"Rigor Mortis: A Deadly Sweet Romance".

By: Tatapajama.

Reviewer: St-renaissance.

1-Title: the title is definitely interesting and original; I don't think I've ever seen a title similar to it on this platform. It bespeaks of a light-hearted drama, and perhaps comedy. I see you've included a sub-title I'm not sure if it entails of any meaning regarding to the plot, but it's definitely eye-catching.

Rating: [9/10].

2-Description/Foreword: The description is sufficient in substance and conventional in form and length, it provides a general outlook of the plot alongside a brief narration of the main characters. The poster is absolutely gorgeous and it fits the overall animated and comical ambience of this story, the layout is neat and organised. I don't recommend changing a thing!

Rating: [10/10].

3-Plot: So, you've chosen the third-person narrative style to narrate your story which is usually recommended in lighthearted dramas. I'll just get right into it, if you don't mind. Since you've chosen the third-person narration, you must analyse how that'll affect the characters in regard to psychological, emotional and physical construction. For example, in first-person narrative, the main character's thoughts and emotions are all vital to the plot, while their physical description isn't too important because it would be illogical for a character to stand still and begin to narrate their own physical appearance because it'll feed into the mistake of mixing your own voice as an author with the character's which hurts the character's durability and validity.

This is a similar issue here with the third-person narrative in your story; you, as an author, have made your narrative voice so pronounced to the point where it becomes evident that it's YOU, the author, who's narrating the story instead of a nameless, neutral narrative voice. Does that make sense? For example, when you wrote "He's like the epitome of Michelangelo's David." Complimentary phrases such as this are considered as flaws in literature because you must differentiate between a narrator and an author. You cannot fuse your own personal opinion of this character's physical appearance with the narrative voice, and you cannot impress your opinion upon the readers; if he looks like Michelangelo's David then describe it in a sensible way without resorting to a biased description. However, you can use other characters' narratives to describe the designated character.

Right, what's the point of the ual innuendos as early as the first chapter? You've already introduced both characters but you haven't bothered with a proper build-up of the evolving relationship between them. The unnecessary description of senseless ual behaviour among the two characters is motiveless and slightly childish; as in the story is clearly being endorsed by a 'shipper' to other shippers exclusively and that'll disintegrate the general value of your work.

I have several questions regarding the underlying idea of this Zombie rhetoric: Why are they considered so separate from humans? Weren't they once humans as well? Why do they need to socialise among humans if they've comfortably established their own community? Why are they obligated to attend school if they're dead? These questions cannot go unanswered, I understand that this story is heavily fictional but every literary work must have an economy of jurisdiction and rules, otherwise, it's Surrealist and you should be following the fundamental pillars of that genre.

You use of diction is very good, it serves all necessary purposes of meaning, however, let's break it down one element at a time. The speech correc