Advance Review: ‘Is Ted OK?’ #2 Has Multiple Possible Answers

by Benjamin Hall

Summary

When one person questions another on whether they are ok one can get a lot of responses. Case in point, Sarah asking Ted this question is not generating reassuring answers. Yet, could he be right about their employers being part of a conspiracy? Also what is going on with the reporter’s interview with the owner of the company?

Overall

9.9/10

Writer, artist, and letterer Dave Chisholm creates a second issue in this series that is nearly as strong as the first. However, the question of whether the titular character is “OK” remains multiple choice because “OK” can mean many things. Additionally, the events of this issue raise other questions — such as “Is Ted right?” Luckily, Chisholm is providing some answers to the secondary queries while slowly answering the primary ones. It’s doing a great job keeping the suspense going while not making the series feel like it will fail at the end. There is also still a lot of social commentary in this issue, especially during the scene involving the reporter from the debut installment.

*Is Ted Ok?* #2 (2026) cover art by Dave Chisholm.

The visuals remain astounding in both detail and execution. One can look at the cover or interiors and notice small items that may not immediately capture the eye. For example: the cover (above) displays Ted appearing on Sarah’s glasses as a reflection, but each lens shows a differing amount of him. The line work suggests Chisholm’s patience and confidence when creating the art. As for the colors, Chisholm uses a wide enough range while maintaining a kind of laser focus when it comes to application. Thus, the colors seem to merge with the art in an almost symbiotic fashion. At least, this appears to be the case from this reviewer’s perspective.

There are a lot of good things when it comes to the lettering of this issue. Unfortunately, font size is not one of them. One bit of text is so small that it may as well not be legible. Luckily, it is just a sound a mouth can make and not important dialogue. Therefore if one misses it, or cannot read it, nothing is lost in the reading experience. On the plus side, Chisholm does an excellent job placing the text in a way that displays emphasis and assists with characterization. Lastly, the positioning of the internal monologues occurs in a believable way to how one might have them while conversing.