Making fun of music, one song at a time. Since the year 2000.
Check out the two amIright misheard lyrics books including one book devoted to misheard lyrics of the 1980s.
(Toggle Right Side Navigation)

Song Parodies -> "This Song Will Score 5-5-5"

Original Song Title:

"I've Got My Mind Set On You"

Original Performer:

George Harrison

Parody Song Title:

"This Song Will Score 5-5-5"

Parody Written by:

Laurence Dunne

The Lyrics

Prove me right!!!!!
This song will score 5-5-5
This song will score 5-5-5
This song will score 5-5-5
This song will score 5-5-5

it will need to be funny
it will need to be really funny
it will need to be plenty funny
to score all 5's yeah
it's gonna need to ryhme
it's gonna need each line to ryhme
it's gonna need each time to ryhme
to score all 5's yeah

This song will score 5-5-5
This song will score 5-5-5
This song will score 5-5-5
This song will score 5-5-5

It'll need to have good pacing
no need to have the lyrics racing
It'll need to have really good pacing
to score all 5's yeah

The 1-1-1 guy has to skip it
oh yeah that jerk has gotta miss it
it's gonna need no-one to diss it
to score all 5's yeah

This song will score 5-5-5
This song will score 5-5-5
This song will score 5-5-5
This song will score 5-5-5

Was I right? Look below!!!

Your Vote & Comment Counts

The parody authors spend a lot of time writing parodies for the website and they appreciate feedback in the form of votes and comments. Please take some time to leave a comment below about this parody.

Place Your Vote

 LittleLots
Matches Pace of
Original Song: 
How Funny: 
Overall Score: 



In order for your vote to count, you need to hit the 'Place Your Vote' button.
 

Voting Results

 
Pacing: 3.6
How Funny: 3.5
Overall Rating: 3.5

Total Votes: 8

Voting Breakdown

The following represent how many people voted for each category.

    Pacing How Funny Overall Rating
 1   1
 2
 2
 
 2   1
 1
 0
 
 3   2
 0
 2
 
 4   0
 1
 0
 
 5   4
 4
 4
 

User Comments

Comments are subject to review, and can be removed by the administration of the site at any time and for any reason.

Jack Wilson - January 23, 2004 - Report this comment
You're right! This was great!
Laurence Dunne - January 23, 2004 - Report this comment
Ouch, I got a 4. Oh well.
mac195 - January 23, 2004 - Report this comment
5-5-5
Laurence Dunne - January 23, 2004 - Report this comment
OK, a 3-3-3, now I've never got a 3-3-3 before, so I have to think that was deliberate!!
John the grunt - January 23, 2004 - Report this comment
A begrudgingly 555
neminem - January 23, 2004 - Report this comment
I can't not. Weird Al's was better, though.
Mr. X - January 23, 2004 - Report this comment
Sorry, I think a verse or two was missing. So if anything, I'll give 4-5-5. Sorry. :(
ones guy - January 23, 2004 - Report this comment
I gave you twos just to be unique (and because you're bent out of shape over 3's)... awww... too bad... no more fives for you...
Laurence Dunne - January 23, 2004 - Report this comment
9 out of 11 gave ones so far, so it's not too bad, I guess!!
Phil Alexander - January 23, 2004 - Report this comment
neminem- you mean "This song is just six words long"? (which in itself is seven... confused?)
Agrimorfee - January 23, 2004 - Report this comment
Phil & Nem--Al's was "This Song's Just Six Words Long"--but it's dumb because Al sings two beats on the "Song's" each time, rendering it seven words long. Talk about your pacing problems! Any way, 555 just because you were ballsy enough to do it, Laurence.
Mr. X - January 23, 2004 - Report this comment
That's right, he treats "song's" (contraction for "song is") as one word.
Joe - January 23, 2004 - Report this comment
Aaargh! I just noticed that somebody voted ones! Why would they do that?
Michael Pacholek - January 23, 2004 - Report this comment
I hate it when people pander... You know, like the guy who wrote "Big DarkJon," "Wild Man," "Give My Songs to Chuck," etc... Wait, that was me... But you worked hard in your pander, so fives all the way!
Jonathan C. - January 23, 2004 - Report this comment
Sorry, your omission of the bridge lowered your pacing score to 3, but it was funny, so a 5 there.
Laurence Dunne - January 23, 2004 - Report this comment
OK, the 1-1-1 and 2-2-2 guys are just being snotty. Everyone else, thank you. John C, what's the 'bridge'?
sloatead - January 23, 2004 - Report this comment
legend is, if you say the name of the one-troll three times, he'll give your next three parodies one's. good thing you only said it once
Rick D - January 23, 2004 - Report this comment
First let me say I'm not the one's or two's guy. But I hate this, and can't understand how people are giving you fives just because you begged for them. I think you've done some very good things here Laurence, but as a writer, write about something that isn't just a plea for votes. I know the song itself isn't that challenging, but Al made something of it. I have expressed this same opinion about all the "In-crowd" parodies, but this is just plain blatent, and I am amazed it's working for the most part. I used to know a musician who prefaced everything he did with "This is the best song ever, you'll just love it." After a buildup like that, it's a mighty tall order to even like it a little. I did give you fives for your other entry. Do more of those.
Chris Bodily TM - January 23, 2004 - Report this comment
You at least scored a 5-5-5 with me, dude! This was hilarious -- just the title alone! Keep writing these amazing songs! There's actually a bridge to this song?... I'm glad I know that.... This might be a song I parody in the future.
Paul Robinson - January 23, 2004 - Report this comment
Lawrence, I'm plenty ambivalent here; decided not to vote since I really don't know original all that well. That's a bit of a dodge, though, so I'll comment: I would like it and score it well IF, and ONLY IF there was a whole lot of cleverness & originality in it. In that case that would preclude any repetition of whole lyric lines in the song verses - each line would have to still fit the story, hopefully move it forward, and be mainly unique. Chorus could have SOME repetition but would need to change at least slightly a couple times as the song moved forward. If you can do that I'll salute something even if there is a strong pander undercurrent present. If it didn't I wouldn't give a low score, I'd just take a pass. Yeah, pretty picky, I know, but otherwise it does kind of fall too deeply into "inside" writing. I've been guilty of a bit of that a couple times here, so I won't issue a blanket stand on this. There can be times when it's cool and appropriate to wade into this area, but I need to feel there's a particular reason to do it, not just to try and load a good score. I do like most of your stuff that I know quite a bit.
Laurence Dunne - January 23, 2004 - Report this comment
Rick, this isn't a plea for votes, it's simply a title that lent itself to a voting parody. My comments above are just milking the joke.
John the grunt - January 23, 2004 - Report this comment
Paul obviously doesn't know the original, it's full of repetition in both the verses and the chorus.....Rick, get a life, this was brilliant!!!
Paul Robinson - January 23, 2004 - Report this comment
John Grunt - Yes, I admitted to not knowing much about the original. What I was saying, however, and perhaps I lacked clarity, is that for me to score a parody that is totally about trying to get a good score (yes, even, and in fact, ESPECIALLY if it is done in jest) it would have to be extremely clever and not use too much of the original lyric. Because I don't find a lot of humor in repetition per se since it's not in and of itself a particularly humorous subject. I think that makes this parody a bit too "inside" except to other parody authors - not a crime but If I viewed it as someone dropping in the site trying to get some clever amusement it wouldn't mean much to me and I'd pass. On the other hand if it IS very cleverly done I could look past that and see another level and be amused by THAT. That may still not be clear but I never claimed my logic was always of the "straight-line" variety. It makes sense to me but that doesn't mean you have to care about it one way or the other. Just a matter of personal preference I guess you could say. Maybe my reference to repetition was misleading in the context of this parody? Finally, I'm not saying people shouldn't vote or shouldn't vote high for this or any other parody. It's really up to them to judge. I can't tell what's funny to you, it's not up to me anyway. But I would add that Lawrence's parody does beg the question here, he asks for + or - proof up top in his comment section and from the voting so far 80%++ agree with him and with you. From my comments you will note that I did not vote AGAINST that judgment. Most folks who voted liked it, and it got a healthy number of total votes...That's cool, I'm truly glad they enjoyed it. They answered his question. Lawrence is a gentleman and a good writer and accepts comments and I offered mine. Thanks for your time and opinion.
Laurence Dunne - January 24, 2004 - Report this comment
Wow, it seems i've started a philosophical war. I didn't mean to, it was just for fun!!!
Attitude Cop - January 24, 2004 - Report this comment
Grunt, when you say that this parody's brilliant, it's just your opinion, that's all, nothing more. Everone doesn't share your opinion. Rick just expressed his, what is that get a life comment about. I'm not the ones or twos guy either, by the way. Lawrence, a 4 isn't a bad score.
Paul Robinson - January 25, 2004 - Report this comment
Lawrence - better a "philosophical war" over parody preferences/voting than a "real war" over....well, almost anything. I went on a bit (especially my 2nd comment because (a) I didn't think JGrunt understood what I was really saying and (b) because, well, that's me, I tend to go a bit without any particular reason/provocation. I don't expect or want everyone to be like me, the world would run out of paper and you could never finish reading all the comments for each day.
one troll - January 26, 2004 - Report this comment
you said my name at least three times, I came and blessed it with 1's... off to find the rest of this losers parodies
ZSGhost - January 26, 2004 - Report this comment
All 5's. I've never heard the song, it just feels right to give it 5-5-5.
Jeff Reuben - January 26, 2004 - Report this comment
Well, can't say people on this site won't relate to this song! It might not fly in the real world (a world without amiright website voting), but obviously appropriate here. Good job.
TVOD - February 17, 2004 - Report this comment
I agree with Mr. X. Some parts are missing. I gotta vote 3-5-3.
Harri Georgeson - March 15, 2004 - Report this comment
5-5-5 for parodying a George Harrison hit
Max - March 16, 2004 - Report this comment
I agree that the pacing was a wee bit off. Sorry. I'm gonna vote 3 for pacing, 4 for how funny, and either 3 or 4 for overall (I haven't decided yet).
Max - March 16, 2004 - Report this comment
I decided to vote 3-4-3.

The author of the parody has authorized comments, and wants YOUR feedback.

Link To This Page

The address of this page is: http://www.amiright.com/parody/90s/georgeharrison0.shtml For help, see the examples of how to link to this page.

This is view # 692