Round 3
Plastic Teeth
Lots of larva stage comics this time around--that's wonderful. It's important early on to get a lot of eyes on your stuff before bad habits start settling in. I know I'm paying the price for some of that, now, as much as I love my work.
Goals/Intentions/Inspirations:
Trying to innovate with Vampires. That's a tricky one--not necessarily because it's all been done, but because vampirsm has very strict and UNAVOIDABLE archetypal rules that, when not followed, erase the vampiric identity. They have to drink blood, they have to have fangs, and they need to be "undead," whatever that means. I am neither a fan nor a hater of vampires, so I cannot say I have my finger on the pulse (hehe) of the genre. However, I can say that the only time I ever thought to myself "Woah, this is a new and cool take on the vampiric archetype" was when I played one of my favorite games, Darkest Dungeon. The Crimson Court bloodsuckers are reminiscent of mosquitoes, ticks, and other vampiric insects, with grotesque and alien features that are normally glossed over in other vampire works. They look insanely badass and are all around a truly compelling character design tableau.
Now, your challenge is that, from what I can tell, you are not going for the Monster route. The choice of Slice of Life Drama means accessibility, relatability, and appealing visuals. We'll go deeper into that later. My point is that I hope you are being mindful of what your vampires are like, really. It's such a loaded word, with so much lore and history behind it.
I think it would be easy for a classic pitfall to come your way. This is my concern for the FUTURE of the comic, NOT because I see them NOW. These are thoughts of down the line. I make no judgements at present.
The first danger, and this is the most relevant one, is that your vampires are superficial vampires. Right now, the only meaningful indication that Hugh is a vampire is the grisly scene of him eating squirrels. Yes, there is his aversion to sunlight, and yes, he has fangs--but his vampire identity, at this moment, could easily become a gimmick rather than a draw of your comic. Again, I'm not saying he is now. I am saying that the intrinsic conflicts and unique challenges that come with vampirism are not yet apparent in meaningful ways. I am sure you have plans. I merely wish to extend my conviction that an easy way for this comic to suffer is if Hugh's vampirism becomes strikingly subordinate to the Slice of Life genre. It is the classic identity conundrum--you don't want a character to be defined solely by his identity, but neither do you want that identity to be little more than a gimmick, or a tagline, or a prop. if I can take away the vampirism, and he is the same character, then it is a missed opportunity.
Like I said, that is for the future.
Art:
There is little to go on, but enough for me to make some scattered observations that I think will be helpful. As a whole, it looks fine. It is sufficient, as I like to say. I don't think it is getting in the way of your comic's success, with the notable exception of Page 3 Panel 2. It's a lousy panel, this one. No energy, no sense of motion or tension. I expect a scene like this--the reveal of the beast within--to be climactic and dramatic, even if it is a Slice of Life comedy. It's a strange, awkward pose, stiff and angular. When I take it in, I cannot decide how he's moving, where his momentum is leading, or what the flow of energy is supposed to be. In a word--it is a dull panel for a moment any reader would expect to be more explosive, even comically. This isn't me calling for a gorefest. This is an observation about character energy. Hugh looks staged in that panel; he does not look like he is moving.
That convinces me: while the art is generally sufficient for telling your story, it is simultaneously being a slight drag on the experience. The visuals are dull. There's no life. The colors are faded, muted, and sterilized. When I look at pages 6-7, the panel bleed together into a tapioca blend. Ironically, the pages look drained of life. It's an instance of minimalist/simplistic art being just a little too bare bones to carry emotive weight. It carries across the artstyle--the expressions don't quite sell the emotion I should feel or be seeing and the character design isn't striking enough or appealing enough to stir interest, as examples.
I think I can sum it up by saying that is all feels incomplete, like a draft. It is bare bones to the eye. I search for more meat and cannot find any. I suggest trying to pack more power into your style itself. That could translate into more dynamic color--not necessarily gaudy, but it should certainly be a more helpful guide for my eyes; that could translate into spending more time on detail--SMART detail, not necessarily a lot, obviously. There's a lot of solid color planes in the comic that are just tedious to get through. How you choose to bring life and energy to the visuals is largely up to you. All I can say is that from what I've seen so far, I am not feeling energized or intrigued by your art style. It needs more energy.
Writing:
Of course, it isn't much to go on, but taken for what it is, I like it quite a bit. I have to point out that giving Hugh a Londoner accent pulls a lot of weight. The reader's mind's ear will contribute a lot of energy to the written voice. It s a strong archetypal accent, which allows for entertaining colloquiums and manners of speech that the mind produces easier than a page. While there haven't been any standout pieces of writing, that's just natural. it's only been 9 pages or so. That said, what IS there is more than sufficient. It is amusing. Not laugh out loud, sure, but it is unobtrusive, endearing, and character-building.
Zazu takes home the prize. One of the most frustrating aspects of writing, as both writer and reader, is children. Making children sound childlike--authentically youthful--is extremely difficult. Only Dickens comes to mind, but he's him, so that doesn't help much. What I'm trying to say is that Zazu is 100% an authentic child. She talks as a child does and should, with the same respectful deference and innocent abandon that so many weird, maladjusted, podium written children don't. She's absolutely adorable. I know I was critical of the visuals, but I have to say that Zazu avoids most of the problem. She is prime daughterfu material, and it is early in the game. Not knowing anything about where you're taking this, I can say that I hope that Zazu and Hugh have many misadventures. Even if she is pulling most of the weight, she and Hugh do have good chemistry.
I question the inclusion of profanity. The comic seemed to be chugging along just fine until Hugh says "fuck." It sounds harsh for a comic that has set itself up to be so accessibly charming. Even his Britishness can't stop that. "Bitch" is a funny word, so while I found that unnecessary, I didn't mind it much. I would definitely consider trying to write around profanity. I said this in another thread, but I often think we use it as a crutch. It's often better to say nothing at all, or to use some equally blunt and common word. I think you could do without it, if for no other reason than this is the kind of comic that younger readers could get into easily. I don't think there's a reason to limit your audience.
Summation:
This one is in the early stages, so not a whole lot can be said about the here and now. Most of my points concern the future, and that future is largely dependent on the art style. I have few concerns regarding the writing, which is charming, accessible (other than for the question of profanity's place), and authentic. The weight, then, lies on the art style to catch up. In the face of dialogue that sounds true to life, the art is dull and overly simplistic. it is drab and grey, not just in color, but in attitude. I feel no energy or passion in it at all. You would do well to find a way to work on your style, to find ways of making it more compelling, engaging, and dynamic.
