Uncyclopedia:VFH/Waltz with Bashir

Article: Waltz with Bashir	Score: 4 Animated Israelis
Nominated by:	Rabbi Techno kvetch Contribs FOXES 10:46, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
For: 9	Nom and For. OK, so Kakun has a bit of a reputation for being a little odd at times, but every now and then he produces something that reveals his secret greatness. This, in my opinion, is a classic example of one of those occasions. Rabbi Techno kvetch Contribs FOXES 10:46, 29 April 2009 (UTC) I like it! —Sir Socky (talk) (stalk) GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 10:54, 29 April 2009 (UTC) For. ~ 11:09, 29 April 2009 (UTC) NO U Kakun. -OptyC Sucks! CUN14:29, 29 Apr Fur ~ Kakun · talk 15:06, 29 April 2009 (UTC) For. TKFU U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U UU U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U CK 02:49, 30 April 2009 (UTC) why the f not. I saw dis i roflmaoed intill i killed a kitteh huffr with mai roflness Bbgunbb 18:51, 30 April 2009 (UTC) Kakun is one of the most underrated writers on the site, and articles such as this, and this and this show what a hidden gem he is. -- Sir Mhaille (talk to me) For. Nice. Sexy Chick Zeitgeist 12:34, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
Against: 5	Eh It was pretty incoherent and unfunny. PS; I have seen the film and there is a connection with the article, but overall the article just has way too much random unfunniness and that is what makes it mediocre. Some of the pictures have no link with anything in the article. The idea is there but the execution is just very lacking. --Sir DJ ~ Irreverent 12:10, 29 April 2009 (UTC) Terrible I can watch Southpark and spew randomness lol --Moneke 14:36, 29 April 2009 (UTC) Against. As I haven't seen the film, I would abstain, but: 1. I generally I like features to have enough about them that they can be enjoyed without having to have such specific knowledge. And 2. I did find it tricky to follow as it seemed kinda random, possibly because of the way it's written - it does make a lot of leaps of logic that don't make sense. I fumbled through trying to follow it and struggling. Maybe the film puts it all in such context that it even eliminates that issue, but I can't see how it would. Plus DJI's comment about the pictures seems valid to me. I'd say it needs work, myself. --UU - natter 15:22, Apr 29 Against. per above and per the abstains. Mnb'z 17:45, 29 April 2009 (UTC) Against. A parody like this has to be of a higher standard of consistent humour to make it work . The writer is therefore all already setting themselves up against the people who make the show in the first place. The better way would be to anticipate a line of humour/joke BEFORE the South Park people get there. However I think in general - writing parodies/humour of another humour show rarely works. --Romartus 12:32, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Comments	First, you need to watch Waltz with Bashir to understand the context. Second, I'll make sure next time I vote against any of your articles to use to word "mediocre", "poor" and "terrible". The against votes could have done without those. ~ 14:50, 29 April 2009 (UTC) abstain i guess. haven't seen waltz with whatever...is this a popular film? also, what is this 'south park'? SirGerrycheeversGunTalk 15:14, 29 April 2009 (UTC) Abstain, I guess. I haven't seen it either, and I don't watch South Park. • • • Necropaxx (T) {~} 15:21, Apr 29 This article is mostly for people who know South Park and its style. Those people know that many South Park episodes require specific knowledge too - this is one of the only ways to spoof the show. About the pictures, 2 of them are from the actual "Waltz with Bashir". ~ Kakun · talk 15:39, 29 April 2009 (UTC)