Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Battleship Potemkin

Main

Current

Reviewed

Archive

Guidelines

FAQ

Committee

RotM

Battleship Potemkin

• It's very much a high brow experiment; I think it works as a funny article for all though. I'm looking for any serious weak point or any niggly issuies that I can iron out before i fianlly decalre it finished, thanks for your time:-)--Sycamore (Talk) 12:12, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Humour:	7.6	I'd definitley call this a worthwhile read if you're looking for Battleship Potemkin-related humour...or even commie-related humour. It's not hilarous exactly, but it's a good send-up of the film and its themes. It does feel a little short at the end (see the next section for suggestions on how to lengthen it), but the humour sticks to the theme well. As you said, it's very high-brow humour, which is all the better, and it also maintains that tone well, but always remember that too much high-brow humour in one place without breaks can lose its edge even to the intelligent. Still, I probably don't need to tell you that, and ultimatley this is an article of nicely intelligent humour, that could be made just that much better with some lengthening. Good stuff.
Concept:	7.8	A great, solid concept-Battleship Potemkin was a great film, but more importantly, it has some real humourous potential, what with the 'class' theme and all. And I think that, for the greater part, you took good advantage of that potential-although, now that I think about it, you could have said a bit more about that famous sequence on the steps. Massacre can be very funny when it's done right. Perhaps you could have said a bit more about the whole 'worms in the meat' thing, as well...it's one of the key events in the film, after all. Still, what you have done has taken a good and intelligent advantage of the film's themes...great effort.
Prose and formatting:	8	For the greater part, a good and proper-sounding prose that's a little bit ruined by one or two careless mistakes-for instance, in the 'Ship' section, you've ended with "ended on the positive none"-I'm guessing that was meant to be note. And in the introductory paragraph, there's asentence that ends "and though the Potemkin Revolution failed despite its apparent success."-period. That's a fragment. Those little things are a pity, since they’re the sort of thing people tend to notice. Them aside, though, the casual tone of the prose is otherwise very fitting to the article, with no complaints regarding the format.
Images:	7.1	Some very good work with the images; did you do those edits yourself? They're very convincing. Really help keep up the theme of the article. Still, I think using the same one twice in a different way does come across as a bit of a shortcut. There are plenty of other related images I'm sure you could've done some great stuff with...like that famous shot from the film of the screaming nanny with the busted eye. Now that one has the potential to produce some great laughs!
Miscellaneous:	7.6	Averaged, as you might have guessed (although you could perhaps have thrown one or two more quotes in, just to give it an edge. Politics is something that involves quotes.)
Final Score:	38.1	I'll readily admit I'm still a bit of a noob at the reviewing business, but I do my best, and I really hope this helps. It's a worthy and intelligent effort, and I must say that it's impressive how most of your articles tackle the more complex subjects. Good night and good luck, keep it up!
Reviewer:	BlueYonder 15:25, 29 April 2008 (UTC)