>>1049018
>"It gives me new insight into the series"
>"This stupid dullard said it gives new insight to the series
<WHY DO YOU HAVE TO BE SO MEAN KILL YOURSELF GRRR I'LL FIT IN IF I SAY FAGGOT
>Not to mention the implication that only one page of the comic has bad art and not the entirety of the issue and previous issues
I understand you're a big fan of Squirrel Girl and you would like your bubble pipe lounge chair analysis of "Wow, this illustrator must've been chosen to draw bad on purpose and this is a lot different than the usual art that is drawn bad! Woah! Narrative framing!" to be taken very seriously from a very serious person, even though you're flimsily propping up what is one of the worst comics to come out in recent years until next month. But the fact of the matter is that you are defending an absolute dogshit comic book. There is no redeemable aspect of it, except the fact that I didn't pay for it. It's a book of poorly drawn randumb wacky xD scenarios and the only bit that has some artistic consistency is just reformatted Garfield strips.
This is why comic books are dying, by the way. Because you look at things like this and you, completely unironically, think phrases like 'narrative framing' and 'new insight'. I bet if a comic book was just blank pages you'll be right back here telling us how comic books usually have panels and artwork and how it broke new ground. You are a dunce and you probably smell too.