This post will be in 3D!!!

DDD

I haven't been to the movies in a long time because:

1) I only go on Tuesdays for free popcorn and drinks because I'm too cheap otherwise.
2) I can't go on Tuesdays because Lost is on at 8.

There have been some flicks that people have been raving about recently; Avatar and Shutter Island. I don't have a lot of time (or money) these days so if I do go out to the old cinema, I don't know which one I'd see. Here's my dilemma.

Movies nowadays are less about plot and character development but about famous faces and visual effects. Big explosions, cheap laughs and women in bikinis. It's not taht I have anything against those, it's just that those are easy to produce and because of that, people are producing them non-stop. One once in a while comes a movie that makes you reevaluate your life and think about the last time you did anything nice for someone.

There are also the movies that are the package deal. They have all the spectacular graphics and effects with a plot that tries to support all the wild things you see on screen. In my opinion, these movies usually fizzle out 20 minutes into the movie. They try too be too "artsy" or "deep", and with this, continuity and flow are sacrificed. But I mean, I guess they tried.

So back to my debacle. Do I go see Avatar for it's mesmerizing and unbelievable settings in spite of it's Pocahontas-esque story line? (By the way, I hate Pocahontas. Weakest songs on Disney movies by far) Or do I go see the mind-warping psychological thriller that is Scorsese's Shutter Island?

YOU DECIDE.

DDD

P.S. This post was infact in 3D. Get it?



He does.

In Hindsight...

maybe that wasn't such a good idea.

I decided I wanted to use the Internet tonight so I opened it. Like many others who are involved in the Internet-using community, I have Google as my homepage. I was surprised to see this as their design today:





Most people have heard about the tragic death of Georgian luger, Nodar Kumaritashvil this Friday.

I don't know when Google updated the image, but I'm guessing it was posted before the death, and someone just hasn't noticed the connection yet. Hopefully Google realizes it soon and changes it ASAP.

On another note, the video of Kumaritashvil's crash has been released and circulated around the internet. It is being broadcast on various news programs all over the TV. I don't know if this shows much respect to Kumaritashvil or his family. I mean, posting the video of someone's death is one thing, but for it to be repeatedly played over and over for his family to see is something else. I heard YouTube refuses for it to be posted on their website, so it seems as though some people are getting it.

Hopefully the video makes a quick round and then people get over it. It's a sad story, and let's hope there won't be anymore disasters for the duration of the Olympics.

Twitbook/Facetter

The biggest names of social media in the history in the entire world are "Facebook" and "Twitter". This is partly because Web 2.0 devices have only been around for a couple years but the number of users that are involved with them are increase exponentially.

Even though they are on the same medium, there are benefits that one has that the other does not.



Facebook has many more options and features than Twitter, but this also make it easier for messages and information someone wants to send, to get buried under all the clutter. People always complain about wasting time on Facebook and never getting work done, and I think this because you go on to update your status, or send a message to a friend, but you see a revealing picture of a girl you went to high school with, or you just remembered you need to harvest your crops in Farmville or Barn Buddy.

The focus of Facebook is to bring everyone together regardless of where in the world they are, and this is true, to some extent, but how effective is it really? It's not only a communication tool but also an arcade. It's a outlet for emotions and feelings through notes and rants. You can draw, you can take pictures and you can creep on people you don't know.

It is, effective in the PR world because it allows you to make yourself unique with what groups you join, what people and causes you support and what events you say you're going to or not going to. This pre-segregates the critical mass of Facebook users into smaller and smaller communities which, in turn, makes it easier for organizations to target specific groups.

Also, because Facebook has so many capabilities other than messaging, you can pile on as many extra features you think people you want to target would enjoy, giving them more of what they and making things more personal and customized for them.



If Facebook is the articles, crosswords and personals, Twitter is the front page. Now, we have to establish something first. Yeah sure, you follow 5628 people and almost as many follow you but you're doing more harm to yourself than good. You want a front page that is convenient and readable. You only want to see the things you want to see and will follow whatever interests you.

You have to weed out everyone who's tweets are just that. Tweets. You need to cut down your follow list to people and organizations that have a message and information in everything they post. You might feel bad not follow Timmy, but he'll get over it. If you do this, everything that appears on your feed will be relevant to your interests and if they tweeter is serious, their messages will be of value.

My sister an I had an argument about the effectiveness of Twitter. The thing I noticed is that the only people she mentioned was Ashton Kutcher, Perez Hilton and some other celebrity. This proved my point. Most people follow people because they're famous or their friends, and this isn't effective use. (Except Sarah Silverman, she's too funny)

Now, you might think it's not a powerful tool because of the 140 character limit. This is true in some cases, but in other cases, not. You can always link the follower to the Facebook page or somewhere else. The tweet is simply to get their attention so they go to the bigger thing. It's the headline, it's the lead, it's the melted peanut butter on the toast. Once you get them to click on the link, you've got them. They've already invested their time into that click, so there's a greater chance they'll at least read a bit of whatever you linked than just close the window right away. Sure, all the cool things you have to show aren't on Twitter, but it's easy enough to show them the way to get there.

If people who send messages and people who receive them use social media, such as Facebook and Twitter, use them properly, effectively and remove all unneeded clutter, their message can remain focused and be received as it should.

For everyone else, I hope your harvest in Farmville was better than last year's.

My Corona

This scene looks familiar doesn't it? Of course, it's the white sandy beaches of Corona ads! But, these eternal vacationers who lounge on the pristine beaches of wherever might be packing up and moving back to the real world.

The beer's sales have been declining for the past couple years and they think it's about time to rethink their strategy. When you hear Corona, you see the scene above. "A vacation in a bottle" is where Corona has been positioning themselves for the past 16 years, says Jeremy Mullman of Ad Age in an article he wrote this week.

It's true, you don't group Corona with all the other beer ads with young college-ish guys high-fiving and trying to hook up with the way-too-good-looking hotties at the bar. Most of the time you see those in between the game on sports channels or Spike TV. But you know what? That's where most of the beer drinkers are. Sitting with their college-ish buddies watching TV, hoping they could get with way-too-good-looking hotties. Even if Bud's or Coors' commercials are unrealistic, it still gives them a bit o' hope. And that's enough.

Corona is going to try and make their advertising a little more relevant. It's going to try an incorporate a little more humour, maybe some women, and maybe even get off the beach.





Another ad shows couples enjoying Corona on the beach as well as other places.

I think there's nothing wrong in a little change, especially if what you're doing right now isn't working for you. It's good that the higher-ups took time to stop splashing each other in the water and re-evaluate. There's a party happening a little further down the beach and if they pack up and move a little closer, they'll still be able to keep their little piece of paradise but they'll also be able to check out the girls playing beach volleyball.