11 posts tagged “editing”

TV3 just re-ran the 2004 remake of Man on Fire, but I thought it might be interesting to see some clips from the original version, in this preview:

Disqus is the latest site I managed to find a bug with (sigh).
   I have tried to upload an avatar to it. Now, I am pretty sure I had my photo set in Disqus a long time ago, but the site seems to have forgotten that setting and put me on to the default.
   Not a problem: let’s try reloading one.

Based on my experience, getting to this screen is a 2 in 4 chance. But that’s all right: maybe we can put the two failed attempts down to timeouts and other internet issues. I’ve now highlighted the part which I want on my avatar. I click ‘Save changes’.
   There is a 2 in 7 chance that I will get to the next screen, which confirms that the photo is saved. (The other five times, I was taken back to the screen that I had before this, with the old avatar in place. Reloads would not change it.) But on those two times, what’s happened? Did I ask Disqus to squash the photograph?    I don’t know how these websites work. I suspect there is a magic Harry Potteresque sequence of words I have to mumble while drinking spirulina to get the photograph right, which I utter while pressing the ‘Save changes’ button with my little right toe.
   Friends joke that I have a Frank Spencer reaction to computing (and I encourage the jokes, because I find it funny). But I also argue that I am doing what everyone else is doing, but that the sites themselves are imperfect and untested. The difference is I am less willing to tolerate it when websites go buggy, and I expose the errors. (I know our own sites are imperfect, too, but at least we believe people when they alert us.) And since support staff no longer listen to complaints (note: I have not told Disqus of this error yet but their instruction page is a bit hopeless), I use blogging to vent.

Remember how a few weeks back, I chided Examiner.com for a poorly written review of District 9? The writer of the review told us how a chap called ‘Neill Blomcamp’ directed the film, and invented new words such as gansters, prolifigate, demonstate and permissiable. I still wonder if a prolifigate is where pro-lifers meet up.
   It looks like the site never really checks things. Its latest review is a bit better when it comes to spelling and word usage, but it still has some mistakes, such as ‘the Nazi’s outlined treatment of the Jews during WWII’ (which Nazi?). Less forgiveable, however, are the first two words which begin the review. There, I see that Neill Blomkamp’s name is now ‘Neil Bomkamp’:

Examiner writers and editors: repeat after me. Neill Blomkamp. Neill Blomkamp. Neill Blomkamp. Now, write that out 50 times on the blackboard till you get it right.

The writer of this review of District 9, Andrew Ricks Jr, has good phrasing, and seems to know his stuff. However, it reveals that someone did not do any checking at the Examiner, whether it’s the writer (I am the first to admit it is difficult to proof your own stuff on-screen), the proofreader (who should be skilled enough to do this) or an editor (who really should be). And this paragraph is where I stopped reading because I was way too put off by the errors:

With my tongue firmly in my cheek, I must make these nine points.
   1. What are gansters?
   2. Which single African nation is the writer referring to?
   3. Is a prolifigate where pro-lifers gather?
   4. Must be the French spelling of activities.
   5. It is shakiest ground?
   6. What is permissiable?
   7. I haven’t seen the film, but I am pretty sure director Neill Blomkamp will be delighted to know this is how his name is spelt.
   8. I know, sometimes I am insenstive about these things.
   9. Which other is he referring to?
   10. A demonstate must be a pretty evil place to live.
   My worry behind this is that kids will grow up thinking having a dozen errors in a paragraph is OK for communication, when the reality is that it is distracting and does not serve the purpose of communicating.
   Our publications are not perfect but I don’t think we mess up this much.
   I have even been nice here because in print, we would have to mark all the “dumb” apostrophes.

Found via Jason Cutler’s Facebook, one of the funniest videos I have ever seen on YouTube. Sure, the cut of Helvetica is not quite right and the typesetting is a bit on the tight side compared to the original Magnum, PI opening, but it still shows amazing attention to detail. And the sequences that the creator chose are perfect.

Not getting much done at work today. Some clever netizen took the Planet of the Apes: the Musical songs from The Simpsons and married them to clips from the film.

Still enjoyable—seen it half a dozen times, but still enjoyable. And, critically, the editing was very good. As Prime had to trim some 13 minutes from the broadcast, what they chose this time made a lot of sense (e.g. Alex’s self-made phone call, Ray’s singing cut by two lines). They left in the entire scene with Tim Price turning into the Pierrot clown and from that point it ran (as far as I could tell) uninterrupted. On my four-by-three TV screen, however, I did miss that freaky final scene where the Pierrot clown appears on the mural at Luigi’s, which does bring into question what exactly is going on with Alex Drake.
   Also, the BBC has made announcements about the next series. SFcrowsnest has information on it.
   I saw about four minutes of Terminator: the Sarah Connor Chronicles on TV2. Nothing kept me glued to that channel, other than, ‘Hey, that’s Shirley Manson!’
   Manson and Lena Headey do very, very good fake accents.

Marshall Lancaster’s best line in last night’s Ashes to Ashes on Prime was cut. I can understand the need to cut for advertisements in New Zealand and we will always argue on what is appropriate and what is not, though if you are my age or older you may wonder why the last line was missing. I apologize in advance to anyone who finds this offensive: it is poking fun at the behaviour of a more homophobic time. [Postscript for New Zealand readers: the comments contain a spoiler. Do not read on if you do not want to know.]

It’s probably because Ashes to Ashes is new that I was able to identify where Prime made cuts to fit in the ads—but I have to compliment them because I don’t think they were as serious as what we lost on TV One with Life on Mars.
   I think around seven to ten minutes were cut whereas I am sure we lost over ten with Life on Mars.
   I watched it again tonight, partly to support the network for making a good move—they deserve as many viewers as they can get for not just buying a great series but showing it in the year it was first broadcast in the UK. I think for once we beat the Americans in getting a British series—maybe even the Australians. It’s a real treat to see a British 2008 copyright notice!
   Missing were a few scenes where the Pierrot clown chased Alex down the alleyway, Chris’s final apprehension and shooting of a villain, and entire conversation between Alex and Shaz about death and life flashing before her eyes, and this:

   I know it wasn’t integral to the plot since it was a dream sequence, and if cuts had to be made, I can understand why this went, but since Rainbow aired in New Zealand, too, it would have had some significance to people my age. Even my Dad asked me if there was a cut right there, so he noticed!
   Still, thank God for YouTube and a chance to share this bit with other Lifers in New Zealand.

It’s understandable that TV One in New Zealand has to cut around 13 minutes out of each Life on Mars episode to fit commercials in, but why did it have to be the Camberwick Green sequence from episode five of series two? It was the best bit! (Sam still says he comes out of a box when he gets to the nick, and local viewers will be wondering what on earth he was on about.)
   For Kiwi Lifers, here is the missing bit.