|
 xique rated 13 months ago- Great to see a set of rules which actually works for humorous purposes, as unhumorous as that might sound.
|
|
13 Reviews
-
-
- GoodnightJulia rated 9 months ago
- A lot of this is applicable to other forms of comedic writing as well. The inability to distinguish "humor" from "random, stream-of-consciousness stupidity" isn't limited to Uncyclopedia.
- xique rated 13 months ago
- Great to see a set of rules which actually works for humorous purposes, as unhumorous as that might sound.
- MrEricSir rated 24 months ago
- if you really want to know how to write the funny, get a book called Comedy Writing Secrets.
- Socman rated 24 months ago
- This page just isn't funny. It IS the very stupid crap it complains about.
So why have I just up-voted it? Because the science or it all is accurate to some good degree (although my own comedy workings work to prove that every character CAN be psychotic - no "straight man" needed). I'll keep an eye on this one.
- suzillagirlybutt rated 24 months ago
- HA HA HA HA HA HA HA heh heh heh...................?........ . ... .
- kaamran rated 24 months ago
- From the page: "%u201CAnybody can write a three word article. It merely requires a complete ignorance of both life and literature.%u201D"
 noigetit rated 25 months ago- not funney because it makes a science or formulaic approach as to what constitutes funny and what doesn't.
- eljaytee rated 25 months ago
- Right on.
- skrut rated 26 months ago
- i only paid it lip service (coz i'm tired and it's beddy-bye time) but it seems funny, misinformative and solid like jelly.
- Sneeezy rated 26 months ago
- You'd be suprised how long it takes some people to realise everything on Uncyclopedia is wrong.
Australia's page is hilarious.
|
