Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Reel Big Fish
From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
|Humour:||4.5||Hmm. Well, I think you have an interesting idea somewhere in there, but right now, you sort of flip flop in various directions, making your article look, more or less, like a trainwreck. In the first section, you write in 2nd person. For the rest of the article, you alternate between narrators. An article needs a consistent tone throughout, so i'd recommend either permanetely changing the dialogue from an old man or a fanboy. But don't try to mash them both together- it just makes your article look like a mess. Also, not everyone has heard of Reel Big Fish, which i'll get into in the below section.|
|Concept:||5||I actually had to look up this band before I read the article, so i'd get a general idea of where you were going. Writing a band article is always very difficult, because it's hard not to assume everyone knows who you're talking about- for example, if I wrote an article about Glenn Miller (my favorite band leader-yes, i'm a 40s music guy), unless I had exceptional skill, nobody would get it. The trick with Band articles is for it to be entertaining and educational at the same time- so people who have already heard of the band can laugh right away, and people who have never heard of it can educate themselves on the band so they get the punchline. I would recommend eliminating the backround character, and focusing on the old man- as he rambles, he talks about their band, it's style, and it's current activity.|
|Prose and formatting:||4||This one comes off as a rambler. A general rule for interacting dialogue is that you space your conversations. For example:
How it is: “Naow, after therr secon’ thin’ they did a lotta songs ‘bout beer and drinkin’ themselves to pieces.” ‘I can’t believe he’s still talking. I mean I’m a good fifty feet in the opposite direction...
How it should be:
Old Man:“Naow, after therr secon’ thin’ they did a lotta songs ‘bout beer and drinkin’ themselves to pieces.”
<insert name here>: ‘I can’t believe he’s still talking. I mean I’m a good fifty feet in the opposite direction...
Once you fix up the formatting on your dialogue, your article will look much more presentable, and will encourage readers to finish the article. The way you have it now, it takes to much effort to read.
|Images:||7||One of the stronger points of the article, as while they do not have any laugh out loud moments in their own right, they aren't really random, and tie into the subject matter well. My only problem is with the last 2: having two images in such close proximity to one another is a bit redundant. You should probably get rid of one, as they're pretty much duplicates caption-wise.|
|Miscellaneous:||4.5||My overall grade of the article.|
|Final Score:||25||You've got too many execution styles mixed up into one another, which makes your article, on a whole, not very funny. Like I said before, however, there are several things you can do to improve it. First, pick one style, and stick with it. My recommendation is to present this in a style of an old man rambling about the band, while he rattles off facts that will inform people who are clueless about the band. Second, if you decide not to go with that idea and want to keep a 2 person dialogue, space out your interactions, like I lectured in the P&F section.
Bottom Line: Too many styles at once make it look like a mess. Pick a style, stick with it, and make it so anyone can understand it. Good luck! =)
|Reviewer:||Saberwolf116 02:18, 16 May 2009 (UTC)|