(My) Mainstream Geekery: Star Trek from the Blogosphere

reprinted from May 11, 2009 Nerdabout:

@NYCRockStar Feels the Love at Star Trek

Our pal Roger usually shares his rants at NYC Rock Star. But today he's giving his two cents about Star Trek for us lucky folks. Can Englishman Simon Pegg do a better Scotty than American James Doohan? Should Kirk quit chasing hot green chicks and admit his love for Spock? Is Karl Urban fit to fill old Bones's shoes, or should he go back to fighting Orcs? Dammit, Jim, we're bloggers, not reviewers! Oh wait, here's the review! Read on ...

By Roger Resnicoff

Fans and non-fans may look at the new Star Trek movie, classify it as "science fiction", a "summer popcorn blockbuster," or even a "nostalgia trip," but I'm here to tell you that they're all right, and all wrong. Star Trek may the biggest, loudest love story ever. And it's fantastic.

Director J.J. Abrams honors the show's legacy without alienating and antiquating its best qualities. Whereas Abrams is indeed a solid director, he's truly enabled by a strong, smart script by Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman that contains just enough winks and nods to ring true to the Trekkies. But there's none of the cringing that I expected. There's really so much that could have gone wrong with this reboot—in fact, I was waiting for it to. Just about 10 years ago, I was at this very same theater (the Ziegfeld) to see Episode I of a much-loved science fiction icon. Awaiting the premiere of this Star Trek was a lot like that for me ... except without the massive letdown afterwards. Somehow accomplishing the enormous task of appealing to the wider, un-indoctrinated audience while satisfying the established base, one of the most astonishing qualities of this new Trek, is how it consistently fires on all thrusters and keeps from sucking.

So, where's the love?

You can sense the love that went into writing the script, with nods to older movies and episodes, in the form of lines, themes and symbols. The optimism of Trek, absent in most recent science fiction like Battlestar Galactica, is present. My favorite Trek has always been Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan; this movie both shows and references the Kobayashi Maru test (keep a lookout for a familiar apple) that sets the stage for Khan, along with that film's revenge theme. Time travel, another familiar Trek plot device (see Star Trek IV, or City on the Edge of Forever), once again figures prominently in this outing, but I won't talk too much about that, so as not to ruin any of the fun.

The plot is almost secondary to the much-more-interesting "origins" story that's being played out simultaneously. All props to Eric Bana as a great Romulan baddie and an exciting "destroy the galaxy" storyline, but it's been done before in countless tv episodes and movies, Trek or otherwise. Kirk's "saved the galaxy/Earth/alien" many times before—it's like his specialty. The real fun is seeing the characters enter the canon of Trek history. Characters in this case not only includes the members of the Enterprise crew/family, but all the great toys that we've grown up watching them use, like the transporter, phasers and even the Enterprise herself, who's gotten a facelift enough to hold her own with any other sci-fi starship of the genre, but stayed true to her iconically-shaped profile.

The same can be said for the aforementioned "toys" ... they're all updated here, but with reverence for the originals—they're instantly recognizeable. The doors still swish, the communicators still beep, and the ship's computer sounds like she always has (Majel Barrett Roddenberry, a.k.a. Nurse Chapel, in her final Trek role). It adds a layer of familiarity and comfort for the longtime fans.

There’s love in the design of the sets and costumes, with a thoughtful updating of the original Sixties look and feel, with just enough refinement to lose the campiness and be reasonably acceptable as 23rd-century Earth. That's one of the defining differences with Star Trek than other sci-fi shows—this is our future that's being portrayed, so it has to feel right too. I even bought the officers in miniskirts.

The ensemble cast lovingly channels the spirits of the show's original characters, instead of just impersonating the actors themselves. Karl Urban retains all the country-doctor charm of DeForest Kelley’s "Bones" McCoy, yet restores a youthfulness to the character with a bit of a more believable edge to his eccentricities. Anton Yelchin's Chekhov predictably mispronounces his w's and v's, and Simon Pegg as Scotty is pitch-perfect.

There's love of mythic storytelling: Shades of Howard Hawks and Kurosawa (and by design, Tarantino and Lucas) when the young Kirk is encouraged to join Starfleet by Captain Pike, who issues a challenge to "do better" than his father, "a Starfleet Captain for thirteen minutes and died saving the lives of 800 men and women," including Kirk and his mother. This is immediately followed by a scene with Kirk, en route to ship out to Starfleet, rides his motorcycle to gaze at the sun as it rises on the dawn of his new destiny. A nod to Hidden Fortress, Star Wars, or maybe even Top Gun? Steadicam cinematography and stylized editing reflect the influence of Trek TNG alum Ronald Moore’s Battlestar Galactica reboot.

That brings me to the grandest love story of all: James Tiberius Kirk and Mr. Spock. Notwithstanding the parody videos of homoerotic relationships between the two, their story is of the budding of a lifetime relationship and iconic friendship (with the occasional triangular complications added by an alien hottie or Dr. McCoy). That said, in classic romantic-comedy fashion (like Cheers' Sam and Diane, Moonlighting’s Maddie and Dave) they initially can’t stand each other at Starfleet Academy.

Chris Pine, as the young Kirk, reminded me a bit of Good Will Hunting, which I find amusing, because there were rumors of Matt Damon being offered the role. Like Will, he's seen as an extraordinarily gifted young man, with lots of potential and an attitude problem (which is how many geeks see themselves). A father-figureless townie living in the shadow of Starfleet Academy (like Damon's Southie to Cambridge), he's kind of an ass—but that's as it should be. Zachary Quinto fully inhabits the young, more impulsively emotional, Spock. Nimoy's Spock was always fun to watch when he was mortally threatening, especially to Shatner's Kirk. Quinto convincingly plays Spock *just* in control of his emotions, with sometimes logic being the only thing keeping him from kicking Kirk's ass. As per tradition, Kirk, seemingly reckless cowboy, calls shots from the gut, in contrast to Spock's logical, deliberate decision-making as the Nerd-in-Chief. You can see how these guys are going to "grow up" to be the men that we've come to know.

Bottom line, it's a satisfying, warp-speed reboot of a franchise held dear (and sometimes as equally derided) to many. I loved it back. Oh, and there are tons of the pew-pew-pew and kickass that makes it a fun summer movie for everybody else.

Thanks, Roger! And don't forget to watch the man-on-the-street coverage from@sciencegoddess as well!

Link

Watching TV to Learn (YouTube and Research)

Sounds counterintuitive, doesn't it? It did to my mom, when I was a student. But that may be changing: In an recent New York Times article, Miguel Helft described how YouTube has evolved from a video hosting and sharing site to become the second most popular search tool on the Internet. The second? That astounded me. Yes, it recently passed Yahoo (explains why their stock is dropping like a rock, huh?) to move into second place, behind parent company Google. The journalist describes how 9-year-old Tyler Kennedy turns first to YouTube for school research. But why?

I guess the easiest way to explain it is this; think back to grade school… Remember when you’d sit in class, and the teacher would say that during you’d be watching a video that day? Remember how watching a video was somehow more exciting than normal lessons? For some reason, seeing someone demonstrating something on-screen was far more gripping than watching your teacher do it, although I have never been quite sure why (I’ll expound on that a little later in this entry). Whatever the reason, it’s also true for adults, particularly when it comes to subjects people consider complicated. But the more I think about it, the more sense it makes.

In the first half of the 20th Century, folks grew up reading books and newspapers. Then there was a generation that grew up on movies, and then television (and later, cable/satellite). The most recent shift was to the Internet. Now, online video is creating yet another generation in the 21st.

At first, this made me kind of upset. First, because I didn’t have the luxury of Google when I was in school—I had to dig through the annoying Dewey Decimal System, be tied to a desk in a library, and go through a lot of fruitless searches before I found what I needed. Today’s students can easily Google for some information, or text search some digitized documents, which is much easier, and time-effective, and I probably would’ve gotten much better grades if I had that kind of tool at my disposal (people naturally want others to have to ‘earn’ their stripes, in whatever their achievements may be, be it educationally or professionally). Now, instead of documents, are kids these days (blurgh – that makes me sound like one of the “olds”), getting so lazy that they won’t even be inconvenienced to read text on the interwebs anymore? Not necessarily— perhaps it’s just more efficient. Why?

• Video incorporates sound and visuals, as well as text
• It’s short, due to the nature of the technology
• Interactive technology allows tagging and commenting to drive you to more information, text or otherwise

I’ve always said that I wished the Discovery Channel and the History Channel were available when I was younger. For some reason, I can absorb and analyze and regurgitate facts more easily when gleaned from a 1-hour documentary than a 300-page textbook. YouTube does that in bite-size portions, due to length limits imposed (though that might change soon). It allows a viewer to pause for reflection, and rewind for review. And it’s not just for 9-year-olds like little Tyler. Have you ever explained how to do something techy to your Boomer parents or grandparents? Showing them over and over and over again? I used to have to explain how to use the VCR to my mother over the phone. It was impossible. If my mom could use Firefox, at least I could send her a link to demo something visually. Guess I could send it to my father.

Does that mean that text is going to go away? Of course not. The increasing popularity of video doesn’t (necessarily) mean deterioration in the consumption of text and its related formats. It does, however, signal a trend (and you know how us PR people and journos luuurve trends): people are now turning to video not just for entertainment but also for reference.

The main reason that text rules the interwebs today is because of hyperlinks. Linking pages via hyperlinks is what makes the whole thing possible. Hyperlinking video is a bit harder. Not impossible (you can link objects and insert text in videos), but a slightly impractical thus far. It's just not as astrophysicists would call an “elegant solution”. Also, YouTube doesn’t have a great search engine in the first place. But guess who’s YouTube’s Daddy? That’s right: Google. It'll get there...

So there is, and will be a shift. Because video was not practical before, to create or consume, the web was dominated by text. With higher-speed connections and more powerful computers, images began to flourish on websites. Now that video cameras and broadband are widespread, information that is better served by video is getting more action. And because kids like Tyler were born into video, this is just the beginning.

A Postscript:
Interestingly enough, this NYTimes piece helps to justify my previous blog entry – The father of the kid that is profiled in the article writes in his own blog:

“I was contacted by the reporter, who had seen a post on ReadWriteWeb about Tyler’s use of YouTube and wanted to bring the story to the New York Times’ readers.”

Another example of online journalism being picked up by the MSM! To paraphrase what Sean Connery said so eloquently in The Untouchables, “Thus endeth the lesson.”

"But it's only online..."

Over the years, I've been in an ongoing back-and-forth (conflict sounds too harsh) with clients who say they want to embrace "New" (hate that term) Media, but are very much stuck in an "Old Media" way of thinking. You know these clients -- the ones who hear some buzzword and immediately want to get their brand in on it -- whether or not it's possible/correct/etc. For example:

"Can you make me a Viral Video?"
"We need a blog for all our press releases..."
"Let's put our blog on Twitter and then it'll go viral, right?"

Blurgh.

Then there are the others (identities will be hidden to protect the naive), who can think of nothing more successful than getting their brand on a Network AM Show or The New York Times. Don't get me wrong-- there's definitely a ton of value in hits of those magnitude. But these are the same people who completely discount the value of online hits; as if, unless you can 'hold it in your hand', it didn't really exist.

So when I saw this video on Richard Laermer/Kevin Dugan's Bad Pitch Blog (both of whom I unfortunately missed meeting at their party last week), and I thought I'd pass it on.


The Online Media from RealWire on Vimeo.

I've heard the headline of his post ("It was just on the web site, not in print") from countless clients and colleagues and managers. I'm sure you probably have too.

Of course, nothing compares to actually holding a great hit or seeing it on TV. But isn't that really just an ego thing? Granted, my Mom and Dad are probably more impressed when I snag a placement on Good Morning America or the NYT, but which is actually serving the client better? A lot of clients feel just like Mom and Dad, unfortunately, because that's they way they were raised to consume media. They need to understand why an online placement is valuable to their brand, sometimes even more than a print placement (but ideally with both). The video above is a great way to show them the power of Digital.

What really got me, however, was a comment on the blog. To wit:

"I've gotta be honest - if you think a placement in Wired's blog is as good as a placement in the magazine then you're kidding yourself. I certainly see benefit in online placements - they do get (limited) readership, they have hyperlinks that can drive people directly to the product/service and they have SEO benefits.

But, pound for pound, print placement gets us more results than anything. Period."

SERIOUSLY? First of all, leaving "Anonymous" comments is kinda lame --own up to your views. I agree with Kevin's response... Making absolute statements about media relations is *very* short-sighted, and I think discounts the credibility of the comment itself.

As for the comment itself: This is the constant discussion with those aforementioned clients-- what's 'more results than anything' mean? Is it more eyeballs? Not necessarily. How many people actually read a magazine cover-to-cover? Are you absolutely sure that the person read your product's mention? With online, readers are more active -- they may have found your mention via search, or trackbacks to the piece.

In addition, the MSM picks up stories online, and goes online for research, so that placement lives on far longer than the newspaper that is now lining the litterbox, or the magazine that is left in the bathroom. As the video also says, bloggers may pick up the story as well -- and then the aforementioned MSM may take notice. It also has the opportunity to go GLOBAL, which is less likely for a US-based long-lead pub. I won't even go into the fact that the run-up time makes most info covered in mags very old by the time they're published. They're called "long-lead", right? That usually means a few months, at least.

So, once again, how do you quantify "more results than anything"? Are you talking 'impressions' that are an inflated number based upon circulation numbers? Can you directly correlate those numbers to sales figures? Probably not. Or is it just because the client likes a fancy masthead or pretty pictures in a magazine that his boss likes to read?

Pepsi Shakes Up Its Branding

(ED. NOTE: Updated and tweaked 10 Nov. 08)

Pepsi-Cola has decided to shake up their branding (as opposed to a can of Pepsi, which is not advised) to see what happens.

FULL DISCLOSURE: I don’t like Pepsi. The brand itself is fine, but any carbonated beverage, aside from Champagne or beer, is anathema to my palate. Blech. Anyway…

You may have already seen some posts from several “social media influencers” (Shankman, PSFK, Rohit Bargava, among others) in the marketing and advertising field about Pepsi's innovative new campaign, being dubbed by many the "Pepsi 25" for their choice of 25 bloggers to single out and send three packages to over the course of an hour (gotta suck to be an Account Assistant at Pepsi’s agency, huh?). Since I wasn’t one of them, I've grabbed the image posted on AdRants (thanks, AdRants! :) ) .

I’ve been a bit busy lately, but being late to the party gives me the benefit of some “widescreen views” about the campaign, and seeing what many of my fellow bloggers had to say the new initiative. Here’s the topline thus far:

• The new logo looks a lot like Barack Obama's campaign logo. Really. I assume Pepsi's was being mocked up before Barack started his campaign (not sure when he debuted his, but let’s assume over a year ago), but it’s really, really close.
• Who are these “Pepsi 25” influencers that Pepsi chose (though you can find them by checking out the Pepsi Cooler and other blogs—see below)?
  
• How did they choose them (friends in the blogosphere?)?
  
• Blogs/observations/rants that this campaign won't necessarily get any of the bloggers to like or drink Pepsi any more than they do now. I think they’re more the Mountain Dew, hyper-caffeinated types, probably, but I don't think that's the point of the effort. More on that below.

Pepsi’s making moves, no doubt about it. They’ve always been eager to make connections with youth and pop culture. It started in the ‘80s as the “Voice of the New Generation/Pepsi Generation”. According to AdAge , this effort will cost them hundreds of millions of dollars worldwide as part of a multi-year transformation. But the Social Media part is probably of minimal cost. You know something? I think it’ll work.

Why?

Research shows that 1 in 2 online Americans access social networks. I’ll write more about that in another post, but as you can imagine, the young (under 30 – grr..) people of today make up the bulk of the users, and that number will grow as that demographic matures. But also...

Social Media is the most efficient, cost-effective way in which to:

• Grow a publisher's audience, increase engagement, and generate new revenue streams
• Enable Brands to engage their customers more effectively in an increasingly fragmented world
• Enable Marketers to evolve from delivering messages, to engaging in a conversation with customers

And get this:

"93 percent of Americans believe a company should have a presence in social media, while an overwhelming 85 percent believe a company should not only be present, but also interact with its consumers via social media."

- 2008 Cone Business in Social Media Study, September, 11-12, 2008

It could be argued that this is a very well-executed campaign, if only for the reason that these influencers have large followings (especially from marketing geeks like myself), and therefore will just get a lot of buzz. From what I can see, it’s succeeded. Going by the compiled list of "Pepsi 25" targets on ParkerWeb, the campaign's hit rate as of this writing is 16 for 25, which is pretty decent (for a small scope), actually.

Granted, some on the list don’t add to coverage in the “Positive Team”, but as some of my previous employers have noted/built their empires on, any coverage is coverage. Not my style, but then, I don’t work for them anymore. Pepsi's choice to make it an exclusive marketing story to online journos (in the Stuart Elliott/NYTimes vein of MSM pitching), and a revamp of a 100+ year-old brand logo and its evolution in the physical form of cans (would’ve LOVED to have that collection in my office!), probably means that Pepsi is pretty happy with what they got: a bunch of marketing geeks who reach a larger group of marketing geeks (as I said before, myself included) to talk about it. Word of Mouth, baby!

So what does this mean?

More importantly, many folks who really have no interest in writing about Pepsi now have a reason to, and Pepsi's (attempting) to keep the buzz going using the tools that Social Media people use, like FriendFeed. They’ve created an online community called the Pepsi Cooler (hehe, ‘cooler’, get it? For soda pop, and ‘cause it’s cool!).

The Interwebs are a superlative communication stage, but you already knew that. It's efficient (fast, cheap-ish), effective (you’re reading this, right?) and scalable (start with 25 influencers, and let them grow the buzz for you). However, now that Social Media is here, it's become even more so. The ‘Net is now a launch pad for global relationships between brands and their consumers, as well as their stakeholders/critics.

Random Musings on Liza, Brooklyn, the News, and Summer

Ever feel like there's some sort of energy field that surrounds us, penetrates us, and binds the galaxy together to act in synchronicity? Oh, yeah, that's the Force. Anyway...

So a friend of mine invited me to go see Liza Minelli at a free show in Brooklyn last week... It's part of a series that's goin' on this summer. I'm not a huge Liza fan, per se, but it would've been fun to see just for the ridiculous spectacle of it all; Liza Herself, Brooklyn, free, the NYC/Brooklyn Gay Scene, etc. I didn't go, 'cause we ended up doing karaoke instead -- that's another entry. Anyway, I'm a bit disappointed that we didn't check it out now... Why?

Found out that Christopher Cross was a special guest... One of my favorite one-hit wonders, with a song from probably one of the only Liza movies that I've ever sat through.

BTW, I just tracked this video down, and it frakkin' RULEZ:


So how did I become privy to all this information? Well, I heard that Huey Lewis is performing on Thurs 8/21 - saw him a few years back, and it was a super fun show. Now here's where that "Force thing" comes in: the Back to the Future movies have been on rotation on HBO lately, along with the underrated American Psycho (a.k.a. the Dark Knight!) so I've been inundated with Huey recently. The movie's been in the news a bit lately too, because of John Edwards' girlfriend (Gawker) That Patrick Bateman really understood the band:


On top of all that, there's a movie out there that I'm DYING to see (perhaps this afternoon) -- it's become an 80s summer with Huey and his News releasing a theme song to a big summer movie... Wha? (AllAboutJazz)

Wow... That's totally a move I'd make if I was making a movie...

Gossip Girls

Just wanted to share this oldie but goodie with y'all...

He Also Eats More Than They Do

PR girl #1: I love your outfit today!
PR girl #2: You know, I was walking down the street, and this homeless man in a box told me that "Purple is the color of royalty."
PR girl #1: Don't joke about that. I could be joining him, if my apartment doesn't come through.
PR girl #2: At least he lives in Manhattan.

--Office, 53rd & Broadway


Overheard by: Roger Resnicoff

Overheard in New York

New York Mets get Rick Rolled

Frakkin' FARK.

My Mets will be having a runoff vote to determine their new eighth-inning sing-along song.

Traditionally, Shea (in its last season alive) plays Neil Diamond's "Sweet Caroline", and everyone rocks out a bit. In the latest misguided digital corporate campaign, the organization received five million votes at mets.com after inviting fans to choose from among 10 selections to potentially replace the song.

Fark.com readers bombarded the Mets website with votes for a write-in candidate: Rick Astley's "Never Gonna Give You Up."

And it won.

My first footnote

And the 'first' colleague, too, Dave Binkowski. I'm sure he'll dig the traffic that this search brings... Again. It's the gift that keeps on giving. :)

NY Daily News

Valleywag

Spike TV Unlocks the Secret to the Sith

Really the key to the reason the Empire came to power... That and Jar-Jar Binks.


Image courtesy of Slashfilm








"A guy can only be called "Annie" so many times before he snaps..."

Rabble Rabble

Did you know that the creation of the Happy Meal was in response to the Iranian Hostage Crisis?


The Colbert Report

Mail... Snail Mail.

The Royal Mail (UK) has launched a set of stamps marking the 100th birthday of the birth of James Bond creator/author Ian Fleming.

The series of six stamps show a selection of 007 novel covers, including Casino Royale, Dr No, Goldfinger (Goooooooldfingah!) and For Your Eyes Only. It’s on sale at UK Royal Post Offices and online (link below).

Almost makes you want to start sending stuff old skool stylee now.

I really dug the Muppet (U.S.) collection from a couple years back:

Via the Beeb

Royal Mail

LIVEBLOGGING: American Gladiators (Hour 1)

After a 20-year absence, American Gladiators has returned to the airwaves. I used to love watching it on Saturday mornings as a kid... Let's see how this one goes...

9pm: Opening montage and 'history' of the American Gladiators. Nice to see a sense of history.

9:01 pm: Hosted by the Hulkster and Laila Ali! Funny how Hulk Hogan and his compatriots of the day (Iron Sheik, Jimmy "Superfly" Snuka, Junkyard Dog ("Grab Them Cakes!") "Rowdy" Roddy Piper) used to bodyslam in the same timeframe during the Saturday mornings of my youth.

9:04 pm: Chick contestants introduced with short piece on their lives. First sob story of series achieved by divorcee avec kids contestant competing against Life Coach.

9:06: POWERBALL (Chicks)! Divorcee Avec Kids sob story is down about 40 secs in, and eliminated in the Powerball event after injury.

9:10: Familiarity grabs my attention as I scan through commercials with the TiVo... Hold on... Quick replay. KNIGHT RIDER promo with the voice of K.I.T.T. by G.O.B. from Arrested Development (is he always going to play acronymical characters?). That's freakin' HUGE. Now, I'm always open to a good remake (Charlie's Angels, Fugitive, Brady Bunch Movie)... Hope it doesn't suck like Bionic Woman. NBC? Can you hear me? Can you create something new? Or can you bring back The Greatest American Hero? Realize I'm thinking this while watching American Gladiators, and decide to move on.

(UPDATE: It's here!)

9:11p Tattooed pro skateboarder DAD Chad and Little Italian NY Firefighter introduced.

9:14 Little NY Firefighter dude freakin' RULES at Powerball! Watch them moves... Scrappy! Kicks Skater Dad's ass, 12-2.

9:16p Rehab Doc replaces Divorcee, gets whupped in JOUST.

9:18p Life Coach survives JOUST but doesn't get the knockdown. A Walk's as good as a Hit, I suppose.

9:23 HANG TOUGH. Firefighter is slick and spry, and Gladiator Militia doesn't even make contact.

9:24p Militia is eliminated because of injury (they don't make Gladiators like they used to, apparently... Nitro NEVER missed an event, yo.).

9:25p The Wolf, a Wolverine knockoff, is introduced to replace Militia against Skater Dad Chad. SKD talks smack.

9:25p Wolfman ensnares him, and into the drink they go. Crowd sings along to "Hey Hey, Goodbye"... This is looking more and more like Running Man.

9:27p EARTHQUAKE. Rehab Doc against Gladiator Fury on a swinging disc of Lucite, kinda like the spiky platform in Flash Gordon. RD survives by contrition.

9:32p Life Coach makes a strong move against Fury, but overshoots, and dumps off the platform.

9:33p HIT AND RUN Scrappy Firefighter makes obligatory 'back in the 'hood of the LES NYC' event allegory, to adoring fans. Once again sails through.

9:35p Skate Dad Chad tries his luck, and makes some anti-establishment comment about why he will be triumphant. Dumps into the water 30 secs in. Oops.

9:38p Both chicks in the PYRAMID. Rehab takes a fall from the top, and then Life Coach follows. Rehab makes a scramble for the top, but doesn't make it. Rehab wins the event with 5 pts, and taking the lead in the competition.

9:44p WNBC WxGuy says we'll be 'flirting with 60' this week... Sweet.

9:45p Scrappy McFirefighter busts his ass, gets a lucky break, and takes the PYRAMID. He leads in the competition, 37-2. Oh snap! Get ready for THE ELIMINATOR!

9:47p Over a wall, 20 foot underwater/under fire swim, rope cargo net climb, barrel roll, windy-up thing, balance beam, pyramid, zip line, travelator (both contestants are barely making it through the course). Rehab is making a comeback! Life Coach can't get up, and she passes her for the win at the breakthrough wall! So much for mind over matter, Life Coachy.

9:51p Hulkster declares Rehab the Winner of this round, and a spot in the Final Eight. Cut to commercial. Hope they run another Knight Rider promo. :)

9:56p Dudes in the ELIMINATOR. This one's a bit more evenly matched, as Skater Dad Chad seems better at obstacle courses than against the Gladiators. Scrappy McFirefighter struggles, but takes the win to get his place in the Eight. NYC! NYC! Woo hooo!!

BREAKING: Britney In Hospital, May Lose Kid Visits

Oh snap.

US Weekly magazine, citing a hospital source, says Brit has been "designated a 'special needs' patient" and was under "constant watch" (suicide watch? - R). Another US Weekly source says that in the ambulance, Spears had to be restrained like a mental patient and that she "was going between laughing and hysterics."
Uh-oh.

I miss the old Brit:

Reuters

My Obsession: Top Gear

What happens when you combine the Beeb’s (that’s “the BBC”, for you Yanks) big budget, the attitude of MTV’s Jackass, MythBusters, Car & Driver magazine, some celeb guests, shake it up in your cable box and let fly? Top Gear.

I’ve been getting digital downloads via ‘unauthorized sources’ (cough cough, BitTorrent) for years (though they’ve been showing up on YouTube recently), but it’s kindof sucked having to watch it all jaggy on my computer monitor. Anyway, the cable gods have smiled upon Time Warner’s NYC viewers – BBC-A (a.k.a., “BBC America”) has been playing double shots of the show for the past few weeks, and my TiVo has been working overtime (see previous sleep-deprived post). Whoo hoo!

So what’s it all about? Hmmm… Not even sure where to start. The show follows the Top Gear boys, the crotchety Jeremy Clarkson, vertically challenged (I only mention it because Clarkson does constantly) Richard “Hamster” Hammond, James “Captain Slow” May on various adventures, both on and off the racetrack. They put all sorts of motoring machines to the test, from supercars (think Ferraris and Bugattis) to crapmobiles (like the ones I rent all the time).

Speaking of the crap cars, there’s a fun recurring segment referred to as “Star in a Reasonably Priced Car” where a celeb is interviewed on-set by the Top Gear guys, and then video of the celeb is shown of their top-speed run around the Top Gear track in a low-end machine. It’s tons of fun watching someone like Ewan MacGregor cursing and grinding the gearbox as he pushes the car’s limits around the track.

Keep a lookout for the episodes where the boys do stupid things that almost get them dead. One’s a road trip in America below the Mason-Dixon line, almost getting killed by pissed off locals, and the one where Hammond almost kills himself by crashing a rocket car at 300 mph. At least he set an ‘unofficial’ UK land speed record with that one.

Okay, this is just CREEPY...

Saw this on boingboing... Some are very fitting, and some are just disturbing in a Wes Craveny sorta way... Photos of celebrities and celebutantes who've had their eyes replaced with smaller versions of their mouths. Photoshop Fun.

Freaking News via boingboing.

Star Trek DIY: Fans make their own 'Webisodes'

To quote my colleague Dave, "The future of CGM and TV are here in full effect."

This is really really cool -- not just 'cause I'm a geek for this stuff (yes, including the Star Trek angle), but because it was done COMPLETELY with consumer-grade hardware and software. I estimate it was done for about $3K for all the equipment involved. In addition, it was worked on by remote teams, who communicated via Skype and email (free).

From a public relations / media relations standpoint, it's a great example of consumers taking a piece of pop culture into their hands and creating something for mass consumption... Much like we're about to do with Swiffer/You Tube in January.

I realize that this was produced by an IT guy and a printing shop guy, but this is an extreme example. But think about it: media editing technology is getting simpler everyday, and the digital cameras we all have are getting better video quality by leaps and bounds (aka, 'you don't need a special camera'). Engaging consumers like this will explode soon. Have you seen the material out there that's been done by WGA Letterman strikers?

The moms we're targeting for Swiffer/YT are just the tip of where this can go... Just think of all the new tech-savvy moms we have around here, who have the technology and the skill to do it....

http://www.cnn.com/2007/SHOWBIZ/TV/12/20/star.trek.podcast/index.html