Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/UnScripts:The Socialer Network

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

FAQ

edit UnScripts:The Socialer Network

~~ Sir Ljlego, GUN  [talk] 03:16, May 2, 2011 (UTC)

Since I can't bring myself to vote for this on VFH as it is, I guess I'll just review it. Yeah. That totally makes sense. Expect it done soonish. 1234 ~ 16px-Pointy 22:58, 13 May 2011
Humour: 7 HI LJLEGO! That said, uh... article. Script. Thing. Yes. And I am capable of writing this dealy out, too, really. So anyhowhowhow, most of this is pretty funny. A lot of it could probably be funnier, but hell if I know how, so I'll just stick to the less of it that probably could be funnier that I've more of an idea how... also, I should probably point out at this point that I know nothing about Twitter; everything I say is based on... well, not that. So I'm kind of skimming over the references and parallels, because I don't know what they are.

So the beginning... well, to be honest, the intro means nothing to me, really. Nothing funny, anyhow. A film that had some good minds behind it, not terribly organised, and getting more disorganised into the sequel, but... it's a bunch of names. They don't mean anything. In the end, I'm not even sure whether you're talking about the original or sequel. Make it clearer, at very least, that this is about the latter, when you transition; currently the mention of the sequel seems more like an afterthought than anything else, especially given how much background there is on the first... perhaps more than you really need, considering the fluff of it. An introduction like this doesn't need to be funny, as this isn't, but it should set the scene. Although it could also be funny as well. Like... do some of that stuff you do in the rest of it.

From there, though, the thing gets a lot better; the script itself was what you actually wanted to write, no? Seems to start out a little slow, relatively speaking, and there are other less... ah, defined bits, but there are also definite moments of goodness - things that one is apt to recognise as typical, or silly, or ridiculous... I like these things. The chinese food, the girls, the shift from mixing in unattractive to just having attractive around... that one's apt to get lost pretty easily, though, just a word that changes. Words are small.

But in the first act, look at the difference between scenes one and two. One has good stuff, the density, compared to scene two... three gets less so... it wavers. If you could make it more consistent in its funny, work in more cinematic silliness.... it'd be just lovely.

Also, there are some bits that just... confuse me. Kind of like the intro, you skim over things, and it left me a bit lost, maybe just because I'm not familiar with the actual story (there is an actual story, right?), but maybe also because you seem to skim over things. Also, what's the guy in the suit with the com referring to? Just general paranoia? Why there? What has that got to do with anything? Who is Noah Glass? He certainly can't be important, since you don't even link him to anything. Why does Stone get all upset, exactly? He's not the paranoid guy, he's a... kid. Okay, why did I just have to look up what he was? (Introductions are iffy.) Anyhow... I know folks get that way in reality, for all manner of reasons, but films like to have reasons or people complain of plot holes. So is there a reason? Or could you actually mock it as a plot hole somehow? Or did I just not notice something?

Last scene: How did that get... from that... what... eh? I mean, I could piece most it together by the end, but... it's still so vague and sudden and so little actually there. Maybe more stupid stagey stuff or scene stuffy could balance it out on script, or something?


I like the lackeys.

Concept: 9 It's good. Not entirely sure what it's actually supposed to be, but most all the stuff within the whatever it is is good. You have a thing. Moving on...
Prose and formatting: 4 This would be my main beef with the thing. At least, I'm putting it here: the format - it doesn't make sense in the least. You say this is a treatment, but treatments aren't scripts at all - they're prose, regular written-out prose describing what happens in a film or show or dealybobber or whatever, a way of getting across what happens, communicating the ideas of the things without going into detail of script or specifics of dialogue.

This, however, is clearly a script, but not a script formatted like any one would see, even at the early stages of the thing... but I'm not really one who knows much about these, so I'll just say, see here. Talk to Funnybony or Guildensternenstein, perhaps - they seem to know more about these things, and Funnybony was indeed the one who dug up that gem. They can't be the only ones, though, can they? But yeah.


Unrelatedly, your links are really boring. I expected clever witticisms. I got... one, before giving up on the mouseovers. Which I guess is something, but... come on, man. Why must you leave me hanging like this? Wikipedia links work too, you know. Like the important people whom we should know who they are, in case we don't know who they are, so we can look and see who they are, and subsequently know who they are after all... and make some more jokes, for crying out loud. Pleeease?

Images: 6 Eh, they're okay. Nothing overly special, but illustrate the scenes fairly well. Not sure why the guy in the suit is so big, since he's not that prominent in the script, is he? I'm missing something, ain't I... the title image, though, you might want to look to. Unless you had a specific reason for doing this, well, slapping the text over the entire image is just amateurish, and putting white text on a partially white background is likewise not good. I'm not entirely sure what you're going for here, but... er... I can say more later. Or we can forget about this entirely.
Miscellaneous: 7 The amount of waffles consumed during this review. I guess. Honestly, it was hard to tell. That was a really bad batch.
Final Score: 33 Uh... well, I reviewed it. Obviously. I mean, you totally couldn't have figured that out from the pile of review above. Because that would just be crazy.

But seriously, here you go, man. Terribly sorry it took so long, but that seems to always happen when I try doing reviews, so, er... it's nothing against you, really. But I do hope this helps; a lot of this is why I wasn't inclined to vote for the thing, if that gives you some idea, and maybe it can help in more general sense. And judging by my missing userpage, you know where to find me.

Reviewer: 1234 ~ 16px-Pointy 06:36, 15 May 2011
7
Bloink
Humour
The implementation, how funny the article comes out...
HI LJLEGO! That said, uh... article. Script. Thing. Yes. And I am capable of writing this dealy out, too, really. So anyhowhowhow, most of this is pretty funny. A lot of it could probably be funnier, but hell if I know how, so I'll just stick to the less of it that probably could be funnier that I've more of an idea how... also, I should probably point out at this point that I know nothing about Twitter; everything I say is based on... well, not that. So I'm kind of skimming over the references and parallels, because I don't know what they are.

So the beginning... well, to be honest, the intro means nothing to me, really. Nothing funny, anyhow. A film that had some good minds behind it, not terribly organised, and getting more disorganised into the sequel, but... it's a bunch of names. They don't mean anything. In the end, I'm not even sure whether you're talking about the original or sequel. Make it clearer, at very least, that this is about the latter, when you transition; currently the mention of the sequel seems more like an afterthought than anything else, especially given how much background there is on the first... perhaps more than you really need, considering the fluff of it. An introduction like this doesn't need to be funny, as this isn't, but it should set the scene. Although it could also be funny as well. Like... do some of that stuff you do in the rest of it.

From there, though, the thing gets a lot better; the script itself was what you actually wanted to write, no? Seems to start out a little slow, relatively speaking, and there are other less... ah, defined bits, but there are also definite moments of goodness - things that one is apt to recognise as typical, or silly, or ridiculous... I like these things. The chinese food, the girls, the shift from mixing in unattractive to just having attractive around... that one's apt to get lost pretty easily, though, just a word that changes. Words are small.

But in the first act, look at the difference between scenes one and two. One has good stuff, the density, compared to scene two... three gets less so... it wavers. If you could make it more consistent in its funny, work in more cinematic silliness.... it'd be just lovely.

Also, there are some bits that just... confuse me. Kind of like the intro, you skim over things, and it left me a bit lost, maybe just because I'm not familiar with the actual story (there is an actual story, right?), but maybe also because you seem to skim over things. Also, what's the guy in the suit with the com referring to? Just general paranoia? Why there? What has that got to do with anything? Who is Noah Glass? He certainly can't be important, since you don't even link him to anything. Why does Stone get all upset, exactly? He's not the paranoid guy, he's a... kid. Okay, why did I just have to look up what he was? (Introductions are iffy.) Anyhow... I know folks get that way in reality, for all manner of reasons, but films like to have reasons or people complain of plot holes. So is there a reason? Or could you actually mock it as a plot hole somehow? Or did I just not notice something?

Last scene: How did that get... from that... what... eh? I mean, I could piece most it together by the end, but... it's still so vague and sudden and so little actually there. Maybe more stupid stagey stuff or scene stuffy could balance it out on script, or something?


I like the lackeys.

9
Bloink
Concept
The idea, the angle, the grand funny of the article...
It's good. Not entirely sure what it's actually supposed to be, but most all the stuff within the whatever it is is good. You have a thing. Moving on...
4
Bloink
Prose and formatting
Screw the prose; I wanna complain about the format...
This would be my main beef with the thing. At least, I'm putting it here: the format - it doesn't make sense in the least. You say this is a treatment, but treatments aren't scripts at all - they're prose, regular written-out prose describing what happens in a film or show or dealybobber or whatever, a way of getting across what happens, communicating the ideas of the things without going into detail of script or specifics of dialogue.

This, however, is clearly a script, but not a script formatted like any one would see, even at the early stages of the thing... but I'm not really one who knows much about these, so I'll just say, see here. Talk to Funnybony or Guildensternenstein, perhaps - they seem to know more about these things, and Funnybony was indeed the one who dug up that gem. They can't be the only ones, though, can they? But yeah.


Unrelatedly, your links are really boring. I expected clever witticisms. I got... one, before giving up on the mouseovers. Which I guess is something, but... come on, man. Why must you leave me hanging like this? Wikipedia links work too, you know. Like the important people whom we should know who they are, in case we don't know who they are, so we can look and see who they are, and subsequently know who they are after all... and make some more jokes, for crying out loud. Pleeease?

6
Bloink
Images
The purdies...
Eh, they're okay. Nothing overly special, but illustrate the scenes fairly well. Not sure why the guy in the suit is so big, since he's not that prominent in the script, is he? I'm missing something, ain't I... the title image, though, you might want to look to. Unless you had a specific reason for doing this, well, slapping the text over the entire image is just amateurish, and putting white text on a partially white background is likewise not good. I'm not entirely sure what you're going for here, but... er... I can say more later. Or we can forget about this entirely.
7
Bloink
Miscellaneous
Give me back my damn waffle iron...
The amount of waffles consumed during this review. I guess. Honestly, it was hard to tell. That was a really bad batch.
33
Bloink
Final score
1234 ~ 16px-Pointy 06:36, 15 May 2011
Uh... well, I reviewed it. Obviously. I mean, you totally couldn't have figured that out from the pile of review above. Because that would just be crazy.

But seriously, here you go, man. Terribly sorry it took so long, but that seems to always happen when I try doing reviews, so, er... it's nothing against you, really. But I do hope this helps; a lot of this is why I wasn't inclined to vote for the thing, if that gives you some idea, and maybe it can help in more general sense. And judging by my missing userpage, you know where to find me.

Personal tools
projects