Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Holocaust film

Holocaust film[edit]

This is pretty offensive, but no more than Daniel Craig speaking in Polish accent, and some similar inglorious basterds. If anyone can make it even more offensive, they're welcome. Kakun nukaK 21:40, November 14, 2009 (UTC)

Kakun nukaK 21:32, November 14, 2009 (UTC)

I've decided to review this. Been here too long. ~

08:26, Dec 5, 2009

Sorry Hiatus - I didn't notice your promise there - just went and reviewed. You can override mine if you like of course. Style

Guide 08:53, December 5, 2009 (UTC)

Uh you made the promise just as I was reviewing it, it seems - no wonder I didn't spot it. Sorry anyway. Style

Guide 09:00, December 5, 2009 (UTC)

Humour:	8	The humour in this one must, in my opinion, be taken in two ways: who is it offensive to? The Holocaust victims? If I were all strict about it, I wouldn't touch this article. I decide not to be, since so much more offensive things exist - like neo-nazis for instance. As far as the humour goes, it's not laugh-out-loud - but then, I laugh at weird things. I did laugh out once; at the name of the Japanese film in the end of the article. The rest of it is good though, and I suppose many will like it more than I do. The only complaint about it is the Adolf Hitler quote on top of page: I dislike time-slips like that, more so when the article is otherwise on line - at least at a quick glance. Of course, if the quote is somehow relevant to movie history: I haven't seen the film.
Concept:	8	Concept naturally overlaps with humour here, and has the same comment in part. What makes it good is that even without seeing almost any of the films, and knowing nothing much about them, I can appreciate the humour on general grounds. This is a feat when writing about cultural stuff - but also here made easier by the choice of subject which not many can fail to recognise. Here, I won't judge the possible tastelessness of the idea at all. Somehow the innocence of the writing makes up for the obvious insult; it's not like "HOLOCAUST LOLZ". I take it the writer is not writing from any of his own points of view, but instead wants to give the impression that movie business has a genre called Holocaust film - which might also be read as a comment on movie industry. An idea on that: what if you made it so that the industry uses it as a cliché to promote films - and made it clearly so? Then you would be shooting in the right direction, and I would give the concept a 10 on the spot. Now (if you mean it) it's too subtle for a casual reader, I deem. As a personal comment, I tend to steer clear of the more difficult subjects, just in case.
Prose and formatting:	8	I guess some of it could be more flashy - some snickers on language here, not many - but since I spot no immediate problems, 8 is at least earned.
Images:	8	Why do I keep giving 8:s? I don't know. Probably because I read a lot of humour and nothing makes me laugh any more, except my own jokes. The images are good, to the point, support the article, but not apparently funny in themselves at a casual read.
Miscellaneous:	10	This 10 is a just-in-case grade. I might be reading a brilliant article and just be too uptight about it when reviewing, and never noticing. It's also to make you to give a more critical look to the article yourself, to find anything I might be missing. I find that when I get praise I go all critical on myself, and when I get stumped I only think: "What does this cocksucker know about anything?" and start on a completely different trajectory. I hope you are similar in this and have another look despite the good score.
Final Score:	42	I re-read the article just in case and noticed Holocaust is a film-making technique of some sort. Makes it hard to use my idea in Ccomment of course. But still possible.
Reviewer:	-- *Style* *Guide* 08:36, December 5, 2009 (UTC)

Oh dammit, I was halfway through my review. All that hard work for nothing! Now where can I direct my self-absorbed opinions? Ok, I'm gonna go ahead and say something anyway. I think I disagreed with some things Multi said.

I think you have too many references to less well known films that people wouldn't have seen. You forced me to look up Wikipedia man. Also they were basically lists in the form of sentences, like the whole "theme" section and many others, which I found not actually very funny.
The concepts and running jokes could use more expansion. You could so be more offensive. I also felt you didn't satirize Hollywood enough. Many times I felt you missed the point. So I agree with Multi on this one to make your concept clearer.
I don't get your concept, the one that Multi mentioned is a film-making technique. People who don't think like you wouldn't make the link between those seemingly random films you mentioned and "get" what you are trying to say. Certainly try to explain stuff, or maybe I'm just a noob who doesn't understand what all the sophisticated humour is about. So anyway here is my truncated review. Ah, I just love the sound of my own opinions in the morning.

~ 10:12, Dec 5, 2009

Hiatus you really just need to think outside the box office to "get" the joke. -- Style

Guide 11:23, December 5, 2009 (UTC)

Explain it pretty please? ~

13:23, Dec 5, 2009

No joke? OK I will if you really want me to. If you're just pulling my leg - well consider my leg pulled then. It seems to me there's nothing you should get. It's just that Kakun seems to have invented a film that is holocaustic. That's really all. He slaps the label on films that somehow stand around the brink of the actual subject, yet not quite on it. I always find such an idea funny - most don't like it since it seems there is something to "get". It's not an insult to anyone's intelligence, it's just a free-floating joke that can spring ideas. -- Style

Guide 13:57, December 5, 2009 (UTC)

Thanks very much to you both. About "I Know Who Killed Me", according to many sources it's supposed to be the worst piece of shit in film history. I haven't seen it either. Kakun nukaK 14:45, December 5, 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for excusing my ignorance. If it weren't for Multi I would have reviewed it improperly. ~

14:56, Dec 5, 2009

Hey Kakun - ever seen Beaufort? I saw it the other week - best Israeli film I've ever seen. Rabbi Techno