Booop, so I just came up with a draft for the review http://pastebin.com/8fQi9iyu
The review is a bit short on substance and long on complaining about the current state of internet culture. I would suggest you try to write with a few ideas in mind:
1) Imagine you're writing to a reader who does not know about or care about Gamergate, Tumblr, etc. How do you explain this comic?
2) Imagine you're writing to a reader who's seeing this review 2 years from now, when all of the surrounding issues you're speaking are old, stale news.
3) Try to give someone a complete enough overview of the comic so they don't have to go read it themselves to figure out what's going on.
So, bit by bit:
BACKGROUND: This section is the only one you've got fully fleshed-out, which makes it seem like this is what you care about more than the comic itself. It might be all right if there were more substance to the review.
DOWNFALL: It's fair to say a comic was never good.
STORY AND PLOT: You're right, what you wrote is a cop-out. I only glanced through about the first 20 pages or so of the comic and I can tell there is a story, there is a plot, there are distinct characters. None of that makes it good, but to brush it off the way you do is not doing your review justice.
ART REVIEW: You're trying to be clever with a put-down rather than convey substance. I see nothing like Picasso or Escher in the art style, so when you use that metaphor it doesn't communicate anything valuable to me. Yes, the art is simplistic, clumsy, and shows no signs of improvement. It certainly gets in the way of understanding the comic. There's plenty you can say about it fairly.
WRITING REVIEW: Again, there is a story in this comic. What you're doing here is grinding your axe against certain people you don't like, not reviewing the comic itself. Here's the thing: any storyteller who puts an agenda first over the story is going to put out crap. It doesn't matter what the agenda is. It doesn't matter whether you're sympathetic with the agenda or not. Give some specific examples of how the author is using characters as cut-outs for their agenda instead of treating them as people. Go a bit deeper.
AUTHOR BIOGRAPHY: If you don't know much about the author, just say you can't find out much. To say the comic is written by a statistic, not a person, actually makes you sound incredibly creepy. It's sociopathic to reduce people to non-human status, you understand. You can be critical without going that far.
Oh, and please don't say "boop" when you deliver something. It comes off as cutesy.
Looking at the reviews written by others would help.
For story and plot, describe enough of a comic's story to give enough of an idea of what it's about, or what sort of plot problems the story has.
For art, I recommend writing things like thick or thin lines, use of color and/or shading, proportions, perspective, backgrounds, animation, etc. Even if the style is like something familiar (Sabrina-Online being like Looney Tunes characters), you need to describe it in reasonable detail.
Also, it is needed to place one picture-any picture-from the actual webcomic. If feasible, try to place a whole strip or page from it.