I would be remised if I did not lead with my antipathy towards horror movies. I am a movie-buff; I love movies. I see everything. There is only one genre that I find little to no redemptive value in; and that is the horror genre. Of course, much of this is a matter of semantics. Certain films may be classified in the “horror” category that I do enjoy. It all depends on one’s definition of “horror.” I suppose my disdain is not for the suspenseful films. For example, pictures like “The Shining,” “Jaws,” “Silence of the Lambs,” “The Sixth Sense,” etc, are absolutely brilliant. I love and appreciate those. Could they be classified as “horror”? Perhaps? Classifying movies by genre is a ridiculously subjective process. (I once had a guy argue to me that "Jaws" was a sports movie. I was incredulous, and asked, "what sport?" To which he replied, "Fishing.") Anyway,the movies I loathe are the wretched, cheesy, gore-filled, blood-infested, slashing, grotesque, b-movies. (In the interest of full-disclosure, I must also add that I have never comprehended why people would attend a movie and pay money to be frightened. I live my life in fear of everything, from the imminently threatening, to the extraordinarily improbable. I try to avoid terror at all costs. If I want to be horrified, I’ll just leave my house in the morning and go through my day. That’s scary enough for me, and it’s free. Why the hell would I pay to be scared?) But, anyway, I digress.
Because of my position on this, I really could not invent a horror flick. But, I could pitch a suspenseful, unsettling, subtly frightening film. The picture would be a sort-of a mixture between “Stranger than Fiction,” “Secret Window,” (though that movie was awful) and “Being John Malkovich,” but highly dramatic. Let me explain. It would be rather meta-physical. Okay, the main character (Jack) begins hearing a voice, and, with the voice, a person (Bob). And, this mystery fellow feeds Jack lines, dialogue, pithy phrases to say at opportune times in Jack’s life. It’s like having a great screenwriter really writing dialogue for Jack in his actual life. Jack’s like a character in a movie; he always has the clever, witty, smart thing to say in every situation (given to him by Bob, of course). At first, Jack loves it, because he is enjoying tremendous success. He gets promoted at his job, because he’s always dispensing witticisms in meetings, impressing his bosses, and earning the admiration and love of everyone in the office. Furthermore, he’s now adroitly picking up women, because he always has the perfect comment to make the adorables swoon. And, just as he is wondering if his life can possibly improve, and realizing it likely cannot, things then turn.
Bob starts feeding him insidious, evil, demented lines. He becomes a depraved, degenerative, offensive maniac. Everything crumbles. His life falls apart. All the gains he made evaporate, and he continues to lose ground. He cannot control himself. Soon, it is not simply dialogue, Bob is making him do things, evil actions--murderous actions. The suspense is derived from not knowing what he will do, or be made to do, next. How much worse can it become? Further, as he becomes increasingly unstable, the viewer is forced to ponder if Bob ever existed at all. Is poor Jack afflicted afflicted by some disorder, a personality defect--paranoid schizophrenia, perhaps? Does he possess multiple personalities? Is the whole thing made up entirely? Is it all a charade orchestrated by an odious madman? Or, is Bob real?
Where is the answer, and how will it all be revealed? How will it turn out? The viewer shall be left guessing until the end in this suspenseful, horrifying, psychological thriller.
Monday, December 7, 2009
Coincidence?
Not sure how to explain this latest bit of research--it appears that Bing users are much more inclined to be "click-happy" than those on Google. Evidentally, people from Bing clicked on ads 50% more than those on google. This research was in July. Now, it's an amazing 75% higher through Bing. While only a snapshot overview, it measures "the proensity for people to click on an ad at asite after arriving there from a search engine via an organic search (i.e., not a paid search ad)."
Even though Google continues to dominate the search-market with about 84% of all traffic, the smaller search engines do better with clicks. It seems inexplicable right now. Obviously, more research will need to be done to ascertain what, if any, meaning can be gleaned from this data.
Even though Google continues to dominate the search-market with about 84% of all traffic, the smaller search engines do better with clicks. It seems inexplicable right now. Obviously, more research will need to be done to ascertain what, if any, meaning can be gleaned from this data.
Monday, November 30, 2009
use case project
I used one of my favorite sites, Espn.com, as my use-case. It is full of information, but that can make it overwhelming, too. So, I decided it would be an excellent choice.
The first of five tasks I asked my friend to complete was to find the profile page for my favorite coach, the head man of the NBA’s Charlotte Bobcats, Larry Brown. My friend clicked the “NBA” button on the top nav bar, then clicked “teams” on the top nav bar, then scrolled down and clicked on the “Charlotte Bobcats.” these three steps went quickly and without much trouble. He did run into some trouble on the team site page, but finally clicked on “roster” on the top nav bar. Then, he went to the bottom and clicked “Larry Brown.” So, that went pretty well, overall.
The second thing I had him find was the page for my other favorite coach, Steve Spurrier. He’s the head football coach at the University of South Carolina. So, my friend clicked “college football” on the top nav, then “teams” on the top nav, then clicked “South Carolina” which was under SEC. Again, upon reaching the team page, things bogged down a bit. He then went to “roster” on the top nav bar, but that was incorrect. So, he had to go back to the team page. He searched and searched for quite awhile, before finally going to a recap of the last game, hoping there might be something about the coach in there, and that he could link to his name. This was, I thought, a pretty savvy move. Unfortunately, it didn’t work. So, finally, having exhausted all options, he just used the search function, typing in the coach’s name, and that worked.
The third thing I had him do was see if one of my favorite columnists (Jeff MacGregor) on espn.com had a new column up for the week. He clicked on “Commentary” on the top nav. On this page, there was a spot where you could search for a particular columnist, either by last name, or by sport. I mentioned that this guy was a general columnist, not covering any specific sport, so he used the last name option, which goes by letter. So, he did “M,” but, for some reason, Macgregor failed to pop up. So, he had to break down and utilize the search function, typing in the name, which was successful.
The fourth thing I asked him to do was find the latest video episode of “Mayne Street.” As he went to click on the “video” button, a selection of shows immediately came up as he hovered over the button, one of which was indeed “Mayne Street.” Obviously, this was one of the better functions of the site. It made this task very easy. He clicked on “Mayne Street” and the show’s page came up, complete with all the episodes and other stuff. Excellent.
Finally, I had him look up when my favorite sporting event, the Kentucky Derby, will be held this year. Obviously, everyone knows it’s famously always “The First Saturday in May,” so it would be easy to figure out. Alas, that is not the point. The point was to have him look it up through the site. He hovered over the “all sports” button on the top nav, which made a whole plethora of sports appear, and he clicked horse racing. Then, he clicked the “calendars” button on the top nav bar. However, there was no way to go to next May. The calendar only went through 2009. This was very disappointing and unthinkable. Talk about a major glitch. They really need to rectify that.
Obviously, the site was varied. The best thing they did was the ease with which one could find the video of “Mayne Street” episodes. The worst was the fact that their calendar for horse racing events only went through the current year. That was pathetic. The other three tasks were in the middle, ranging from fairly easy to accomplish, to arduous, difficult, onerous, and considerably more time-consuming
The first of five tasks I asked my friend to complete was to find the profile page for my favorite coach, the head man of the NBA’s Charlotte Bobcats, Larry Brown. My friend clicked the “NBA” button on the top nav bar, then clicked “teams” on the top nav bar, then scrolled down and clicked on the “Charlotte Bobcats.” these three steps went quickly and without much trouble. He did run into some trouble on the team site page, but finally clicked on “roster” on the top nav bar. Then, he went to the bottom and clicked “Larry Brown.” So, that went pretty well, overall.
The second thing I had him find was the page for my other favorite coach, Steve Spurrier. He’s the head football coach at the University of South Carolina. So, my friend clicked “college football” on the top nav, then “teams” on the top nav, then clicked “South Carolina” which was under SEC. Again, upon reaching the team page, things bogged down a bit. He then went to “roster” on the top nav bar, but that was incorrect. So, he had to go back to the team page. He searched and searched for quite awhile, before finally going to a recap of the last game, hoping there might be something about the coach in there, and that he could link to his name. This was, I thought, a pretty savvy move. Unfortunately, it didn’t work. So, finally, having exhausted all options, he just used the search function, typing in the coach’s name, and that worked.
The third thing I had him do was see if one of my favorite columnists (Jeff MacGregor) on espn.com had a new column up for the week. He clicked on “Commentary” on the top nav. On this page, there was a spot where you could search for a particular columnist, either by last name, or by sport. I mentioned that this guy was a general columnist, not covering any specific sport, so he used the last name option, which goes by letter. So, he did “M,” but, for some reason, Macgregor failed to pop up. So, he had to break down and utilize the search function, typing in the name, which was successful.
The fourth thing I asked him to do was find the latest video episode of “Mayne Street.” As he went to click on the “video” button, a selection of shows immediately came up as he hovered over the button, one of which was indeed “Mayne Street.” Obviously, this was one of the better functions of the site. It made this task very easy. He clicked on “Mayne Street” and the show’s page came up, complete with all the episodes and other stuff. Excellent.
Finally, I had him look up when my favorite sporting event, the Kentucky Derby, will be held this year. Obviously, everyone knows it’s famously always “The First Saturday in May,” so it would be easy to figure out. Alas, that is not the point. The point was to have him look it up through the site. He hovered over the “all sports” button on the top nav, which made a whole plethora of sports appear, and he clicked horse racing. Then, he clicked the “calendars” button on the top nav bar. However, there was no way to go to next May. The calendar only went through 2009. This was very disappointing and unthinkable. Talk about a major glitch. They really need to rectify that.
Obviously, the site was varied. The best thing they did was the ease with which one could find the video of “Mayne Street” episodes. The worst was the fact that their calendar for horse racing events only went through the current year. That was pathetic. The other three tasks were in the middle, ranging from fairly easy to accomplish, to arduous, difficult, onerous, and considerably more time-consuming
Google gets into holiday shopping
I am always out there on Black Friday, amongst the masses. It's become a bit of an annual event. I have yet to engage in Cyber Monday, and maybe I should. It's evidentally quite the enormous deal. Microsoft beat Google to the punch, which is rare, by launcing Bing Cashback. However, Google has now counterpunched. They set up a special "Checkout Deals" page "where you can get discounts on products purchased using Mountain View’s Internet payment system"
"Savings range from $5 to $20 and involve hundreds of participating stores, including Buy.com, Petco and Toys”R”Us."
This is another intelligent move by Google. They always seem to get it right. Even when they are late to the party, they still adroitly jump in, and promptly do it better than anyone else. No wonder they are so good.
"Savings range from $5 to $20 and involve hundreds of participating stores, including Buy.com, Petco and Toys”R”Us."
This is another intelligent move by Google. They always seem to get it right. Even when they are late to the party, they still adroitly jump in, and promptly do it better than anyone else. No wonder they are so good.
Monday, November 23, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)