Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/User:Guildensternenstein/Behind the Music

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

< Uncyclopedia:Pee Review
Revision as of 08:15, April 27, 2011 by Fnoodle (talk | contribs)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

FAQ

edit User:Guildensternenstein/Behind the Music

I wanted to have this finished by the time Conservation Week rolled around, but I got a little sidetracked. Experienced reviewer, please. —Unführer Guildy Ritter von Guildensternenstein 22:34, July 8, 2010 (UTC)

Taking it. Will finish up in a bit. MacManiasig.png MacManiasig-cheerios.png MacManiasig-holmes.png MacManiasig-starwars.png MacManiasig-firefly.png MacManiasig-pixar.png MacManiasig-oregon.png MacManiasig-lesmiz.png MacManiasig-doctor.png 16px-HalLogo.png Portal16px.png UncycLensFlare16px.pngDalek16px.png 16px-ChekhovSig.png16px-JapanSig.png Sir MacMania GUN[23:35 18 Jul 2010]
Humour: 8.4 Heh heh, I remember "Behind the Laughter". That was fun if not pretty funny.

Actually, that's the only reason I know about this show, and I'm not the most experienced reviewer, but seeing how it's been over a week since you requested this, I will give this a try. Bear with me here: I took notes while I was reading.

OK, the Intro is spot on for any generic E!/MTV/whatever cable you have over there (er) show. You also show a consequence of the show having a show about itself (Forbes going hey! earned an audible chuckle over here). I honestly don't know if the opening titles sequence (that is, the one you cue in [cue opening sequence] is describable in a satirical manner, and whether or not it's enough of a missed opportunity for you to revisit it. You decide on that.

Genesis: Why did I think you were going to go into the band Genesis? No, it's fine, keep the section title. Funny though.

And crazy, delightful self-indulgence strikes again in the form of Forbes. Loving that. The VH1 execs provide the satirical voice, so you don't stray out of that mockumentary treatment. Very nice.

Climb to the Top: I have to say, I am loving the attention to detail here. The sentence structures, the commercial breaks, the censorship. It's actually kind of breathtaking. I did see one point where OLD WASHED-UP MUSICIAN is not censored, but I don't know if that was intentional. Also, I was expecting an "I Love the Noughties" commercial break for the fourth one, so the "I Love Toys" bit cracked me up quite a bit. All very good.

Heh, silly narcissistic KISS. Again, I personally have no qualms with the content here. Enlightening and funny.

The High Life: Hurrah, Simpsons! And the cues, oh, the cues! These cues alone are carrying the article quite a bit.

Harsh Reality Catches up: specifically, the harsh reality of not having watched VH1 or MTV growing up. I have no idea what Pop-Up Video was all about; I only know it was spunky and had 30-minute episodes, and that's because of your article. I don't know if the sexual assault charges are some sort of analogy or meant to be purely absurd (money's on the latter). By all means, though, keep it.

OK, I just read the Wikipedia article on it, and I get the impression that this is just the token feud opponent for BtM. Every good Behind the Music episode has a feud, I guess? Still, this section as a whole was funny enough to elicit some wry face-twisting. Also, drug addiction and cancellation bit was poignant yet hilarious. And that line with just the cue [starts sobbing] ... what can I say? Your cues are very well-timed for satirical effect.

RnR Bottom: You know what? I can imagine the narrator of a show like this doing exactly what you've described. I chuckled. It's as if some of the folks from MST3K, after the show was cancelled, decided to create their own audio studio and sell their riffs on the Internet and call the company Riff ... trax ... oh.

Again, funny 'cos it could very well have been true. Can't imagine anything else Ozzy could say.

Triumphant Comeback: Well that was abrupt. But you can't do anything about it, at least if I were you. Can't think of anything. I guess that's because this article can't be too long. And you've got the uplifting cliché ending spot on, I'd say.

Overall: excellent for the most part, didn't see any part that was that bogus.

Concept: 8.6 What can I say? This is a satirical imitation of a programme that was just waiting to be satirised like this. Excellent concept, and your execution was obviously up to it. The opening and closing, the musical cues, the sobbing, the old washed-up musicians, the sobbing, the affairs, the lawsuits, the feuds, the commercial breaks, and even a bit of fun with how the episode is about the programme itself.
Prose and formatting: 9.42477796 Impeccable. The dialogue perfectly imitates the programme, the cues perfectly imitate the programme, the formatting ... well, it's an article, so it can't imitate how a TV programme is formatted. Nonetheless, top-notch as usual. Your use of dialect (fancy word to describe what you've done with the seemingly Cockney washed-up musician) is nice to see as well. Again, I do bring that uncensored swear word to your attention just in case it was unintentional. Harsh Reality Catches Up, second-to-last bit of dialogue. Also, categories! Although I assume you wanted to do that after moving it to mainspace anyway.
Images: 7.55500002 Well, obviously these had to be screen captures from VH1. It wouldn't be right otherwise, and the image choices serve their purpose quite well. I've already said how great that commercial break series was. The few qualms I have:
  1. Title card has no caption. Personally I think adding one would distract from the intro, so maybe you want to remove the "thumb" bit from the image coding to just remove the outline. Your call.
  2. Pants addiction? Er, wha—?
  3. The closing sequence doesn't have its own image. I see this as a missed opportunity, but maybe you just couldn't find a fitting image. Again, your call.
Miscellaneous: 8.02022202 That was a fun, funny article, taking a solid concept, executing it to cherubic oblivion with your impeccable method of satiric imitation. It's like reading that Sergio Leone article or that Quentin Tarantino article, which share a lot of these qualities in your writing. I forget who wrote those two, but you two should definitely collaborate sometime. No, really.
Final Score: 42 Very enjoyable read as I've come to expect from you. Maybe it's bias, maybe it's really a good, feature-worthy article. I side towards the latter.
Reviewer: MacManiasig.png MacManiasig-cheerios.png MacManiasig-holmes.png MacManiasig-starwars.png MacManiasig-firefly.png MacManiasig-pixar.png MacManiasig-oregon.png MacManiasig-lesmiz.png MacManiasig-doctor.png 16px-HalLogo.png Portal16px.png UncycLensFlare16px.pngDalek16px.png 16px-ChekhovSig.png16px-JapanSig.png Sir MacMania GUN[00:09 19 Jul 2010]
Personal tools
projects