CNN Trying to Use Tecnobabble to Get Out of Trouble

Personally, I don't like Dick Cheney. I don't dislike him, but I don't like him either. I also don't think the big X that kept flashing was meant to be seen by the public either (as they say "I think there is no there there"), but CNN's response is garbage. It is a response that uses the mystery of media production to its benefit, but never addresses the "root cause" of the event.

I quote:

"this was a technical malfunction, not an issue of operator error"

"but was inadvertently projected onto the screen by a malfunction in a "switcher" device, they explained."

They go on to talk about how a switcher is a device and not a person. This is true. Here is a page that briefly discusses switchers.

As you can see they are devices and not people, and can even be "software based" devices. I know because I used to use a switcher when I was a student at USC. I worked for their distance education program and was a switcher operator for various class room courses. When you operate a switcher you have multiple television screens where you manipulate a design that may or may not be shown to the viewing audience. Only one screen will actually show what the audience sees and it was a common pasttime among the various operators to play around with the screens not being used. I wasn's an Engineering student, and most of the courses were Engineering, so I would play around. I was lucky...none of my playing around was ever broadcast with the class. With others that wasn't true, they would sometimes accidentally hit a button and BOOM the image would broadcast and the phone would ring with questions about why such and such is being displayed.

I think this is what happened during the CNN broadcast, some techie was having fun in the back room (good for him or her) and something happened. Either they pushed a button or there was a software glitch, but anyone who knows anything about computers knows that "garbage in...garbage out" is the mantra of the day. Unless big Xs were appearing all over the place, the glitch wasn't the X. According to the article, "a place-holding marker used by technicians to cue up graphics." (Emphasis mine.) The glitch might have been why the X flickered on and off, but it wasn't why it was there. It might have been there as a place holder as CNN claims they use Xs for, but the X was likely put there intentionally by the operator. Not necessarily for nefarious reasons because it is entirely possible they were prepping queues for image inserts.

But come on! Be honest and don't try to go all, "you don't understand the hermetic alchemical technical machinations required to make a television program" on us. That is a cheap argument rooted in a desire to obfuscate meaning rather than admit wrong doing, even if it is an accident and there is "no there there."

Switchers are machines, but they have operators. Unless they want me to believe that CNN is entirely automated, in which case it is time to begin the Butlerian Jihad against the thinking machines.

Rush Hour 3 Finally an Official Greenlight...and We Care?

Chris Tucker, who has been a major obstacle in the production of a Rush Hour sequel, has finally come to terms he finds agreeable to make the third installment of the Jackie Chan vehicle.

That's right...Jackie Chan vehicle.

According to E! Online, "Tucker will still receive $20 million upfront, and he'll get 20 percent of the back-end gross; those terms will also extend to a future film to be determined."

Did I mention that this is a Jackie Chan vehicle? I would watch this film if it starred Chris Klein, Chris Farley (though he's dead), or even Chris O'Donnell.
I want to see Jackie Chan kick a$$.

Is Chris Tucker funny in these movies? Yes and he was funny in Fifth Element too.

But 20% of back-end gross? Chan only gets 15%, but does get exclusive distribution rights for Hong Kong and China so it's not like he isn't making any money on the deal.

And let's be honest...the Tucker/Chan combo has been more profitable than the Chan solo projects.

But how long has it been since Rush Hour 2? Maybe we should call this one...Freeway Gridlock.

A Truly Epic Romantic Tragedy

For the Medieval Fiefosphere (maybe illuminatosphere -- for illuminated texts would be better), I am naturally referring to the Medieval scholar portion of the blogosphere, comes the soon to be released film version of the classic romance "Tristan and Isolde" (You can view the trailer here).

The tale of Tristan and Isolde (Tristram and Isaud, etc.) is one that is often intertwined with Arthurian romances, but it is its own tale which happens to share many of the narrative tropes of the Arthurian romance. If you look to the love triangle traditionally told involving Arthur, Lancelot, and Guenevere you will find some similarities, but I have always found Tristan and Isolde a more plausible tragic romance (I also like Peleas and Etard).

Chief among my reasons for favoring T/I is that in the A/L/G romance Guenevere is often portrayed in less than a flattering light, largely due to the fact that Arthur and Lancelot ought to be men of exceeding virtue. A good part of the reason for this co-out is that Camelot is a fictional place and thus authors have never provided a significant political reason for the Arthur/Guenevere marriage or a romantically powerful reason for her attraction to Lancelot. Filmically, there have been several poor adapatations of the A/G relationship (think First -- she likes Richard Gere more than Sean Connery? -- Knight, King --We will largely ignore it -- Arthur (2004), or even the otherwise well done Excalibur where she was merely too young when she first met Arthur).

Anyway...if he reads this, I am certain that Unlocked Wordhoard will have an indepth discussion of the romance in the near future.

Superman Returns Trailer

Welp, the trailer's already been posted.

But, given that I have a bit of a history of being a Superman naysayer (as pointed out here) and that I once posted a grumpy post about it on Cinerati here, and Numero Uno posted what I read as a sideways swipe on that post here.

Whew. Now that the background's done, I must say that I greatly enoyed the trailer. Superman looks like Superman, esp. when he's floating in the clouds, illuminated by sunlight, his cape unfurled and blowing slowly, the old Krpyton theme arising in the background. Also, him being in space and soaring down appeared to be an homage to one of my fave JLA moments in recent years.

Now, how all of this combines/collides with various reports of grim Superman and Lois Lane saying the world doesn't need him anymore and Luthor flushing his head... dunno. But it looks good anyway, even great, even if it seems like early Superman/Re-telling the origin instead of Superman Returns-ing...

10 Animated Films Eligible for Oscar Consideration

According to The Guardian the following animated films are in consideration for nomination for next year's Oscar awards.

1. Wallace and Gromit: The Curse of the Wererabbit.
2. Valiant
3. Corpse Bride
4. Robots
5. Madagascar
6. Steamboy
7. Chicken Little
8. Hoodwinked
9. Howl's Moving Castle
10. Gulliver's Travel

Of these ten movies only three will be official nominees for the upcoming Oscars, and of them I am really only opposed to Robots on an aesthetic level. I haven't seen Valiant, Hoodwinked, or Gulliver's Travels so I won't comment on them. As for Howl's...Miyazaki's films always seem to dominate, but they also always seem to have been released earlier than should make them eligible for consideration at a particular Oscars. Gulliver's Travel hasn't been released stateside yet, but Miyazaki's film had its first international release in 2004. Disney has done a great job with most of the Miyazaki films they have distributed, but it seems to me that their "perrenial" anime is just their way of stacking the deck in their favor. To be fair...Howl's isn't as good as Miyazaki's other work, but given the Academy's tendency to desire to "appear" sophisticated I predict that the Oscar nods will go to...

1. Wallace and Gromit
2. Howl's Moving Castle
3. Steamboy

My choice among these three would be W&G, but if Steamboy (originally released in Japan in 2004 and played at the Austin Film Festival in 2004 with Sony attempting a Disney) wins I won't be disappointed. But the way that W&G masterfully recaptured the tropes of the old Universal horror films into work of genuine comic genius is what makes it my choice.

What do y'all think? Anyone seen Gulliver's?

Finally...a $250 Million Dollar Preview.

Superman Returns has an official teaser trailer.

Yay!

Spider-Man and X-Men to Stay With Activision

ACTIVISION AND MARVEL ENTERTAINMENT EXPAND ALLIANCE AND EXTEND INTERACTIVE RIGHTS FOR SPIDER-MAN AND X-MEN FRANCHISES

Deal Extends Relationship Through 2017

Santa Monica, C.A. and New York, N.Y. – November 11, 2005 – Activision, Inc. (Nasdaq: ATVI) and Marvel Entertainment, Inc. (NYSE: MVL) jointly announced today that the companies have expanded their long-term, broad-based strategic alliance by signing a multi-year extension to their current video game licensing agreements for the Spider-Man™ and X-Men™ franchises through 2017. This agreement replaces all previous agreements between the companies. Under the terms of the agreement, Activision has extended its exclusive worldwide publishing rights to two of Marvel’s most renowned comic book properties for interactive entertainment software products for console, PC and handheld platforms. The original agreements were set to expire in 2009. Activision’s Spider-Man and the X-Men video games rank among the company’s most successful franchises, having sold more than 25 million units across all platforms to date.

"This announcement further underscores the strength of our relationship with Marvel and reinforces our leadership position in the superhero genre,” states Mike Griffith, President and CEO, Activision Publishing, Inc. “Spider-Man and the X-Men are two of the most popular entertainment franchises today and some of the most coveted characters in interactive entertainment. This agreement will allow us to continue developing exceptional games based on these legendary characters well into the future.”

Tim Rothwell, Worldwide President, Consumer Media Group, Marvel Entertainment, added, "The interactive entertainment category continues to be one of Marvel's key strategic categories. Expanding our partnership with Activision, a leader in the video game industry, further ensures that our characters will continue to be among the elite and dominant interactive franchises for the next decade and beyond."

Bruno Maglione, President, Marvel International, commented, "Activision is one of a handful of players who can truly execute worldwide in this business. Spider-Man and X-Men are major global franchises. Because of this, it is always critical for us to partner with companies committed to maximizing success internationally. Activision’s results on a worldwide scale with these brands demonstrated to us that they can and will continue to do that."