Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Test Match Special
From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
OK, it's been a while, but I actually wrote something. Review, please.
Notes: This is about a very English institution, but I'm not looking for an English reviewer. I'm hoping it won't be completely inaccessible to others, but an idea of how much of the humour remains when you know nothing about the subject is what I'm after here, so a review from an American would probably be ideal. To that end, here is what you may need to know first:
- on TMS, a bunch of old men ramble on for ages, and occasionally mention cricket.
- cricket can be thought of as baseball with fewer bases, longer innings, and the most incomprehensible rules and jargon outside of quantum physics, although I hope you don't really need to know that.
- that's about it.
I'm not too interested in VFH, as I think this will be "too English" for one thing, and for another I just wanted to write something whimsical, in keeping with the spirit of the show, instead of aiming for lollage or what have you.
Maybe it is just becasue the Ashes are going on but I really enjoyed this one. Although I shouldn't give you a review since I know too much about the game to not know anything about it. The only thing worse than sitting through a test match is sitting through five of them in my opinion. --Sequence 01:29, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
- Fortunately, I know just little enough to not know anything about the game. I've read through the article already and thoroughly enjoyed it, so expect a magnificent review tomorrow. (Note: the use of the word "magnificent" is in reference to the superb quality of the review, not necessarily the resulting score.) 01:55, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
|Concept, which must be|
the basis of your article
if I'm using this template:
|8||While the concept isn't particularly original, it's certainly solid. I especially like the comments on how overly British everything is, though there is a possible downside to this which I'll address in the next section.|
|Humor, without a second u,|
because I'm American:
|8||The humor in your article isn't of a kind that I'm particularly used to reviewing. Given the length, it made me laugh too little to merit a high score under normal circumstances. However, rather than alternating between "plot" and punchlines as many other articles do, yours maintains a consistent, jovially absurd tone throughout. This serves to create fewer "HOLY SHIT THAT WAS FUNNY HOW DOES SOMEBODY COMEUPWITHTHATITWASWAYOUTOFLEFTFIELDLOL" moments, but rather keeps the reader amused throughout the article. Given the length of the article, this is both a good and a bad thing.
On the plus side, as previously stated this keeps the reader continually amused while reading. However, it only serves to keep the reader amused. I have to admit that I got very few laughs from this, a fact that, when combined with the length of the article, made it seem like finishing the article would be a rather arduous task from only the halfway point. A possible solution to this without decimating a significant portion of your article would be to vary the tones of the different characters more. As it is, they all seem awfully homogeneous, as if it were the same person that happened to fixate on different topics at different times. Given that this same person is you, it may be rather difficult to "shake up" the tones of each individual speaker, so you might want to consider bringing in some outside help (i.e. a user that can write in a similar style). However, because you don't plan to turn this into a feature, it isn't that big of a problem.
Now, as to what I said in the "Concept" section, the possible downside to the article being overly British is that others that read the article will probably think it's written by an American being critical on the British. I knew the entire time that it was written by you, which made it more amusing to watch you mock your nation's own customs. However, a reader not introduced to the author would probably think that it was written by an American. I'm honestly not sure whether that would make it more or less amusing, because while the jokes would be just as good, coming from an American many would end up being cliché. Really, this is a fairly unavoidable problem, it's just something I think you might want to keep in mind.
|Your spelling and grammar,|
which probably sucks:
|10||I normally don't (never, really) give out 10's in this section, but given the daunting task of both imitating the absurd mannerisms of your characters and maintaining proper grammar throughout, I'd say you deserve it.|
|Images, or lack of:||7||Really, your images could use some work. The ones already present are appropriate and have funny captions, but with the length of your article (I keep bringing this up!) you definitely either need to add more or resize the ones you already have. Images can go a long way to avoiding the "arduous" reading task I mentioned previously, and as it is it seems like they're only there as a formality.|
|Miscellaneous, not averaged,|
despite what some would
have you believe:
|9||Because I like the article, and I still refuse to average.|
|Final Score, totaled, as most|
would have you believe:
|42||I certainly agree with you about this being "too British" to feature. I was able to appreciate the article far more due to your introduction at the top and by knowing who you are, but other readers won't get that. Maybe in another time this could have been featured, but I'm guessing that these new kids running around would end up getting it voted down. At any rate, it's a superb article, and I'm glad to see you writing again. I hope this review helps, because usually I end by wishing the writer luck with VFH, and you're screwing up my groove here.|
|Me:||18:40, 13 August 2009 (UTC)|
Thanks Boomer - very helpful and thorough. I keep forgetting that just because my abnormally large screen resolution makes the images look really good with the text, not everyone will see that. Interesting comment about the whole "American being critical on the British" thing - TMS is something that is too English for most English people, to be honest - the majority find it somewhat old-fashioned, and pretty much a relic. So I thought I was just amplifying that view a little for the ol' comedic effect. Add to that the fact that we Brits are probably the world leaders in self-deprecation (a recent bestseller in this country was called something like "Crap British Towns") and I'm pretty sure in this country it would be read as what it is - an affectionate look at an old-fashioned institution (I love TMS). But your point is valid, and I'll try to find a way to make it more obvious to you foreign chappies! And I'll try to have a little more fun ramping up the different voices as well. Blowers and Tuffers should be fairly easy. Aggers doesn't really have so many mannerisms to ape, which is why I cheated with the silence thing (although they do do that a lot on the show as well - can't talk all the time when commentating on a 5-day-long game, after all!)