In keeping with today’s theme of shopping, the Hollywood Reporter brings us a perfect portrayal of just how irreparably woolly Hollywood’s grasp on reality has truly become. The Stock Market’s in free-fall, Hedge Funds are imploding and Foreclosures are almost a national blight. So what do you suppose is in post-production at Disney? A movie in praise of that deluded consumerist, the incurably dim Shopaholic.

Based on the novel by Sophie Kinsella, the film concerns a novice reporter with a penchant for writing but no head for figures, who’s $9,000 in debt on her plastic and still can’t seem to stop shopping. But it also delivers two unplanned surprises; 1) It’s from the Jerry Bruckheimer stable – the creative collective that launched Mr. Depp’s Pirates and turned Tom Cruise into a NASCAR geek, and 2) There are no product-placements involved.

Even accepting the fact that Hollywood’s best war-maker is now arming his leads with gold-cards, not Glocks, the absence of commerce is a sizable shock. The lead character spends a lot of her time [and  even more un-earned income] at Bendel’s…yet the store has no links with the movie at all. She also wears Zac Posen in numerous scenes, but it was apparently just picked at random from wardrobe; And the absence of linkage just goes on from there.

This is either the nascent bloom of more considerate cinema, or the first creative PR in modern Hollywood times. Movies cost money and a plot like this should be ‘All-You-Can-Eat’ dining for the marketing staff. But apparently, that’s not the case.

Mr. Bruckheimer is not famous for such benign fare, but should this start a trend I may well be a fan.

Photo by Fictures

]]> http://www.harlequinade.org/2008/10/27/mr-bruckheimers-special-offer/feed/ 0 http://www.harlequinade.org/2008/10/21/good-tv-it-depends/ http://www.harlequinade.org/2008/10/21/good-tv-it-depends/#comments Tue, 21 Oct 2008 18:57:14 +0000 thelimey http://www.harlequinade.biz/?p=379

In yet another endeavor to cement its position as the television network for those who think cardigans are cutting-edge fashion, CBS has announced plans to add ‘mini-shows’ between their real shows.

I’m not sure what those in charge at ‘the Eye’ are inhaling to form an idea so creatively obtuse, but I want 10lbs of it…Now!

The logic appears to be that their Advertisers are scared of the DVR, so in a bid to persuade you a commercial isn’t really a commercial at all they’re going to run mini-shows during the breaks, featuring Lara Spencer cooking an advertiser’s product while gossiping about the ongoing show.

The objective is clearly to increase sales. And can you guess whose sales will increase the most? Depends!

On the rare occasions when American television produces a show aimed above the IQ of wool, people wait for the break to adjourn to the bathroom. If we’re now to experience endearing young ladies sharing down-home cooking and fireside scoop, every non-gay male in that show’s demographic will collapse in incontinent torment.

I’m sure Ms. Spencer is charming and gifted, but this is, at the least an ill-conceived move. People use DVR’s because they’re sick of incessant adverts that ruin the shows. If you paint the ads to look like a show, people will skip those as well. Then what are you planning to do??

Like the other networks, CBS clearly needs to cut costs and raise income in the current economy. My suggestion would be to stop sipping whatever flavor of Kool-Aid makes you think it takes eleven producers, earning six-figures a year to make 22-minutes of television that’s so insipid, the only laughter it causes is done by machine. If any of you have some budget ideas, I’m sure CBS would be delighted to hear them. Join in, leave a comment and let’s chew this over.

Photo by: Midweek Post

]]> http://www.harlequinade.org/2008/10/21/good-tv-it-depends/feed/ 0 http://www.harlequinade.org/2008/09/23/steven-spielberg-says-no-on-prop-8/ http://www.harlequinade.org/2008/09/23/steven-spielberg-says-no-on-prop-8/#comments Tue, 23 Sep 2008 19:06:00 +0000 thelimey http://harlequinguy.wordpress.com/2008/09/23/steven-spielberg-says-no-on-prop-8/ In a welcome follow up to an earlier story, Brad Pitt’s altruistic act of last week has now been matched by Mr. Spielberg. He and his wife, Kate Capshaw, have donated $100,000 to the fight against Proposition 8, California’s repugnant ballot initiative to ban same-sex marriage.

“By writing discrimination into our state constitution, Proposition 8 seeks to eliminate the right of each and every citizen in our state to marry regardless of sexual orientation,” the statement said. “Such discrimination has NO place in California’s constitution, or any other.” says their statement.

If same-sex marriage bothers you, don’t marry someone of the same sex! The notion that you can, and are entitled to impose legislative boundaries on other people’s freedoms is absurd. If anyone suggested forbidding two people to get married because they were black the protest and outrage would be instant and immeasurable, yet this personal freedom is apparently fair game. I disagree.

Liberty and freedom are constitutional rights, not a Woolworth’s ‘Pick-n-Mix.’ You either guarantee them to the entire population, or no-one. Visit the ‘No on 8‘ site and make your choice…
~~~
ARTICLEURL

Mr Bocho accuses the Networks of devolving into purveyors of programming he has no interest in providing. In other words, “Reality” series. He also tells Forbes that the Nets are obsessed with micromanaging every detail of a production…which comes as no surprise at all.

From the man who was largely responsible for “Hill Street Blues,” “L.A. Law,” “NYPD Blue,” and a string of other top-rated shows that earned the very same networks millions in ad revenues, this is a damming indictment of the state of America’s broadcast media. The sad part, however, is: 1) How unarguably right his view is, and 2) The total absence of anyone in a similar position with the courage to agree, or even speak out at all.

I mean, when was the last time you watched a quality program on a broadcast network?

Let’s say it: American television is about money. First, last and only. Not shows, not quality, and certainly not the audience – Just the dollars. And as Mr. Bochco has proven, it shows. They make intellectual chewing gum for an audience they believe possess the IQ of wool, crush any spark of originality or creativity out of it with obsessive over-management, then infest it with commercials to make as much cash as possible.

…Then they wonder why people don’t watch??

The Summer hiatus is over and so are the Games. The ‘Fall’ season could be the Nets’ chance to repent and refocus their priorities. What do you think — Will they recant and finally show us – the audience – some respect, or will they just go on as before?

Leave a comment and let’s take a poll…

Do you…

A) Create a cinematic masterpiece of such life-altering power it could make even Spielberg weep, then play it 24/7 on every station in the world until the merest hint of its arrival leaves sane people chewing razor blades to try and ease the pain…?

…or…

B) Produce a mildly expensive yet tasteful ad, but slide in one ‘artistic’ shot that will render it utter unplayable on anything so anal as an American Network, then bathe in the endless publicity while watching sales of the malodorous concoction bore holes in the stratosphere on their way to the Sun?

If your client’s Calvin Klein, the answer is known. Cal’s agency has just produced an ad for his latest forgettable odor, featuring Eva Mendes. It was immediately and predictably banned from every TV station in the country.

Result? Cal’s factories can’t make it fast enough.

The “Creative Director” guilty of this adolescent insult is maintaining a facade of self-righteous outrage, but this puerile exercise in inspirational bankruptcy is yet another example of creating controversy to gain free publicity…Which begs the question, just how ‘creative’ is your Director if he finds such a cliché attractive?

To assuage the firestorm of public indignation – for which they so eagerly supplied the fuel – the company will air a G-rated version instead. Meanwhile, the “Directors Cut” will crash You-Tube six times a day, the scent will break records on a budget of $50, the “Creative” Director will get a new Porsche [and a far hotter girlfriend,] and the “star” will raise her fee for her next forgettable film.

This is a tired and brainless assault on our collective intelligence, perpetrated by people with nine-inch pony-tails and the IQ of a Latte, and has been inflicted and enjoyed, in one form or other by every talentless vapidity from Madonna to Mary-Kate Olson.

And the really sad part is, you want to see that ad now…don’t you?

Dear reader…you have my sympathy.

Creating an entire nation from scratch is a daunting task, demanding countless decisions, with a very slim margin for error. One detail the Fathers initially overlooked was ensuring their fellow travelers on this voyage of discovery were free to speak their minds after decades of censure from my peers of the time. This was soon remedied with a simple, yet invaluable amendment to the newly-minted Constitution.

…But they didn’t reckon on CNN.

Blogs have been a cultural phenomenon. Millions of people were suddenly able to reach across the world and share their lives and views with other, like-minded souls they could never hope to encounter by any other medium at so low a cost. And if CNN could have borrowed the mental processes necessary to formulate a policy on the practice, Chez Pazienza, their former “American Morning” Producer might still have a job.

Mr. Pazienza was fired because the CNN suits decided his Blog was against ‘corporate policy.’ Apparently, CNN requires their workers to avoid anything so inconvenient as a personal opinion on any topic because the station is dedicated to unbiased reporting.

Given that this is the same organization who, back in January of 200 displayed the staggering intellectual vacuity needed to decide that merging with AOL was actually a good idea, I don’t see how they’re in a position to judge? What Mr. Pazienza chose to enter into his own personal blog is not only none of their concern, it is – or at least should be – covered by that pesky new Amendment.

Mr. Pazienza expressed his own opinion, in his own blog, on his own time…An action that is enshrined as the inalienable right of every citizen of this radiant nation in that splendid Constitution…And CNN fired him for it. So here’s my question:

Since when did the First Amendment expire at the Georgia border?

“At NBC you have this giant corporate, vertically integrated company….The digital division had seven people, and three weeks later there were 67.” he explained. “What happened was 67 people all wanted to feel they are controlling this…You throw a bit of sponsorship and product placement into the mix and you have a recipe for all kinds of problems!”

We know, Tim – we’ve all seen the train-wreck. Like every other network, NBC is infested by a vast litany of people with designer suits, meaningless titles and no creative flair whatsoever, each drawing six-figure salaries for amounts of work no sane person could find with a microscope, and all unshakably convinced that anyone who meets them should be driven to incoherent adoration by their every slightest thought.

The result is televisual oatmeal. Mediocre programs that wouldn’t engage the intellect of a mannequin, each bloated with commercials to pay for all this dead-weight. The viewers – who should be your first and over-riding concern – reject this insult to their worth and intelligence in droves, and your Network scores the lowest ratings in the history of the medium.

…Yet nothing changes, and no-one gets fired.

One day, someone in charge of a network will overcome this narcissistic myopia, extract their lips from the advertisers rectums and start making shows to please the audience for a change. But if nobody minds, I won’t hold my breath.

And what does a major player like, say, NBC do to recover? They add more commercials!

The November 15th episode of “30 Rock,” featured Alec Baldwin and Tina Fey in a gossamer-thin sham of profit-driven, tub-thumping for a cellphone company, dressed up to look like part of the show.

But when they talk to the Shareholders, these same corporate suits are claiming profits in millions and gleefully assuring them that tons more easy money is on the way.

…Did I miss a memo or is somebody here getting lied to?

Anyone who’s run a major business will tell you the first rule is to keep your Shareholders happy, but this smacks of malfeasance. They tell the Shareholders there’s so much profit they can’t spend it all, while at the same time donning sackcloth and ashes to tell the Writers they’re broke and couldn’t possibly find another dime.

This to the people who make the whole industry – and their own fat salaries – possible?!

As I see it, the Nets can’t win: Lie to the Writers and the strike continues, and your precious profits land in the toilet…Fast! But lying to the Shareholders? That’s fraud. And that wins you a bespoke orange jumpsuit.

Either way, they’re trapped; If the Internet and cellphone markets are the vast ocean of green of which they’re assuring the Shareholders this entire strike was caused by boundless, disingenuous greed, perpetrated to steal from the Writers to pad the bottom line and inflate their own related bonuses.

If, however – and I severely doubt this could be the case — the claims of poverty are the truth, the Shareholders are backing a group of such staggering collective stupidity they remain utterly unable to define a single way to profit from the greatest technological advance in the medium since the arrival of Satellite.

Once this inexorable truth was revealed, of course, the Shareholders would leave, their investment would leave and the Networks would collapse overnight.

The bosses have no honorable choice but to apologize for this premeditated deceit, and either the Writers or the Investors need to get the truth. Now.

Would any of you care to bet on how soon that’s likely to happen??