So, as Perez Hilton mentioned today, LEGO is aiming at making a reality based show.. Perez himself hates the idea; while I kinda think it could be cool. Not for me; but for the kiddies! IF it's done properly. LEGO is a great toy, my own personal favorite. Like all other consumer brands, they'll need to find their way in how to make the perfect blend of new-media platforms.. I'm wondering whether the who will be online, or if LEGO is working with a TV network to develop the idea? I see convergence possibilities here; web/toys/TV/mobile etc.. Could be fun!
See Perez Hiltons thoughts here
www.perezhilton.com/2009-10-24-of-all-the-terrible-ideas-for-a-reality-show
Saturday, October 24, 2009
Friday, October 23, 2009
Battlestar Galactica; The Plan
Battlestar Galactica is one of those series where great narrative structure goes hand in hand with amazing visual effects. Add a little drama and mystery, and we've got a nice recipy for a cult TV show that got great ratings.
I must however say, that the latest installment, The Plan, was quite a dissapointment for me. To many HOWs and not enough WHYs. Dean Stockwell performed the Cavil character(s) splendidly, and on the visual level, it will probably be a treat to most fans.
The series itself had quite a few narrative loops - none too crazy - well, depending on how you see it, I mean, I'd still like a better explanation for Starbucks important other that "divine intervention". But all in all, I personally did not need 90 minutes of filler-unimportant information to sweep the narrative better together. Sure, they made up things as they went along; but the structure was always clear in the series; it had happened before and it would happen again. The circle was meant ( or doomed ) to be completed in the end as it did.
So, all good intentions aside; is the Plan just a cash-cow for the Cult fans? I really can't see it as a stand-alone.
I'd love to see more Battlestar stuff and movies; but this one looked and felt too much like a marketing-machine to me..
For a review including spoilers, see the link above or copy-paste from here:
http://th3tvobsessed.blogspot.com/2009/10/review-battlestar-galactica-plan.html
I must however say, that the latest installment, The Plan, was quite a dissapointment for me. To many HOWs and not enough WHYs. Dean Stockwell performed the Cavil character(s) splendidly, and on the visual level, it will probably be a treat to most fans.
The series itself had quite a few narrative loops - none too crazy - well, depending on how you see it, I mean, I'd still like a better explanation for Starbucks important other that "divine intervention". But all in all, I personally did not need 90 minutes of filler-unimportant information to sweep the narrative better together. Sure, they made up things as they went along; but the structure was always clear in the series; it had happened before and it would happen again. The circle was meant ( or doomed ) to be completed in the end as it did.
So, all good intentions aside; is the Plan just a cash-cow for the Cult fans? I really can't see it as a stand-alone.
I'd love to see more Battlestar stuff and movies; but this one looked and felt too much like a marketing-machine to me..
For a review including spoilers, see the link above or copy-paste from here:
http://th3tvobsessed.blogspot.com/2009/10/review-battlestar-galactica-plan.html
Cult TV history
Today, Star Trek is most likely the most famous of all cult television series, but it was far from the first. 1950s series Quatermass and 1960s series Dr. Who and The Avengers were among the first to achive this status. The original series of Star Trek was cancelled due to low ratings after just three seasons. But the series still continued to generate revenue as local tv stations showed the 79 episodes over and over again while fans increased in size. In 1979 the first of to date 11 Star Trek movies was released - and in 1987 the tv series Star Trek: The Next Generation was born.
Later, three more series were added to the franchise. Star Trek once and for all helped to open the eyes of tv executives towards the vast cult television audience potential - and many tv networks have since begun to create tv shows with the full intention of branding them as ”cult tv” even before they are first aired. This was the case with Twin Peaks, The X-Files, Red Dwarf and even The Simpsons, just to name a few. And it is the case with Lost, a television series which will be be further presented and explored in this essay.
The days when cult tv was an odd phenomena shared only by a small group of initiated are over.
ABC's Lost is one of many new tv series that operates within the borders of cult and mainstream. An interesting thought, given that it is Lost creator JJ Abrams who directed the latest Star Trek movie!
Later, three more series were added to the franchise. Star Trek once and for all helped to open the eyes of tv executives towards the vast cult television audience potential - and many tv networks have since begun to create tv shows with the full intention of branding them as ”cult tv” even before they are first aired. This was the case with Twin Peaks, The X-Files, Red Dwarf and even The Simpsons, just to name a few. And it is the case with Lost, a television series which will be be further presented and explored in this essay.
The days when cult tv was an odd phenomena shared only by a small group of initiated are over.
ABC's Lost is one of many new tv series that operates within the borders of cult and mainstream. An interesting thought, given that it is Lost creator JJ Abrams who directed the latest Star Trek movie!
Defining Cult TV?
”Cult texts must provide a completely furnished world so that it’s fans can quote characters and episodes as if they were aspects of the fan’s private sectarian world.” writes Umberto Eco.
But defining cult television and texts is not as easy as it might seem. While the word ”cult” itself originates from the latin word ”cultus” meaning ”adoration” or ”devotion” and originally referes to systems of religious beliefs and rituals, once it is applied to television, litterature or movies, people will often agree to disagree on what defines as cult as opposed to what is mainstream making the process of organizing various texts into the two different categories fairly difficult and rather subjective. An obvious example is the filmatization of the Lord of the Rings trilogi. Can they still be considered cult after millions of people all over the world have seen them? Can cult be mainstream? And can mainstream be cult? And what lies in between?
Umberto Eco’s definition as quoted above is both well known and often used when defining cult texts. However, it if far from sufficient. Other factors apply; low versus high production costs, theatrical versus non theatrical distribution apart from the textual characteristics and the actual reception which seems to interest Umberto Eco the most.
Perhaps a more practical definition on cult television is provided by Reeves, Rodgers and Epstein in Sara Gwenllian Jones book, Cult Television; ”What distinguishes cult shows from typical fare is that a relatively large percentage of the viewers are avid fans and that these fans have relatively high visibility compared to the avid fans of other shows”.
Another reseacher, Phillippe Le Guern provides a constructivist approach when researching cult texts:
1) The cult expresses the attribution of value;
2) It functions as a unifier that produces groups and communities of spectators
3) These groups are most often limited to audiences of a ”happy few” but can also unite members of the same generation
4) The group maintains enthusiasm for the cult texts
5) The concrete manifestation of this relationship is expressed in the practise of rituals
The success of the Internet has certainly provided cult tv fans with the opportunity to put these five elements into good usage, as tv fandoms rapidly grow in numbers across the World Wide Web...
But defining cult television and texts is not as easy as it might seem. While the word ”cult” itself originates from the latin word ”cultus” meaning ”adoration” or ”devotion” and originally referes to systems of religious beliefs and rituals, once it is applied to television, litterature or movies, people will often agree to disagree on what defines as cult as opposed to what is mainstream making the process of organizing various texts into the two different categories fairly difficult and rather subjective. An obvious example is the filmatization of the Lord of the Rings trilogi. Can they still be considered cult after millions of people all over the world have seen them? Can cult be mainstream? And can mainstream be cult? And what lies in between?
Umberto Eco’s definition as quoted above is both well known and often used when defining cult texts. However, it if far from sufficient. Other factors apply; low versus high production costs, theatrical versus non theatrical distribution apart from the textual characteristics and the actual reception which seems to interest Umberto Eco the most.
Perhaps a more practical definition on cult television is provided by Reeves, Rodgers and Epstein in Sara Gwenllian Jones book, Cult Television; ”What distinguishes cult shows from typical fare is that a relatively large percentage of the viewers are avid fans and that these fans have relatively high visibility compared to the avid fans of other shows”.
Another reseacher, Phillippe Le Guern provides a constructivist approach when researching cult texts:
1) The cult expresses the attribution of value;
2) It functions as a unifier that produces groups and communities of spectators
3) These groups are most often limited to audiences of a ”happy few” but can also unite members of the same generation
4) The group maintains enthusiasm for the cult texts
5) The concrete manifestation of this relationship is expressed in the practise of rituals
The success of the Internet has certainly provided cult tv fans with the opportunity to put these five elements into good usage, as tv fandoms rapidly grow in numbers across the World Wide Web...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)