Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Pentetrator Perpetrator
From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
First article FTw, how is it? Needs some pics of course, but otherwise it's cool, rite? DropDragon 05:00, January 5, 2011 (UTC)
o___O-- 01:26, 7 January, 2011 (UTC)
|Concept:||4||Well, er... um.
Okay, I'll be blunt - it's not exactly the best first I've ever seen. It concerns a made-up character, a rather wacky one, at that, it starts out as an article but then becomes a story, it is rather perverse and graphic in nature, and a lot of it simply makes no sense. It't... well, crazy.
But in of themselves, none of these are necessarily a problem, mind; even sense isn't mandatory here, though it tends to help. The problem is when you put that all together into the same article - Uncyclopedia is supposedly a parody of Wikipedia, which does none of these things, and the best parodies tend to do one or two overall oddities at a time - say, being completely crazy, but on a major topic, or perhaps on a completely stupid topic but looking like an actual article until it goes completely crazy... which is probably what you'll need to do here. Tone down the ridiculousness of the made-up character, develop the concept, flow and presentation so that it reads better, either sticking more to story form or at least transitioning smoothly, but make it all fit together. Suspend all disbelief. Draw in your reader - then you can get into the craziness and horror and properly mock whatever you're mocking. Because this is definitely mocking something; I'm just not entirely sure what. Folks wouldn't have reacted the way they had if it wasn't, though, I suspect. Something vague and broad, I'm sure. Some grand theme we don't even realise.
But for now it is just crazy. Some see value to it, but most do not - you need to to be clear that there is quality to the piece even if people do not see the humour to it, though increasing the overall presentation should help in that regard as well. I have a penchant for writing crazy articles, myself, so I know they can work, but you have to be careful, exacting; you have to make it good. We see a lot of crazy on VFD as well, after all, though for now this is much too new for that, anyhow. It is simply not done yet.
But say he is an ordinary working bloke over at his mum's for tea. They could be having a conversation, sitting in cozy chairs, good view of the lake, chatting about this and that, and there's a bad guy on the news - 'I hear he rapes the bankers!' etc, in hushed voices... or perhaps he is a student typing up a report; it would read like something for a class, then. Unfinished, unproofed, probably formatted different from the rest of it to differentiate between text and dialogue. It could come back to the text later to explain what happened with the dildo-to-the eye and craziness and the the basement later, repeat some section of the original text that foreshadowed that, maybe? But first his mum calls out that dinner's ready, so he stops, looks up... sees the bad guy... and all hell breaks loose. It just needs to make sense within itself, as much sense as any reality, though what sense to the truly depraved ever make?
Just keep the sense of character and place and why and how they are interracting logical within themselves. Crazy stuff happens, but it tends to happen in certain ways, with patterns and whatnot. If you are at all versed in psychology, use that.
|Humour:||5||It is what it is. Readers will either be amused or not from the concept, I suspect; such articles as this, there really is little more to say about humour. Can add individual funnies, of course, but I wouldn't know what, and they would have to fit. Better to focus on the whole, at least for now.|
|Prose and formatting:||2||This probably the weakest point - You need to make it look good and you need to make it read well, or everything else will go to waste.
Keep your tone consistent to whatever you decide the character is - keep the reactions within reason with that, and only talk about what that would notice, how that would notice it. Kid realising his mother has died will react differently than a grown man, and the dashing about afterwards, the panic, the fear, the hope, the horror will all differ, so keep it in line with who it is.
As it is, it is not so consistent. Yelling, screaming, narrating, who is speaking is not even clear - they should have distinct voices, but you can help differentiate between them with different fonts, colours, styles, etc. And don't throw in random lines that don't fit the parts they are in, even if they seem funny - speakers will have their own ways to get points across. I mean, '(wink wink, nudge nudge, COCK COCK, hey, GTFO my pants)'?
Keep your sections within your sections. They should have something to do with their headers, and they should have a purpose for being there - what does each do for the story? Does it make sense with the previous? Nothing contradicts, does it? And are the headers part of the story, or just headers? If someone was speaking it, would they also speak the headers, and would they flow, or would they skip them? Either or valid, but you need to pick one, and here it seems they are part of it - so make them really flow with it, but meriting the sections they head. Are they really the start of new ideas, or should they just be a part of whatever precedes them?
If you are going to say 'fuck', just say it. No need to censor it; just makes it ugly.
Are the sound effects designated by sounds in parentheses, or descriptors in asterists? I think I prefer the aterisks simply because they get a new line and look slightly better, but on the other hand, there is less feel to them. Just choose one and stick to it, and use the sounds more consistently throughout the piece if you are going to use them at all.
And do at least start a new line between locations, differentiate between them - he can see the front door from the basement? Or did he move to the basement after seeing the guy moving toward the front door? That kind of thing will make a wee bit more sense, probably.
You also may want to hide the table of contents with a __NOTOC__ since it doesn't really seem to do much for it.
|Images:||0||Pictures are, of course a must - in something such as this, however, instead of merely using them to accentuate your article as they would normally, perhaps you might have more luck telling it, especially if the text really is all dialogue. Showing pictures of events could do, istead of the guy saying 'he's moving towards my front door' or 'I am now trying to remove the dildo' or whatnot, just show it, free up the dialogue to say what would actually be said. Get across the story while making it make sense.
You could also - and it might be easier to find images for this - do something more iconic. Use something simple, a motif throughout the thing, repeating but different and with captions that support the story itself. Could, say, use a bunch of different dildos... or you could show stills of the aftermath after each part - a bloody dildo amidst broken glass, the front door hanging ajar, progression into the house, blood on the walls, an image of a dildo amidst vomit, but leave all the action to the text... could give it a rather eeiry feel. Like it's just echoes.
Do something, though, make it tie in, and illustrate the piece. If it does not have the visuals to back it up, the presentation will falter, and presentation is key.
|Final Score:||16||This may seem bad and like a lot to take in, but I wrote it out in the hopes that it might help - you definitely have something here, but you also definitely need to make it clear just what, and what's going on in the article in general. I guess you just need to make it overall stronger and prettier. Hopefully this will help, and know that there are those that see much potential in this - they may be able to help as well. They'll probably be lingering, though I think one was on your talkpage; don't disregard him. Anyhow, good luck. If you have questions, comments, poisoned cookies, or what-have-you, don't hesitate to stop by my talkpage, anyhow.|
|Reviewer:||-- 08:02, 7 January, 2011 (UTC)|