2nd review request actually, as per User:Siddhartha-Wolf's review's conclusion:
| “
|
I would strongly suggest sending this to someone who is generally more experienced with reviews and more knowledgable of Star Wars than myself, before considering it being VFHed.
|
”
|
So, here it is, for a second review.
Sir MacMania GUN— [19:39 8 August 2009] 19:39, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
- OK, I have to work tomorrow, but I will try and do your review after. So expect this one back from me within my usual 24 hour time limit. Hope this is OK. --ChiefjusticeDS 20:00, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
- But of course it is. Thank you. (note to self: sign with just three tildes) Sir MacMania GUN— [20:08 8 August 2009]
- And no, I would never, ever kill you for reviewing too much. Sir MacMania GUN—[21:28 8 Aug 2009]
| Humour:
|
9
|
I'd say Sid was spot on with the humour for this one. You do an excellent job of making the story amusing and fast paced. The references to the actual film are very good, and one of my recommendation would be to use a couple more of the famous lines from the first film. Accessibility is much less of a problem with a Star Wars article because the concept is so well recognised so you should be less afraid of putting in dialogue that from the film, however when/if you do this you should remain aware that some people still may not find this amusing and should ensure these quotes are not huge jokes. You should also make sure that when you introduce the time travelling plot device that you don't lose credit. While it invokes a very amusing joke (the destruction of tatooine) it gets ever so slightly incoherent and the time travel joke can be completely lost beneath the dialogue. Try to figure out a way to make this easier to follow and thus allow readers to get the most out of your jokes. I am nit-picking here, your humour is intelligent and I smiled my way through most of the article. You satirise the original work superbly and the parody of the Star Trek film is less obvious but still apparent.
|
| Concept:
|
9
|
Again, you do very well and I notice you have acted on some of Sid's advice. Your tone is excellent throughout and I really like your argument for it's use. If you are plugging the idea that the film was a failure with a very high budget then you should try to reinforce it as much as possible. Visit Orian's UnScript and have a look at what he has done with the reviewer voices, notice how humour comes from the quotes and then from their being recognised in the writing. This could improve your article even more. I also like the idea of having a go at George Lucas and his reasons for wanting the remake, you could consider making a bit more of this too.
|
| Prose and formatting:
|
9
|
Impressive as always. Your spelling and grammar are excellent and although I strove to find an error all I got was an ambiguity and a minor tense confusion, neither of which effects the viewing quality in the slightest. The mark is lost for some slightly untidy formatting, while you pick up on Sid's recommendation for more images you let yourself down by letting them cluster together. This is a pretty long article and you should be able to fit all the pictures in without any fear of them getting in each other's way. Other than that excellent.
|
| Images:
|
8
|
Your images are fine, and amusing for the most part. A couple of them could use some attention though. The image of the Death Star and of R2D2 are the most obvious. The image of R2 was too dark to see without leaning into the screen and a brighter image would be better. The Death Star image, while the joke with it and the black hole image is good, you may wish to reconsider the caption, a well chosen quote from the film could work wonders here.
|
| Miscellaneous:
|
9
|
My overall grade of the article.
|
| Final Score:
|
44
|
Definite VFH material here, your writing is intelligent and most importantly, amusing. All that I have recommended you fix are cosmetic problems and nothing far reaching. Sid's review was excellent and as a major fan of the series I can tell you in no uncertain terms the parody is excellent. Basically, make any changes you see as being necessary and then carefully read your article over one last time for any errors or bits you aren't sure about. Good luck and very well done.
|
| Reviewer:
|
--ChiefjusticeDS 21:41, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
|
Sir MacMania GUN— [19:39 8 August 2009] 19:39, 8 August 2009 (UTC)