8 posts tagged “1997”

There was quite a bit of buzz with the Ford Puma TVC in 1997, which used visual effects to bring Steve McQueen back to life, driving the newer car. The original footage and music are from Bullitt, and a body double was used in some shots, with McQueen’s face mapped on to him. I read some of the YouTube comments and they were quite critical, saying McQueen would never have driven this car, but I beg to differ. Plus, it was done with the permission of Steve McQueen’s children.

   The director even got asked, ‘What was it like to work with him?’ by people who did not realize that, by that time, Steve McQueen had been dead for some 16 years.
   I was very surprised to see Ford used a similar idea when selling the 2005 Mustang a few years ago. Maybe it’s because I knew of the Puma ad for such a long time that this newer one seems less clever. Make a track in your field and dead people will begin emerging. And take your car.

So what’s the deal with ‘England’s rose’, Princess Diana, and Alex Drake? Have we moved from David Bowie to Elton John this year? Why is there a Lady Di reference in the two series of Ashes to Ashes so far (think back to series 1, episodes 1 and 2)?
   There were some great Life on Mars-esque touches with the new series of Ashes to Ashes: viz. mystery phone calls and glimpses of the present day (2008). But those who liked Alex Drake’s self-awareness about the situation she might be in might not take to the darker tone of the new series; those of us who like an extra mystery thrown in, à la Life, will love it.
   The problem was the relative absence of surprises, especially after the way US Life on Mars ended (can’t get more whack than that) but Alex Drake’s mystery stalker, who taunts her with a red rose and even captures her momentarily, is enough to keep me watching. (Also, what is it with tunnels—both the one where Diana and Dodi were killed and the motif used heavily in Spanish Life on Mars, La chica de ayer?)
   I know there are those little things appearing in the show that couldn’t have existed in April 1982, such as the particular model of Audi Quattro or Roger Allam’s Rover SD1 (it’s a Vanden Plas, launched December that year), and on Twitter someone mentioned the SLR camera wasn’t available.
   But as with Life on Mars, it’s telly. Was it good telly? I say yes, with viewer numbers peaking at 7·2 million in the UK last night—identical to the première.

I am glad someone else appreciates Steve Coogan’s Tony Ferrino character out there in YouTubeland. As I mentioned when I first blogged about Tony, this is my favourite of all of Coogan’s creations, but I think he was ahead of his time with the style of humour. As you can see, the show was very well choreographed and Coogan can hold a tune.
   Back in the 1990s, Tony Ferrino did not do well by the standards of other Coogan characters and he was seldom seen again. I have not seen this opening since the show was first aired in the 1990s.

I can’t believe it—found another Tony Ferrino video on the internet!

   I realize this was not Steve Coogan’s most successful character, but I thought it was one of his best. All the numbers were so well arranged and choreographed.
   Incidentally, this is an MOV file, and if your QuickTime player is anything like mine—i.e. it gets worse and less stable with each upgrade—you might not be able to see a thing.

I’ve been having a think about the hatchet-job that Gov. Palin is getting, surprisingly, from the Murdoch Press, specifically its Fox News Channel arm. Considering that she was championed by this network after her selection by the party (over Sen. McCain’s own choice of Sen. Joe Lieberman, who even my Democratic friends felt would have been a better choice to win moderate voters), the about-face shows a level of deceit either now, or before, by the media company.
   While there may have been some gentlemen’s agreement over concealing this information till after the election, I don’t think I have seen the Murdoch Press go after a political figure in quite this fashion since Hard Copy did its exposés on Sen. Ted Kennedy in the 1980s.
   To be fair, even Newsweek, on the left, has kept mum about matters till now, and I imagine other media outlets have done the same in order to maintain their access to the candidates.
   We are hearing some things about the Democrats and we now know that Sen. Obama isn’t above swearing, but overall the post-mortem, even in the conservative press, has been relatively muted about the winning side.
   But not against Gov. Sarah Palin.
   It also shows a disloyalty within the Republican Party that is not becoming of it, if it wishes to be seen as a party that was unjustly cheated out of the election this week.
   In 2000, Democrats could point to the recount process in Florida and the alliance between the state’s Attorney-General Katherine Harris and the Republican Party as having taken the presidency from Al Gore.
   This time, the divide that has occurred might leave Republicans thinking that the disunity in the party cost them the election, and they were beaten by Democrats who hid their divisions better. They may fairly and rightly point to the media as being complicit in giving Sen. Obama a free ride, just as Conservatives in Britain could in 1997, but the reality may be that there was something rotten within the GOP.
   I can’t believe campaign aides and workers coming out and breaching a level of trust by revealing such details as Gov. Palin coming to greet them in a towel, and having this make the news pages.
   Even the supposed hatred by Sen. Clinton’s campaigners for Sen. Obama stayed relatively under the radar, either by a cooperative liberal media or by a sense of loyalty to the Democratic Party.
   We’re hearing news of the Governor’s tantrums and that the $150,000 shopping spree may have been more expensive than first thought.
   This is a personal attack on her that shows party workers who can’t maintain any sense of dignity and trust.
   Importantly, you do not see someone of the standing and decency of Sen. John McCain rubbish his running-mate.
   If this division has been inspired by higher-ups in the Republican Party, then Americans might be fortunate that this version of the GOP did not get into power on November 4.
   One may argue that it is our right to know, and maybe it is. But the pace of this so-called knowledge being disseminated points to a party that is acting out sour grapes and playing the blame game a little too soon, and I find it troubling.
   Every party says it will regroup after a loss. It is fair to note that the loss that the Republicans suffered was in fact very small, given how they were outspent by the Democrats to such a degree. At this stage, I do not think there will be much re-evaluation of where it will lead, because I am not sure if the Party itself realizes where it wishes to head. It may need to rebrand much later, but for now, it hasn’t been able to protect its own from this onslaught—and may well have caused it.

This is no surprise given the promotions that Sen. Obama has been getting in the media: ‘Obama elicits more excitement than McCain’, according to USA Today.
   I want to be the voice of reason but 21 years in communications tell me that this is important. If your brand, personal or organizational, elicits excitement among its constituents, then you have a greater chance of mobilizing those people when you need them.
   Even when it comes to politics, to get messages across to voters, one has to resort to the tried and trusted techniques of branding and marketing.
   There are few in the present generations who will, as many bloggers do, investigate someone’s voting record or dig deeply into their histories. It would be nice to say that presidents are not elected based on how much excitement they can generate. Or that we should place greater emphasis on other qualities like honour and sincerity.
   While some might point to exceptions, such as the Tory victory in the UK of 1992, I beg to differ. That campaign was hard fought by the Conservatives and depended on party unity—which was sorely lacking in 1997 when Tony Blair was elected. The National victory in New Zealand of 1990 was a result of the cry for change and the belief that Labour was leaderless.
   And the cry for change is such a powerful message in politics, because politicians understand our nature: even the vaguest change is better than the strongest, best defined policies if a party has been in power for too long.
   Labour in the UK in 1997, National in New Zealand in 1990, Labour in New Zealand in 1999, Clinton in 1992—all these are examples of that message. And that, too, “excites”.
   Sen. McCain should not pursue an excitement route himself, but he should capitalize on mistakes that the Obama campaign is making with greater regularity. The New Yorker gaffe—where Sen. Obama felt the need to comment rather than appear presidential and above satire—was an opportunity missed. Meanwhile, I wonder if people appreciate the maverick, go-it-alone style of John McCain, which plays well in the Senate, but could be symptomatic of future Cabinet divisiveness under his administration.
   A winner is by no means clear, and a week remains a long time in politics. Months, as Sen. Clinton will attest as she went from dead cert to second-best, are an eternity.

[Cross-posted] This has been official for a while (or so I think—not that I ever heard what the Electoral Commission thought, but I did see it on its website). However, I wanted the party to approve the news first before sharing it with you all. The following is the overseas release which was rewritten from the one sent to domestic newsmedia. One that includes a mention of the Bush–Cheney campaign of 2004 was sent to US media.

JY&A Consulting revamps logo for New Zealand’s Alliance Party

Wellington, May 9 (JY&A Media) New Zealand political party, the Alliance, is looking more modern and relevant, thanks to its new logo by JY&A Consulting (http://jya.net/consulting).
   Devised by JY&A Consulting’s Jack Yan, the new logo signifies a new beginning for the democratic socialist political party.
   Mr Yan says that he has been a keen observer of general elections in the UK, US and New Zealand since the 1980s and that played a part in his team’s design.
   He says the Conservatives in 1983, Labour in the UK in 1997 and 2002 and Labour in New Zealand in 1999 and 2003 had certain commonalties in their campaigns, centring around typography.
   He also said that in those years, the party’s name was important, not the symbol—hence the traditional Labour rose was not present on that party’s election materials in 1997 and 2002.
   By abandoning the old A symbol of the Alliance and concentrating on the word, Mr Yan says that the party looks more professional and ready.
   The Alliance has contested every General Election in New Zealand since 1993. However, due to party changes it is trying to rebuild itself for the country’s General Election later this year.
   ‘We have two major parties in New Zealand that vote pretty much the same on all issues,’ says Mr Yan, ‘and minor parties that get ignored because of a lack of visibility. I wanted to change that. Why should minor parties be laboured with second-rate brands?’
   The logo is based around the Frutiger typeface and its lettering is predominantly in red, with a red dot over the i in Alliance to signify its environmental awareness.
   He says the letter i also shows the humanizing aspect of the party.
   ‘As a piece of design I think it looks more cohesive than the committee-led logos of National and Labour,’ he says, criticizing the major two parties in New Zealand.
   ‘I was given a lot of freedom, which is a good sign of how the party leadership handles matters. It clearly believes in trusting the right people.’
   As well as heading JY&A Consulting’s parent, Jack Yan & Associates, Mr Yan co-wrote Beyond Branding in 2003 and is a director of the Medinge Group, a branding think-tank based in Sweden.
   In October 2007 he was a keynote speaker for the Alliance Party at its annual conference.

It’s time for Tony Ferrino to make a comeback. How about it, Steve? I know this was not that successful back in 1996–7, but I still think it was Steve Coogan’s best character. And trends have shifted: I thought Coogan was always too early with his impression of a fading Portuguese superstar in a pre-Pop Idol world. Just imagine: Tony Ferrino on MySpace! Tony Ferrino on X Factor!
   Coogan can actually hold a tune. Four clips from YouTube are below, one with Kim Wilde exploring the origins of the Tony Ferrino Phenomenon (the title of the show), a number called ‘A Short-Term Affair’ (later performed with Björk), another with Gary Wilmot (‘Fishing for Girls’) with some very bad innuendo, and my favourite, ‘Just Help Yourself’ with Mick Hucknall (saving the best till last here).
   There are far worse entertainers out there with more fame, and a pisstake one such as Ferrino might just work in the 21st century. The issue is: would he be too late now, post-Borat?