Is this any good?

I kind of hope not because I just found out that lasagna-beard-fucker Drew Green is a prominent writer and storyboard artist on this. I've seen like 5 seconds of this from CN ads and it looks kind of like something that you would be into if you're a big fan of the first Jak and Daxter game. Actually how many of these type of wacky-sitcom-adventure type shows have been on Cartoon Network in the past 6 years anyway?

Not in the slightest.

It's good.
Turn off your brain and escape from the humdum of the real world.

...

Just watched the first two episodes.
No.

This shit excuse is exactly why the industry is the way it is.

It's meh. It occasionally gets a good joke in but it's too hyperactive, scattered and hasty. The good gags get lost amidst a tide of mediocrity.

7.5/10 not the worst but I'm not gonna set my DVR for it either.

Is it obvious is this was only meant to be web skits?

Apparently Drew Green does the third one, what about that?

Ok i don't get this lasagna thing with Drew Green.

what's the context??

No. Its so boring and bland it reminds me of the cartoons that came out near the end of last decade.

Cartoons cannot be waifus.

Pic related, you won't like it, though.

Drew Green is a barafag with an untrimmed beard- seeing as he's into rimming, it's probably brimming with fecal bacteria. Last time I checked, he was trying to become a CN storyboard artist, and it looks like he actually did it.

That description has made me extra-ordinarily apprehensive about opening that spoiler.

I don't think I even want to now I'm just utterly disgusted at the concept of that

That's very smart of you. I'll give you a rundown of the comic-

Two poopdicks have one's parents over for dinner to meet the boyfriend. They decide to fuck right after they leave, but the whole time, the boyfriend can't get it up because he's too busy being worried about how his first impression went. I don't know how old the comic is, but when the shots actually get into the more complicated poses, the proportions are fucking awful.

There's this artist I liked because the characters he drew were really cute, but he had this problem where the proportions were always horrible. It was kind of like he had focused more on all the glitter and shiny effects on the characters than the actual drawing of them. But I will give that artist credit for not being so disgustingly crude.

Its not bad 7/10
can be funny at time and I like the animation

That was even worse than the second episode

If it's bad enough I might take a look for myself

This show is mediocre at best. It feels like it wants to be Teen Titans Go in it's style of humor, but toned down so it's not quite as annoying. The episodes feel way too fast, almost as if they sped up the show slightly to make it fit its 11 minute time limit. The jokes are rarely funny or original, and the quick pace ruins the timing for the jokes which make what would probably be okay jokes into something completely unfunny. There's also a lot of terrible millennial style talking, like when the queen says "totes".

The animation is trash, feels even cheaper than teen titans go, which is saying something. The character designs are really boring simple shapes that have been plaguing animation since the very late 90s/early 2000s. Vambre looks like she was ripped off from slayers.

Overall this isn't the worst thing I've seen, but it's not worth your time.

She totally was

Its homage, you see. The we-steal-the-main-character-for-our-main-character-type homage.

-Tries way too hard to be funny
+At least it's not 2deep4U tumblr faggot shit
-The creator bears some resemblance with Dobson.
-Bearded faggot works on that show.


Fan art looks better than the original.

My asperger's is gonna force me to correct you there. The princess is 100% an 80s valley girl stereotype (they even rip off a Cyndi Lauper bassline for her theme) and "totes" like, totes goes back at least that far.

Think of it as watching an horror movie during the night and alone.
Or watching a 3D movie (Is just an example) with glasses.
Is unfair to judge a movie if you don't set yourself to enjoy it in the most.

If I have to refit my viewing context or warp my perception of a work in order for it to click properly, that's a failing of the work.

Something that deliberately aims to be as low as possible shouldn't get congratulations for being on target.

It was earlier than that, I think around the very first cartoon cartoons like Dexter's Lab and Johnny Bravo, and on Nick's side with rugrats and Aaah Monsters, or whatever is called.

Why not? As you said, is spot on target, I didn't said we have to like it.
Besides, that mindset's like when a normie watches a cartoon and no matter how many good examples of storytelling, design and such still will think for not being part of the target is not good.
I'm not comparing good storytelling with lowest common denominator but hypocritical actions.
Just because is bad doesn't mean it can't be good for someone, or is probably just because I'm an individualist.