Wikipedia:Peer review/Hoodwinked!/archive1

Hoodwinked!

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because it was recently promoted to GA status, and I would like suggestions on further improving it, before I nominate it for Featured Article status.

Thanks, Jpcase (talk) 20:47, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Comments:

• "utilizing flashbacks" --> "using flashbacks" (fewer syllables)

• "one week engagement" --> "one-week engagement" (compound adjective takes a hyphen)

• "Hoodwinked! marks one of the earliest examples": "was one of the earliest" works better here.

• "allowed the filmmakers greater creative control, however": "but" is better than "however" here.
  • I changed this, but could you explain why "however" should not be used? --Jpcase (talk) 00:44, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
    • First, "but" is shorter and accomplishes the same thing. Second, "but" is usually used to draw a contrast between adjacent phrases in the same sentence. "However" is usually used to strike a contrast with ideas in the previous sentence or sentences. Consider: "I went to the store, but I did not like what I found there." And: "I went to the store. I did not like what I found there, however." Not: "I went to the store, however I did not like what I found there". But (marginally acceptable): "I went to the store. But I did not like what I found there." And note that a semicolon is generally sufficient to separate two ideas enough for "however" to work. A mere comma won't work, but you don't need a full stop: "I went to the store; I did not like what I found there, however."--Batard0 (talk) 21:42, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

• "a less realistic design, inspired": No comma needed.

• "while few changes were made to the film by the company, they had many of the roles recast with more famous actors": Reccomend: "while a few changes were made to the film by Weinstein, many of the roles were recast with more famous actors"
  • The sentence as written contrasts the recastings with the fact that The Weinstein Company only made a few changes to the film, but your suggested edit would contrast the recastings with the fact that The Weinstein Company made any changes at all. Recastings and changes go together, and as such shouldn't be contrasted. However the fact that only a few changes were made to the film can be contrasted with extensive recastings. If you believe that this sentence should be rewritten, how about "and while many of the roles were recast, the company otherwise made few changes to the film"? --Jpcase (talk) 00:44, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
    • Hmm...I think your suggestion works. Here's another that also eliminates the use of the passive voice in case you want to use it: "while Weinstein made few changes to the film, the company recast many roles with more famous actors".
      • I decided to go with "and while the company had many of the film's roles recast, it otherwise made few changes to the film." Does that work? --Jpcase (talk) 15:43, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

• "fractured fairy tale genre": Can we wikilink this or provide a further explanation of what this genre is?
  • Unfortunately this genre does not have a Wikipedia page yet, though it probably should. This is not necessarily an official name for the genre, though Rotten Tomatoes' consensus on the film refers to it as such. If "fractured fairy tale" is not clear enough, I can change it to "fairy tale parody genre". --Jpcase (talk) 00:44, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
    • It's odd that there's no wikipedia page for this if it's a legit genre. Is it a fairytale fantasy? It seems what we're looking for is something like fairy-tale satire or postmodern fairytales.--Batard0 (talk) 22:09, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
      • I'm not sure what qualifies a genre as being official, but with such recent releases as the Hoodwinked series, Shrek series, Happily N'Ever After, Enchanted, The Princess and the Frog, and Ella Enchanted, as well as older works such as the fractured fairy tale segments on The Rocky and Bullwinkle Show (I think that this is where the "fractured fairy tale" term originated), and the popular children's book The True Story of the Three Little Pigs, it seems clear that fairy tale parodies are prominent enough to be considered their own genre. Fairytale fantasy seems to be a broader genre, encompassing all works having to do with fairy tales, both traditional and revisionsist. The "fractured fairy tale" genre would be a sub-genre within that genre. Again, it probably deserves its own Wikipedia page, but unfortunately one has not yet been created. I'll go ahead and change it to "fairy tale parody genre", since that is pretty self-explanatory. --Jpcase (talk) 16:48, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
        • I've gone ahead and created a bare bones Fairy tale parody article. Hopefully other editors will expand and improve it over time. --Jpcase (talk) 19:24, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

• "concerns held by director Cory Edwards over the integrity of the genre.": This is a vague statement. I'm not sure what it means.
  • This is further explained in the Analysis section of the article. Does it need to be fully explained in the lead as well? --Jpcase (talk) 00:44, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
    • I think you should have a more precise explanation about what, specifically, the concerns were. Leaving it like this raises a lot of questions that aren't answered until later. The lead shouldn't be a tease for the rest of the article...I'd advise just coming out and saying what it is you're talking about (as concisely as possible, of course).--Batard0 (talk) 22:09, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

• "Critical reception to the film": "response" instead of "reception"

• "with negative reviews criticizing its animation and considering it inferior to the Shrek series": See WP:PLUSING and rephrase.

• "sneaks into his lair, however open conflict ensues": "but", not "however"

• Comma needed after "Sue Bea Montgomery"

• "Tony Leech who had worked with the Edwards brothers on Chillicothe was initially": Commas after "Leech" and "Chillicothe"

• "beneficial changes to the story as well": Remove "as well"
  • Could you explain why? I feel that "as well" belongs here since the sentence is detailing two different types of rewrites. Would "either" be better? --Jpcase (talk) 00:44, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
    • I see what you're saying here. I'd suggest that the positioning of "as well" in the sentence is awkward, and if you want to emphasize the contrast between the benefits and drawbacks of independence, you might do it this way instead: "While they did not have to deal with rewrites imposed by a studio, their budget also kept them from making potentially beneficial changes to the story once production was underway."
      • It seems to me that adding the word "also" would cause the sentence to imply that the film's budget kept the filmmakers from having to deal with studio rewrites, but that is not necessarily true. The film's small budget was the reason that the filmmakers were unable to perform beneficial rewrites after the start of production, but their freedom from unwanted studio rewrites was simply due to the independent filmmaking process. I suppose that this might have also been implied by "as well", but since it was placed farther in the sentence from the word "budget", I thought that it would be less likely to. Maybe you were correct at first, and I should simply remove "as well" and not replace it with anything. --Jpcase (talk) 17:45, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

• "Todd Edwards related that": "Todd Edwards said" suffices.
  • I'm willing to change this, but what is wrong with "related?" --Jpcase (talk) 00:44, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
    • Conciseness. "Related" is a three-syllable word that means exactly the same thing as "said" in this context. Readers will never tire of the use of "said" to describe someone's speech. It's what they expect. The following, for example, is fine: "Joe Smith said the movie was excellent, but Jenny Smith said it lacked focus. Jim Brown, a third critic, said the movie 'needed more meat'." The search for synonyms for "said" is a distraction for readers as it becomes obvious that you're only doing it to avoid using "said" repeatedly, for example: "Joe Smith said the movie was excellent, but Jenny Smith related that it lacked focus. Jim Brown, a third critic, commented that the movie 'needed more meat'." The first example is simple and concise. The second is less so.--Batard0 (talk) 22:09, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
      • So then, when should one use the word "related"? --Jpcase (talk) 17:49, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

• "studio produced animated films": "studio-produced" (compound adjective takes hyphen)

• "well known archetypes" --> "well-known archetypes"

• "which led to the character's role being expanded" --> "which led to the expansion of the character's role"

• "little known actors": "little-known"

• "He utilized improvisation": "used"

• "with Todd Edwards relating that": Recommend a new sentence with "Todd Edwards said" etc.
  • I feel that this works better as one sentence, but I have rewritten it to address the WP:PLUSING problem. --Jpcase (talk) 00:44, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

• "Red, and": No comma needed.

• "with Pro Tools being used to speed up the recording of his dialogue by 50%": WP:PLUSING and rephrase.

• "a childhood friend of the Edwards": Apostrophe after Edwards.

• "Emmy winning actress" --> "Emmy-winning"

• ""it becomes an equation: “I have 10 things that I would like to change in this shot. I have the time and the budget to do three. Pick those three and then let’s move on.” And that was hard to do."": The internal quotation should be in single quotes (quote-within-a-quote)

• "well written, likeable characters": "well-written"

• "larger name actors" --> "bigger-name actors"

• "high profile country singers" --> "high-profile country singers"

• "considered for replacing" --> "considered to replace"

• "Goat, however none of them were available": "but", not "however"

• "Albert Brooks, however the role": "but", not "however"

• "However he expressed disappointment with the amount of recasting that was done, saying": Recommend rephrasing this to: "He expressed disappointment about the amount of recasting, however, saying"

• "wasn't available" --> "was not available"

• "Both versions were written by Todd Edwards who called": Comma after "Edwards"

• "Hoodwinked! received a one week, limited release" --> hyphenate "one-week"

• "A nationwide U.S. release was scheduled for Christmas Day, 2005, however it": "but", not "however"

• "maintained its number two spot": "number-two spot"

• "“There are some cute surprises in the telling...but "Hoodwinked" never builds to a level of sustained comic mania": "Hoodwinked" should be in single quotes, since it's within a quote. Same for "Shrek" later.

• "Nancy Churnin writing for the Dallas Morning News gave": Commas after "Churnin" and "News"

• "Gleiberman wrote "I especially liked": Comma after "wrote"

• "the highest selling DVD" --> "the best-selling DVD"

• "Timothy Sexton writing for Associated Content": Comma after "Sexton" and "Content"

• "“un-parodied?”" should be in single quotes, since it's within a quotation.

• Generally the article looks good. The prose needs some massaging before it's FA-ready, but it's going in the right direction. The Reception section is a bit of a quotefarm, but I suppose that's to be expected with movies like this. It's a fairly comprehensive look at the movie. I hope these suggestions are helpful.--Batard0 (talk) 16:43, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Thanks for taking the time to review this article! I believe that I have addressed all issues, except for the ones that I have commented on. --Jpcase (talk) 00:44, 24 July 2012 (UTC)