Category: TV, Film and Radio

Questions about Election 2008

I shouldn’t be dipping my toes too much into the political realm, but this upcoming election has generated some light-hearted questions in my mind:
– I see posters up for something called “Bangkok Dangerous.” Is it promoting a new Nicolas Cage film or Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin’s abstinence-only sex-education program?
– When did “celebrity” become a four-letter word?
– Did Barack Obama make a two-point conversion when he spoke at Invesco Field in Denver last week? Or did he just stick with a safety? Why weren’t there more bad football references made about his speech?
– Much has been made of Palin’s foreign policy experience via proximity (apparently because Alaska is close to Russia, outer space and Santa at the North Pole). Is there a deliberate effort to avoid mentioning the great white menace of Canada?
Please feel free to submit your light-hearted questions as well.

9-0-2-oh-no

The return of “Beverly Hills 90210” airs tonight on the CW (which airs locally as a subchannel of KHSL-TV 12). There has been a lot of hubbub made over the fact that the CW didn’t release a preview copy for media review.
I think this move will backfire on the part of the network. Although I’m not a TV critic, I can easily imagine that critics have a lot of TV to watch before the fall season starts. By not releasing the “90210” preview, I think the CW execs are doing critics a favor.
The network basically handed writers a gift-wrapped story by not releasing the preview. Basically all writers have to do is cover the fact that they won’t be able to see the show before tonight and they’re spared from actually having to watch the show. Well, at least until tonight.
Personally, I don’t know if I’ll watch the show. I’ve skipped a lot of shows that have a similar premise and maybe the show isn’t for me.

More on the “New York” Olympics

As I noted earlier, NBC is having announcers in New York do the call on events happening half a world away. I’m not the only that’s noticed, The New York Times did a story titled “New York-Based Crews Just Call It as They See It” looking inside the Peacock’s New York broadcasting center — set up on the stages of “Saturday Night Live.”

It’s an interesting story that answered a lot of questions I had about the New York operation, including the number of sports being broadcast in this fashion (13) and the reason why they did it (because NBC agreed to send fewer people to the Games).

Fake fireworks and “live” coverage

In my earlier post, I was somewhat hopeful that NBC took pains to note when their Olympic announcers were in New York instead of live in China.
Maybe I shouldn’t have been so hopeful after I found out that some of the Opening Ceremony fireworks were apparently digital fakes. Commentators and bloggers are jumping on the fact that the ceremony producers were worried about the display of the fireworks so they created a fairly convincing reproduction to air on TV while the real display took place around Beijing.
A blog from The Hollywood Reporter goes into pretty good detail about the matter. That blog post gets responses to some pretty good questions, including how NBC feels it can get away with graphics that say events are “LIVE” when they are most certainly being tape-delayed for the West Coast. It’s a minor frustration for me — I’d rather see sporting events live.
Aaron Barnhart has more about the digital fakery at TV Barn.

Live from New York … it’s the Beijing Olympics

Watching the overnight, live coverage of the Olympics on USA Network has been interesting. One huge thing caught my eye, or rather my ear. When equestrian dressage and soccer started, the NBC announcers took care to note that they were watching the action “along with the audience” from the NBC studios in New York.

It struck me as odd that at least two live events would be called out of a broadcasting booth 6,800 miles away. I wonder how many events will be aired like this.

Part of me thinks its a little ridiculous. If these announcers are “watching along with the audience,” why have professionals do the call at all? Wouldn’t an equestrian enthusiast perhaps have an equal chance to provide some interesting insights to a general audience? Especially when I’m fairly sure they spend a considerable amount of time trying to explain their sport to people.

Still, I can think of a couple possible reasons why they would do this. It might be the best way to cover some of the less-mainstream events when the alternative is to not cover them at all. I can scarcely imagine how much NBC is paying to produce its coverage when the license fees cost hundreds of millions of dollars. Maybe not flying some staff to China helps save costs.

I’m sure there are a few dirty secrets about airing a huge sporting competition halfway around the globe. Sometimes the announcers don’t record their play-by-play until after an event ends when they know it’s going to air later on tape. Also having broadcasters do a play-by-play far removed from the playing pitch is a trick that goes back to the days when there was just radio.

Ultimately, I guess it’s a good thing that they’re noting that the announcers aren’t on-site. Although the Internet and other near-instantaneous media have their advantages, I think someone who’s actually present has a unique perspective that a broadcast booth in Rockefeller Center can’t match.

The live Games – Part of me really wants to get into badminton and equestrian dressage, but the tired, up-since-9-a.m. part of me just wants to go to bed. Still, kudos to Katerina Emmons of Croatia for winning the first gold of these games for an air rifle event. She won shortly after the West Coast airing of the Opening Ceremonies ended.

The Opening Ceremonies – I didn’t get a chance to watch much of the ceremony while I was at a house party. There were some pretty rabid Oakland Raiders fans who wanted to watch a pre-season game instead of a show recorded 15 hours ago.

One thing stood out as I watched Yao Ming and Lin Hao, his young companion who survived the Sichuan earthquake. Lin Hao’s Chinese flag was upside down, which is either a sign of protest or distress in the United States (it most often generates ire when it’s flown in protest). Repeated displays of such an image stood out in what was otherwise a carefully and beautifully choreographed event.

The glances that I saw of the 4.5-hour event were pretty spectacular and I managed to see the climatic cauldron lighting. Good thing there’s a repeat of this taped event airing right now so I can catch up.

Online – Have I mentioned that you can keep up with the Games with ChicoER.com’s Olympics section? I’m just saying. 😉

Outrage: Does Disney endorse cannibalism …

… of robots?

In the latest Disney/Pixar movie, “Wall•E,” the eponymous main character is seen replacing its body parts for others. When the robot’s treads grow worn, he plucks a new pair off his dead brother laying on the side of the road. The same thing when he breaks his eye or a circuit board.

What sort of sick, twisted message is Disney trying to advance here? Can you imagine kids on the playground breaking their arm and trying to grab a new one off their schoolmate?

Actually, I can’t.

I think it’s a great credit to the Pixar team that they were able to create such an identifiable — dare I say cute? — characters such as Wall•E and EVE and yet maintain their non-humanity as robots. EVE has a giant gun as an arm, for heaven’s sake.

Despite my mock outrage, I thoroughly enjoyed “Wall•E” and place it among the top of Pixar’s excellent heap of quality animated films.

Unlike recent Pixar films, such as “Ratatouille” and “Cars,” there was no huge identifiable villain. For various reasons, some robots were set against each other. However, they’re not “evil” — they’re just following the programming set by the human designers.

The two protagno-bots were different in that they were able to somehow exceed their programming. In same ways this transformation was inevitable for a movie (because it would be lame if they didn’t break out of their metallic shells).

Of course, when these metallic antagonists are sidelined, there’s some satisfaction but there’s no great joy. The triumph of “Wall•E” lies not in defeating tangible enemies, but winning something greater — freedom, love and a chance at a new life.

That’s no huge spoiler for the film. As with any great movie, the enjoyment is in the journey and how the story is told. “Wall•E” continues Pixar’s grand tradition of using animation to tell very enjoyable, out-of-this-world stories.

The two-word review of: “Definitely, Maybe”

The romantic comedy “Definitely, Maybe” was released on DVD Tuesday. Instead of going on and on about the film’s pros and cons, I thought I would try to ape an Internet classic — the five-word movie review.
However, in the grand tradition of “Name that Tune,” I’m going to review this movie in two words. So, without further ado:

“Definitely, Maybe” — Sorta OK

Two-word reviews copyright 2008 by RTOmedia.com. All rights reserved. I will actively prosecute any one who blatantly steals my work for their own. It’s great when the copyright notice is 16 times longer than the review, ain’t it?

Dumb reasons to watch a movie

There were a couple of big comedy movies coming out last weekend — “Get Smart” and “The Love Guru.” Neither movie really received very good reviews from critics.
While the films were being lambasted by critics. I was thinking of reasons to watch these films. Some of them I thought were pretty well reasoned — I like the actors in “Get Smart,” including Steve Carell and Anne Hathaway. I also thought the original TV series “Get Smart” was pretty funny.
My desire to see “The Love Guru” made less sense. The TV commercial featured Stephen Colbert and another actor in front of the “Hockey Night in Canada” set.
I guess I’m a sucker because my desire to watch the film increased dramatically. It would be like if the “Monday Night Football” team was in a film.
Good news — the fact the Toronto Maple Leafs are the featured team in the film didn’t pique my interest at all. I do hope they play better fictionally than in real life.

Random thoughts

Blog stuff:
If people are teed off about hearing “Press ‘1’ for English,” imagine the fervor if it was “Press ‘2’ for English.”
There’s no title for “The Office” spin-off. May I humbly suggest that the show be titled, “That’s What She Said.”

Super Bowl ad yanked

Just a quick follow-up to my last post, which touched on a questionable Super Bowl ad featuring cartoon pandas speaking in dubious Asian accents.
According the New York Times, the ad has been withdrawn with an apology from Vinod Gupta, the head honcho at InfoUSA, the parent of Salesgenie.com. It’s a good article, detailing how Gupta has been the brains behind the commercials over the past couple of years and the reaction from audience tests of the ads (as part of the Super Bowl ad extravaganza).
The NYT article also discusses humor and race in advertising. It’s a fine line and it’s one that appears to be easier to cross as time goes by. Is it still safe to mix humor and race in advertising and programming and still be entertaining/effective?