I’m not sure why everyone is so shocked by news that an artist created a cover for The New Yorker using an iPhone app. Big deal. It’s a tool for creative outlet. That’s what it does and therefore we shouldn’t be all that surprised by its use for that purpose.
I have to wonder if these people, had they been around at the time, would have been quite as breathless about a news reporter using a photographic contraption to capture a scene as part of a newspaper story.
A batch of really smart and savvy people at The Chicago Tribune have launched ChicagoNow, a blog hub that features a lot of people sounding off on various topics. Leah Jones has high praise for the site after being one of the beta testers and I’ll check it out more deeply based on her recommendation alone.
On a related note, the Trib has one less of those folks around now that Daniel Honigman – the creator of the more-than-a-little-awesome Colonel Tribune character – has been hired into the PR agency world by Weber Shandwick. That’s great news for Weber as Dan is a bright guy who’s not afraid to try new things.
I’ve been doing a bit of…soul searching lately regarding what I’m writing online and where I’m writing it. Here are some conclusions I’ve come to, in no particular order:
So there you have it. It’s like my whole online persona is a pet and I occasionally say “Hello there pretty little pet, I love you. And then I stoke it, and I pet it, and I massage it. Hehe I love it, I love my little naughty pet, you’re naughty. And then I take my naughty pet…” you know how it goes.
I think I just needed to get all this down and out of my system. I’m constantly trying to tweak things and optimize and all that in terms of what I’m doing online. Probably won’t figure the whole thing out any time soon but at least I’m hashing it out. When I hit on the right formula I’m sure I’ll be surprised at how easy it is to maintain. Until then…more hand-wringing.
The director of the original 1992 Buffy the Vampire Slayer movie, who still holds the rights to that story, is reportedly working on an updating of that movie that might launch its own franchise, work that’s being done without input or support from creator Joss Whedon.
Really bad idea from a number of viewpoints, not the least of which will be the gigantic &$!storm that erupts from fans of the show and will result in the biggest, most unholy PR nightmare any studio has ever had to deal with.
I was never a devoted listener to Kathy & Judy on WGN. I tuned in occasionally but I’m not their target demographic and so it never really “spoke” to me, even if I did find their banter and style entertaining and funny.
Despite that I’m a bit shocked and saddened by their ousting from the airwaves last Friday. The move was made apparently because their ratings were shown, according to the new Personal People Meters being employed by Arbitron, to be dropping pretty fast. That, combined with the station’s desire to reshape its identity and appeal to younger listeners, means there was no room for the Girlfriends, as they were known, on the air.
I get what WGN is trying to do by undergoing a brand reidentification process right now. But I hope they don’t go too far down this road and start to turn off the people like me who have, quite literally, been listening to it all their lives and who still turn to it first for news, weather, traffic and talk radio that is more like listening to a really interesting community conversation than like someone shouting at you over whatever the Outrage of the Day is.
I forgot to include this in my TV-centric post below, but have to note it.
In the latest episode of 3o Rock, “Kidney Now,” Alan Alda is walking across the scene and sees Tracy Jordan’s character in the midst of an emotional moment. Alda says:
“A man crying about a chicken and a baby? I thought this was a comedy?”
I’m not going to state why this was so funny, but if you’re familiar with Alda’s previous work you might have, like me, found yourself staring with mouth agape at the screen as you wonder whether that actually just happened.
A bunch of things I’d like to say about some television happenings and news.
One of the biggest pluses to working from home is that I don’t have to do the commute downtown anymore. It was never really a problem in and of itself, but logistically it was a headache.
Those who are still using the Route 59 parking lot on the BNSF line will soon have a new option for finding a parking spot (often the biggest of those logistical headaches): condo-style parking spots. A developer is building a lot next to the existing lot that people can buy spots in, spots that not only have an upfront cost but also ongoing property taxes and assesments being levied.
I guess if you can afford it that’s a good option. And it has the benefit of opening up those regular-lot spots for those who can’t.
In my column about the new Star Trek film’s marketing campaign I referred to the second, third and fourth movies in the original series as making up one of the greatest one-two-three punches in cinematic history. I’m sure there are some who disagree with me, but I’m sticking with my notion that creating three distinct stories that form one single narrative, especially when those three movies aren’t the first three films in a series a la Star Wars.
As part of the build up to the release to that new feature film, these three movies have been re-packaged and re-released on DVD in what’s labeled Star Trek: Motion Picture Trilogy. Containing The Wrath of Khan, The Search for Spock and The Voyage Home it’s made up of the three movies often pegged by people as among the best of the bunch. And I can tell you after watching them all back-to-back that reputation has been well-earned.
I won’t rehash the plots of each individual film but here’s the broad arc: We begin with James T. Kirk having been promoted to the rank of Admiral, which is great but which comes with him being pulled from a starship. As he feels he’s getting old before his time he finds himself pitted against an old foe in a battle that eventually takes the life of his old friend Spock. But the Genesis Device, which is what Khan was after, winds up bringing Spock back from the dead. Along the way he reconnects with an old lover and encounters the son produced from their liaison all those years ago, a son who gives his life in order to keep Genesis away from the Klingons. Kirk and his loyal crew steal the Enterprise to go find out if Spock is truly alive but they have to destroy the Enterprise to defeat the Klingons. As the crew returns to Earth they find the planet being devastated by a mysterious probe and so have to travel in time back to 1984 to bring back a pair of humpback whales to communicate with the probe and end the onslaught. That heroism means Kirk and his crew have their previous treasonous actions dismissed, with the only punishment being that Kirk is busted back down to Captain and once again given command of the Enterprise.
Phew.
These three movies really do represent the best of the Star Trek series on a number of levels. They’re action packed, they tell an interesting story and the cast is obviously still having fun in their roles.
Each movie in the new set comes with a handful of new bonus features, ranging from commentaries with the directors or producers to featurettes that delve more deeply into some of the elements of each movie. They’re entertaining and alright but you might start to feel like you know too much and might be starting to become a Trekker or Trekkie or whatever they’re calling themselves. Even if you never watch them, the movies are more than enough to justify this set.
Creating a package of just these three titles is a great move for people who haven’t picked them up individually already or who might want a nice collection but don’t need either all six movies with the original cast or all 10, including the Next Generation cast. It’s highly recommended, especially for casual fans who remember these films from their childhood or who are newbies to the Trek world who are looking for a quick primer on the characters either before going into or after just coming out of the new movie.
No movie should have as its aspirational goal “Be as much like Forrest Gump as possible” but unfortunately that seems to be exactly what The Curious Case of Benjamin Button has set for itself.
The movie, which I’m sure you’re familiar with, chronicles the story of a man who was born backwards. As an infant he had the body of a 90 year old man, with severe arthritis and other infirmities, as well as a wrinkled and ugly exterior. That led his father to take the baby and, after initially flirting with throwing him in the river, leaves him on the stairs of an old-folks home in New Orleans. The woman who takes care of the home’s residents takes the baby as her own and cares for the child as he grows, slowly becoming more youthful looking the older he gets. Benjamin has all sorts of dramatic experiences through his life as well as a long-lasting love, one that only culminates when he’s in his 40’s, finally looking about the age he actually is.
The problem is that the movie never looses a sense of being extraordinarily heavy-handed. Every single line, every camera angle, every motion of the actors (primarily Brad Pitt as the title character and Cate Blanchett as the love of his life) all arrive at the eyes and ears of the viewer with a massive, overly earnest THUD. Everything seems so calculated that there’s never any sense of movement, a problem when the movie is dependent on “movement” being an over-arching theme, whether it’s of time or of the body.
Also afflicting Benjamin Button is the same sort of thing that afflicts many movies that span decades. The story skips over years and years in just a couple minutes while spending half an hour on a particular moment or series of moments. But the characters only seem to undergo any sort of change or evolution when the film slows down. We watch Pitt and Blanchett have a 20 minute meeting in real time and then it’s six years before they see each other again. But the characters haven’t changed at all – at least not emotionally – in that six years. Their character arcs are only defined by the moments we view in detail. Like I said that’s not a problem that’s unique to Button but it’s frustrating nonetheless.
There’s a case to be made for seeing Benjamin Button, to be sure. There’s been so much hype and press about the film and its sizable technical achievements that I’d encourage people to check it out and judge for themselves. For me though it just didn’t work through a combination of being overly long, overly earnest and not nearly entertaining or interesting enough to sustain my attention throughout or actually make me care about the people I’m watching.
Daniel 2:47 pm on May 29, 2009 Permalink |
Thanks for the kind words, Chris. I’m not worried about the Chicago Tribune. They’ve still got some smart folks there!
Leah 1:19 pm on June 3, 2009 Permalink |
I’ve been checking in on the site every day. I like watching the progress and have found some new-to-me bloggers that I’m enjoying.