Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/HowTo:Defeat James Bond
HowTo:Defeat James Bond[edit source]
Certainly needs a better title. May need many other things Sog1970 21:41, June 18, 2010 (UTC)
- I'll get this one. Don't mean to hog all of Sog's articles or anything, but it's the only one I really have anything to say about. --Black Flamingo 12:56, June 19, 2010 (UTC)
| Humour: | 8.5 | Ok Sog, this is a damn fine article, and as such this review isn't going to be particularly in-depth... but I'm sure you're used to that by now. There are a couple of minor problems where the prose gets a bit messy, but apart from that I'm just going to go through a few little things that niggled at me. Because there aren't any major problems at all.
Right, so the humour section is pretty much just going to be a couple of jokes that I don't think work very well (although when I say they don't work, they're still better than 99% of the shit on here, so don't let it upset you). First off, I didn't really get the Vulcan reference in the intro. If there is some kind of popular joke that the Obamas are Vulcans then I've not heard it. And unless this is the case, which I doubt, then the line is just random really. Maybe this would work better if you had Barack compare Michelle to a Vulcan, rather than suggesting she is one literally. For instance, you could say: "she only gets the urge to mate about one every seven years, which makes me wonder if she's actually a Vulcan". Then in the Dungeon section, you say how "relying on henchmen is never too good in the long run." While this isn't necessarily a failed joke or anything, I just thought it might help to go into more detail here. You never actually reveal why it's not good in the long run, and it wasn't obvious to me as a reader (I mean, apart from the general fact that henchmen in Bond films are incompetent, but it felt like you were referencing something more specific here). Is there a joke you're not quite getting at because you're being too subtle? Something about henchmen messing it all up? If not, then maybe there should be. Another line that took my interest was the joke about the lesbians being jealous of the hyenas for having penises. I had to think about this for a while before I knew what to make of it, but I'm not sure I like the implication that all lesbians wish they had penises. While this may not be how you intended it to sound, I recommend you go and have another look at it as it doesn't really work here. Now, I'm not saying "don't make fun of gays ever!" In an article that was purposesfully offensive, a joke like that would be ok. However in this article I feel it would be much better if you reworked the joke so it's obvious that Obama doesn't really understand lesbians, rather than presenting it as a fact that lesbians wish they had penises. Again this isn't a major issue and it wouldn't deter me from voting for the article on VFH. Also, it took me a while to realise that it actually was the lesbians who were jealous, which I think was because I wasn't expecting this. Another joke that stuck out in this way was this one: "we do not assume that they have decided to test the batteries on their latest vibrating jelly toy". Again this is not a bad line by any means (in fact it probably did make me laugh), it just seems a bit odd in here. The whole idea of them being lesbians works because it's a plan to impede James Bond, but then in turn, jokes about lesbians don't sit well with the rest of the article (in my opinion, at least). Surely there is a more relevant way the henchmen could be distracted? Something actually from the Bond movies/books? It was a similar case with the YouTube joke in the Still Later section, which I found a bit cheap and out-of-character. Well, they're the only jokes I had any issues with. The only other thing I can suggest here is that it might be nice to see a couple more of the cliches mocked (not that you don't already do a terrific job of this, I am very impressed with your knowledge of Bond tropes). For instance though, how about a couple of references to how the minions always go down in one hit? Or how they can never shoot straight? Just some ideas, feel free to disregard them. |
| Concept: | 7.5 | Conceptually, this really reminds me of Austin Powers, but you do a great job of making all the jokes sound fresh (despite the fact that the caption for the first image is pretty much a direct quote). Anything you can come up with to differentiate the two further might help, however. I love the irony of this piece. The villain goes on about how he's avoiding all the elaborate pitfalls of his predecessors but by doing this ends up constructing really elaborate pitfalls of his own.
While I also loved the fact that the villain is Obama, it seems a bit random (until the end, of course, where you make the BP reference - that was classic satire and in my opinion what this site sorely needs). However, throughout the main body of the article, the fact that Obama is a supervillain is barely referred to. I think maybe you need more of an introduction to this near the start. A "yes, it is I! Barack Obama!" moment, if you will. That should sort it out. As for your title - I agree, a new one is needed. I think just plain old Bond Villain would work well, as your article is actually very informative on that subject. |
| Prose and formatting: | 8.5 | Again, very few problems here. You've captured the Bond villain tone wonderfully and your spelling and grammar are near perfect. There are a couple of parts where your prose gets a bit unclear, only a bit mind you, but I will go through these now.
The first sentence I found with this problem was this one: "FBI agents do not wear opaque, full-face masked helmets so beloved of my predecessors in their secret (but easily identifiable on radar) bases on the moon or the ocean floor". Firstly, I think you need a "the" in there, before "opaque". And secondly, you're trying to cram way too much into that sentence, making it hard to read as a result. Perhaps try to get rid of the references to moon bases - you could always move that further up to where you talk about bases in general. It also suffers from too many adjectives. I realise you want to give a very specific impression of what the helmets are like, but there are just too many words in there. Just try to simplify it as much as you can. Another sentence like this appears at the end, where Obama talks about the toxic vats and "going over the top of them". I struggled with this, having to read it several times before I got what you meant. Just make it clear that he means going over a walkway which is above the vats, and how he prefers to just go around. That's about it for prose problems, but there was another bit where you were too vague. You say "you try recruiting blonde lesbians without attracting unwanted attention" - what do you mean by this exactly? I couldn't figure it out. I also noticed some very minor spelling/grammar errors (that I could have easily fixed myself, but oh well):
Again, you formatting is very good, just noticed these little goofs:
|
| Images: | 8 | The image of Jaws would probably make more sense a little higher up in the part where you actually talk about him. Likewise, the one of the button should go down. The latter really threw me until you started talking about self destruct buttons a quite a bit further down the page.
Also, this pic is a bit of a throwaway one, it's not particularly funny or interesting. I'm not necessarily saying delete it, but if you can think of a funnier one, this would be the one to replace. Something a bit more James Bondy would be nice, involving cats or absurd gadgets or something. Anyway, you do an excellent job with all the other pics, so well done. |
| Miscellaneous: | 8 | I gave you an 8 here. I thought an average would lower your score too much. Although I've marked you down in places, the overall excellence of the article makes up for everything I discuss above. |
| Final Score: | 40.5 | Right, hope that's in-depth enough for you sog (and you Chief, when you come to read this). You should have no problem fixing this up, all the suggestions I've made are relatively straightforward. Even as it is, it's good enough for VFH, although I would like to see a couple of edits here and there before I nom it myself, I think. Anyway, good luck, and feel free to message me with all your thanks and applause. (And also if you want me to clarify anything in the review, or look at any edits you make). Over and out. |
| Reviewer: | --Black Flamingo 18:53, June 19, 2010 (UTC) | |