Oh No! Another Lord of the Rings Parody? by kitt_otter PG
Summary: ‘Fraid so. Frodo’s a stinker and Bilbo’s worse. Sauron’s beard is pointy and his minions wield chainsaws. Aragorn couldn't find his nose in the dark. And the worst of it…? Gandalf owes me money.

It does, I suppose, follow the basic plot, but most of the humour seems to centre on making the canon characters either stupid or mean, regardless of their actual canon personalities, plus the entirely unecessary addition of modern technology.

For example, this? Isn't funny, it's stupid:

“I think you’ve had it long enough – magic rings should be shared, not hoarded for two thousand years. Let it go.”
“Oho! Oho! I see; you want it all for yourself, don’t you, Gandalf?
“Well – I – well – no – I -- ”
The Eye of the Monkey crackled as dangerously as the eyes of its holder. “Then take this – Kreeahh!” Bilbo flipped overhead; Gandalf stumbled back, and they met staff-to-staff, thus beginning a very messy duel. In the end, they called it a draw, having hit Bilbo’s stuff more than each other.
“Alright then, here’s the Thing.” Bilbo carelessly tossed a small shiny ring onto the oliphaunt-skin rug. He met Flópi outside with an over-packed wagon. “No hard feelings,” he said, shaking Gandalf’s hand. There was a buzz of electricity, and Gandalf’s beard sizzled outward from every angle. “So long, schmo. And watch out for Frodo!”
Gandalf watched the old crackpot hop down the hill and the eerie blue flames that rose from Hobbiton afterward.

Bad parody is what you have when you don't have good parody.

What would you expect to see in a good parody? Probably the characters in character acting out the fandom cliches. I once read a parody where the characters seemed to be more or less aware of the cliches. Or at least, they asked each other about them. "Why do you always sing that song?" "We don't know any other songs."

Humor is subjective. And there will always be people that think a bad parody is the funniest thing ever, and a good parody dull.

I find cheap shots at characters and plot put me off. Plainly insulting the continuum or the original author also shows little effort.

I can say that a good parody tells the reader something about the original piece in a way that criticism might. Then I suppose a bad parody would not take the author's intent into account and, as I noted above, just take cheap shots of everything. It needs to get to the heart of the original piece, and then dissect it for better or worse. And if it doesn't do that...then in my opinion, it's a bad parody.

Mind, this is the opinion of one who hasn't read much parody at all.

There will always be room for argument depending on a person's particular sense of humour, so I'd say the DBP would be restricted to the sort of thing that no one (in their right mind) would find funny - cheap jokes about death (or murder), OOCness for no reason other than to be the butt of jokes, and inane plot devices would all be flashing warnign signs in my book.

Regardless, this is why I stay away from parody fic in general. It's just too hard to judge "good" or "bad" without involving "what I like" and "what I hate".

"For a long time, there has been a debate at Headquarters concerning the effects of humor on the continuum. Said debate questions whether humor fics have any effect on the continuum at all, and if so, how much? Most people believe that a fic's impact depends on two things: 1) its subject matter, and 2) its genuine humor content. A well-handled comedy that is genuinely funny is thought to cause little damage to the continuum, regardless of the plot. Some kinds of comedies also do little damage, even if they aren't all that funny. Stuff like bogus diaries by unlikely individuals, e.g. Bill the Pony, and fics set in chatrooms have little impact on the continuum. List fics also don't harm the continuum, no matter how inane they are.

The comedy fics that do the most harm are the ones that try to tell an actual story, have serious elements, and aren't as funny as their creator thinks they are. They also tend to rehash the same jokes that other people have used. (If I have to read one more "comic" account of the Council of Elrond, I swear I'll scream....)"

Don't know how helpful this is, but it might give you an idea of what would make a good mission for Bad Parody, which isn't always the same as what IS a bad parody - some fics, however awful they are to read, just aren't easily sporkable.

If the jokes made at the expense of the subject being parodied come off less as funny or clever and more as petty or cruel, that might very well be indicative of a bad parody. A good parody will not outright attack its source material, or if it does it will at least temper itself with some self-referential humor.

Stupid or obvious jokes are another major concern, as is overusing well-known memes. Sheer randomness posing as humor is also something to be concerned about.

Here's what I can think of.

Stale, tasteless jokes;
good portrayal of characters the author likes and generally worse portrayal of those he doesn't';
not even attempting to put together a plot (or, if there is one, it's obviously half-baked and done as an excuse to make characters do "funny" things);
relying on Internet memes and in-jokes to get their laughs across;
tastelessly turning characters who are normally straight-laced (or immature or whatever) into snark machines...

and so on and so forth. Some of these may connect to "general badfic characteristics"...