Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Hellboy

Main

Current

Reviewed

Archive

Guidelines

FAQ

Committee

RotM

Hellboy

Waylander37 10:13, June 24, 2011 (UTC)

OK then, gimme a day. --EpicAwesomeness (talk) 13:45, June 25, 2011 (UTC)

Humour:	2.5	Well, I won't lie. The humour in this article is weak to say the least. I silently chuckled once or twice but that really was it. Let's go at the whole thing, not just humor, bit by bit: Quote: Well, the quote wasn't bad. It was an interesting start to the article and it made me smile. You can keep it if you want to. Opening: It's one-and-a-half lines long and it's not really funny at all. So first it points out how the franchise has sprawled out into all manner of media. That's a good, potentially funny, idea but you need to rework it so that it stays encyclopedic and doesn't get too casual-conversationish of informal. In the same sentence we have a bit about who Hellboy is, unfortunately he is described as A big red guy named Hellboy who looks like satan. OK, this is supposed to be the quickie description which saves up for the characters bit, but you again need to get encyclopedia-like. A big red guy? How about a large red mutant? Yes he looks like Satan, but you shouldn't announce that in such a crude manner. Try to rework that bit as something more subtle. After that is The stories consist of half baked ideas about monsters and stuff. The first half of that, or more specifically the phrase 'half baked ideas' is good and you can keep that for sure, but it's dogged down by 'about monsters and stuff'. 'Monsters' is OK but 'stuff'? Stuff?! Try and substitute that for, umm, maybe of the 'monsters', or even something like: ...about monsters like (idea) and (idea). I'm not ordering you to do this, and then again you can improve it in some completely different way, bit I'm just making suggestions. Oh yes, The most memorable feature of the franchise is the undead Nazi guy in the first film. Lose that. Or sneak it in somewhere else in a much more subtle manner. And finally, add in more information here. When was the film made? Who was in it? etc/ Characters: The characters bit is about the characters. It can be short or detailed; either way can be fine if done right. It seems that you have taken the short approach. Hellboy's bit is basically one line of glaringly obvious facts (this could be OK if some subtle - I like using that word - self-reference is thrown in) followed by a comparison to Bruce Willis and a final, slightly more encyclopedic bit about him being John Hurt's son. This section needs more John Hurt and less Bruce Willis, ie more encyclopedic facts and less OOC parts. If you really want to leave Bruce Willis in, do something like this: Fans and critics have compared Hellboy to Bruce Willis. Then we have a description of the professor. That whole sentence is lingering on the ugly rape joke in the middle, which is instantly unfunny just because of the fact that it's a glaring rape joke. Throw that out and put in some formal facts, eg about the character's past or the actor that played him. This Abe guy is a fisherman, OK, but then we have another sex joke (...in the hope that one day a woman will ask him to tell her future and he will loose his virginity.). Random sex jokes and rape jokes are mostly stupid and unfunny, or at least treat the line more sensibly. Lose the Nazi guy bit (or make it sensible) and maybe add some other characters in. Film: The first sentence of this, like the Hellboy character bio, is made up of obvious facts. Again, subtle self reference can make it work if you haven't used it previously in the article. Next you have It was directed by Guillemaro Del Toro who later went on to direct Gran's Labyrinth (2006) and The Midget (2012). All articles need one or two serious lines to smooth out the satire, and there is nothing much wrong with this line apart from the fact that it belongs in the opening paragraph. Here you need to put actual info on the film - a plot synopsis, development, reception and possibly divide these under subheadings if they look right for that. Other movies in the franchise: Hmm. Hellboy 2: The big golden guys was about the big red guy and the big blue guy killing a lot of big golden guys and a pointy eared bastard. Del Toro continued the role of director but now he was on steroids and started creating loads of monsters. The film is much less dark than the first film and is not as good because John Hurt is dead (Spoiler alert) and the cool Nazi guy is not in it. What kind of fucking arsehole would not put a nazi in a film?! The Nazi bit really isn't funny anymore. This still isn't encyclopedic and because of that, it's more pathetic-ish than funny. Subtlety is the key to pulling off stuff like but now he was on steroids, so cover that up a bit. And the thing is that this seems very unprofessional, especially for Uncyclopedia. It's one of those things where you need to look at articles that pull off the film thing well (The Last Man on Earth is a good example) and try to learn from them. Other media: This section has three lines, one about the Hellboy comic and how no one even reads comics, one is about action figures and how kids don't play with the stuff they buy, and the third line is about an animated series but then "MR Nazi" comes in. At this stage, you might want to actually check out Wikipedia's film artcles. See how they do it and try to incorporate that into your article.
Concept:	6	Ehh, the whole film thing has been done many times but if done well it can become a feature. This doesn't really echo those articles, it's just kind of a shell of them. However this is the concept and I will now move on.
Prose and formatting:	3.1	Prose? Prose is the voice of the article, the writing style. For these articles, encyclopedic style is usually reccomended, however this is more of a drunk, informal, type-it-up-in-five-minutes, opinion based artcle which makes glaring and unsuccessful attempts at humour. The formatting also needs improvement. Out of your nineteen links here, six of them are red, one because you misspelled Guillermo del Toro. This whole thing looks very short. I also found one or two spelling errors.
Images:	4.5	The first image is of one of the Hellboy 2 characters with Spock pasted over his head. Whilst I applaud your idea, I boo the fact that it is really just an image of Spock pasted over his head. Try removing the background, or go to the image request and ask for it. The other image is of that Karl guy. Whilst the image itself is OK, the caption and why it is used are not. Try to but something sensible but funny in the caption, It just might make the image welcome.
Miscellaneous:	4	Averaged your other scores. Sorry I couldn't do a better review.
Final Score:	20.1	Being brutally honest, this article needs work, but it has a few good ideas in it. Don't be afraid to look around and see how others do it, but don't steal, and remember, always follow your dreams! OK, screw that last bit. I looked at your other articles, they're much better than this one. Try to channel that skill into here and you'll have an adequete article. Oh, and don't forget, subtlety!
Reviewer:	EpicAwesomeness (talk) 07:55, June 26, 2011 (UTC)