Here's one more I found interesting with my explaination.
Okay, what I think's going on is there are animatronic feet, and that the girls face is actually a mirror image from under the stage. When David shows the feet in the box as he holds them up, you can see some sort of wire holding them in place and maybe making them move. Also, at 2:30 and 2:54, you can possibly see a trap door. Check it out!
Thursday, December 20, 2007
Illusions
Lianna posted optical illusions. I'm fascinated by that type of thing - I used to be obsessed with Stage Illusions. Check out David Copperfield
Impressive huh?
Now here's a kid doing the same thing.
Not as spectacular without all the millions of dollars behind him like copperfield, but it's still a great effect. What I think is he's kneeling and he's only half in his pants. Any suggestions?
Impressive huh?
Now here's a kid doing the same thing.
Not as spectacular without all the millions of dollars behind him like copperfield, but it's still a great effect. What I think is he's kneeling and he's only half in his pants. Any suggestions?
Funny Commercial
After the two serious 'conspiracy' style blogs, I want to lighten the mood of the blog. I found this funny spoof commercial on YouTube about energy drinks. This would really come in handy for finals ;)
BrainGate
Wow, this is pretty ridiculous. So I posted that Orwellian blog below because of Jen's Facebook speech and found that interesting. Anyway, there's a keyword in that report, "BrainGate implant." Wanting to see what it was all about, I did a quick google search and found this out.
It's this microchip they implant into the physically handicapped's brain. If they have problems with their limbs, what it does is it allows them to control lights, doors, etc, with their BRAINS! The computer chip reads brain activity, waves, and electricity, and converts the waves into INTENTIONS which are converted into Computer Commands! Then the computer is attached to something that turns on lights or opens up mechanical doors. That's pretty crazy.
Useful for parapelegics, but what if the normal person got something like that? We'd be super human. Good in theory, but potentially dangerous in practice. We'd all be super human computer people. Are we really that lazy and do we really want that?
It's this microchip they implant into the physically handicapped's brain. If they have problems with their limbs, what it does is it allows them to control lights, doors, etc, with their BRAINS! The computer chip reads brain activity, waves, and electricity, and converts the waves into INTENTIONS which are converted into Computer Commands! Then the computer is attached to something that turns on lights or opens up mechanical doors. That's pretty crazy.
Useful for parapelegics, but what if the normal person got something like that? We'd be super human. Good in theory, but potentially dangerous in practice. We'd all be super human computer people. Are we really that lazy and do we really want that?
Facebook & Privacy.
I'm going to get Orwellian on you on this blog. After the presentation about Facebook & Privacy settings, I found this article I wanted to share with you that compared Facebook to Big Brother. Enjoy.
The Following is from InfoWars.com and in no way reflect my views. Please, Big Brother, don't kill me ;)
"Imagine a computer database which catalogued your entire social network: the email, home address, and sensitive details of all your friends, and consequently, all of their friends in a massive interlinked web. What if this service also archived all of your personal preferences on everything from books to movies to music? And if it also categorized your political views, club associations, previous jobs, educational background, and who you are dating?
How about if this information was available not only to government spooks but the general public free of charge?
Sounds like a hellish vision of the future, right? But this program is not the devilish spawn of DARPA’s Total Information Awareness program, nor the secret plans of “private” data miners like Choicepoint or Axciom.
The Beast system is here right now. And worst of all, people are voluntarily giving up this information, with some updating their profile every day with their latest personal details.
Welcome to TheFaceBook.com. Founded in February 2004, it currently operates on 800 college campuses cataloging the details of its 2.8 million users. According to the Boston Globe, “the free network…boasts that on average it attracts 80 percent of a school’s undergraduate population as well as a smattering of graduate students, faculty members, and recent alumni.”
For example at Boston University, 14,007 of the school’s 15,846 undergraduates have joined and volunteered their most intimate details. According to the statistics, approximately 60 percent of users log in daily, with 85 percent logging in weekly.
And just to make sure you can join the fun, TheFaceBook.com is busy adding more than 50 campuses a month as well as expanding to high schools and international institutions.
Call it Big Brother with a consumer-friendly smile.
So who do we have to thank for this? According to the official story, TheFaceBook was founded by 3 students from the CIA’s favorite breeding ground of Harvard University. Their first $500,000 in funding came from Peter Thiel, founder and former CEO of Paypal.
Thiel is also a former columnist for the Wall Street Journal and a graduate of 2Stanford University, the home of NSA computer research and CIA mind control projects like MK ULTRA. He is an avowed neocon and globalist whose book “The Diversity Myth” received praises from William Kristol, Christopher Cox, Edward Meese, and Linda Chavez. Thiel sits on the board of the radical right-wing VanguardPAC and he personally donated $21,200 to Arnold Schwarzenegger’s campaign for governor.
At a June 24, 2004 conference, Thiel remarked “I think the only way that the world can become unified in some sense is through technology. Technology is driving us towards a single, seamless humanity.” Surely John Poindexter and the architects of the cashless society control grid would agree.
Yet TheFaceBook.com’s connections to the shadowy world of black ops don’t stop there. They recently received $13 million in venture capital backing from Accel Partners. James Breyer, the manager of Accel, sits on the board of National Venture Capital Association (NVCA) alongside Gilman Louie, head of In-Q-Tel.
The CIA set up In-Q-Tel in 1999, with the goal of fostering companies that provide “data warehousing and mining” in a “secure community of interest.” Further goals include “profiling search agents” which are “self-sustaining, to reduce its reliance on CIA funding.” Sounds like an exact description of TheFaceBook.
After all, what better way to spy on potential radicals and student activists than with a program so seemingly innocuous? TheFaceBook already categorizes users on a scale from “Very Liberal” to “Very Conservative” allowing for easy government profiling. Additionally they can search for anyone who lists the wrong keywords, like “anarchist,” “protest” “New World Order,” or any other thought crime. And with the click of a button, they have your picture, address, and the names and information of all your friends.
TheFaceBook is the devil in sheep’s clothing. It is leading the vanguard of the “consumer friendly” Big Brother targeting young people, specifically college and high school students. While pretending to be a harmless and fun service, TheFaceBook is a dark foray into psychological profiling, where the cryptocracy wants to know every detail of your life and track your location at every moment.
Unfortunately, this is part of a larger plan to spy on students. In March, AOL, a company that has admittedly handed over emails and web logs to the FBI and NSA, announced a new privacy policy for their popular AIM instant messenger program used predominately by students. It said “You waive any right to privacy." Civil liberties advocates immediately warned users that all their conversations could be tapped by AOL, which uses an Illuminati all-seeing eye as their logo. But with so much MTV to watch and so many Britney Spears songs to memorize, it seems few of them are listening.
Last week the CIA announced they would be hiring students to spy on campus activists and report the information back to headquarters. In actuality this has probably been going on far before the official announcement.
Eventually all of this information will be stored in pentabyte databases and linked to our microchipped National ID card. But before they can implant Verichips into our hands and solder BrainGate chips into our brains, they must weed out the “student troublemakers” with the help of programs like TheFaceBook and AIM.
Civil liberties advocates are so busy protesting the PATRIOT Act that they have ignored the insidious spy networks right under our noses. The same college students who list themselves in the ACLU club on TheFaceBook are blind to the danger of announcing their affiliation to the world.
TheFaceBook.com is nothing more than COINTELPRO with slick packaging. It is part of a new breed of spy networks designed to profile students for the next phase of martial law. The Bush regime is a megalomaniacal cabal of mass murderers who want to crush all internal dissent, and like all dictatorial regimes, the first place they will look is students.
Of course with the ECHELON network already spying on all phone calls and emails, there is really nowhere to hide. So in the meantime I am using TheFaceBook to my advantage. I have listed myself as a “Very Conservative” intern at the Dan Quayle Library with a penchant for books by Oliver North.
After all, maybe I have entered the right keywords and the CIA will come recruit me as one of those new student spies. "
The Following is from InfoWars.com and in no way reflect my views. Please, Big Brother, don't kill me ;)
"Imagine a computer database which catalogued your entire social network: the email, home address, and sensitive details of all your friends, and consequently, all of their friends in a massive interlinked web. What if this service also archived all of your personal preferences on everything from books to movies to music? And if it also categorized your political views, club associations, previous jobs, educational background, and who you are dating?
How about if this information was available not only to government spooks but the general public free of charge?
Sounds like a hellish vision of the future, right? But this program is not the devilish spawn of DARPA’s Total Information Awareness program, nor the secret plans of “private” data miners like Choicepoint or Axciom.
The Beast system is here right now. And worst of all, people are voluntarily giving up this information, with some updating their profile every day with their latest personal details.
Welcome to TheFaceBook.com. Founded in February 2004, it currently operates on 800 college campuses cataloging the details of its 2.8 million users. According to the Boston Globe, “the free network…boasts that on average it attracts 80 percent of a school’s undergraduate population as well as a smattering of graduate students, faculty members, and recent alumni.”
For example at Boston University, 14,007 of the school’s 15,846 undergraduates have joined and volunteered their most intimate details. According to the statistics, approximately 60 percent of users log in daily, with 85 percent logging in weekly.
And just to make sure you can join the fun, TheFaceBook.com is busy adding more than 50 campuses a month as well as expanding to high schools and international institutions.
Call it Big Brother with a consumer-friendly smile.
So who do we have to thank for this? According to the official story, TheFaceBook was founded by 3 students from the CIA’s favorite breeding ground of Harvard University. Their first $500,000 in funding came from Peter Thiel, founder and former CEO of Paypal.
Thiel is also a former columnist for the Wall Street Journal and a graduate of 2Stanford University, the home of NSA computer research and CIA mind control projects like MK ULTRA. He is an avowed neocon and globalist whose book “The Diversity Myth” received praises from William Kristol, Christopher Cox, Edward Meese, and Linda Chavez. Thiel sits on the board of the radical right-wing VanguardPAC and he personally donated $21,200 to Arnold Schwarzenegger’s campaign for governor.
At a June 24, 2004 conference, Thiel remarked “I think the only way that the world can become unified in some sense is through technology. Technology is driving us towards a single, seamless humanity.” Surely John Poindexter and the architects of the cashless society control grid would agree.
Yet TheFaceBook.com’s connections to the shadowy world of black ops don’t stop there. They recently received $13 million in venture capital backing from Accel Partners. James Breyer, the manager of Accel, sits on the board of National Venture Capital Association (NVCA) alongside Gilman Louie, head of In-Q-Tel.
The CIA set up In-Q-Tel in 1999, with the goal of fostering companies that provide “data warehousing and mining” in a “secure community of interest.” Further goals include “profiling search agents” which are “self-sustaining, to reduce its reliance on CIA funding.” Sounds like an exact description of TheFaceBook.
After all, what better way to spy on potential radicals and student activists than with a program so seemingly innocuous? TheFaceBook already categorizes users on a scale from “Very Liberal” to “Very Conservative” allowing for easy government profiling. Additionally they can search for anyone who lists the wrong keywords, like “anarchist,” “protest” “New World Order,” or any other thought crime. And with the click of a button, they have your picture, address, and the names and information of all your friends.
TheFaceBook is the devil in sheep’s clothing. It is leading the vanguard of the “consumer friendly” Big Brother targeting young people, specifically college and high school students. While pretending to be a harmless and fun service, TheFaceBook is a dark foray into psychological profiling, where the cryptocracy wants to know every detail of your life and track your location at every moment.
Unfortunately, this is part of a larger plan to spy on students. In March, AOL, a company that has admittedly handed over emails and web logs to the FBI and NSA, announced a new privacy policy for their popular AIM instant messenger program used predominately by students. It said “You waive any right to privacy." Civil liberties advocates immediately warned users that all their conversations could be tapped by AOL, which uses an Illuminati all-seeing eye as their logo. But with so much MTV to watch and so many Britney Spears songs to memorize, it seems few of them are listening.
Last week the CIA announced they would be hiring students to spy on campus activists and report the information back to headquarters. In actuality this has probably been going on far before the official announcement.
Eventually all of this information will be stored in pentabyte databases and linked to our microchipped National ID card. But before they can implant Verichips into our hands and solder BrainGate chips into our brains, they must weed out the “student troublemakers” with the help of programs like TheFaceBook and AIM.
Civil liberties advocates are so busy protesting the PATRIOT Act that they have ignored the insidious spy networks right under our noses. The same college students who list themselves in the ACLU club on TheFaceBook are blind to the danger of announcing their affiliation to the world.
TheFaceBook.com is nothing more than COINTELPRO with slick packaging. It is part of a new breed of spy networks designed to profile students for the next phase of martial law. The Bush regime is a megalomaniacal cabal of mass murderers who want to crush all internal dissent, and like all dictatorial regimes, the first place they will look is students.
Of course with the ECHELON network already spying on all phone calls and emails, there is really nowhere to hide. So in the meantime I am using TheFaceBook to my advantage. I have listed myself as a “Very Conservative” intern at the Dan Quayle Library with a penchant for books by Oliver North.
After all, maybe I have entered the right keywords and the CIA will come recruit me as one of those new student spies. "
Wednesday, December 19, 2007
How I "Worked" My Documentary
I just wrote a blog about how reality TV show's a 'work.' I also explained that a 'work' is something contrived. To make my point about reality TV a little clearer, I want to talk about a 'reality' documentary I did in Video Editing class a year or so ago. Here's the video itself.
Okay, now the editing came out great and the story flowed congruently. But the truth is, I filmed a bunch of random footage and had NO story to tell until I actually sat down and figured one out. Basically what I did was get Brito's general story, filmed some wrestling interviews, and figured it all out as I was editing.
Everything about Mike Brito was true. He's a college student at BSC, he wants to wrestle part time, his class scheduel, etc. But the first shot of him coming out the door? "Hey Mike, that sucked. Do it again." He must have walked in and out of that door 20 times, because I'm anal retentive and have OCD with this type of stuff.
His dream isn't to become an 'EPW Wrestler.' That'd be stupid, and that was greatly exaggerated to make the story flow. Dreaming to become an 'EPW Wrestler' is legitimatly equal to dreaming to be a thankless weekend wrestler who gets paid maybe $20 or less and a stale bag of popcorn. Oh yeah, and he'd have to set up the ring and get yelled at by a crappy promoter. So no, his dream isn't to be an EPW wrestler. A better thing to say would be, "I dream of being a WWE superstar," but I called Vince... he could't make it to Bridgewater that day. But like I said, it was a 'goal' i could have him set so he could accomplish it by the end. The Pay-off!
So next we're in the car with him. I probably should have cut this up with some stock footage, but I didn't. Hindsight's 20/20. This story was completely true.
Next shot we're 'interviewing' the Head Trainer. The head trainer's really an assistant trainer who me & Mike are good friends with. Oh yeah, and the interview? Never happened. Sean's just looking out into space somewhere and talking to himself. I go, "Give me 10 minutes of bullshit about how great Mike is." And he did. The great thing is, he actually stops and reacts to the invisible man he's talking to to add realism. And who said wrestler's can't act?
Okay, next up is the dramatic sequence where we reveal there's this huge wrestle-off to be in a Battle Royal match. If Mike wins the match, he gets to be in it. Truth is, WRESTLING's FAKE! The outcome's pre-determined! Nothing was determined in a Wrestle-Off. That was just filmed so I could have something to throw into the story. And the Battle Royal already happened 3 months before the filming of this documentary. The original plan was to show footage of Mike in the match itself at the end of the documentary, but the promoter refused to give me the footage.
My favorite part of the editing came from splicing Kyle O'Riley's interview with Sean & Mikes as they all go back and fourth. I think it was great for effect. Truth is, Kyle's a sweetheart. He's soft spoken, respectul, all that. I go, "Kyle, I need an asshole for this documentary. You're, um... you're the Star Student, you have a bad attitude, and you don't like Mike. Go!" and I turned the camera on, and he spouted off a whole bunch of ad-libbed lines.
In editing, I discovered that just about everything Kyle said, Sean said something to counter act, or I could find a sound-bite of Mike that would fit. For example, Kyle: I'm definately the star student, Sean: A lot of people think he has an attitude problem. OR Kyle: I got the chance to be in this Battle Royal Mike: I think I want to be a part of that. This was pure luck and I capitalized on it in editing.
The "Trainer giving last minute instructions" was really after Kyle wrestled someone ELSE, not Mike, and Sean was giving feedback. I just got a good shot of Mike sitting off in the distance so I made it seem like they were in 'opposite corners of the room.'
The match itself had heavy editing. The moves didn't really connect and they exposed a lot of the 'magic' behind wrestling. (They're both relatively new at the time of the filming.) So I cut and pasted and made it all flow and fit short. The match was probably 10 minutes, I cut it down to about 15-30 seconds.
And finally, Mike Brito's post-match interview? We filmed all the stuff with Mike in the black shirt, then I go, "Hey Mike... uh.... take your shirt off. You just had a match... you're tired, you won..... Go." And just like that, it's edited in to look like he just had a match.
Figured I'd shed some light on how Editing completely shapes a 'true' story. Maybe you guys wont look at VH1 the same way after this. Sorry for spoiling it ;)
Okay, now the editing came out great and the story flowed congruently. But the truth is, I filmed a bunch of random footage and had NO story to tell until I actually sat down and figured one out. Basically what I did was get Brito's general story, filmed some wrestling interviews, and figured it all out as I was editing.
Everything about Mike Brito was true. He's a college student at BSC, he wants to wrestle part time, his class scheduel, etc. But the first shot of him coming out the door? "Hey Mike, that sucked. Do it again." He must have walked in and out of that door 20 times, because I'm anal retentive and have OCD with this type of stuff.
His dream isn't to become an 'EPW Wrestler.' That'd be stupid, and that was greatly exaggerated to make the story flow. Dreaming to become an 'EPW Wrestler' is legitimatly equal to dreaming to be a thankless weekend wrestler who gets paid maybe $20 or less and a stale bag of popcorn. Oh yeah, and he'd have to set up the ring and get yelled at by a crappy promoter. So no, his dream isn't to be an EPW wrestler. A better thing to say would be, "I dream of being a WWE superstar," but I called Vince... he could't make it to Bridgewater that day. But like I said, it was a 'goal' i could have him set so he could accomplish it by the end. The Pay-off!
So next we're in the car with him. I probably should have cut this up with some stock footage, but I didn't. Hindsight's 20/20. This story was completely true.
Next shot we're 'interviewing' the Head Trainer. The head trainer's really an assistant trainer who me & Mike are good friends with. Oh yeah, and the interview? Never happened. Sean's just looking out into space somewhere and talking to himself. I go, "Give me 10 minutes of bullshit about how great Mike is." And he did. The great thing is, he actually stops and reacts to the invisible man he's talking to to add realism. And who said wrestler's can't act?
Okay, next up is the dramatic sequence where we reveal there's this huge wrestle-off to be in a Battle Royal match. If Mike wins the match, he gets to be in it. Truth is, WRESTLING's FAKE! The outcome's pre-determined! Nothing was determined in a Wrestle-Off. That was just filmed so I could have something to throw into the story. And the Battle Royal already happened 3 months before the filming of this documentary. The original plan was to show footage of Mike in the match itself at the end of the documentary, but the promoter refused to give me the footage.
My favorite part of the editing came from splicing Kyle O'Riley's interview with Sean & Mikes as they all go back and fourth. I think it was great for effect. Truth is, Kyle's a sweetheart. He's soft spoken, respectul, all that. I go, "Kyle, I need an asshole for this documentary. You're, um... you're the Star Student, you have a bad attitude, and you don't like Mike. Go!" and I turned the camera on, and he spouted off a whole bunch of ad-libbed lines.
In editing, I discovered that just about everything Kyle said, Sean said something to counter act, or I could find a sound-bite of Mike that would fit. For example, Kyle: I'm definately the star student, Sean: A lot of people think he has an attitude problem. OR Kyle: I got the chance to be in this Battle Royal Mike: I think I want to be a part of that. This was pure luck and I capitalized on it in editing.
The "Trainer giving last minute instructions" was really after Kyle wrestled someone ELSE, not Mike, and Sean was giving feedback. I just got a good shot of Mike sitting off in the distance so I made it seem like they were in 'opposite corners of the room.'
The match itself had heavy editing. The moves didn't really connect and they exposed a lot of the 'magic' behind wrestling. (They're both relatively new at the time of the filming.) So I cut and pasted and made it all flow and fit short. The match was probably 10 minutes, I cut it down to about 15-30 seconds.
And finally, Mike Brito's post-match interview? We filmed all the stuff with Mike in the black shirt, then I go, "Hey Mike... uh.... take your shirt off. You just had a match... you're tired, you won..... Go." And just like that, it's edited in to look like he just had a match.
Figured I'd shed some light on how Editing completely shapes a 'true' story. Maybe you guys wont look at VH1 the same way after this. Sorry for spoiling it ;)
Reality Shows are Crap... Kinda
I think reality shows are a total work. "Work" is carny talk for "set-up" or "staged." I think a lot of the stuff that happens might be real, considering the situations are contrived, but the emotions coming out of those situations are probably real. But the "worked" part comes from video editing.
Every TV show, movie, etc, needs a PLOT. It's essential. The generic make up for a movie is 1) The Good Guy Shines a little bit in his everyday life, 2) The protagonist messes up the good guys life in some way by distrupting something. 3) The Good and Bad guy face off, and 4)The Conclusion happens.
Let's take the VH1 show Rock of Love for example. My take on what happened is that the show was filmed, everything happened, and Brett Michaels picked his winner. Now, typically everyone wants a) the underdog and b) the good guy to win. So, why not take all the flattering shots of Jes, the winner, and make her look like a) the underdog and b) the biggest sweet heart? Why not manipulate the shots to make the "reality show," in reality, have a Storyboard Arc?
Now, lets make a protagonist. Lets find the girl that's kind of edgy, dig up all the shots that make her look as manipulative as possible, and splice it all together to make it seem like this stuff was a well written drama?
So now, we painted one of the runner-ups to look like a Villain, we painted the actual winner to look like the Hero. When we run the TV show, people will NATURALLY prefer that one who's painted to be the hero, and the one chosen as the villain will get the people wanting to see what happens week after week. And finally, when the hero wins, everyone feels like they're justified, and it's a huge pay-off.
Televisions all psychology. It's manipulating people's emotions to get them to tune in week after week. Reality TV's a work.
Every TV show, movie, etc, needs a PLOT. It's essential. The generic make up for a movie is 1) The Good Guy Shines a little bit in his everyday life, 2) The protagonist messes up the good guys life in some way by distrupting something. 3) The Good and Bad guy face off, and 4)The Conclusion happens.
Let's take the VH1 show Rock of Love for example. My take on what happened is that the show was filmed, everything happened, and Brett Michaels picked his winner. Now, typically everyone wants a) the underdog and b) the good guy to win. So, why not take all the flattering shots of Jes, the winner, and make her look like a) the underdog and b) the biggest sweet heart? Why not manipulate the shots to make the "reality show," in reality, have a Storyboard Arc?
Now, lets make a protagonist. Lets find the girl that's kind of edgy, dig up all the shots that make her look as manipulative as possible, and splice it all together to make it seem like this stuff was a well written drama?
So now, we painted one of the runner-ups to look like a Villain, we painted the actual winner to look like the Hero. When we run the TV show, people will NATURALLY prefer that one who's painted to be the hero, and the one chosen as the villain will get the people wanting to see what happens week after week. And finally, when the hero wins, everyone feels like they're justified, and it's a huge pay-off.
Televisions all psychology. It's manipulating people's emotions to get them to tune in week after week. Reality TV's a work.
Industry Standard, WWE, & Macintosh
We had a discussion not too long ago about Industry Standard and Mac's vs PC's in the video editing and digital imagery world. The industry I want to get into is, what else, professional wrestling. So I came across this article I found interesting. It's from Mac World. Basically, they're talking about how WWE used a Mac Pro and Apple Cinema Display themed set at a Pay Per View named Cyber Sunday. The video screen looked like a gigantic laptop monitor and the floor was set to look like a keyboard. "The set also featured an Apple keyboard which was the top area of the ramp leading down to the ring." The article mentions how WWE uses Macs to make all of their graphics for their TV programs. Also, the countdown clocks that WWE uses to countdown to pay per view events are also Apple Dashboard widgets.
Figured I'd pass the info along.
Figured I'd pass the info along.
More about Parallell's
All that talking about Parallel TV Shows and the previous post about Boy Meets World & 3D characters made me remember an episode, and I figured I'd link two and two together.
As I said before, all the characters were 3-dimensional and the viewers knew what everyone was about, almost as if they knew them personally. That's what made the following episode so ironic.
Eric tries out for a role in an upcoming TV show, "Male gets acquainted with the Universe" (an obvious take on the real show's title.) In it, all the actors look exactly the same as the one's in Boy Meets World, only they're in a 'parallell universe' so to speak. Corey, the usually mellow one, is a complete jerk & primadonna. Shawn, the usual blunt and confident one, is ridiculously shy and self consious. And the little innocent sister, if I remember correctly, was a chain smoker who was really twice her supposed age. I could be wrong though.
They did another one where Corey gets knocked out an has a dream where he's in the Happy Day's era. Shawn become Shawnzie, the girls are all wearing poodle skirts, that whole thing. And the comedy comes from how they all relate to each other in similar manners but only in Greaser style.
Just a tangent, but these types of episodes probably wouldn't have worked if the character's wern't 3 dimensional and connected with audiences on such a level.
As I said before, all the characters were 3-dimensional and the viewers knew what everyone was about, almost as if they knew them personally. That's what made the following episode so ironic.
Eric tries out for a role in an upcoming TV show, "Male gets acquainted with the Universe" (an obvious take on the real show's title.) In it, all the actors look exactly the same as the one's in Boy Meets World, only they're in a 'parallell universe' so to speak. Corey, the usually mellow one, is a complete jerk & primadonna. Shawn, the usual blunt and confident one, is ridiculously shy and self consious. And the little innocent sister, if I remember correctly, was a chain smoker who was really twice her supposed age. I could be wrong though.
They did another one where Corey gets knocked out an has a dream where he's in the Happy Day's era. Shawn become Shawnzie, the girls are all wearing poodle skirts, that whole thing. And the comedy comes from how they all relate to each other in similar manners but only in Greaser style.
Just a tangent, but these types of episodes probably wouldn't have worked if the character's wern't 3 dimensional and connected with audiences on such a level.
Paralell TV Shows
The Jeffersons had their own TV show, and also made cameo appearances on All in the Family AS George & Wheezy. There are spin-off shows like Grey's Annatomy and that other one (Can you tell I don't watch TV too much?). Anyway, thinking of stuff like that, I thought this would be an interesting concept.
You have two TV shows that are together, but seperate. Hear me out. For example, you have to families, lets just say The Jeffersons and the Bunkers for arguments sake. Episode 1 of the Jeffersons, they're doing their thing, they go to some group picnic or party, meet up with the Bunkers. Something funny happens, it's this big to-do, and they go home and they resolve whatever it is happens. Then on Episode 1 of the Bunker's TV show, they're doing THEIR own thing, then when they go to the group picnic, it's the same scene, only from the other families perspective, and when they go home, see how THEY resolve the issue.
Now you have two different TV shows based on the same concept, so double the advertising and sponsorships, double the syndication money, double the DVD sales and royalties, etc etc. What'd be even more interesting is if you could run the two shows simultaneously on different channels and they intersect at exactly the right times. Not sure if you'd want that to be done and compete with yourself, but it's still an interesting concept. And who says you can't flip-flop them at another time so people can see both? What do you think?
You have two TV shows that are together, but seperate. Hear me out. For example, you have to families, lets just say The Jeffersons and the Bunkers for arguments sake. Episode 1 of the Jeffersons, they're doing their thing, they go to some group picnic or party, meet up with the Bunkers. Something funny happens, it's this big to-do, and they go home and they resolve whatever it is happens. Then on Episode 1 of the Bunker's TV show, they're doing THEIR own thing, then when they go to the group picnic, it's the same scene, only from the other families perspective, and when they go home, see how THEY resolve the issue.
Now you have two different TV shows based on the same concept, so double the advertising and sponsorships, double the syndication money, double the DVD sales and royalties, etc etc. What'd be even more interesting is if you could run the two shows simultaneously on different channels and they intersect at exactly the right times. Not sure if you'd want that to be done and compete with yourself, but it's still an interesting concept. And who says you can't flip-flop them at another time so people can see both? What do you think?
Boy Meets World/3D Characters
In class a while back we were talking about 3D Characters and how they make TV shows more interesting. In my opinion, a 3D character is one who you almost grow up with. You know all their emotions and they're all expressed at one point or another, and you feel as if you know them personally. I think a good example of this is Boy Meets World.
People really grew up with these shows and the cast grew with the audience. They all started as geeky elementary kids, Topanga liking astrology and all that stuff and Feenie being a hard-ass. Then they grew into awkward teenagers and finally into adulthood. The whole way, you saw Topanga & Corey grow as a couple, Eric turn from an asshole older brother to a comic goofball, Shawn evolve from a punk to a decent human as well as his strained relationship with his family, and finaly you got a sense that Mr. Feenie was a grandfather or mentor figure. Even to the point where I refered to an old High school teacher as, "Our personal Mr. Feenie."
I think overall this show had a lasting impact on its viewers because of the emotional connection it had with its viewers thanks to the 3D characters.
People really grew up with these shows and the cast grew with the audience. They all started as geeky elementary kids, Topanga liking astrology and all that stuff and Feenie being a hard-ass. Then they grew into awkward teenagers and finally into adulthood. The whole way, you saw Topanga & Corey grow as a couple, Eric turn from an asshole older brother to a comic goofball, Shawn evolve from a punk to a decent human as well as his strained relationship with his family, and finaly you got a sense that Mr. Feenie was a grandfather or mentor figure. Even to the point where I refered to an old High school teacher as, "Our personal Mr. Feenie."
I think overall this show had a lasting impact on its viewers because of the emotional connection it had with its viewers thanks to the 3D characters.
Monday, October 22, 2007
Who knew Mario looked like that?
I found an interesting piece on YouTube - it's the guy who does the voice of Mario playing around with technology that allows him to capture voices and animations for the characters from anywhere in the world. What's interesting is that as he talks, the character models move according to his tone and pitches. Also I find it interesting that when he changes his voice to Wario, the computer model changes from Mario to Wario. I'm not sure if that's actually voice-activated or if he switched using a button. But what's the MOST interesting is that the voice of Mario and Warrio looks like Frasiers dad :). Who knew?
Seinfeld Narrative
Narrative Analysis is to look at something as a novel, find out who the characters are, what the plot is, and piece it all together. In class we were discussing Seinfeld, and how it's a narrative about a whole lot of nothing and that there never is a set-in-stone plot.
I think the creators played around with this notion a bit. This is evidenced by the "Backwards Episode." Basically what happens, is they play the final scene first, and then in order, played them all back to the first scene of that particular episode.
If I remember correctly, it began with everyone being miserable because of a failed-wedding. Then the next scene was the wedding, which was a disaster because of something to do with invitations. The following scene was the actual mishap to do with the invitations, and so on and so on until the very last scene was the announcing that someone's getting married. It all pieced together so nicely that the episode was just as good backwards as it would have been forward.
I think this was a neat way for the creators to play around with the characters and the show as a whole. It was the characters that really helped to drive the episode, because as a viewer, you knew what they were all about.
I think the creators played around with this notion a bit. This is evidenced by the "Backwards Episode." Basically what happens, is they play the final scene first, and then in order, played them all back to the first scene of that particular episode.
If I remember correctly, it began with everyone being miserable because of a failed-wedding. Then the next scene was the wedding, which was a disaster because of something to do with invitations. The following scene was the actual mishap to do with the invitations, and so on and so on until the very last scene was the announcing that someone's getting married. It all pieced together so nicely that the episode was just as good backwards as it would have been forward.
I think this was a neat way for the creators to play around with the characters and the show as a whole. It was the characters that really helped to drive the episode, because as a viewer, you knew what they were all about.
Convergence in Wrestling
Speaking of convergence, there's this new concept in wrestling called, "Cyber Sunday." It's a pay-per-view event in which the fans supposedly create the entire pay-per-view. What WWE's doing is they give the fans a website to go to where they can vote for who wrestles who, what stipulations are involved in the match, right down to the attire of what the female wrestlers are wearing. It's touted as putting the fans in 'complete control of the situation.'
However, much like Star Wars' fan films, they're in complete control "ONLY if....." For example, they'll give you the following choice: "Who do you want to challenge Randy Orton for the title?" They'll give you three choices: "Shawn Michaels - Mr. Kennedy - Jeff Hardy." By that, they're limiting what the fans can actually control.
FURTHERMORE, using that same example, they'll announce the pay-per-view months in advance, but every week on TV, they'll make the 'companies pick' look like the stronger, more viable choice. For instance, they'll give you the three choices, but Shawn Michaels will be winning every week, getting the most television time, and put in situations where he lays out the other two picks. Meanwhile, Mr. Kennedy and Jeff Hardy could be burried, losing in the opening matches, all in an attempt to sway the votes.
Overall, I think it's pretty smart business. Make the fans think they have a choice so they're happy, meanwhile influence their decision so it's best for business overall.
However, much like Star Wars' fan films, they're in complete control "ONLY if....." For example, they'll give you the following choice: "Who do you want to challenge Randy Orton for the title?" They'll give you three choices: "Shawn Michaels - Mr. Kennedy - Jeff Hardy." By that, they're limiting what the fans can actually control.
FURTHERMORE, using that same example, they'll announce the pay-per-view months in advance, but every week on TV, they'll make the 'companies pick' look like the stronger, more viable choice. For instance, they'll give you the three choices, but Shawn Michaels will be winning every week, getting the most television time, and put in situations where he lays out the other two picks. Meanwhile, Mr. Kennedy and Jeff Hardy could be burried, losing in the opening matches, all in an attempt to sway the votes.
Overall, I think it's pretty smart business. Make the fans think they have a choice so they're happy, meanwhile influence their decision so it's best for business overall.
Movie Idea
We were discussing Movie Idea's in class a few weeks ago if I remember correctly. Anyway, here's something I came up with while getting lost while driving a few nights ago.
This couple, or group of friends, is on a road trip to Canada or something like that. They plug in the GPS system because it's more convenient than maps. The GPS takes them on the right path for 5 or 6 hours, but then as it gets dark, it goes, "Recalculating....." All of a sudden, the GPS voice starts taking you down all these side-streets and dead-ends, finally leading you to the middle of this dark, creepy orchard. It goes, "You have arrived at your destination!" Then it can turn into the typical October horror movie.
Like I said, I came up with this idea while I was driving with my friend and the GPS kept rerouting me through side streets. I go, "We're probably going to end up in some slasher movie" and then I just pieced it all together. If you use it, though, I will sue for intellectual properties, so watch out ;)
This couple, or group of friends, is on a road trip to Canada or something like that. They plug in the GPS system because it's more convenient than maps. The GPS takes them on the right path for 5 or 6 hours, but then as it gets dark, it goes, "Recalculating....." All of a sudden, the GPS voice starts taking you down all these side-streets and dead-ends, finally leading you to the middle of this dark, creepy orchard. It goes, "You have arrived at your destination!" Then it can turn into the typical October horror movie.
Like I said, I came up with this idea while I was driving with my friend and the GPS kept rerouting me through side streets. I go, "We're probably going to end up in some slasher movie" and then I just pieced it all together. If you use it, though, I will sue for intellectual properties, so watch out ;)
Sanjaya's a Star
When I first got into wrestling, I was introduced to then-WWE Talent Agent, Kevin Kelly. I asked him, "What does it take to be a star in this buisness?" He told me the following: "Stick around, work hard, and get on TV somehow even if it's a seemingly worthless role." What he meant by that last statement was, "Get on televised wrestling, even if that means losing every match for a year." The moral of the story was that if you're on TV, you're under the radar, and your perceived value increases instantly.
With that in mind, I want to talk for a minute about American Idol's ability to turn seemingly worthless people into celebrity superstars. Take William Hung for example. Before his small bit of TV exposure, he was probably bullied in school and picked on in the lunch room, the whole bit. Why? Because he's a walking joke (in a good way of course!). But ever since his stint on American Idol, he's a famous, RICH walking joke, and just about everyone loves him!
The same with Sanjaya. Here's a guy who if it wern't for American Idol, he'd be just like anyone else, but quirkier. Because of his 15 minutes of fame, for NOT BEING VERY GOOD I might add, he's in all the gossip magazines, his face is in media print, and people know his name. In both William's case, and Sanjaya's case, if they wanted to take that little bit of celebrity and capitolize on it, they could with very little effort. In Hung's case, he did.
What's the difference between Sanjaya and the girl that sings across the hall from me? The girl across the hall from me isn't in magazines or famous. Why? Because she wasn't on Television .
With that in mind, I want to talk for a minute about American Idol's ability to turn seemingly worthless people into celebrity superstars. Take William Hung for example. Before his small bit of TV exposure, he was probably bullied in school and picked on in the lunch room, the whole bit. Why? Because he's a walking joke (in a good way of course!). But ever since his stint on American Idol, he's a famous, RICH walking joke, and just about everyone loves him!
The same with Sanjaya. Here's a guy who if it wern't for American Idol, he'd be just like anyone else, but quirkier. Because of his 15 minutes of fame, for NOT BEING VERY GOOD I might add, he's in all the gossip magazines, his face is in media print, and people know his name. In both William's case, and Sanjaya's case, if they wanted to take that little bit of celebrity and capitolize on it, they could with very little effort. In Hung's case, he did.
What's the difference between Sanjaya and the girl that sings across the hall from me? The girl across the hall from me isn't in magazines or famous. Why? Because she wasn't on Television .
Survivor Joke
I'm thinking back to our discussion about Survivor and reality TV, and I remember the saying, "Behind every Just Kidding, there's a little bit of truth." With that in mind, I want to bring your attention to Daniel Tosh, a Stand-up Comedian who does a bit about Survivor. The joke goes like this:
"We wonder why other countries hate us? I love that! We have a game show in our country called "Survivor." Thats a GAME in our country! ...You can win a million dollars for surviving on a place where people already live! Do you realize what kind of message that sends? Not a good one!
'Excuse me, I've been here for 60 years. May I have some bread?' 'Haha!!! No! We're American's! This is a game! OH NO! We dont have our cell phones! This is so hard!"
People find humor in it because there's a notion that this is probably pretty accurate LoL. Any comments?
"We wonder why other countries hate us? I love that! We have a game show in our country called "Survivor." Thats a GAME in our country! ...You can win a million dollars for surviving on a place where people already live! Do you realize what kind of message that sends? Not a good one!
'Excuse me, I've been here for 60 years. May I have some bread?' 'Haha!!! No! We're American's! This is a game! OH NO! We dont have our cell phones! This is so hard!"
People find humor in it because there's a notion that this is probably pretty accurate LoL. Any comments?
Tuesday, October 2, 2007
Paris is an idiot.
I'm no Celebrity junkie, I'm really not. But my buddy Nick just sent me this video on YouTube and I find it hillarious. I figure since I already did a rant on Brittney, I'll rant on Paris, too. She's only famous for being famous and has no real talent at anything. She's just a name that happens to be in the public eye so they use her to do stuff. I find it hillarious that Dave will parody her to her face, and she STILL has no idea how useless she is. This is a perfect example. After watching that, Dave did a GREAT job with it, he treated her exactly as he should have. She tries to pout and 'sad puppy face,' to get out of the subject and it's really pathetic. Someone's got to teach this girl a lesson, but everyone's too busy trying to appease her. I thought she wanted to be a role model? Why didn't she use it as a platform to say, "What I did was wrong, don't do what I did?" Because in her opinion, her Futuristic Musical and new perfume is more important.
Tuesday, September 18, 2007
Enough with the Brittany
Hey, it's Jared for the first actual blog. Just to let you know, the "Do I get 5 points?" for the first one was just a joke, I tend to be like that sometimes ;). Anyway, after reading some of the student's blogs and being oversaturated with it from the media itself, I want to post my quick take on Brittany. First of all, she's NOT THAT FAT! She's not the rock-hard sex symbol she used to be, but for a mother of two? C'mon, she's in good shape, so what seems to be the problem with that? She looks, 'normal?' I thought the media was fighting against unattainable images with things such as the Dove Campaign? Apparently not, they'll dog Brittany until the day she dies. Which brings me to one more point, is that what the media wants? It's a bit morbid, but think about it, they're relentlessley attacking her day after day. I'm not a big fan of hers, and yes, she has problems, and yes, people should get on her for being a bad role model, but is it necessary to make it front-page headlines everytime a hair's out of place or her clothes don't match? I personally think the media's searching for Anna Niccole #2, and arn't going to be happy until she suffers ANOTHER nervous breakdown or potentially something worse.
Wednesday, September 12, 2007
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)