My friend Tom M. has just seen the new Charlies Angles movie and is boosting this following notion of a cross media meme plant. He says in the movie there is one of those gags involving a character named Chad. The name functions as a gag line somewhere in the script, i.e. : you walk out of the theater going, Chad ha ha ha. He posits the possibility of the studio goosing the press to use the chad political buzz word to secure it via comet-tailing in the greater overall buzz vernacular to benefit the film. Did this stick out at all ? Jim, you notice ?
-"Dead horses flogged here"
Chad, or more correctly "the Chad" (said in the same tone of voice as that SNL office skit with the guy who always puts a "the" before peoples names - "the davemeister" ect...) is a running gag in the movie. Personally I didn't find it funny, but I guess that's a matter taste. In any case, I can't see how this could have been planned, as the movie had to have been finished a long time ago, and the recent fame of the election ballot chad could not have been foreseen. And any suggestion that "the Chad" was added last minute to the script in order to ride the chad wave generated by the election controversy runs into the credibility problem generated by the fact that this would be a lot of work to go through for a very stupid joke. So, in other words, I say coincidence, and not a very meaningful one at that.
That was my take too. But, what he was saying was that he thought that someone from the studio had noticed that chad was a fresh and timely political news buzz word getting a lot of play and then tried make a covert media connection (by alerting reporters ?) since it was also a preexisting comic theme in their newly launched movie. An attempt to bundle his smaller movie meme with a larger (spontanious) political news meme. I guess I thought the funny part was the coincidence aspect linking these two look alike blips coexisting in saturated media and how Tom makes a little office joke by connecting the dots with a slightly paranoid industry theory. I need a vacation.
others have considered your charlies/chad coincidence.
Have I mentioned that this is a World in fracture?
There is a dialectic between synchronicity and conspiracy; two ways of finding meaning in coincidence. This relationship then fractures into another dialectic, in which meaningful interpretation is opposed to nihilism, but if meaning has a positive and a negative aspect, how do we subdivide meaninglessness?
Through the i-ching and Dada Manifesto ?
Punk Rock ?
if this is devolving into abstraction, i need some tutoring. has the world ever not been fractured? everything is at odds with everything. my interpretation of your question is are there countervailing forces within that which is considered meaningless. true versus false meaninglessness? i guess youll have to poll the gods on that one. is false meaninglessness therefore meaning? so my authoritative answer is if it is truly meaningless then there is no possiblity to bifurcate. meaninglessness is an absolute, otherwise there would be meaning. meanwhile can you define the term spiritual materialism?
|
-"Dead horses flogged here"
- bill 11-16-2000 3:50 pm
Chad, or more correctly "the Chad" (said in the same tone of voice as that SNL office skit with the guy who always puts a "the" before peoples names - "the davemeister" ect...) is a running gag in the movie. Personally I didn't find it funny, but I guess that's a matter taste. In any case, I can't see how this could have been planned, as the movie had to have been finished a long time ago, and the recent fame of the election ballot chad could not have been foreseen. And any suggestion that "the Chad" was added last minute to the script in order to ride the chad wave generated by the election controversy runs into the credibility problem generated by the fact that this would be a lot of work to go through for a very stupid joke. So, in other words, I say coincidence, and not a very meaningful one at that.
- jim 11-16-2000 5:14 pm [add a comment]
That was my take too. But, what he was saying was that he thought that someone from the studio had noticed that chad was a fresh and timely political news buzz word getting a lot of play and then tried make a covert media connection (by alerting reporters ?) since it was also a preexisting comic theme in their newly launched movie. An attempt to bundle his smaller movie meme with a larger (spontanious) political news meme. I guess I thought the funny part was the coincidence aspect linking these two look alike blips coexisting in saturated media and how Tom makes a little office joke by connecting the dots with a slightly paranoid industry theory. I need a vacation.
- bill 11-16-2000 9:13 pm [add a comment]
others have considered your charlies/chad coincidence.
- dave 11-16-2000 5:35 pm [add a comment]
I cant get this link. Maybe it's cause I use NETSCAPE !
- bill 11-16-2000 9:23 pm [add a comment]
FWIW, I can see it in Netscape.
- jim 11-16-2000 11:27 pm [add a comment]
Have I mentioned that this is a World in fracture?
There is a dialectic between synchronicity and conspiracy; two ways of finding meaning in coincidence. This relationship then fractures into another dialectic, in which meaningful interpretation is opposed to nihilism, but if meaning has a positive and a negative aspect, how do we subdivide meaninglessness?
- alex 11-16-2000 6:18 pm [add a comment]
Through the i-ching and Dada Manifesto ?
Punk Rock ?
- bill 11-16-2000 9:34 pm [add a comment]
if this is devolving into abstraction, i need some tutoring. has the world ever not been fractured? everything is at odds with everything. my interpretation of your question is are there countervailing forces within that which is considered meaningless. true versus false meaninglessness? i guess youll have to poll the gods on that one. is false meaninglessness therefore meaning? so my authoritative answer is if it is truly meaningless then there is no possiblity to bifurcate. meaninglessness is an absolute, otherwise there would be meaning.
meanwhile can you define the term spiritual materialism?
- dave 11-16-2000 10:11 pm [add a comment]