User:Shabidoo/happymonkeycompetition/2012/TimmyTom

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Happy Monkey Competition 2012

Pee reviews for: TimmyTom

Article: UnBooks:Still beefy: The autobiography of Beefy McManstick

Pee Review from Shabidoo

Creativity: 10/10

The whole article is extra saturated in creativity and I can only give you total full marks for that. Ideas that were particularly out there: "tub of grape jam", "my name isn't important", "she thought I was gas", "died from eating chocolate out of a garbage can", "500 dollar italian leather pants", "chump dog food".

Moments that were a little wah wah wah wahhhhhhh (for me at least): Ironically selling hot dogs (it's a good line, but I don't think it was set up well enough, that it was a kind of line that totally wasn't expected...I'm sure you can find a better place to put it or a better way to lead into it), "raiders of the lost sausage".

Originality: 5/10

As for originality, the creative moments which I mentioned above would constitute super originality as well, especially the idea of being the child of a fat woman and a bull dog. For me, the funniest and best moment of the article (and perhaps the competition) was the characters father dying from eating chocolate from a garbage can. I really suggest that you consider developing that line a little more (and perhaps taking it down a level with the disgusting fat mother).

As for over all originality, when someone has the title "beefy mcmanstick" one is obviously expecting an article about a big cock and the story of it. I'm glad that you alluded to this very little and in fact were careful to not directly mention pornography but insinuate it. At the same time, if you can pull off writing an article in which Beefy McManstick has little to do with a big cock, and someone totally unexpected, your article will get lots of attention and your creativity will bloom into something great. You seem to be really good at writing in a way where the narrative changes quicly, takes unexpected turns, resulting in something unexpected and funny. However, in this article, there are also several moments where it falls flat. Examples: All of the wah wah wahhhh moments I mentioned above, and also most of the third section. While its creative, its not particularly original, as a lot of writers here have written about porn stars. Try coming up with an over all idea if you can, something that the article is heading towards, something alluded to throughout the article and will hit us on the head when it happens, either that or at least having some sense of continuity.

Cleverness: 6/10

Again, as with those great moments I mentinoed in the creativity section, you are one clever guy. I look forward to seeing what you manage to pull off with the rest of the article when you write it, and especially with the images, and how the article finishes. I'm sure it will be awsome.

Content and Images: 5/10

The dialogue is good, full marks for your narrative skill, no images, think "original here", as I say in all the pee reviews, add images that the reader doesn't expect, and add a caption that gives it meaning in the article. Images is a super important park of the article here on uncyclopedia.

Points for whatever reason: 10/10

Ten extra points, as you are a nOOb who obviously worked hard on the article and followed the spirit of the competition, and hoepfuly those 10 points encourage you to write the rest of the article, conceptualise it a little more and polish it up with awsome images and more of those bad dum bum moments.

Final Score: 36/50

Thanks for making me laugh. Come to my talk page if you need me to clarify anything here, have questions, if you didnt get anything I was saying or if you want to goof around and throw dirty jokes at each other. HAPPY MONKEY!!!

Comments:

{{{Comments}}}

Score and Comments from Wilytank[edit]

7/10

Wow, what the hell? Who came up with that title? I'm giving you some handicap credit for having to work with it.


Actually, "what the hell?" was what I was saying to myself as I read the article as well, but it was a chuckling kind of "what the hell?" rather than a skeptical, unimpressed one. Bombastic insanity, like a Mr. Bungle song. Pics are worthless though. --Wilytank can be a pain in the ass. 13:48, February 14, 2012 (UTC)

Score and Comments from PopGoesTheWeasel[edit]

4.5/10

Score and Comments from Mattsnow[edit]

6.5/10

That was a good one :) You're smoking some good stuff! Talk Mattsnow 18:29, February 13, 2012 (UTC)

Score and Comments from Joe9320[edit]

6.7/10

Score and Comments from Chief[edit]

7/10

I have to agree with Wilytank when he says that this topic is definitely one of the harder ones and as such I find myself unable to truly critique the article in of itself. There isn't much you can do with it, though I might have considered juxtaposing the name by making the character highly sophisticated. The route you have chosen works fairly well, although you do suffer from a lack of meaningful images.

Final Score[edit]

67.7/100