Talk:Keanu Reeves
All this "whoa" crap's not funny. I don't know how many times I've sat at a cocktail party and listened to a bad Reeves impression of "Whoa" Reeves. Delorted.
- I agree, you can edit out yourself you know. Quadzilla99 04:46, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
Rewrite[edit]
I'd much like to rewrite this article, because I think it is comprised of nonsensical bullshit. The pictures are good, but I'm not sure whether Reeves as a kiwi is supposed to be a reflection of his acting, or whether the person who wrote this is 8-years old. Either way, I'd like to know whether other people actually find this funny, or whether I just can't appreciate it. --Matfen815 14:31, October 25, 2009 (UTC)
How's that for a motherf****ng rewrite! --Matfen 22:42, November 10, 2009 (UTC)
Pee Review[edit]
Just so I could prove what happens when one person decides to put some effort into an article, rather than 146 different IP addresses adding one line of crap at a time! HaHA! Our lord Reeves is done Justice! --Matfen 20:07, November 11, 2009 (UTC)
| Humour: | 9 | This is a very funny piece, one of the best I've read for a long time. Like I've already said, I couldn't think of much you could do to improve it. The only thing I thought was that it feels a bit too long, and on top of this, the 'matrixism' and 'restraining order' sections are a bit of a chore to read - they didn't really make me laugh anyway. I recommend deleting both of them but obviously I understand if you want to keep them. That really is the only flaw I can find, and it's quite a minor one. |
| Concept: | 10 | Keanu Reeves is a great source for humour and you defintely tap into that. Although a lot of this stuff has been done before, such as the Reevisms and the portrayal of Reeves as an airhead with no acting talent, you execute it brilliantly so that it's as fresh and funny as it can be. Both your encyclopaedic tone and your characterisation of Reeves are completley consistent, I don't really think there's anything to improve. |
| Prose and formatting: | 9 | Again this is pretty much all perfect. There were a few minor grammatical problems but they have now gone so it all seems good. Again, the two sections I mentioned earlier get a bit dull, there aren't really any funny bits in 'Matrixism', and the 'Restraining Order' bit was all based around the kung-fu joke, which I thought was a bit silly (the bad kind of silly) and didn't really work for me. |
| Images: | 9 | Yet again, your images were awesome, the sonic one in particular I really liked. There were only 2 I didn't like - the basketball one and the heavy metal one at the start. They don't detract from the article itself, but nor did they make me laugh. |
| Miscellaneous: | 9.3 | Used an average for misc. The only thing I'd say is, and this might just sound like I'm desperately trying to find faults with your article, I'd get rid of the word 'alleged' from the opening quote. It makes the sentence sound cumbersome, and I think it would be funnier without it. Sounds petty I know, but it's niggling at me like a loose tooth. |
| Final Score: | 46.3 | This was a hard pee for me because the article was just so damn good. You've clearly done your research (or really do have an encyclopaedic knowledge of Keanu), and having the actor himself constantly interrupt is one of the best comic devices I've encountered in my short reviewing career. I'd be happy to nominate it for VFH if you want. Hope my comments have been helpful, get back to me if you want to clarify anything. |
| Reviewer: | Black Flamingo 19:55, November 11, 2009 (UTC) | |
Alternative Pee Review that could potentially make the writer of this article cry[edit]
| Prose | Concept | Humour | Images | Misc | Score |
Reviewer details:[edit]
A little bit about the reviewer before we start.
Well, given that you asked me to do this review for you, that pretty much says that you know who I am. Having said that I'm a relatively new uncyclopedian, having been here about 4 months or so. In that time I have managed to be NOTM, ROTM and WOTM. I was waiting for my nom as UOTM but I'm guessing that due to my habit of not keeping my mouth closed I'm more likely to be nommed for UGOTM.
I also have a couple of features, won something on PLS, and probably won something on CW, and have been given a Doctorate in Atheology for my work on Intelligent Math. And I also like to do a bit of coding, which is why I firstly have to thank you for being the guinea pig for my new PEE review template. For more vanity, click here
Prose and Formatting:[edit]
How good does it look and how well does it read? 6.5
Writing style
Not bad, but could use a little tightening up. It reads at the moment in a little more of a juvenile voice than an encyclopaedic voice. Now the reason behind that, as far as I can see, is that you keep slipping into this in-the-style-of Keanu Reeves (as Ted). Now an article on Keanu written in-the-style-of could work, but that voice would become too annoying in the end. Try and get this in a more encyclopaedic tone as I think that would work better as it then gives more of a contrast between the narrator and the character. (In short, the smarter the article reads the dumber the Keanu quotes will be by comparison.)
Spelling
Embarrasingly, superweed, notedly, rivaling, Marajuana, defense
Embarrassingly, super-weed, notably, rivalling, Marijuana, defence
Grammar
Not too bad. I don't have any stand out examples or issues. A word repeated here or there, but nothing that really struck me. If you are going to go through and tighten the tone then I'd suggest UN:PROOF as well.
Layout
The images are a little higgledy piggledy. You have left and right floating images of varying sizes and it feels a little slap dash in the way that they've been put in there. Other than that though the layout is reasonable. You wouldn't expect to have anything more. Again, try and get this to mimic the feel visually of the wikipedia article on him.
Overall appearance
Overall it looks okay, but not fantastic. The problem is that you'll potentially be putting this up for VFH, and okay is not quite good enough for a feature. Remember that the first thing that will lose you your audience is an unattractive page and the second thing is sloppy writing style. This needs a bit of work.
Concept[edit]
How good an idea is behind the article? 7.5
I can't argue the concept, except in as much as I already have (re the in-the-style-of elements.) If anything it is a little too easy. It's like saying that Leonard Nimoy is actually an unfeeling individual who allows himself to be driven by logic only. Keanu seems to just fall into this mould.
I can't think of anything to add to this. There is probably something spectacular that you could add to this that would bring this up another notch, but whatever it is I'm failing to find it.
Humour[edit]
How funny is it? Why is it funny? How can it be funnier? 5.5
Okay, this is where the cracks start to show a little. The humour is there, but it doesn't ring out as much as it should. I'm expecting something punchy and blunt to hit me in the face, and yet I just keep getting these snippets of random humour which, while they are cute, aren't laugh out loud funny. I would expect a little more exploration of the ridiculous truth behind this, or the blurring of the lines between the actor and the roles he plays.
Breaking it down a little
Intro
Too long, and it takes away some of the effect of the punchlines further into the piece. Keep it short and to the point, and leave the bigger jokes to be found later on. Also try to not deviate from reality into comic reality too soon. The intro should more or less be as truthful as you can make it, although throwing in the fact that Keanu uses the word dude constantly - or something else to set up the comic pretext - would be a good idea.
Early life
This is well done. Keeping it as truthful as possible while pointing out that he is ripe for ridicule. The only issue that I have here is the inclusion of Captain Oblivious. The level of humour you get out of a stale joke is destroyed more or less by the fact that stale jokes are, in fact, stale. I groaned a little when I read this as I was afraid that you had fallen back on Chuck Norris type references where they didn't belong. Have a look at HTBFANJS#Avoid Stagnant Jokes. Glenn Benton should also be added to this list, by the way.
Career
The only thing that I would like to see in here that I feel is missing is Dangerous Liaisons and Much ado about nothing. Whenever I watch either of those movies I keep expecting him to break out and say "dude" every five seconds. The idea of having Ted as the evil Don John who is plotting and scheming to take down his brother, Denzel Washington, I think is hysterical. And also a guy carrying around a surfboard in snowy 18th century France while trying to sleep with an aristocrats daughter...
Philosophising
I'd change the book title to Philosophising, dude or Whoa, philosophising. I'd also get rid of the quotes all together. They're good, but they don't really feel like they belong in the article. Keep the link to the Unquotable:Keanu Reeves though.
Controversies
The Mensa section and the Assault section are okay. The Kung-fu section fails dismally. The only thing I can think of to improve this to to change it to some form of delusion, where he has watched himself play in his own movies for so long that he believes that he is a gestalt entity comprising of Ted and Neo, where he was admitted into hospital, stark naked, screaming "Whoa! I know Kung Fu!" Or something to that effect. Personally I would just axe this altogether unless you make his claim to know Kung Fu as a running joke throughout.
Images[edit]
How are the images? Are they relevant, with good quality and formatting? 5
I've already talked abut the layout of the images, and I think you can work on the captions a little. I would remove the Sonic image unless you make a reference to this in the article as his next big career move, or something of the like. Also the 1994/2008 photo really belongs in his career section.
Miscellaneous[edit]
The article's overall quality - that indefinable something. 6.5
I like it, but it is a work in progress. I would definitely work on the tone of the piece, making it as intellectual as possible - without alienating your audience - so we have that stark contrast between you as a writer and Keanu as your subject. This will emphasise the basic premise that Keanu is, when you come down to it, a moron who can play only one role, and he plays that in every role that he is in.
Denmark is a prison, dude!
82nd Academy Awards[edit]
Wheres the part about Keanu killing Jeff Bridges and becoming one of the FBI Ten Most Wanted Fugitives? --The Dragon Lizard 04:28, July 20, 2010 (UTC)