NEWS ITEM:

I’m helping organize the HAITI POSTER PROJECT, a collaboration of artists and designers from around the world raising money for victims of the earthquake in Haiti.

In 2005, we organized the Hurricane Poster Project. The effort raised $50,000 for victims of the hurricane. Exhibitions of the show appeared around the country and in Europe. Additionally, many of the posters are now in permanent collections of several major museums, including the Library of Congress and the Louvre.

We are doing it again.This time, we are teaming up with Josh Higgins, the organizer of the 2007 So-Cal Fire Poster Project, to raise money for victims of the earthquake in Haiti. All money raised will be donated to Doctor’s Without Borders.

If possible, I’d love for If This Is a Blog Then What’s Christmas? to help spread the word and do a piece on the project.

I have attached a PDF of the details. Additionally, you can find information at thehaitiposterproject.com.

If you have questions, please feel free to contact me or the head of the project (Leif Steiner.)
Leif Steiner
303.506.2320
leif.steiner@moxiesozo.com

On behalf of Moxie Sozo and The Haiti Poster Project, thank you in advance.

Thanks,

I hope it interests you.

This subject was suggested to me by George from Academy. It sounded interesting, so let’s see if some ill-thought-out conjecture and baseless bollocks helps to make it even more so.

George thought it was worth pointing out that directors only do a job for one of two reasons: the reel or the cash.

Having thought about that for a bit, I think he’s right, but that’s partly because those two reasons cover a large bunch of sub-reasons.

Here’s an example: early in my career my head of TV managed to persuade a director who had won a BTAA gold the day before to film a script that my partner and I had written. The ads were not of the Mountain/Odyssey/Cog standard that might tempt a director because of what they might do for his reel, but the director knew that in taking the job on he was keeping my agency sweet for future jobs. It was a favour that would be repaid, either in ‘reel’ or ‘cash’. In the end it was a bit of a disaster because the director’s heart wasn’t in it 100% and his post involvement was pretty non-existent. I’ve since gone on to become a regular blogger, while he is directing Hollywood movies. How the world turns, eh?

Example number two would include those jobs where a director takes on a charity script. he might well want to do his bit for the charity in question, but there’s also the ‘reel’ to think of. Charity ads are more likely to win awards. They just are. If you haven’t worked this out yet, go to the back of the class. So the director gets to satisfy his conscience AND, if all goes to plan, get a tasty award-winner for the reel. I’m sure some directors are motivated purely by the goodness of their own hearts, but there is always that nice added bonus that plumps up the warm feeling still further.

Example number three is the one where they have this great new technique they’ve always wanted to try out. This is usually another disguise for the ‘reel’ argument. If someone’s willing to spend a bunch of cash letting them lose on the suites of MPC then that might persuade them to do a script that they would not otherwise be interested in just so they can get slapped on the back for their great ‘craft’.

However, there are a couple of reasons outside the reel and the cash that motivate directors:

One is the ‘movie factor’. This means that the director will be more likely to shoot a script if it allows them to be in LA for those all-important meetings on Final Destination 6 or Saw 12. The other way of doing this is the Tarsem technique of using up the spare time in the shooting schedule to actually shoot your own movie. Cheeky, but it worked for him.

The second is the ‘tits’ factor. Most directors are men and most men like tits, so a script that involves hot girls wearing very little might also attract certain directors who would not otherwise be interested. Hey! maybe that has helped Lynx over the years. Or maybe the scripts were just good.

Anyway…directorial motivation.

?

Ok, just hang on a second. Before you jump right in, you have to remember that he’s only got the Avatar trailer footage to work with and it’s only a two-parter, so it’s not quite as good as the Phantom Menace annihilation. But it still better than 99.9999999999999999999999% of what’s on YouTube or TV. And it appears he’s in the midst of an Attack of the Clones review. Thank Darwin for people like him.

(Thanks, K.)

By the way, I finally got round to watching the first episode of The Persuasionists. I feel a bit sorry for the writer. I don’t think the gags were that bad, but the whole thing is played so hard for laughs that it kind of reeks of an unpleasant desperation. The acting and direction are terrible so the lines don’t stand a chance. I hope it gets better but I’ll probably never find out because I’ve got better things to do. Like eat some bird shit off an old bit of grating above Paddington Station.

Here’s the new Skittles ad:

It’s perfectly fine.

But it’s not:

Or

It may be down to the darker edge in the last two. It feels like the dilemma of the Touch guy is really quite tragic, which is what makes it funnier. And the Sour guy is a complete arsehole who is willing to ruin the farmer’s business. Having said that, I don’t know if this one conforms to that rule, yet it’s still one of the best:

God knows.

Any ideas?

(Thanks, BB. Via Twitter.)

Some comments on YT:

‘…shocking. stinks worse than turds.’

‘Wow. I don’t know how to say “Awful/Bad/UtterSh*t” in a way that hasn’t been stated already.’

‘I rarely log into YouTube, but I just had to tell your marketing team that you guys should kill yourselves.’

‘WTF? Why hasn’t the Dr Pepper marketing team pulled this down by now? It’s so embarrassing. To think they paid to create this content. Idiots.’

And, of course:

‘Love it. Really effective.’