02:07, March 27, 2012 (UTC) I recently watched "The Hunger Games", so I'm reviewing it. And may this Peereview be ever in your favor! (expect this to last the entire book trilogy) 12:43, April 7, 2012 (UTC) Checked. So you're a veteran writer, eh? 13:04, April 7, 2012 (UTC) And important points highlighted in bold. 13:22, April 7, 2012 (UTC)
| Attributes | Values |
|---|
| rdfs:label
| - Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/User:Maniac1075/The Hunger Games
|
| rdfs:comment
| - 02:07, March 27, 2012 (UTC) I recently watched "The Hunger Games", so I'm reviewing it. And may this Peereview be ever in your favor! (expect this to last the entire book trilogy) 12:43, April 7, 2012 (UTC) Checked. So you're a veteran writer, eh? 13:04, April 7, 2012 (UTC) And important points highlighted in bold. 13:22, April 7, 2012 (UTC)
|
| dcterms:subject
| |
| Mcomment
| - Score average used because I think I need to do something to myself.
|
| Pcomment
| - Formatting is excellent. I had not seen any single flaw in your formatting- especially the Wiki formatting. The prose? I say that you made sense of it. But I picked some bad prose in your writing, like this one here: "This causes a large riot in the all blacks community of district 9, where they are pissed off that both their niggers where killed, and the white bitch with no booty won it with her partner who they beleive is a future prospect to be a regular visitor to Vegemite valley." Now come on, there is a capital in "District", and you have jammed a lot of swearing and racist words. And also this: "Just focus on the bow and arrow shooting, fire a shot at the rich peoples dinner, take a bow and say "Thanks for considering me"... it makes no fucking sense, but hey, like we said, the people of the future are fuckwits". Maybe I suggest that you should cut the swearing down unless you make it humorous for the audience. And what you are writing here is more suitable for an UnReviews article.
|
| Icomment
| - The first photo is hilarious. Of course, there is too much Goatse reference again, as I mentioned last time. This third photo has a lovely caption. This caption is what I see as humorous. And I'm sure others may find it funny, including Hunger Games fans. Fourth photo is also funny. Why? Because you just lampshaded the fact that the black kids die first, and this plot device is already old, so the film makers make their black victim die at a younger age nowadays. This final photo, again, has a nice caption. Revealing hypocrisy on humanity is the first sign of humor. The rest of the images, I think, are good, but the captions look dull. Finally, I am proud that you are using images.
|
| Pscore
| |
| Ccomment
| - Develop a dark sense of humour. Make killings funny. Murder is funny. Crime is funny. Jail is funny. Torture is funny. Capital punishment is funny. Find anything humorous in these and I'll give you kudos. Finally, if you had read that book, you know that District 13 Last advice for your concept: it's OK to spoil things.
- I clearly see that you choose to do a movie adaptation of the first book as your premise for humour. You worked on the concept that the guys who made this are obviously greedy for money because of the teens going ape shit over a book that had just been very popular and wanted to make a movie out of it like they did for Harry Potter or Twilight. And you also used the concept about Hunger Games fans, and that concept around the plot itself . What I want to see is that you make more of the last two mentioned concepts and less of the first concept I had just mentioned in this paragraph, because the first concept is bland for anyone's tastes, even yours. There is a variety of concepts, and I liked all three, but you got to pick two of the three concepts, and I recommend the ones I highlighted in bold. That is, the Hunger Games fans and the stupidity of the plot of having kids being killed.
|
| Cscore
| |
| Hcomment
| - Unfortunately, although funny, I had seen too many Uncyclopedian in-jokes, and too many Goatse, pedophile- and sex-related jokes for my liking . The puns obviously need working on for more. For example, instead of Katniss' name as "Cactusshit", isn't it more appropriate to use "Catpiss" or "Katnissan" as a pun? But anyway, you see, my rule for us is this: only five Goatse references per article, no more, no less. Go to this page, and look at these in-jokes. Do people get such jokes? You got to think about these things, because in the past three years of article writing I had put on so many bad jokes- sex-related and Goa Tse related, and this almost made me earn the Useless Gobshite of the Month award , and hence, my articles are removed, huffed to death in hell. The first two subheadings are full of the same things as I mentioned just in this comment. The last two subheadings before the See Also subheading is listcruft and sadly, almost void of humour Though I would list the ones that I found hilarious:
- Also, the Australian humour is a bit too bland for us. Liven up the Aussie humour or remove it.
- *Plot: The first few sentences are hilarious. However, do note that your punchlines are filled with scatological and toilet humour. Unfortunately the subpages became less funny, and I feel dissapointed because I knew that you are a veteran Aussie Uncyclopedian with more experience in making humour than me in five years. I could not say anything else. I'm sorry, I just can't.
|
| Iscore
| |
| Hscore
| |
| Fcomment
| - There is potential for this article. Don't give up your hopes yet, because a heavy rewrite may be a solution, fixing some parts to make the article funnier is the best bet.. I suggest that you re-read HTBFANJS and not touch the Uncyclopedian In-Jokes in any shape or form, because only a few get the jokes. Finally, just remove the overused Goatse jokes. They're not funny anymore. And on my final note, may I recommend that you rehash this article to make it more of an UnReviews article? You would do wonders for this.
|
| dbkwik:uncyclopedi...iPageUsesTemplate
| |
| Signature
| |
| abstract
| - 02:07, March 27, 2012 (UTC) I recently watched "The Hunger Games", so I'm reviewing it. And may this Peereview be ever in your favor! (expect this to last the entire book trilogy) 12:43, April 7, 2012 (UTC) Checked. So you're a veteran writer, eh? 13:04, April 7, 2012 (UTC) And important points highlighted in bold. 13:22, April 7, 2012 (UTC)
|
![[RDF Data]](/fct/images/sw-rdf-blue.png)