Special Edition: The News Reel!
(Alternate Title: "Watching webcomics in two sentences or less!")
Hello everybody, this is "The Receptionist" again.
Dr. Haus is still missing in action, leaving behind little more than a note saying that he was going to deal with a cliche. I'm not sure what he meant, but I hope he comes back alive.
Anyways, it's finals week at my university, and I don't have time for a full review, but I can give you a sampling of what may be reviewed via this "News Reel."
Hello everybody, this is "The Receptionist" again.
Dr. Haus is still missing in action, leaving behind little more than a note saying that he was going to deal with a cliche. I'm not sure what he meant, but I hope he comes back alive.
Anyways, it's finals week at my university, and I don't have time for a full review, but I can give you a sampling of what may be reviewed via this "News Reel."
- Have no fear, the Zero Hunters are here to save the day, including "Slant-Eyed Asian #1" in the third panel! And he has swords, too!
- I don't know what's worse, that Solid Snake looks like a Vietnam-era hippie with bitch tits, or that Giando feels like mocking those "90's-era [genre] CD collection" commercials without actually being funny.
- "What do you read, my lord?" "Words, words, words."
- Bonus points to whoever can name where the dialogue comes from (hint: It isn't a webcomic)
- OMG THIS IS T3H MOST 0R1G1N4L COMIX EVAR!!!11!!!1onetyone!
- Heh, he put those dogs to sleep...what?
- A knight in a trenchcoat on a beach. Now if he could only control his nose, that picture would be real awesome.
posted by Dr. Haus at
5:25 PM
8 Comments:
Haw. Look at this. A bunch of Websnark wannabes. This is adorable.
It's even more adorable when I type in "Webcomic Watchman" on Google and half the entries I get are forum profiles and posts from the author!
Awwwwww.
But you know, you're right. Being a reviewer (crap, Watchman! Sorry!), you may not be able to draw and your previous attempts in writing webcomics have failed...
...but at least authors of obscure DrunkDuck and Keenspace comics can benefit from the credibility of your awesome reviews (or watches? you call them reviews, so you tell me!)
By the by, I never said cracking on WW2 video games were original, but hey, writing like JeffK!!!onetyoneimsocool!!!11 to mock my imaginary claim really makes you look like a star reviewer, doesn't it?
Crap I'm sorry again.
A star -Watchman-.
There's a difference.
:)
Addenum: Or wait, this is the "receptionist", isn't it? Ha. My bad. Have fun playing Doctor Webcomic Watchman (laff again!) and Receptionist, you crazy kids.
By
Anonymous, at 5:42 AM
This comment has been removed by the author.
By
Unknown, at 1:18 PM
Can movie critics make better movies? Can book reviewers write better spy thrillers? Can safety technicians build better bathrooms?
No, so why should a webcomic critic HAVE to be able to make better comics? Anyone can critique, and much like making comics themselves, you get better at it the more you do it. You should be thankful he gave you publicity; there's no such thing as bad publicity on the net. Everyone has to start somewhere. Eric Burns and Wednesday White don't even update half the time anyway, I think we could all use more bloggers like Dr. Haus.
Dr Haus: YOU'RE JUST JEALOUS OF MY MAD SKILLLZZ!
By
Unknown, at 1:25 PM
It's fine if someone reviews. It's fine if that reviewer can't make/act in movies or draw/write comics. Totally fine with that.
I am, however, attacking the credibility of this blog. You can post a negative review of a comic without coming off as a pompous little 10-year-old with absolutely -no- tact.
Of course, a reviewer certainly has the right to act that way.
But by being completely unprofessional in his writing, a person can diminish credibility. But that's fine if he doesn't take this blog seriously at all. If he's posting stupid JeffK shit just to be a jackass, then that's fine and it'll be regarded as that. It's probably why this isn't a very popular blog.
Negative reviews are fine. Everybody has their opinion and if they conduct their review tastefully without A. making it a personal issue and B. not acting like an idiot, then it's all good.
And yeah, I'm real grateful for all four referrals this tiny site has given us. Nice going.
By
Anonymous, at 3:40 PM
Don't worry Scott, I love you too. Besides, I'm not trying to be like Websnark. This blog is just something I do in my spare time. If you've been digging through my archives and seen my references to Stephen Colbert, and then still take my comments that literally, then obviously my humor is way too subtle for you. I mean, "pompous 10-year-old?" I was shooting for at least "pretentious 16-year-old."
Besides, even if I do give bad reviews, people can still follow the links and judge the comic for themselves. And hey, haven't you heard of Ebert's Law?
Other than that, welcome to The Webcomic Watchman, Scott.
By
Dr. Haus, at 10:53 PM
Well you surprised me. This wasn't quite the response I expected.
I take back what I've said. The way I read the blog, I thought you would've reacted a little differently. Obviously I assumed wrong.
Then again, from the looks of things, it looks like this is your "receptionists" work anyway.
So post and review away. Sorry I disturbed.
By
Anonymous, at 11:20 PM
Wow, some people can take criticism, can they? Keep up the good work!
-DCM
By
Anonymous, at 8:14 AM
Hamlet, of course.
By
Anonymous, at 7:21 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home