Even better than Marvel.

Peanut: Too Dark!
Joey: The Shining Light Wolf Pack?
Peanut: Meh. Needs more seriousness.
Cubs: Death and Destruction!
Peanut: ;_;

I would read it.

And then some years later Rob Deathaxe leaves the company together with other like-minds to form "Picture Comics".

Their first creator-owned series teams up DethAXE with BLOODRIFLE. First they search for BLOODRIFLE'S mighty BLOOD RIFLE, but then they must save the WHOLE WORLD from their greatest enemy - the leader of the Republican Party, Satan McHitler-bin Ladin!

**** YEAH!!!

peanut doesn't draw a whole lot better than he does

I bet drawing this one presented a bit of a challenge, since it was necessary to have a comic drawn visibly worse than Spot (superdog) is.

Well compared with the cubs drawing, it makes Peanut's comics look professional (in a sense). But this is a cool comic strip.

Awesome strip, next issue we have a guest hero by the name of Superdog! I can see it now!

DETHAXE VS SUPERDOG!

I agree 100 percent on this. I thought Peanut was bad at drawing, but the cubs...wow...

Well the cubs are also much younger then Peanut and haven't been drawing as long.

Edit: fixed wording

True. After all, my very early works looked similar to that lol.

+1 with Dr. Prower.
Everyone hasn't Rick's talent. *sigh*

My spanish teacher verbally berates you if you draw bad. She shows your drawing in front of the whole class, asks everyone to look, and then proceeds to tell everyone on how sucky you are. Its very good for your moral. Why are we even drawing pictures? this isn't even kindergarden...

But yeah. The cub's drawing is kinda what she thinks every looks like.

Art class? i hated that class

I just like the fact that Peanut is giving the cub (DethAxe) some pointers on the comic, such as putting some more feeling into it and adding more stuff to it. (I know DethAxe is not the cub official name, but i though I just use it anyways).

are you denying there naming abilites?
anyway, I wonder what mean humans come to there front door...

They're also wolves. :3

No. What I saying I'm saying is that, I have yet to learn of the cub's real name.

Because the cub has no real name.

Isn't blood breaking the PG rating?

thats not real blood, its drawn blood... in the comic ... erm
i dont know

in "Housepets!" the comic it would be, but there is no rating on the cubs comic! (Hooray for loopholes! >:D)

The logic Nazi in me want to point out that technically if housepets comic=a and cub's comic=b then it would be a(b) which simplifies to ab which means their product is part of both of them making the rating distributed to all. But who cares.

My grammer Nazi would like you to explain.

And I thought there would never be a Godwin point right here.

bound to happen sometime or another... and Im guessing we should stray away from nazis. Plus I think I've figured it out.

It's a subcomic. A comic within the comic. Thus it counts as the comic.

and another fast reply by our wonderfull fourum team...

The reason I believe that the "blood" doesn't break PG is because it's fabricated, and is only implying violence from the perspective of a child, kind of like how superheroes wail on villians, but aren't considered violent. That and it's very poorly drawn.

I think I had Joel bleeding some last year

Anyway, it's fake poorly drawn blood. You'd have to convince me that it would qualify as PG-13

I don't think that anyone who regularly comments is under 13 anyways.
Best not to think too hard on it. Trying to think of reasons someone else might be shocked or offended when you are not is a bit loony.
We'll leave that to the MPAA and ESRB =P.

Most of the people here are graduating high school seniors or college students. Some sophomores and juniors i think. Well, at least the people who post are

I really don't see how. In the first place it's pretty obviously fake blood and (as has been mentioned) probably about the same as any kid relatively the same age as Mile's cub would probably use. According to the Motion Picture Association:

"A PG-rated motion picture should be investigated by parents before they let their younger children attend. The PG rating indicates, in the view of the Rating Board, that parents may consider some material unsuitable for their children, and parents should make that decision.

The more mature themes in some PG-rated motion pictures may call for parental guidance. There may be some profanity and some depictions of violence or brief nudity. But these elements are not deemed so intense as to require that parents be strongly cautioned beyond the suggestion of parental guidance. There is no drug use content in a PG-rated motion picture."

http://universitytoolkit.org/FlmRat_Ratings.asp

According to TV Parental guidelines:

"This program contains material that parents may find unsuitable for younger children. Many parents may want to watch it with their younger children. The theme itself may call for parental guidance and/or the program may contain one or more of the following: some suggestive dialogue (D), infrequent coarse language (L), some sexual situations (S), or moderate violence (V)."

http://www.tvguidelines.org/ratings.htm

By either of these, I don't think the blood shown would qualify for the net higher rating which is:

"A PG-13 rating is a sterner warning by the Rating Board to parents to determine whether their children under age 13 should view the motion picture, as some material might not be suited for them. A PG-13 motion picture may go beyond the PG rating in theme, violence, nudity, sensuality, language, adult activities or other elements, but does not reach the restricted R category. The theme of the motion picture by itself will not result in a rating greater than PG-13, although depictions of activities related to a mature theme may result in a restricted rating for the motion picture. Any drug use will initially require at least a PG-13 rating. More than brief nudity will require at least a PG-13 rating, but such nudity in a PG-13 rated motion picture generally will not be sexually oriented. There may be depictions of violence in a PG-13 movie, but generally not both realistic and extreme or persistent violence. A motion picture’s single use of one of the harsher sexually-derived words, though only as an expletive, initially requires at least a PG-13 rating. More than one such expletive requires an R rating, as must even one of those words used in a sexual context. The Rating Board nevertheless may rate such a motion picture PG-13 if, based on a special vote by a two-thirds majority, the Raters feel that most American parents would believe that a PG-13 rating is appropriate because of the context or manner in which the words are used or because the use of those words in the motion picture is inconspicuous."

http://universitytoolkit.org/FlmRat_Ratings.asp

TV14:
"This program contains some material that many parents would find unsuitable for children under 14 years of age. Parents are strongly urged to exercise greater care in monitoring this program and are cautioned against letting children under the age of 14 watch unattended. This program may contain one or more of the following: intensely suggestive dialogue (D), strong coarse language (L), intense sexual situations (S), or intense violence (V)."

http://www.tvguidelines.org/ratings.htm

O_O

I'll have to save that down somewhere. You know... incase I need a written report on content ratings some time .

Who knew a drawing with a blood so fake it might have been spilled fruit juice could spark such an intense debate.