Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Russ Meyer
From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
Hey guys, just wanting some feedback on this article about one of my favourite film directors :)
DisappearingBoy 23:54, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
|A big mug o' reviewin' strength tea? Why, that must mean this article|
is being reviewed by:
UU - natter
(While you're welcome to review it as well, you might like to consider helping someone else instead).
(Also, if the review hasn't been finished within 24 hours of this tag appearing, feel free to remove it or clout UU athwart the ear'ole).
|Humour:||6||I deliberated for a while before settling for this score. There are some good lines, and some funny passages, but overall, it reads too much like a Wikipedia article with the occasional line changed - which the "Film Career" section blatantly is. Your twin problems here are: keeping the Wikipedia section too similar to the source and just changing a few words; and making the rest blatantly fictionalised in a pointless way. I'll expand on those points below, but I'd recommend a change of focus.|
|Concept:||5||We need more good biographical articles here, we don't have enough of them. But your approach here highlights the problems people face - staying too close to Wikipedia, or straying too far from the target in a bid to find something different to be funny about. You mesh both here, and this comes across a bit disjointed as a result, to my mind.|
|Prose and formatting:||9||Yay, a good score! This is well written, no formatting or spelling problems, and a decent layout. Good use of template without going over the top. I like it.|
|Images:||5||Two of them, one of which is relevant. The one of Meyer is fine, relevant, and amusingly captioned. The other one, while relevant to the text as you wrote it, is over-used on this site as it is, and I'm dubious about the value of the "Buddy Christ" character in the article anyway, so I think this should go. You do need pics though, an article of this length could do with about 3 decent ones. There's plenty of scope from his titles alone, so why not have fun? He's accused of using women with beach ball-sized breasts, so why not go one step further and have one of a woman with beach ball breasts? Someone on UN:PIC may be able to help with that.|
|Miscellaneous:||6.3||Averaged. It's what Russ would have wanted.|
|Final Score:||31.3||A bit of a mix of an article. There's definite potential here, and some of the lines you've added to the Film Career section suggest you have the ideas and the skill to make it work, but I'd say you have to make this more consistent and work with the abundant potential already suggested by the man and his career.|
|Reviewer:||--SirU.U.Esq. VFH | GUN | Natter | Uh oh | Pee 10:31, Feb 27|
OK, so I need to justify my comments with some suggestions. I'll start by saying that this is not a bad start - I treat 5 as an average score, so I'm putting this above average. In other words, I think you've made a promising start, but really need to work on this to get it where it should be. If you present a section that's essentially the truth with minor manipulations such as the Film Career section, then to put it next to a blatant piece of fiction such as the hot dog vendor bit with its various inventions doesn't fit so well. Instead, you could focus on the man, and something Wikipedia doesn't cover - where could his giant breast and dominant female obsession have come from? I'm sure there's potential for a comedic exploration of this, and the bonus is it stays true to the character of the man while allowing you license to be inventive! Instead of inventing things that don't really add to the character or tell us anything about the man, save the invention for exaggerating what we do know about him.
Then, you apply what you've set up to the stuff you do know. So yes, his war photography was good. But perhaps it regularly had to be censored due to his uncanny knack of getting a topless female in shot somehow? That kind of thing, anyway.
Essentially, total fictionalisation of a character should be saved for individuals with no other potential. When you have someone such as Meyer, who by his very nature offers many possibilities, use those instead, and just ramp them up for comedic effect. Or, conversely, play against them totally - that's always a possibility!
Also bear in mind: he's been held up as an inadvertent feminist filmmaker. While including women with massive tits in his movies. There should be plenty of scope to have fun there.
Have a look at Buster Keaton - a rare example of a biographical article that made feature. I'm not suggesting you take ideas from it, but note that it bases itself on the life of the man, and uses that as the source for the humour, and at the same time, exaggerates the more interesting areas for comic effect. While it does add fictional elements, they're more aligned to the overall story, and a little less random.
I hope this helps, and gives you ideas for working more on the article. I would encourage you to do so, because you have promise, and this subject lends itself well to parody. But remember, this is only my opinion, others are available if you disagree. And good luck! --SirU.U.Esq. VFH | GUN | Natter | Uh oh | Pee 11:43, Feb 27