Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/UnScripts:Trapped at Sea

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

FAQ

edit UnScripts:Trapped at Sea

Ok so I finished this in record time. Is it shit? In depth as you can please! :D    Orian57    Talk   Union pink 11:26 28 June 2009

Humour: 9.5 Your humour is once again spot on, I have been having to work very hard to come up with something to criticise. Ultimately I feel that you do exactly what you set out to do, the jokes are intelligent and the text is engaging. If I had to criticise something.... and I do, I would simply suggest that you make more of Marline's stupidity in the latter part. You are obviously trying to focus on Martin's utter disdain for her, so why not make it more obvious to the reader? While Marline has a penchant for stating the obvious perhaps you could encourage the feeling of disdain a bit more clearly for the reader. I would point to the scene where she is trying to use the phone, it is the shortest of all the scenes and has the most room for further comedy.
Concept: 9 As with the UnBook article that I reviewed, I think your concept is spot on. In flicking through the UnScripts to make sure I could review this article from an informed standpoint, I found myself enjoying the ideas that parody real life films or plays most. Your concept draws on the main criticism that is leveled at films like 'Open Water' that ultimately they are just people floating in the sea for 90 minutes. I think that this style, while slightly unoriginal as there are a lot of parodies out there, is perfectly acceptable when done right. Your exaggerations of the stereotypes in such films are pleasingly written and don't rely on knowledge of the genre to be amusing. Your tone is not inconsistent and your characters develop as much as one would expect. I also like your preamble at the start, in which you really put the script in context and, in a lot of ways, make it more amusing to read.
Prose and formatting: 7 The weakest part of your article unfortunately, and I do feel slightly cheapened for picking on your syntax difficulties and typos to reduce the score. However I can't really overlook it. For someone as talented at writing as you proofreading is a matter of the utmost importance. If you are a bit lazy when it comes to proofreading then why not place the proofread template on the page and let one of the red pen waving users over there take a look. If you can up your game after the article is finished then you won't have any difficulties. Your images are appropriately placed and do well to break up the text.
Images: 10 Your image choice, while not varied, feels necessary and really emphasises the supposed disdain that surrounds the film. Your captions are intelligently chosen and the decision to use repetition humour with the sea image was a brilliant compliment to the text. The use of the possible sequel image also does an excellent job and is a joke on it's own and happily doesn't feel like any action is required to explain it.
Miscellaneous: 9.5 My overall grade of the article.
Final Score: 45 Overall your writing is a superlative example of intelligent and engaging comedy. I think no real improvement is required here, as your article is not shit at all. Just sort out your proofreading, unfortunate spelling and grammar errors meant I found myself being more annoyed at them than in any other review because they are a stupid thing to let spoil an otherwise near flawless article. This article is more than deserving of recognition and I hope to see more of your work.
Reviewer: --ChiefjusticeDS 19:06, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Personal tools
projects