gedblog

So like millions of Americans, I went to see PIXAR & Disney’s latest animated film, WALL•E this weekend. For those of you living under a rock, the film tells the tale of a brave little robot who is left to clean up the Earth after mankind dumps so much trash that he can’t live here anymore. Adventure, romance and of course humor ensue for the tiny bot with a Johnny 5 complex.

Reviews from critics and the movie-going public have been overwhelmingly favorable, and it’s easy to see why. Behind the futuristic facade of WALL•E lies basically a love story between WALL•E himself and the angelic EVE. The story also cleverly taps into an topical issue that is sure to raise the ire of some of the more conservative audience members - environmentalism.

Back in August of 2007, I wrote a post about PIXAR’s advanced PR for the film, via the Buy n Large viral website. Buy n Large is the company responsible for the vast consumerism that ultimately makes the Earth uninhabitable to the human race in the film. The message in WALL•E is clear - if things keep going the way they’re going, we won’t have a planet left to live on. This moral imperative is one of the major plot points of the film, and I’m betting it won’t be very long until we see right-wingers railing against Disney and PIXAR for “green propaganda”.

I’m willing to bet that by no later than this Wednesday, Michelle Malkin, Bill O’Reilly, Neil Boortz or some other misguided blowhard will do their best to alter WALL•E’s portrayal as lovable protagonist to that of a mechanized propaganda bot intent on brainwashing your kids. Rest assured it will happen, and when it does, I’ll update this post with which offender was first to pull the trigger.

In the end, nothing these people can say will diminish the movie’s endearing success. WALL•E is nothing short of an animated masterpiece that has its heart and message in exactly the right place. There is plenty of emotion and humor to keep audience goers smiling and parents safely content. And if kids get interested in recycling or gardening, let’s just say it wouldn’t be the end of the world.

UPDATE: Here’s a tweet that illustrates what I’m talking about. It’s starting.

UPDATE II: DING! DING! We have a winner, or rather a big, fat ignorant loser… in the form of everybody’s favorite shill from CNN, Glenn Beck. Think Progress has more too boot. To quote Weird Al, “Man, I hate it when I’m right.”

Although Mystery Science Theatre 3000 is best known for the lampooning of various B-rated sci-fi movies and horror flicks, I always enjoyed their roasts of public service short films best. These self-righteous reels from the 40’s and 50’s, always did take themselves too seriously and made perfect fodder for Crow, Tom Servo and Joel’s witty zingers. The clip below is classic MST3K as the trio firings on all cylinders. I’ve tried to get into Michael J. Nelson’s new take on MST3K, called RiffTrax, but it just isn’t the same. Thank goodness for YouTube so we can sit back, relax and enjoy “A Date with Your Family”. Just don’t enjoy it too much, after all, the dinner table is no place for emotion!

I’m pleased to report one of my favorite science fiction films of all time is the latest flick to get the Hollywood make-over treatment. Airing over two nights, beginning tonight at 9pm est on the A&E network, The Andromeda Strain, tells the tale of a particularly nasty alien microbe that threatens to wipe out all life on earth. Director Ridley Scott’s new version of the classic 1971 picture promises to be full of action, suspense and smart science and features a solid cast including Benjamin Bratt, Viola Davis & Andre Braugher.

Based on the best-selling novel by Michael Crichton, the original version of Andromeda gave audiences of the 70’s a realistic look at what just might happen if an alien microorganism fell to earth. The movie’s deliberate pacing, cold electronic soundtrack by Gil Mellé and use of multiple simultaneous shots (spoofed in Austin Powers and made famous today by FOX’s 24) builds suspense and impending dread even when viewed today. If the original Andromeda Strain had a weak point, it was surely the rushed ending which bottled things up neatly, without deliberate action from Wild Fire’s team of sequestered scientists. Somehow I doubt Scott will let his version go out with a whimper, and if he plays his cards right, this new version just might be a classic for the ages. High hopes to be sure, but coming from the director of Black Hawk Down, Blade Runner and Alien, I would expect nothing less. Should be a fun couple of nights, check it out.

UPDATE: After having watched both parts of the new version, I can see my hopes were sorely misplaced. Ridley Scott should stick to directing real films instead of producing made for TV movies cause this version couldn’t hold a candle to the original. The plot gets wrapped up in the meaningless exploits of an addict reporter whose actions ultimately don’t amount to squat. The effects were second rate and all of the great scientific detective work at Wild Fire felt rushed. Save yourself four hours of your life and don’t bother to tune in to the repeats OR purchase the DVD. Go buy the original 1971 version instead. At least Andromeda is actually creepy in that version.

I’m pleased to report that episode 008 of Sci-Fi Cast is now online and is truly one for the ages. Dave Caolo and I participate in the geek version of Fesivus and “air our grievances” with the Star Wars prequel films. We cover a wide range of important nerd-esqe topics such as GCI sets, the less than deadly Nuisance Battle Droids, poor casting decisions and how a high school biology lesson managed to suck the life out of the Star Wars universe. This one’s our longest episode yet, clocking in at 47 minutes, so if you’re looking for the Cliff Notes version of this episode, simply skip forward to the 39′ minute mark to avoid all that tedious mucking about in hyperspace. If you love Star Wars however, tune in for the whole cast, I think Dave and I do a fairly good job of putting into words what was so frustrating about ep I-III. Don’t forget to post your own prequel pet peeves (or favorite bits) in the comments over at theSciFiCast.com! Next week we return you to our regularly scheduled program of BSG. See you then!

One of the things I love most about Twitter is the way interaction between friends and followers can take on a life of its own. Today I casually threw out a question on Twitter that turned into a genuine laugh riot. Taking a cue from one of my all-time favorite shows, Who’s Line Is It Anyway?, the question I posed was this:

Name a quote from a Star Wars movie that could apply to your significant other.

Without missing a beat, I received back dozens of responses, some of the best of which I’ve reposted here for your amusement. Thanks to everyone who took time out to play today, it was a blast!

panache: “Either I’m going to kill her or I’m beginning to like her!”

MauriceReeves: “I don’t know who you are or where you’ve come from, but from now on you’ll do as I say, okay?”

gedeon: “She may not look like much, but she’s got it where it counts kid.”

Moltz: “IT’S A TRAP!!!”

firecracker: “Why you stuck up, half-witted, scruffy-looking, nerf herder!”

dmoren: “You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious.”

krystynheide: “I cannot teach him. The boy has no patience.”

and my personal favorites:

ag_michael: “You are required to maneuver straight down this trench and skim the surface to this point. The target area is only two meters wide.”

luomat: “No no no, this one goes THERE, THAT one goes there!”

bettnet: “Size matters not. Look at me, judge me by size, do you?”

splorp: “Get in there, you big furry oaf! I don’t care what you smell!”

While I was busy watching the Red Sox vs. Yankees tonight, the world kept turning and evidently things happened. Here’s some stuff I missed while I was watching the slugfest in New York:

The Democratic Debate - Evidently ABC gave new meaning to the term “pointless”. Moderators spent most of their time talking about “Bittergate”, sniper fire, Reverend Wright and get this, flag pins. Some of the comments on the ABC website, courtesy of The Huffington Post are just brutal. Good to know the MSM is still doing their usual bang-up job.

The Indy IV Backlash Has Begun - Apparently the folks at CHUD think they know for a fact that the new Indy movie will suck. Why? Because its final running time is clocking in at 140 minutes. I mean who’d want to sit in a theater and watch Harrison Ford play one of the most beloved screen heroes of all time for THAT long? And before you get that puss on your face, this isn’t a podcast, it’s a feature film. I figured the movie would suffer from overly high expectations, but to pan it just because it’s 13 minutes longer than The Last Crusade is plain stupid.

Full of Hot Air - The next time George W. Bush announces an “important” speech from the rose garden about one of the most pressing challenges facing this nation, maybe he’ll actually want to take action instead of offering more bloviating. The press made a huge deal about how the Bush Administration was about to do an about face regarding climate change today, and all we got was vague notions of future shifts in potential policy. It’s unsurprising that Bush is doing whatever he can to try and rescue his legacy before he leaves office, but I expected more than the typical Bush bait and switch.

Knowing Is Half the Battle - First there was Snake Eyes, and now there is Scarlett. I’ll hand it to the people behind the PR for the new G.I. Joe movie, they sure know how to put lipstick on a pig tease! This movie just keeps getting better and better. I have a feeling that when picts of the Baroness hit the web, I’ll probably blow a gasket. Yo Joe!

When was the last time you played a game of pinball? If you’re anything like me, it’s been years since you plunked quarters into one of those classic arcade contraptions. The plight of the pinball machine is one, that in today’s modern world, has grown more and more familiar. What once captured the money and imagination of players across the country, has become relegated to collector’s garages and played by a small group of enthusiasts who look back on pinball with fond memories through neon colored glasses. The story of pinball’s origins and how one company tried to re-invent it, is being told via a new documentary written, produced and directed by my friend and designer Greg Maletic.

Tilt: The Battle to Save Pinball tells the story of the Williams company and their dedicated team of designers who were tasked with nothing less than single-handedly saving the entire pinball industry. The DVD can be ordered via the Tilt homepage, and is a wonderfully produced documentary spanning the entire history of the game. Tilt takes the viewer on a light-hearted and fascinating journey from pinball’s humble beginnings as merely a game of luck, to the industry changing era of classic video games, and the creation of Pinball 2000.

The DVD’s production values are top notch and are marked by retro style graphics (all created in Adobe Illustrator and animated in After Effects), an easy to follow narrative and some of the best music I’ve ever heard written for a documentary by composer Skip Heller. Much more than just “talking heads”, Greg’s film gives special insights into the world of the penny arcade that eventually morphed into the electronic palaces of the 60’s 70’s & 80’s that so many of us spent our childhood in. Watching Tilt, it’s easy to see how much a labor of love this film has been for him. Case in point comes in a scene discussing Baby Pac Man, an unsuccessful fusion of pinball and video games. The director’s audio commentary reveals he was unable to find a functioning Baby Pac Man unit to film, so he decided to animate the entire cabinet in After Effects. An impressive feat to be sure, and one that I would never have realized had I not listened to the commentary. Tilt is full of these kinds of subtle treats which bring both eye candy and visual interest to a subject that some might consider boring.

Over 2 and a half years in the making, Tilt: The Battle to Save Pinball, not only serves up an interesting slice of history, but also provides insight into problems that designers face every single day. How do you make something old and familiar, new and fresh? How do talented individuals leverage their skills to create a unique new experience even in the face of tremendous industry pressure? All of these questions, and many more are tackled in Tilt. It’s a fun journey for pinball fans and lay people alike that I highly recommend. Check out the trailer available on the Tilt homepage or via YouTube.

This week I was confronted by no less than two glaring examples of poor or lazy design that I just had to share with you. I think they really illustrate how important our job is as communicators and how easily information can be miss-conveyed when designers don’t do their jobs well.

The first comes in the form of the DVD box art for the Oscar winning film, No Country for Old Men. I rushed out this week to snap up my copy of this fabulous tale starring Tommy Lee Jones, Javier Bardem and Josh Brolin, only to find a glaring design error. Although not all of us are schooled in design principals like the Gestalt Law of Proximity, we can still determine when things aren’t “quite right”.

Apparently the designer accidently or intentionally miss-matched Tommy Lee Jones’ and Josh Brolin’s portraits with their names. Because it seems to be such an obvious mistake, some might try and argue that it can only be intentional. As I learned from our experience with the official War of the World’s icon set a few years back, movie studios have many rules about who’s name can appear first, second, and so on. Given that, plus the fact that Javier Bardem’s face is associated correctly with his name directly below, why not match Tommy Lee and Josh as well? There’s simply no good reason for it and I’m forced to conclude that the juxtaposition of Jones’ and Brolin’s images are a mistake. Apparently design accidents happen, even on multi-million dollar marketing campaigns.

The second example comes from the world of television, and if I didn’t know better, seems anything but accidental. The season 4 premiere of Bravo’s hit show, Top Chef, featured a typical audience poll via text message. Season 4 features a pair of female chefs that are not only competing against each other, but are also a couple. They’ve been together for 3 years and the question to viewers was “Do Zoi and Jen have an advantage in the show because they’re a couple?”. After several commercial breaks the results were displayed as you see in this screen capture. The graphic was not accompanied by any informational voice over of any kind and so you are left to determine the results in a fleeting glimpse of 10-15 seconds of actual screen time.

At first glance, the majority of viewers seem to think, yes, the couple does have an advantage since that result is circled and highlighted. But upon closer inspection, poll results reveal that a full 78% of viewers in fact think, no, Zoi and Jen do not have an advantage. For some reason, the graphic strangely highlights the minority opinion. Why would Top Chef want to highlight the losing segment? Could we be looking at yet another error (perhaps generated automatically by faulty poll software)? I think it’s far more likely that the show’s producers wanted to drum up controversy by highlighting the most dramatic result, no matter how small. If I was a guy who wore tin-foil hats, I’d say there could be other reasons for what they did, but I’ll just leave that to your imagination instead.

Although these issues don’t amount to the proverbial “hill of beans” in most people’s world, they do illustrate the kinds of problems that designers face all the time. As a wise man once said, “With great power, comes great responsibility.” Remember that as you use your design powers for good and not evil… like making scores of fans think Tommy Lee Jones is really Josh Brolin.

UPDATE: This week’s cell phone poll on Top Chef correctly highlighted the viewer choice with the most votes. As suspected the example I posted here is an error of some kind.

Spurred on by some recent tweets as well as some surprising Oscar wins for the latest installment, my wife and I decided to come up to speed on the Bourne trilogy with Matt Damon. I borrowed the first two films on DVD from Talos which Mindy and I have spent the last two nights watching. The Bourne Identity was surprisingly good. Lots of twists and turns, smart action sequences and some superior acting from both Damon and Franka Potente (Marie). I wasn’t expecting much and was pleasantly surprised.

The second installment, not so much. The story was almost identical, the characters were two-dimensional and the plot was predictable. So now I’m in a quandary about if we should bother with the third movie, The Bourne Ultimatum. I know it’s supposed to conclude the trilogy, so I expect some lose ends to be wrapped up and everything, but given our luke warm reaction to Supremacy, I’m just not sure it’s worth our time. So my question is, how do you rank these movies? Which one is your favorite and should we bother watching the third one. And remember, NO SPOILERS PLEASE! Thanks all!

UPDATE: Well, we took the plunge and watched part 3 tonight. I have to say I pretty much agree with the commenters here that 3 was better than 2 but not as good as 1. The chase in New York was pretty awesome, and the tying up of loose ends is always good. If there hadn’t been some glaring plot holes (like convenient windows placed suspiciously inside über-secret government brainwashing centers that can be broken simply by jumping through them, or fax machines that can’t be traced or shut down) I think I would have enjoyed it a great deal more. Overall a solid movie and a fun trilogy from start to finish.

News out of Hollywood today that Kate Beckinsale won’t be returning to star in the next Underworld film titled Underworld: Rise of the Lycans due next year. This one is an origins story centered on the centuries-old feud between the the race of aristocratic vampires known as Death Dealers, and their onetime slaves, the Lycans.

Beckinsale revealed today on a press junket for her new film Snow Angels, that she won’t be returning to don the leather and corset that helped make her famous. She did however say that one day she might pull a “Bruce Willis” and return to the character of Selene when she’s 50. I think I speak for all the geeks out there when I say, “Come on Kate, hit just one more for the team!”. I’m not ashamed to admit the only reason why I eventually watched Underworld: Evolution was because of you-know-who.

The producers have chosen actress Rhona Mitra to replace Beckinsale, but is there really a point? I mean, Mitra may be pretty, and maybe, just maybe she can act, but she’s no Kate Beckinsale. I might be beating a dead vamp, but given the way the box office returns have been sinking for the franchise, I’d think they’d pay Beckinsale whatever she wanted to squeeze into her Death Dealer garb and kick some fuzzy werewolf ass just one more time. Oh well. As they say, all good fangs must come to an end.