Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Giant, fanged hams

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search


edit Giant, fanged hams

This is definitely an Uncyclopedia article and I am definitely not attempting to misuse pee review for my own nefarious ends. But seriously, is it funny? 1234 ~ 16px-Pointy 18:53, 13 February 2011

I am on this like white on rice on a paper plate in a snowstorm. --John Lydon 12:47, March 1, 2011 (UTC)

Humour: 5 If I had to sum this article up in one sentence, it would be this; a very well executed and thought out plan, based on a poor concept. In most cases, there are several areas to point at to explain why an article is not as humorous as it could be. I find this article to be a little unique in the fact that I actually think it's probably about as humorous as it can get. Unfortunately, the concept just doesn't have a lot of potential.

The story is actually written very well; especially the way you use short, panicked sentences to convey the terror and desperation of the group. There's a great build up throughout the story, aided by the constantly declining survival probability (very nice touch), then we find out what they are afraid of...... feral meats.

The point of it all is that this story is a lot of build up for very little pay off. Come to think of it, I don't recall another attempt at a joke being made through the rest of the article. I would suggest trying to find some ways to mix in some more subtle humor throughout, but then again that may break the feel of this story. As I said earlier, this may be about as funny as this topic can get.

Concept: 4 From what I’ve learned about you Lyrithya, you tend to shoot pretty straight with people. So, I won’t try to fancy anything up here and I’ll just say it. The concept for this article is pretty weak. Again, I think it is extremely well written, and does a great job building up to a crescendo. Unfortunately, there just isn’t a pay off at the end. After thinking about it for some time, (hence the untimely review), I may have figured out a way to improve the humor and overall value of this article without changing that great build up. What if you were to go into a little more detail about the testing they did on the meats? You already dance around this idea in the section titled “They got out” but I think this may be a good spot to expand some more. Maybe some bumbling janitor lackey guy got really hungry and wanted to make a sandwich with the meat and that’s how they got out. Or maybe some anti- meat experimenting group (think PETA, only with meats) broke into the lab and set them free. I think that may be a good way to inject some more humor and improve that payoff I keep yakking about.
Prose and formatting: 9 The prose here is excellent from what I can tell. I thought the way you went about telling the story was excellent. You did a fantastic job of building suspense and conveying that feeling of desperation. Well done here madam.
Images: 7 The images look like a 12 year old was bored and decided to tinker on MS Paint. I love it. It fits really well with the plot line of a few survivors trying to record their last moments on Earth. Unless they were trapped with Rembrandt, this would be the type of sketches I would expect to see in that scenario. As much as I like them, I scored you the way I did because I’ve seen what you can do with images. I would have liked to have seen at least one Polaroid style photo of a feral meat. Maybe something out of focus, like someone snapped it from hiding or just before being attacked. I realize that’s a pretty tall order to fill, but I also know that you are one of the best choppers on the site. That’s your cross to bear I guess.
Miscellaneous: 6.3 Averaged Score
Final Score: 31.3 Again, I think you might have done all you can do with this topic and you did it well. Unfortunately, the topic just isn’t that solid. I did throw a few suggestions out that may help, but that's your call.
Reviewer: --John Lydon 13:24, March 2, 2011 (UTC)
Personal tools