|
2003 Archives
Orrin Hatch Contracts Foot in Mouth Disease
Senators and congressmen with no programming experience
and little understanding of either intellectual property law,
our Consitution's prohibition against unlawful takings and/or
the amazingly stupid things kids do on the computer when
they are unsupervised would
do well to learn from the unfolding
Orrin Hatch debacle.
I am, of course, referring to Senator Hatch's outrageous
comments endorsing the destruction of any
computer whose owner illegally downloads a music file.
The music industry has been lobbying hard to
get Congress to pass some Draconian penalties against
anyone who uses Kazaa or other Napster-like file swapping services.
Now they want to destory someone's computer with a deadly
virus if they -- even accidentally -- illegally download software.
It's the new "Two Wrongs Make a Right" theory of legislation, I
suppose.
Let's explore a hypothetical scenario, shall we?
Your stupid high-school age student (who is currently
suffering from testosterone poisoning of the worst description)
illegally downloads the latest Brittany Spears single (out this
fall, in case you are not keeping up with pop culture).
Under Senator Hatch's scenario, your computer will be destroyed.
Your Turbo Tax program with this year's taxes -- gone.
Didn't back up that important work project? Too bad,
it's gone too, along with your prescription lists, all your emails,
your Excel files, and the draft of that novel you've been meaning
to finish. Oh, and you'll need to buy a new computer, because this
one is toast.
But here's the really great part of this story. It turns out that
Senator Hatch is using pirated software on his own website! Yes,
that's right -- under his own rules, it's time to destory his computer
and take down his website. According to
Wired, an unemployed
programmer began clicking around Senator Hatch's website, after
reading and becoming incensed by the Senator's comments.
What he found was software piracy, pure and simple.
The webmaster apparently has been running an unlicensed JavaScript
menu system developed by
Milonic Solutions. What's even worse is that someone
removed Milonic's copyright notice from the source code.
So, Senator Hatch, before you shoot off your mouth again on
an important legal issue, perhaps you should take the time
to actually research the issue first. Just a thought....
Posted on June 20, 2003
Permanent link to this entry.
| |
Martha Stewart: The Witch Hunt is On
Well, they really did it. After an 18 month investigation,
the Justice Department filed an indictment against
Martha Stewart, founder of Martha Stewart Omnimedia.
The 41-page indictment can be found at The Smoking
Gun website. (The SEC has also filed a related civil suit.)
For those who have the stomach for it, a perusal
of this document reveals a host of intriguing information,
the most glaring of which is that the government
has no case against Ms. Stewart for insider trading.
Yes, that's right, they didn't even charge her
with insider trading -- presumably, because they
don't have enough evidence to go to trial. Instead
of charging Ms. Stewart with the underlying
crime, they have elected to charge her only
with the legal "extras" that normally are tacked
on to the underlying crime: securities fraud, conspiracy and
obstruction of justice.
In fact, the last charge is something you just never
see in this type of case. The government
alleges that when Ms. Stewart went on television
and was quoted in the newspapers as saying she
was innocent of all charges, she was committing fraud
with the intent to pump up the stock price of
Martha Stewart Omnimedia. Excuse me?
You've got to be kidding me. You're charged with a
crime, and when you assert your innocence, that somehow
amounts to stock manipulation, fraud and conspiracy?
Top legal experts around the country have admitted
puzzlement at that bizarre interpretation of the law.
The other interesting tidbit that shows up in the
indictment is the fact that there is physical evidence
supporting Ms. Stewart's case. Apparently,
Merrill Lynch turned over to the SEC
Peter Bacanovic's worksheet which listed all of
Ms. Stewart's stock holdings. Next to ImClone
is a notation in blue ink which says "@60."
Hmm...so, he did note to sell the stock if it
dropped below $60/share. But the government
says that scientific testing shows that this notation
was written with a different pen. That's their whole
case? That he used a different pen to note the
stop loss order? Why I myself personally have at least ten
different pens in my penholder on my desk. And I am
liable to switch between them during they day. Is that
a crime now?
As far as I can see, this proves that Bacanovic used
a different pen to make the note. Apparently,
the vast resources of the U.S. government
cannot determine exactly when that notation
was made (carbon dating not being precise enough
to nail down the exact day someone used a pen).
Therefore, the fact that he changed pens is supposed to prove
that he doctored the worksheet after the fact. If that's not
circumstantial evidence, then I don't know what is.
Stewart and Bacanovic both deny any wrongdoing.
Which brings me to the next issue.
How much did this investigation cost the American taxpayers?
Martha Stewart is not, and never has been an
insider of ImClone Systems, Inc. She didn't cause
thousands of people to lose their jobs and their
pensions, as did Ken Lay and the other crooks who
ran Enron, Global Crossing, Tyco and Worldcom.
She avoided a personal $45,000 loss by selling ImClone stock the day before
bad news became public which would adversely affect the
stock price. Yet the indictments have been few and far between for these
other notorious criminals -- Lou Dobbs of CNN's Moneyline
is the only media personality taking the government to
task for its lackadaisical prosecution of these, much more
egregious, crimes.
And the stockholders of Martha Stewart Omnimedia
have definitely suffered from this investigation;
the stock price has dropped from $19.00 to around $10.00 because of
this witch hunt. Why not go after the guys that
have really hurt American citizens with their blatant
disregard for the welfare of their employees and shareholders?
In the end, Ms. Stewart is a successful, intelligent woman
who created a media empire -- all by herself without a man
to help her. And that may turn out to be the biggest crime of all.
Posted on June 5, 2003
Permanent link to this entry.
| |
Angel Set For Another Season
After keeping fans on tenterhooks for weeks,
The WB finally announced that it will renew
the critically acclaimed fantasy drama, starring David Boreanaz
as the vampire with a soul, in search of redemption. Angel
is a spin-off of the recently ended Buffy the Vampire
Slayer series, which starred Sarah Michelle Gellar for a seven year run.
Darker in tone than Buffy, Angel nevertheless
continued with Joss Whedon's trademark
blend of high-octane action, snappy dialogue,
pop culture references and heart-rending drama.
The show will retain its Wednesday timeslot,
at 9:00 pm Eastern time, and will follow
Smallville, which is moving to Wednesdays.
James Marsters, who played Spike
on BTVS, has been announced as a
series regular for the fall, and it's likely that
other Buffy cast members will make guest appearances.
Charisma Carpenter, who plays Cordelia, will scale
back her schedule and will not appear as a regular.
Next season will see Angel head in a new direction,
plot-wise. The season finale featured stylishly evil (and now very
dead) lawyer Lilah returning from the grave to offer
Angel and company the L.A. offices of Wolfram and
Hart as a reward for ending world peace when they
defeated Jasmine (Jasmine's price for world peace was just
too high to pay -- she ate human souls daily to stay in
shape). Bemused and yet tempted, Angel, Wes,
Fred, Gunn and Lorne head over to their new, plush offices.
Suddenly, they have hordes of employees, cool digs,
and access to all of Wolfram and Hart's amazing
R&D department which has the skinny
on all things mystical.
With Spike moving to L.A. (I assume that somehow he
survived dying heroically during the Buffy series finale
Tuesday night) and the incredibly annoying
Conner vaulted to an alternate life, this is going to be a great season.
Go, Joss, go!
Posted on May 21, 2003
Permanent link to this entry.
| |
Movie Review: The Matrix Reloaded
When we last saw Neo (Keanu Reeves) in The Matrix,
he had just defeated Agent Smith (excellently played by
Hugo Weaving) and had reluctantly come to terms with the
fact that he was The One who would help free humanity
from its virtual slavery to intelligent machines. Taking a page
from Peter Jackson's book, the Wachowski brothers dispense with
any preliminary explanation at the beginning of The Matrix
Reloaded. The action just picks up where the first movie
left off. So, if you haven't seen The Matrix yet, stop reading
and go rent the DVD before seeing Matrix Reloaded.
Otherwise, you'll be dazed and disoriented, just like
Neo was after he took that red pill in the first movie.
Keanu Reeves plays Neo with a restrained,
Gary Cooper-like performance that perfectly fits
the moody atmosphere. The dialogue is clipped, funny
and jam-packed with pop culture
and regional references: from martial arts films to
westerns to our current traffic woes.
Los Angeles residents are sure to nod their heads
sagely in agreement at this piece of dialogue:
Trinity: "The freeway? You said never to go on the 101,
it's suicide."
Morpheus: "Well, let's hope I was wrong."
This little gem precedes the most amazing car chase scene
in movie history: a spectacular 18-minute adventure set on
a freeway, involving, cars, trucks, motorcycles,
guns, ammo, martial arts and incredible special effects.
Yuen Wo Ping, the fight choreographer who
created the effects in Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon,
outdoes himself this time out. Neo -- who has discovered
some of the secrets of the Matrix -- is now able to do
almost anything while in the virtual reality world of
the Matrix; he can fly, he can move faster than most
humans, and his martial arts skills are out of this world.
At one point, he fights one hundred Agent Smiths, while
barely breaking a sweat. He also has some really cool clothes.
Carrie-Ann Moss, as Neo's love interest Trinity, looks
great in her black patent leather catsuit, drives like
a Winston Cup-winning NASCAR driver and makes us
believe in her love for Neo and her faith in the prophecy.
Much has been written about the Wachowski brothers'
dark vision of the future of humanity, where the machines
take over, put us in tanks and use our brain emissions as
energy. To keep humans occupied, they are plugged into the
virtual reality world which looks just like our current, modern world.
But a few people -- those who don't fit in, who always felt
that something wasn't quite right about our world -- well,
it turns out they were right. The Wachowski brothers
slip lots of subtext into this movie which reinforces the
idea that our "real" world really isn't real at all, that we are
the ones caught in the Matrix; just because you're paranoid,
doesn't mean they're not out to get you.
In between all the musings about the nature of
reality, the goals of humanity, and the
fundamental role of choice in the universe,
is some fantastic, thought-provoking entertainment. So, for those who
are not into cyberpunk or contemplating the
nature of slavery, reality -- virtual or otherwise --
just grab the popcorn, sit in an air-conditioned movie
theater with a really big screen and enjoy the
best spectacle of the summer.
Director: Andy Wachowski and Larry Wachowski
Studio: Warner Bros.
Running time: 138 minutes
Rating: Rated R (for sci-fi violence and some sexuality)
Cast:
Neo: Keanu Reeves
Morpheus: Laurence Fishburne
Agent Smith: Hugo Weaving
Trinity: Carrie-Anne Moss
Oracle: Gloria Foster
Niobe: Jada Pinkett Smith
Zee: Nona Gaye
Lock: Harry Lennix
Link: Harold Perrineau
Persephone: Monica Bellucci
Twins: Neil and Adrian Rayment
Posted on May 18, 2003
Permanent link to this entry.
| |
Oscars Hit Just the Right Note
In light of the current war in Iraq, many people
felt that the Oscars were just plain inappropriate.
The red carpet arrivals with ostentatious displays
of designer gowns and fabulous jewelry seemed
a bit much when American, British and Australian
servicemen and women are fighting and dying in
Iraq. But the decision that the show must go on
actually turned out to be a good one. Most of
the actresses toned down their outfits quite a bit.
De rigeur for the evening was a black dress,
pulled back hair and no diamonds. To make up for
the lack of glitter, most of the actresses accessorized
with major cleavage. The host, Steve Martin,
did an excellent job. He was funny and discrete, avoiding
the obvious political issues of the day, choosing to focus
on his famous audience for laughs. Sample: "The truth
is, Nicole Kidman has actually worn a prosthetic nose
in every one of her films, except The Hours. That was
her real nose."
Of course, media watchers were all just waiting
for the biggest blurt-out of the night. And, sure enough,
we weren't disappointed. Instead of thanking anyone
for his win for Best Documentary Film for
Bowling for Columbine, Michael Moore instead
used his time to berate the audience about the
"fictitious" war in Iraq (it looks pretty real to me)
and our "fictitious" president, George Bush
(he also appears to be real, as far as we can tell).
I can only assume that Mr. Moore meant that
he doesn't approve of Mr. Bush or the war, not
that he doesn't believe that either Mr. Bush or the war
is not actually real. I mean, honestly,
if you're going to do a big blurt out at the Oscars,
please at least use appropriate language and imagery; otherwise
you run the risk of thoroughly confusing the audience.
Mr. Moore was roundly booed and cut off by the
orchestra, who had been instructed to launch into
the theme from Shaft if anyone started making
political commentary. Steve Martin noted that
"there was lots of love backstage after Moore's speech;
the Teamsters were seen helping Moore into the
trunk of his limo."
In a marvelously graceful speech, Honorary Oscar winner
Peter O'Toole outdid himself, thanking the United States
for all it has done for him over the years. Nominated
seven times for an Oscar, but never winning, O'Toole
noted, "Always a bridesmaid, never a bride my foot.
I have my very own Oscar now to be with me until
death us do part."
There were two upsets of the night: Adrien Brody
winning Best Actor for his performance in The Pianist
and Eminem winning Best Song for "Lose Yourself",
from the 8 Mile soundtrack, much to the apparent
shock of presenter Barbra Streisand.
The very pregnant Catherine Zeta-Jones
looked fabulous as she accepted her Best Supporting
Actress award for Chicago. Looking as if she was expecting
her second child any minute,
Zeta-Jones nevertheless managed to belt out a rousing
rendition of "I Move On" with Queen Latifah. No word
on why Renée Zellweger didn't do the number that she
performed with Ms. Zeta-Jones in the film. She didn't look
ill --- could there be any truth to those rumors that it wasn't
really her voice in the film? Or perhaps she just doesn't
want to sing live in front of millions of people? At any rate,
she looked grand in her red gown, and has her Golden Globe
award to keep her company, since the Oscar for Best Actress
went to Nicole Kidman.
Chicago is the first musical to win an Oscar since
Oliver, although that was no surprise, really.
So, the seemingly endless awards season is coming to a close.
Now we'll have to wait another entire year to see Hollywood
put on the glam to congratulate itself on yet another job
well done.
Posted on March 24, 2003
Permanent link to this entry.
| |
CNN's Talk Back Live is DOA
In a surprisingly insightful move, CNN has finally
cancelled one of its most annoying programs:
the insipid, hyperactive and relentlessly
interactive Talk Back Live, hosted by
entertainment reporter Arthel Neville.
Talk Back Live featured a live audience,
one of the most irritating introductory
music riffs on television, and various
guests who would yell at each other
between commercial breaks. When
the host finally came up with an interesting topic,
say embryonic stem cell research or
the war in Iraq, so-called "experts" of wildly
varying credentials would have a few seconds
to give their opinions -- if they could spit them
out before being screamed at by some
no-name radio talk show host from Nowheresville,
Indiana.
In obeisance to the Sacred Altar of Interactivity (one of the
tenets of CNN's new programming religion), we
then get to hear what "Bob, from Dimebox, Texas" has to say
about the war in Iraq. If we're really lucky,
I can find out what "Matt, from the San Fernando
Valley in Southern California" thinks about cloning
("I just think that Star Wars was, like awesome!!")
Wow, I feel so, like...enlightened.
The show will be replaced by an extra hour of
hard news, given by Anchors Who Are Actually
Intelligent, Miles O'Brien
and Kyra Phillips. Given the fact that we appear to
be on the brink of a very serious war in Iraq, this
makes good sense. Apparently, someone with some taste
actually Talked Back to CNN.
Posted on March 10, 2003
Permanent link to this entry.
| |
Clinton vs. Dole: Again
Somebody over at CBS' 60 Minutes has really
got his groove on. After losing over a million viewers
in the past year or so, the once-mighty news magazine
show has really been revamping its image lately.
First, Dan Rather lands the interview of the year
with Saddam Hussein which airs on 60 Minutes II,
and now the show is bringing back the popular
"Point-Counterpoint" segment of the show.
Former President Bill Clinton and former Senator
Majority Leader and 1996 presidential candidate Bob Dole
have been signed to air 10 segments (which will be
called "Clinton/Dole" one week,
then "Dole/Clinton" the next) at a reputed cool $1 million,
for Mr. Clinton alone. According to the Associated Press, Clinton said
their wives -- freshman U.S. Senators Hillary
Rodham Clinton and
Elizabeth Dole -- were ``both terrified'' about
what they may say, although Dole joked that
they have both gotten "permission" to be on the show.
I personally think this is a great idea. I cringed at all the press reports
and rumors last year that former president Clinton was
going to be either a talk show host, an MTV
correspondent or a movie star, depending on which
bizarre report you read. Regardless of their politics, I think
most Americans would prefer that their ex-presidents
behave in a professional manner. Clinton is the youngest
ex-president that we've ever had -- I mean, it's not like
he's going to retire to play golf or something --
so he had to find something to do. And he really has
behaved himself since President Bush was elected.
I think the new Clinton/Dole segment will fill the gaping
hole left when CNN re-tooled and basically destroyed what used to be
the best show of this type on tv: Crossfire. CNN fired
the likeable Bill Press and replaced him with Paul Begala and
James Carville. Then they made the hosts dress up in
stupid boxing outfits and glare at the cameras for promos.
Bill Press and Tucker Carlson made a great team. They
hotly debated the issues of the day, but somehow still
seemed likeable to viewers. They played off each other's styles
and actually seemed to like and respect each other, even
when they disagreed. Now Crossfire has deteriorated
into an obnoxious shouting match, and the
poor ratings reflect viewers' distaste for watching
Bob Novak and Paul Begala scream at each other. It's
boring, tasteless and amazingly uninformative.
Bob Dole's appearances on late night television, such
as Letterman, show how funny he really is. And, of course,
Bill Clinton isn't exactly lacking in the charisma and
brains departments -- those weren't the traits that got
him into trouble. Dole and Clinton think that viewers
are ready for lively debate, without screaming and name
calling. And I think they're right.
Posted on March 6, 2003
Permanent link to this entry.
| |
Oprah Travels With the Classics
In a move that has the beleaguered book industry
down on its knees thanking the publishing gods,
media mogul
Oprah Winfrey has announced that
she is bringing back her popular book club, although
in a different form.
In a speech to the Association of American Publishers,
Ms. Winfrey said that she will soon be "back in the
business of recommending books...but with a difference."
This time around, the focus will be on classic literature.
The new book club is tentatively titled
"Traveling with the Classics," and will air three to five times a year,
a slower pace than the grueling monthly schedule of the old club.
Another difference is the location of the broadcast. Oprah
will travel to a location connected with the book or the author and
broadcast from there. Full support materials will be found on
Oprah.com, as well as companion study guides.
Of course, the big question for the publishers is:
what constitutes a "classic"? Are we talking public domain
works like Shakespeare here, or will the show include
modern classics, such as Catcher in the Rye, which
are still copyrighted and have exclusive print rights?
The news had publishers flipping through
their backlists immediately, hoping to find some "classic"
gems.
Oprah has publicly stated that she misses doing the old
show, but wanted to do something different. And why, you may
ask, did she cancel the first book club? I have two words
for you: Jonathan Franzen. This is only my opinion, of course,
but I think that the
Franzen debacle really hurt Oprah's feelings.
I mean, here she is doing an unprecedented, wonderful thing for literacy and the
book industry, and she gets kicked in the teeth for her troubles by
the World's Most Ungrateful Author himself. (After being invited
to be a Book Club honoree, the National Book Award-winning
Franzen wouldn't let
his publisher put the Oprah sticker on his precious literary
masterpiece, made fun of the Book Club format and its
female readership, then dissed Oprah's taste in books to
any media outlet that would listen, calling the books she
picked "schmaltzy", among other things. So Oprah uninvited
Franzen from the show.)
The great thing about doing classics is that, generally speaking,
the authors are dead and cannot make insulting comments
about one's taste/readers/tv show format. I, for one,
think that this is a wonderful idea. The classics are a part
of our history, our language and our culture. Yet, they are
sadly being forgotten in the pop culture of the new millennium,
by generations who would rather watch an episode of MTV's
Cribs than dive into Dickens. And if anyone can get people
to discover the joys of Shakespeare, Twain and
the Brontë sisters, it's Oprah Winfrey. More power to her.
Posted on March 4, 2003
Permanent link to this entry.
| |
Saddam Hussein: Ready For His Closeup
After the presidential election debacle of 2000,
some people were hoping that Dan Rather's career was
about to end in retirement.
His bizarre comments during the night-long presidential
election circus elicited confusion from
media and viewers alike. Always known for his
odd behavior and strange bucolic expressions over the years,
Rather outdid himself on Election Eve. (Sample commentary:
"If a frog had side pockets, he'd carry a hand gun."
"This race is tight like a too-small bathing suit
on a too-long ride home from the beach." "We've
lived by the crystal ball, we're eating so much
broken glass. We're in critical condition."
"Frankly we don't know whether to wind
the watch or to bark at the moon." And my personal
favorite: "Turn the lights down, the party just got wilder.")
It hasn't helped that the CBS nightly news has been
dead last in the ratings ever since he booted out
co-anchor Connie Chung, years ago.
But the veteran news reporter has
redeemed himself last night with the
scoop of the year that puts all the younger aspiring
news anchors to shame: a live, uncensored interview
with Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein.
According to his ex-mistress of thirty years, Parisoula
Lampsoss, Saddam Hussein
is a complex man. He loves scotch whiskey, the music
of Frank Sinatra, a good
Gazelle steak, American films, especially the Godfather trilogy,
and administering a thorough beating to his
wayward mistresses. He is very concerned with his appearance, dying
his hair jet black, wearing custom-made Western style
suits and worrying about his weight. He enjoys a good
Cuban cigar, and showing off his dancing skills to
traditional Arab music. He also takes Viagra and is a
germophobe who requires visitors to have their
clothing laundered, sterilized and x-rayed before meeting him.
He worried about being a good father, and so faithfully took his
son, Uday (pronounced you'-die), to watch torture
sessions when Uday was but a little tyke (now that's what I call some
good father-son quality time). Uday is known
to have committed multiple rapes and murders
and is regarded with terror by most of the
populace -- I can't imagine what would have made
him turn out that way. His antics got so out of control that
Saddam attempted to have him assassinated; he's now
in a wheelchair as a result of the botched attempt.
One would think that Saddam must have some
kind of evil, overpowering charisma, given the fact that
he rose from poverty to the top of the Baath party, to being the
sole ruler of all of Iraq. He must be intelligent to have risen
so far. Yet some of his actions seem incredibly stupid,
such as his invasion of Kuwait and his flouting of various
U.N. resolutions over the years. So how would Saddam come
across in the interview: as an evil mastermind? a lunatic?
a charismatic politician?
Conducted in Baghdad in one of the twenty restored
presidential palaces, the interview featured
Rather, Hussein and two Iraqi translators
sitting at a small table, with tiny porcelain
cups of coffee to provide sustenance for the
grueling, three-hour interview. Now you've got to give
Dan Rather credit: he's a brave man. He didn't pull
any punches at all with his questions.
Saddam seemed relaxed and confident. He does not
have a melodious speaking voice. And although it's
hard to tell because I don't speak Arabic, it did seem
as if he might be a compelling and emotional
speaker in his own language, who uses a lot of
metaphor and poetic stylings.
He invokes Allah and the honor of the Iraqi people a great deal.
He speaks using the royal "we". He
is a raving megalomaniac, telling Rather repeatedly that
he was elected by 99.6% and 100% of the vote in the
last two elections, respectively. And he is an amazingly
adept spin doctor. Here are some of the gems to
emerge from the interview:
-Iraq did not lose the Gulf War. His troops did retreat
with bombs being dropped on them, but it was their
choice. (How's that for some spin for the home crowd?)
-He will never go into exile and anyone who even
suggests such a thing (hint, hint, Saudi Arabia)
is an immoral person who is insulting the people of
Iraq.
-He is not, repeat not jealous of Osama bin Laden.
"Jealousy is for women; men should not be jealous
of each other." (If looks could kill, Rather would
have been a smoking pile of debris after he asked
this question. Clearly, Osama's popularity in the Arab
world makes him pea-green with envy. )
-He wants to debate President Bush via satellite
television, for the entire world to hear. And, no he is
not joking -- "we don't joke about war." He sounded
eminently reasonable as he made this request.
(Of course, the chances of this debate happening are
as remote as Saddam suddenly becoming shy of
having his portrait painted.)
-He only wants peace and is not in violation of
U.N. Resolution 1441, despite what Hans Blix says.
-In the event of a war, he will not set fire to Iraq's
oilfields, but the Americans might do that and then
blame it on him.
After one especially annoying question when he was
clearly about to lose his temper (remember,
Saddam is usually never seen to be asked direct questions
by anyone -- it's disrespectful) Saddam said he had to
leave to "go pray". He left for 15 minutes, presumably to
execute some hapless servant to calm himself down,
then reappeared, once again in control of his emotions.
When he started to get upset again, he picked up
what looked like a Sanford Uni-ball felt-tipped pen and
twirled it in his fingers.
One thing that emerged from the interview was that
Saddam really seems to worry about what the American
people think of him. He asked Rather some tough questions
about American opinion, to which Rather replied,
"Mr. President, I don't think
you're going to like my answers."
The translators looked terrified. Me? I just think
Dan Rather was lucky to get out of the palace
alive.
Posted on February 28, 2003
Permanent link to this entry.
| |
Sarah Michelle Gellar to Leave Buffy
Now this is one Internet rumor that I really didn't want
to be true, that Sarah Michelle Gellar is hanging up
her stake and crossbow and departing from Buffy the Vampire
Slayer. I mean, I know her movie career is
going well, but surely she could fit just one more
year into her schedule? Unfortunately,
Zap2it.com
is reporting that the rumors are true, and that Gellar
will spill all about her departure from the
critically acclaimed show in an exclusive interview for the March 7th issue
of Entertainment Weekly. And the Hollywood Reporter
says that Gellar is slated to start shooting in August for
the lead in MGM's Romantic Comedy, a
love story about a guy who tries to
win the heart of his longtime best friend and U.N.
translator (Gellar),
by recreating romantic scenes from movies. The film
is set for a 2004 release. A male friend, who
falls in the coveted 18-30 age group, responded to the news
of Gellar's departure from the Buffyverse thusly:
"That sucks, bigtime." Bigtime, indeed, my friend.
For as television slips further and futher into the morass
of reality programming, excellent shows with
intelligent writing, witty humor and talented actors
are going to become few and far between in the next year.
Of course, there are also rumors that the show will continue
in some form or another, perhaps with Eliza Dushku
reprising her role as the fallen slayer, Faith. But Dushku
has agreed to star in a new Fox pilot about a girl
who can go back in time for one day to save lives
(shades of UPN's ill-fated series 7 Days come to mind
here), and so a Faith-centered show seems
unlikely. Nicholas Brendon (Xander) and Alyson Hannigan (Willow) are both contractually bound to
stay with Buffy for one more season -- if there is a season.
And James Marsters (Spike) has stated that he's
more than willing to stick around. Of course,
some cast members could migrate over to Angel.
There is still no official confirmation
from either UPN or Mutant Enemy productions, but
those in the know say it's a done deal. That's a stake
through the heart for Buffy fans.
Posted on February 26, 2003
Permanent link to this entry.
| |
Ready.gov: Ready, Set...Terror!
Feeling bored? Filled with ennui? Need some more
thrills in your life or a good scare? Then
I recommend a trip to a website that is more
frightening than a Stephen King novel, and more
surreal than anything written by Douglas Adams.
Today the U.S. Government launched its terrorism
preparedness website,
www.ready.gov. The website
loads incredibly quickly -- it's clear they have
planned for millions of people to visit, and so have
have put the site on dedicated servers with
extremely fast connections to the Internet backbone.
The site gives an overview of what you're supposed
to do with all that duct tape you purchased last week.
Ok, seriously, the site tells you what in the world
you, Joe Citizen, are supposed to do in case of a
biological, chemical, or nuclear terrorist attack.
So, what does all this mean anyway? Is this just
Tom Ridge trying to justify his new budgetary allocation?
I don't think so. After all, if you had told people in, say 1997,
about what would happen on 9/11, no one would have
believed you. This is America. That's too far-fetched to ever
happen here. What makes this website all the
more alarming is something
we all know from reading all those Le Carr? novels over the years:
the stated policy of any government on almost any
issue that might cause a mass panic is to -- you guessed it --
not tell us. Because, as soon as you issue
a warning, people totally freak out. Like the guy who covered
his entire house in duct tape and plastic (I am not
making this up) after hearing Secretary Ridge's comments
last week. If Osama bin Laden has access to cable,
he must be laughing his head off.
So when you have the U.S. government actually
recommending that all citizens purchase potassium iodide,
which "may or may not protect your thyroid gland,
which is particularly vulnerable, from radioactive iodine
exposure," -- presumably from a dirty bomb --
this is Not Good. Especially since the site's writers don't even
seem to know if this potassium iodide will or will not work.
What I seem to recall from those horrible Hiroshima and
Nagasaki films we were forced to watch in high school was that if you are
anywhere near a real nuclear bomb going off (as opposed
to "just" a dirty bomb) you are in Big Trouble. If you aren't
immediately vaporized or burned beyond all recognition,
you die of Really Horrible Things about 10 years later.
The people who are instantly vaporized
suffer quite a bit less, actually. Which leads one to ponder:
how bad are things when getting instantly vaporized
is the preferred alternative?
In California, most everyone already has an earthquake
preparedness kit, with water, flashlights, batteries,
food etc., and a plan to get in contact with family members
in case the Big One hits. It's probably not a bad idea
for all Americans to have a kit like that.
That's just common sense.
I don't know about you, but I really long for the
good old, pre-9/11 days. Remember the Internet boom?
All those obnoxious 22 year-olds running things?
The cover of Time magazine shouting, "Why Aren't
You Rich?" Employee stock options being worth something?
Anne Heche making the rounds of the
talk shows to discuss her ever-changing sexual orientation,
her alter-ego Celestia and the arrival of the Mother Ship?
It seemed like the bubble would never burst. But it did,
bin Laden launched his war and here we are in the
America of today: broke
and stressed out beyond belief. Now, where did I put that
duct tape...?
Posted on February 19, 2003
Permanent link to this entry.
| |
Oscar Nominations Announced
Best Picture:
Chicago
The Hours
Gangs of New York
The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers
The Pianist
Best Actor:
Adrien Brody, The Pianist
Michael Caine, The Quiet American
Nicolas Cage, Adaptation
Daniel Day-Lewis, Gangs of New York
Jack Nicholson, About Schmidt
Best Actress:
Salma Hayek, Frida
Nicole Kidman, The Hours
Diane Lane, Unfaithful
Julianne Moore, Far From Heaven
Ren?e Zellweger, Chicago
Best Supporting Actor:
Chris Cooper, Adaptation
Ed Harris, The Hours
Paul Newman, Road to Perdition
John C. Reilly, Chicago
Christopher Walken, Catch Me If You Can
Best Supporting Actress:
Kathy Bates, About Schmidt
Julianne Moore, The Hours
Queen Latifah, Chicago
Meryl Streep, Adaptation
Catherine Zeta-Jones, Chicago
Best Director:
Pedro Almod?var, Talk to Her
Stephen Daldry, The Hours
Rob Marshall, Chicago
Roman Polanski, The Pianist
Martin Scorsese, Gangs of New York
Best Original Screenplay:
Pedro Almod?var, Talk to Her
Jay Cocks, Steven Zaillian, Kenneth Lonergan, Gangs of New York
Alfonso and Carlos Cuar?n, Y tu Mam? Tambien
Todd Haynes, Far From Heaven
Nia Vardalos, My Big Fat Greek Wedding
Best Adapted Screenplay:
Bill Condon, Chicago
David Hare, The Hours
Peter Hedges, Chris Weitz and Paul Weitz, About a Boy
Charlie and Donald Kaufman, Adaptation
Ronald Harwood, The Pianist
Best Animated Feature Film:
Ice Age
Lilo and Stitch
Spirit: Stallion of the Cimarron
Spirited Away
Treasure Planet
Best Foreign Language Film:
The Crime of Father Amaro (El Crimen del Padre Amaro), Mexico
Hero, Peoples Republic of China
Nowhere in Africa, Germany
The Man Without a Past, Finland
Zus & Zo, the Netherlands
Art Direction:
Chicago
Frida
Gangs of New York
The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers
Road to Perdition
Cinematography:
Chicago
Far From Heaven
Gangs of New York
The Pianist
Road to Perdition
Costume Design:
Chicago
Frida
Gangs of New York
The Hours
The Pianist
Documentary Feature:
Bowling For Columbine
Daughter From Danang
Prisoner of Paradise
Spellbound
Winged Migration
Documentary Short Subject:
The Collector of Bedford Street
Mighty Times: The Legacy of Rosa Parks
Twin Towers
Why Can't We Be a Family Again?
Film Editing:
Chicago
Gangs of New York
The Hours
The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers
The Pianist
Makeup:
Frida
The Time Machine
Music (Score):
Catch Me If You Can
Far From Heaven
Frida
The Hours
Road to Perdition
Music (Song):
I Move On from Chicago
Lose Yourself from 8 Mile
Burn It Blue from Frida
The Hands That Built America from Gangs of New York
Father and Daughter from The Wild Thornberrys Movie
Short Film (Animated):
The Cathedral
The Chubbchubbs!
Das Rad
Mike's New Car
Mt. Head
Short Film (Live Action):
Fair DHiver
Ill Wait for the Next One ... (J'attendrai le Suivant...)
Inja (Dog)
Johnny Flynton
This Charming Man (Der er en Yndig Mand)
Sound:
Chicago
Gangs of New York
The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers
Road to Perdition
Spider-Man
Sound Editing:
The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers
Minority Report
Road to Perdition
Visual Effects:
The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers
Spider-Man
Star Wars Episode II: Attack of the Clones
Posted on February 11, 2003
Permanent link to this entry.
| |
Michael Jackson: A Trip to Never Never Land
Last night's airing of the Martin Bashir
documentary about Michael Jackson's life truly
had to be seen to be believed. There was so much bizarre, sad and ultimately
disturbing content that was aired during the two hour
interview, that it's hard to know where
to start.
The film began with Bashir's trip to Jackson's
famous Santa Barbara rance, Neverland.
The ranch is truly amazing, containing
a full zoo with elephants, monkeys and other
animals, and a full-blown amusement park,
complete with a working train, carrousel,
go-cart track and many other rides. Jackson, with his
whispery-soft voice, in full make-up, climbs a tree
(he's in great shape for 44, I might add), tells Bashir he wants to "live
forever," and explains the details of his abusive
childhood. He shows Bashir his house full of
Peter Pan statues and tells Bashir that he
"is Peter Pan in his heart." He touchingly describes
his humiliation at having severe acne as a child, and
the relentless teasing by his brothers and father, who called him
"Big Nose." "You didn't get that ugly nose from my side
of the family," says father Joe Jackson, according to
Michael. He also describes throwing up at the mere
sight of his father who "threw him against a wall" and
beat them with "anything that was handy." He admitted
that he hated his father during the beatings -- a normal
reaction, I would say. He also claims to have had only
two nose jobs to help him sing better. He also gave the
oddest impression of almost believing this clearly falst
statement. Based upon a series of photos, a
plastic surgeon later detailed which procedures
she believed had been done: a brow lift, thinning of the lips,
lip tattooing, a chin implant, a cheekbone implant, skin
bleaching, and an eye job. She
said plastic surgeons describe a nose
such as his as "end stage," e.g.,
that's doctor-speak for "his nose
is so screwed up from too many surgeries, that there is nothing else
that can be done to fix it."
A note about smarmy journalist Martin Bashir is in
order here. Michael Jackson said he agreed to give
Bashir unprecedented access to his family and life
because Bashir told Jackson that "He was the man
who turned Princess Diana's life around." Excuse me? Bashir
was the man who conducted that ghastly interview
with the Princess where she looked like a deer
caught in the headlights, eyes red-rimmed from
crying. He is the man who got her to admit to infedility
on international television and to say that Prince
Charles wasn't fit to be king. Princess Diana said
repeatedly that she did not want a divorce, but
as soon as that interview aired, the Queen wrote
a letter telling Charles to divorce her immediately.
Soon after, she lost the right to be called
Her Royal Highness, and is said to have greatly
regretted giving that interview. Bashir is a real creep.
He exudes an oily sympathy which is solely
designed to get celebrities to say things that
they shouldn't on film. He is shown sucking up to
Jackson during most of the film, even holding hands
with poor little Prince Michael I, Jackson's five
year-old son. Then, in sanctimonious voiceovers, he says how
"disturbed" he was by Jackson's comments and
how he "knew he must confront him" about
the
allegations of child molestation which have
haunted the pop superstar since the 1994
civil settlement of the case. (No criminal charges were
ever filed.) Bashir was actually in the hotel room in Berlin
when Jackson dangled Prince Michael II over the balcony,
which caused a worldwide furor. Did he say anything
about child endangerment? No way. That might
end the incredibly lucrative interview.
Of course, Jackson played right into Bashir's hands with
absolutely outrageous comments about having children
in his house for sleepovers, and sleeping in the same
bed as actors McCauley and Kiernan Caulkin.
Jackson maintains the sleepovers are not sexual in
nature, that they are very sweet and touching.
Let's just say I wouldn't want any child of mine
in bed with Michael Jackson, who clearly is in
need of therapy because of his bizarre and abusive
childhood. One also has to wonder about the upbringing
that his own three children are enduring. There are nannies,
but no real mother. Prince II's (also known as Blanket)
mother has not been
identified. Prince I and Paris' mother, Debbie Rowe,
is nowhere to be found, and Prince I told Bashir
"I don't have a mother." The children are dragged
all over the world, and will not attend regular school
"because of the paparazzi." Oh, please. If Prince
William and Prince Harry can go to school,
then I think a way could be found for
Michael Jackson's kids to go to a formal school with
other children, instead of being subjected to a series
of tutors as their father was. I mean, look how weird
he turned out to be.
Several things became very clear as a result of this
interview. Michael Jackson is trapped in a fantasy childhood to make
up for the childhood he never had. He does not appear to be
a violent or aggressive person, and he is an extremely talented musical artist.
He was horribly abused as a child, and is now surrounded by
people and a lifestyle designed to keep him from being
confronted by the harsh realities of the real world.
Lastly, Michael Jackson truly does not seem to realize how strange his
life and attitudes are. And perhaps that is the saddest
thing of all.
Posted on February 7, 2003
Permanent link to this entry.
| |
Farewell to the Columbia Seven
Americans are growing used to it.
The ritual of grief and shock at yet another
national tragedy: people standing around looking
at television sets, spellbound by the horror
unfolding before them. In a horrifying
moment, the space shuttle Columbia disintegrated
over North Texas, taking the lives of seven
heroes and crushing the dreams of millions
of humans who believe that one day man will
reach another solar system, even another galaxy.
When Challenger exploded on liftoff in 1986,
there was a sense that perhaps the shuttle wasn't
safe or practical. Thousands of American schoolchildren
watched in horror as teacher Christa McAuliffe's life
came to an end. In 2003, our feelings about the shuttle
had changed. It had become such an everyday occurrence
that planned news coverage of the landing was minimal.
Major anchors were all caught away from their posts that Saturday
morning: CNN's Aaron Brown was in
Palm Springs, California, playing in a Celebrity
Golf Tournament, Tom Brokaw was
vacationing in the Virgin Islands. Many newsrooms
are preparing for round the clock coverage of the
impending war in Iraq and most anchors were
getting in their vacation days before the real
news marathon started. In fact, space travel via the
space shuttle has become so
commonplace that we've even had space
tourists -- people willing to pay $20 million
to Russia in order to experience the wonder of
seeing the Earth from the International Space Station.
But this tragedy has brought home to us how
very dangerous space travel is.
NASA's budgets have been cut repeatedly over
the years, thereby stifling innovation, and
reducing the manpower available to
perform needed safety upgrades. The design for
escape pods was another program which was halted
because of budget cuts, for example.
As the family of the crew reminded us
on national television, the astronauts
took the risks they did in order to further
the advance of science and to pave the way
for improvements in the human condition.
It is fitting that we take a moment to consider these
real heroes and the cause that they felt was important
enough to risk their lives for. As Stephen Hawking
has said, in order for humanity to survive in the long run,
we must reach outward to the stars. It is now time
that we took that goal seriously, and give the space
program the attention, support and funding that it deserves.
Posted on February 3, 2003
Permanent link to this entry.
| |
The Sorry State of Super Bowl Ads
Although millions of people tuned in to Sunday's
Super Bowl hoping to see either the somewhat
geriatric Raiders or the less than exciting
Buccanneers win the Vince Lombardi trophy,
there is another demographic which faithfully
tunes into the game: the Ad Watchers.
With spots going for $2 million for a 30-second
ad, usually the ad firms go all out to make a memorable
commercial, like my favorite of years past: the cat
herding commercial. But this year's crop was
less than stellar. The worst ad, hands down, was
Quizno's. The ad showed the founder of the company
working to come up with the perfect sandwich. He worked
so hard that he forgot to feed his pet bird, which
starved to death in its cage. Oh, yeah, I always
find the prospect of an animal suffering from thirst
and hunger until it eventually dies just hilarious.
Apparently, I'm not the only one who had that reaction to
that ad -- I've heard quite a bit of complaining about it
since Sunday.
The best ad, in my opinion, was the ad for
Pepsi Twist, starring the Osbornes and the Osmonds.
Now that was funny. Ozzy is in his kitchen trying to
get the trash compactor to work when his children Kelly and
Jack tell their dad that they're not really the Osbornes,
they're the Osmonds. They turn into Donny and Marie,
and begin to belt out "I'm a little bit country, I'm a little
bit rock and roll..." Ozzy is horrified, like he's having an
LSD flashback and yells for Sharon...he awakes from
his dream to find...Florence Henderson in his bed. His
look of horror at finding Mrs. Brady
as his new bunkmate was priceless.
There were a few flashes of wit, but mostly the
ads were just boring. Well, there's always next year.
Posted on January 28, 2003
Permanent link to this entry.
| |
The Rise and Fall of Steve Case
Eighteen years ago, Stephen M. Case founded a little
company called America Online. At the time,
no one really knew what the future of computers would
be, and no one anticipated the incredible speed at
which the World Wide Web would become an accepted
part of everyday life. Even Bill Gates didn't see the
potential of the Internet in the beginning. In one of the
most amazing corporate turnarounds in history,
Gates refocused his entire company towards the Internet
right about the time of the infamous browser wars.
(You remember a little browser called Netscape, don't
you? Oh wait, that's owned by AOL now).
Overnight, entire divisions of Microsoft were reorganized
and personnel were reallocated to different, more
net-friendly projects.
As Case's company grew and began to aggressively
sign up customers, it became clear to some that
hey, this Internet thing was here to stay. And
at the height of the tech boom, Case made another
bold move, by engineering the merger of Time Warner
with AOL; the merger was eventually approved by the FCC in 2000. Along the way he also found time to have an
notorious office affair with the then-married Jean Villanueva,
VP for corporate communications at AOL, whom he later married after
divorcing his wife of 11 years who is the mother of his three
children (Source: The Washington Post).
But the bubble was about to burst.
Greenspan started raising interest rates (he was
worried about inflation, remember?) in
1999. Then investors got nervous and began pulling
out of tech stocks, which were wildly overvalued.
("Earnings? We don't need no stinking earnings!"
was the mantra of the growth stock cheerleaders.)
Then 9/11 hit and the economic
boom was officially as dead as videocassettes.
The numerous accounting scandals didn't help either.
AOL is currently under investigation by the SEC for
accounting fraud...something about booking
free ad swaps as revenue to boost
the stock price or something. (Of course, one
has to wonder what the IRS would have thought
about failing to report that barter income, but that's
another column).
So, here's Case: he's achieved his goal. He is now
the head of the largest media conglomerate in the world,
which includes such goodies as CNN, Warner Books,
Time magazine, People magazine, and Warner
Bros and New Line Cinema.
The AOL people started pushing around the
Time Warner people. The management at CNN went
completely nuts and hired soft core porn star
Andrea Thompson to anchor Headline News, while
firing talented, experienced journalists in a drive to
compete with Fox. Even Ted Turner acknowledged
in an interview that he made a mistake in giving up
control over hiring decisions. (Perhaps he was distracted with
his messy divorce proceedings?) Meanwhile,
the stock price was falling faster than
the waistband of Christina Aguilera's hip-hugger jeans.
At the shareholder meeting in May, it was clear
that Case was going to get his walking papers, so he
resigned, making it clear in interviews that he really didn't
want to go. Richard Parsons has now taken over as both CEO and Chairman of the Board of AOL Time Warner. (Case is still on the board of directors, but who
knows how long that will last.) Critics of Case say that
he was like a bull in a china shop; that he didn't know anything
about running a traditional media company and that
the AOL corporate culture clashed with the more traditional
Time Warner style. Case himself says he is being blamed
for the falling stock price, which is a result of the ailing economy.
So what does Steve Case do now? He's only 44 years old and
has millions in the bank. According to the New York Post,
Case owns 41.5% of the publicly held plantation, Maui Land
& Pineapple Co., and is its largest shareholder. Reportedly,
the company is in a heated dispute with arch-rival Del Monte over an
exciting hybrid pineapple. So, he could head back to his
home state of Hawaii and be plenty busy. But can he really
give up the thrill of being the head of AOL Time Warner?
Perhaps he's just waiting in the wings, hoping to regain
what he once had. Only time will tell, but
one thing's for sure: this guy is never boring. So far,
no one has grabbed up the rights to film his life story.
It has everything: the struggling entrepreneur who rises
to fame and fortune, a lurid sex scandal, backbiting, infighting,
trysts in a tropical paradise, and even the possibility of a criminal investigation.
I think it would make a great movie of the week. Casting ideas,
anyone?
Posted on January 24, 2003
Permanent link to this entry.
| |
The Price of the Information Age
As I was happily surfing the Net today, I happened to
zip over to the
Los Angeles Times website
to check out the business entertainment news -- and
received a nasty shock. All registrations before July, 2001
had been summarily wiped out. In order to access the site,
you had to fill out yet another online registration form.
Only this time, they wanted to know my income,
my date of birth, my phone number, my address, the name of my first
real boyfriend, if I'd ever used recreational drugs and various other very
personal information (alright I'm exaggerating a bit,
but not much). Then I was sent an email telling me to
click on a link to activate my account. The email
told me in bold red letters to hurry up and
activate my account! And we mean now! No,
not in a minute...now! By now, I felt my blood pressure
rising as I got a cortisol kick, the heady afterburn of
stress. It was implied, although not
specifically stated, that if I didn't activate
my account right away, something terrible might happen.
Like, I might not find out which celeb has just headed off to
rehab, what exec has just been indicted for insider trading,
or whether Pamela Anderson and Kid Rock's
wedding was really going to go forward, in light of all those
Sheryl Crow rumors.
So I activated my account, thinking that was the end of it.
But wait, there's more! I was asked to create a Product
Profile. "This is getting really tedious," I thought to myself.
But being a tenacious type, I soldiered on. It turns out
that if you don't make your preferences known, you might
inadvertently subscribe yourself to yet another three or
four email newsletters, and you may have every bit of your
personal information sold to merchants. People who generally don't read
the instructions on anything in life are going to be bombarded
with email newsletters and offers for some very targeted
personal products, indeed. Being a compulsive reader, I was
handily able to avoid these consequences. So, now I'm
registered. It really wasn't that bad, was it? There's only
one problem. I don't just read the L.A. Times.
I also read The New York Times, Salon,
The Wall Street Journal and a host of
other online publications, all of which require either
registration and/or a subscription.
What it really boils down to is this: what are you willing
to put up with to read information for free? Online
publications have to either charge a subscription fee,
or use the print magazine model and charge for ads.
Declaring that there is no more free lunch on the Web,
Salon editor David Talbot has said that customers will either have to
pay a subscription fee to see ad-free content, or they are
going to have to agree to wade through some ads to see
the content for free. Right now, most publications are still free,
but they are starting to ask for more demographic information
from their users: information which will help them sell ads to
keep that content free.
So there are really three issues here,
as I see it: 1) What information are you willing to pay for
online? 2) What hassles are you willing to go through and
what personal information about yourself are you willing
to give to see information online for free? and
3) How in the world do you keep track of the 10,000
user names and passwords you will need to see this
information, whether you paid for it or not?
The debate is just beginning. It will be interesting to see
what happens.
Posted on January 22, 2003
Permanent link to this entry.
| |
Firefly Swatted by Networks
SciFi.com
is reporting that Joss Whedon's
innovative and critically well-received
series Firefly has been turned down by
ABC, CBS, NBC, UPN and the SCI FI Channel,
according to Christopher Buchanan, president
of Joss Whedon's production company,
Mutant Enemy. With production costs of
around $2 million per episode, the show is finding
it difficult to find a new home mid-season, although
reportedly, Whedon hasn't yet given up finding a home
for the series.
The SF/Western drama originated by Joss Whedon,
the talented creator of the hit television shows Buffy the Vampire
Slayer and Angel, was never really given a chance
by Fox. First, Fox brass decided that the two
hour season premiere "didn't have enough action,"
and so never aired it until the end of the first
season, which made for some continuity problems.
I'm not sure what the Fox brass were
smoking; if there were any more action
in the exciting and well-written two hour premiere, it would
have been yanked off the air by network censors.
The show drew decent ratings for the
dreaded Friday night timeslot, especially given the
total lack of promotion for the series. Given a little
support, it easily could have grown into its own.
The Nielsen Galaxy Report for 12/16/02 - 12/22/02
showed Firefly as the fourth most popular
SF show, pulling a 2.7 HHR Rating.
(The HHR, or household rating, is the average number
of households that watched a specific show expressed
as a percentage of all television households.)
Fan support has been overwhelming.
FireflySupport.com
was launched by loyal followers of the show, who
purchased a full-page ad in Variety, and has been engaged in
an active letter-writing campaign urging network
execs to pick up the show. But after the latest rounds
of pitches to other networks were unsuccessful,
even diehard fans are losing hope for a last-minute
resurection of the show.
With excellent writing, well-rounded characterization,
exciting action and some excellent CGI work, Firefly
deserves to be picked up and promoted properly.
This is the kind of unique and quality programming
that we need more of.
With the loyal fan base, it's clear that this could be
a money maker, given a decent time slot and a
competent publicity campaign. I know I'd tune in.
Posted on January 17, 2003
Permanent link to this entry.
| |
Harry Potter and the Juggernaut of Hype
In a development that's sure to thrill booksellers,
Scholastic has announced the long-awaited publication
date of the next Harry Potter novel, Harry Potter and the
Order of the Phoenix: June 21, 2003. To date, the series
about the boy wizard and his friends has sold approximately
80 million hardback and paperback copies
in the United States and 192 million worldwide since
the first book was released in 1998, according to Scholastic.
The book has also been widely ripped off, with bootleg
Russian versions entitled Tania Grotter selling quite well in the
former USSR. Chinese readers (illegally) can enjoy
Harry Potter And Leopard Walk Up To Dragon: a really
bizarre book in which Harry Potter has become an obese
dwarf with no magical powers. The opening line in that
soon-to-be-a-classic is "Harry doesn't know how long
it will take to wash the sticky cream cake off his face."
Luckily, most countries are signatories to international
copyright treaties, and print authorized foreign-language
versions of the books.
Here in the U.S., the hype juggernaut is starting up again: journalists'
requests for interviews with J.K. Rowling are
increasing, bookstores are already planning huge
event parties with treats, parties and even sleepovers
for fans, and people are pre-ordering the book from
amazon.com. Normally, I would eschew any book which
has this kind of in your face marketing, but there's a problem:
I love the Harry Potter books. There, I've said it.
They are funny, witty and wildly entertaining. The films
are excellent, as well. Which puts a real damper on my
inner curmudgeon, to say the least.
So, there you have it. Time to borrow a friend's children
and head to my local Barnes and Noble, carrying:
1) the lightning bolt decal for my forehead,
2) my AMEX gold card
and 3) a sleeping bag for the all-night party.
I'll be in disguise though, so please don't
say hello.
Posted on January 15, 2003
Permanent link to this entry.
| |
|
Our Blogs
Bloggers Blog
Book Blog
Crafters Craft
Drivers Drive
Fantasy SF Blog
Gamers Game
Health News Blog
HowToWeb.com
The IWJ Blog
Lovers Love
Media Cynic
Petosphere
Pleasant Morning Buzz
Science News Blog
Shopping Blog
Singers Sing
Surfers Surf
Traders Trade
Video Nacho
Watchers Watch
Workers Work
The Write News
Writer's Blog
|
