it.
You shouldn't judge a book by it's cover, instead, you should read every single book to see what every book is about before you even come close to judging its viability.
- It doesn't appeal to me,
- It's hard to follow (remember: you go from left to right, from top to bottom),
- You didn't use a clear piece of paper (I can see a scribbled version of the comic behind it),
- There is no clear storyline,
- No clear punchline either,
- I've never really liked such dirtied-up-spoofed humour (eg. The Gaytrix).
You shouldn't judge a book by it's cover, instead, you should read every single book to see what every book is about before you even come close to judging its viability.
A) I meant for the background to hold the original drawing, otherwise I would have fixed it when I uploaded it (I'm not blind)
B) This doesn't show the story because it just gives the basic background information.
Thus, through the voting, I've decided to start posting the episodes! Thank you all for helping out!
Yeah, since the voting so clearly shows that most of us say "yes" [/sarcasm]
But seriously, a child rapist? That, in my opinion, has no place either in humor or on a YOUNG Writers' Board. And Multi-Blood Man is one of the least creative superhero names I've ever heard, and doesn't even sound like who he is. It sounds like he's someone with the power to control blood or something, not someone who can switch between Oprah and some [insert swear word here].
Why would you name a superhero after how he got his powers? The method in obtaining powers is hardly what defines the hero. Besides, having the blood of different people doesn't make you act like different people.
I have to disagree. The way someone gets their powers can completely define that person. In this case it tells how he got his powers, and what his powers are. Do you criticize "Flash" for having a name defining the fact that he runs fast? Or "Green Arrow" for saying what he uses as a weapon? Also, in the world of comics, not everything has to make sense. Did we criticize "Superman" for being an alien that looks exactly like a human? Do we criticize Batman for not really having any powers, but the power of wealth? Do we criticize the TMNT because in reality the mutagen would have actually killed a real animal because their biological DNA would have broken?
Okay, so the reasons people get their powers rarely make sense, but I think it makes perfect sense that an alien would look human, being a Christian myself. "Multi-blood man" does not tell what his powers are at all, only how he got them. If his name did describe his powers, like most the other superheroes you described, it would make perfect sense. And what does Batman having no real powers have to do with it being a bad idea to name someone after where they got their powers from? It's a completely different subject, and doesn't even relate to his name. At least his name sounds creative.
I guess the idea of mutations makes since because of your religeon also. And they do, his powers are that he got injected with the blood of both Oprah and a child rapist, those two blood intertwined with his inner DNA, and caused a chain reaction inside his body, now the three personas are intertwined in his body. THEREFORE, Multi-Blood Man, the name, makes perfect sense at pointing out his powers. Which are to switch between the personas, and the blood, of the other two in his body. If you had actualy read my last post, you would have known I was using examples, about criticizing superheros. And also, Batman was created because of the hype of the "Superman" comic. Multi-Blood Man was made because I wanted to, not because I thought it would catch on.
bizzatch
he obviously got it from a spider, just for the run, you dont call someone who got their powers from a spider "Snakeman"
You shouldn't judge a book by it's cover, instead, you should read every single book to see what every book is about before you even come close to judging its viability.
