“Empire”

January 8, 2015 by Leave a Comment

Taraji P. Henson, female lead in “Empire.” Photo by The Heart Truth (Taraji P. Henson) [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons

by,

Suzanne Coleman

 

HIT.

I think it was obvious from the ads for this new show on FOX, but after seeing it last night, it was confirmed for me:  yes, it’ll be a hit- as long as they continue to produce shows like the one they did for the premiere.

The characters are very real-to-life, so, it was a success in that aspect; they were played well and had good depth.  The music was fun, and some of it was good.  The synergy between the two brothers in composing a musical piece together was excellent.  The relationships that they are establishing are intricate and the indications of future conflicts should keep things interesting for an above-average viewer.  Being scheduled right before the huge hit “Nashville” (ABC, 9pm CST) is a good position as both shows are very similar, and yet very different, studies on a musical sub-culture in American society.  Above all, the drama and characters of “Empire” are very strong.  The cinematography is of high quality as well, with good color, depth, and lighting.  Plus the show offers stimulating visuals in the fashion choices of the lead female character, and the scenes set in expensive mansions and other amazing locations will draw in viewers just to see how the other-half (of a percent) lives.

There was one thing which I found interesting (which you may or may not appreciate, depending on which cultural groups you are or are not a part of).  The show had a young black male in the rap industry from the background which the writers have developed for him and his family which clearly identifies which cultural group they are a part of, say to another black male of his same background “the n-word” instead of actually saying “nigger” which is what he would have most likely said in the real world.  It was pretty awkward to watch, and I’m sure that if there were any black men or youths watching in Chicago that there was some discussion over that decision on the part of the director.  Then, they later say “faggot” which is an equally taboo word in current American society.  Why one and not the other?  It seems that there was some type of agenda behind their choices, and maybe it will become more obvious as the show progresses.  I’d be very interested to know what the director was thinking when they made that decision.  I can guess but I’d like to hear what they have to say about it.

Going forward, this production will need to watch the line between offending or disturbing people too much, and staying within what is socially-acceptable.  I have seen several shows that had high potential to be successful fail, simply because they crossed this line.  “Outsourced” was one.  It was a great show, with funny writing and acting, but they crossed over the line into socially-unacceptable and offensive.  This ended the show.  They didn’t seem to realize the error of their ways (maybe they should have hired a consultant?) and when they had the chance to recover, they continued down the wrong path and lost their airtime.  Other shows have followed the same path.  I say, know your audience.  While some might go for this behavior, if it’s only a minority of your viewers, and the others will turn off the show, then, you need to decide if you want to continue or not, and under what terms.

The cold-blooded murder of the traitorous childhood acquaintance was one possible line crossed on “Empire.”  The abuse of the main character’s son was another.  These were both very real, and I mean very real as in this type of stuff happens in the real world, all of the time.  They gave the show grit, character and shock value.  But too much shock would probably send people away.

The choice of using or not using socially questionable words is another tricky spot.  Do you speak the way you would in the real world?  Or do you choose not to, which might avoid offending some people, but at the same time would lessen the reality of the experience?

Personally, I’m hoping the show continues to have the high quality of writing, directing and acting it did in the first episode.  I am excited to have this series on TV.  Hopefully it will watch those lines, keeping its viewers in mind, while still maintaining the freedom to express reality and to challenge any concepts it would like to challenge.  Great productions are more and more rare these days, and as a lover of TV, music, and culture I’m ready to get pulled into this one.

 

 

Like us on facebook at:  www.facebook.com/SliceIconic

AND click on the blue “FOLLOW” button on the upper right of this page to stay tuned!

_______________________

Filed Under: Empire, POP News, We LOVE TV! Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Obnoxious Commercials, are They Effective at All?

December 30, 2014 by Leave a Comment

too loud! image with text for slice, signed

By,

Suzanne Coleman, MD, BS social psychology

It seems that the advertising community has decided that screaming at the audience increases sales, but does it really?  I wonder what the research shows on this.

What I have read actually shows that the best way to get and hold someone’s attention, besides actually saying something they want to hear, is to whisper.  Screaming is not whispering, so why are they doing it?

Besides screaming, they have added random loud noises with no real rhythm or melody.  Do they think that everyone has ADD (attention deficit disorder)?

Another prevalent ad technique which doesn’t make much sense is when the presenter is talking really fast, and the speech is edited to eliminate the normal pauses in conversations.  It’s really hard to follow this and again I wonder, is there actually any research that shows that this leads to sales?  I would think that the basis of any sales would be getting the consumer to listen to what you are saying to them, but maybe I am wrong about that.

When any of this noisy distracting craziness is going on, I simply reach for my remote, and hit my favorite button, “mute.”  Ah, that’s better.  Am I the only one?

What about the bright white backdrops they are using so often these days?  With the new backlit televisions, this just blinds me, am I alone?  I literally block the screen when those commercials are on.  Is that effective marketing?

So conversely, what are the best commercials?  Well, in my opinion, the ones that are enjoyable.  Now I know I am not alone on this when I say that the ones with the best music are at the top of the list.  Add to those the ones with interesting and enjoyable visuals and you have my top characteristics of TV ads that hold my interest.  These tend to be things like high-end car ads, some other car ads, Target ads over the last few years or more, some Apple ads, and others.

So I want to know, is this an age thing?  Maybe a cultural background issue?  Or is it just that advertising executives are making the wrong choices when it comes to really getting their audience to sit, watch, and listen to their ads?  I wonder what the research shows.

What do YOU think?

Please add your voice in the comments (see the link at the top by the title, or below).

Filed Under: Stocks and Economics, We LOVE TV! Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

An important, yet little-known day in history, Religious Freedom Day, January 16th

December 28, 2014 by Leave a Comment

Opinion Piece

by Guest Contributor,

James A. Kulacz

Religious Freedom Day in the USA was first declared in 1996, in honour of Virginia’s landmark Statute for Religious Freedom. That statute was written in 1777, and enacted by the Virginia Assembly on January 16, 1786. The statute was written by Thomas Jefferson, and was the precursor to the Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses of the I Amendment of the US Constitution.

The statute was a landmark of disestablishmentarianism, severing the Anglican Church from the Commonwealth of Virginia. No longer would the Commonwealth use taxation as a means to support the Anglican Church, and going forward all religious faiths and none were recognised under Virginian law as being equal.

Those who promote antidisestablishmentarianism (there is a word I have never used in a sentence before) today, the Religious Right who would tear down the Separation of Church and State, would prefer this particular day and proclamation go unnoticed.

One might argue that those who favour the Secular State, which permits religious belief but favours none, should shout this proclamation every year from the rooftops.

It was the Baptists who argued for the inclusion of those clauses into the Bill of Rights: in those days Baptists were a tiny minority, and were punished, exiled, jailed, or killed for their beliefs. Baptists today, now powerful in the USA, seek to impose a regime of antidisestablishmentarianism (gotta use that word twice) on all those who disagree with their particular colour of belief.

Every year the President issues a proclamation in honour of Religious Freedom Day, reminding all that this is a nation of all faiths and none. The Presidential Proclamation of the day for 2014 can be found here.

Make sure you celebrate the separation of Church and State on January 16, the Religious Freedom Day which allows both the flourishing of religious belief, and the right to have none, without the interference of the State, nor the interference with the State by churches.

Filed Under: What You Need to Know Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

What Do YOU Think?

December 28, 2014 by 2 Comments

What do you think? box with blue around and blue letters, graphic, SI, 700x700

by,

Suzanne Coleman

 

So here’s the story.  There are a bunch of us sitting at a table in a popular restaurant having dessert when one of the guys brings up something that happened to him in his dating past, and asks what the women think about what he did and what happened after that.

So as best as I can recall it, he tells us the following story:

______________

I had met this woman and we went on a few dates together.  We were getting along fine and she was in my apartment one day when I played back a message on my answering machine.  I shouldn’t have done that with her there, in retrospect!

It was my wife calling about the divorce we were going through.  I hadn’t told the woman I was dating that I was still married.  It never came up.

My date left after hearing that message.  The next day I opened up my front door and found out that she had come by and left the flowers I had given her recently  outside of my apartment, turned upside down.

______________

So after telling us this story, he turned to us, a questioning look on his face, and asked us what we thought.

“Well,” I told him, “you were still married and you didn’t tell her that.  That comes across as pretty creepy.  You weren’t being honest with her, it was like you were lying to her the whole time.”

Another woman spoke up, agreeing that he should have told her his exact status, as it matters to many women.

Some other opinions were voiced, and it was interesting that some of the people there were only concerned with how SHE responded to his behavior, and not with what HE did to her in the first place.  There were comments about how she shouldn’t have left the flowers there, how could she do such a thing!

One man found it particularly upsetting and shocking that a woman would enter the man’s building and leave the flowers that he gave her outside of his door, upside down, returning them to him, no longer wanted.  He felt that her behavior was some great violation.  He was upset that she was “trespassing,” though I don’t recall any mention of a secure building during the story.  But even if she entered a secure building, she was buzzed in by him or someone else.

I found these responses interesting, to say the least, and very telling about these people’s views on women and their “rights,” as well as men and their behaviors.

Above all, I thought that this woman’s message was clear, “you are a jerk and I don’t want your flowers.”  Personally, I applaud her reaction.  She stood up for herself against what she thought was a violation of her trust, and a lack of respect for her as a person.  She made a statement that she had every right to make, as we all do.

So now I turn to you, ladies and gentlemen, what do YOU think?

(Click on “Leave a comment” above to let us know.)

Filed Under: What do YOU think? Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

America Today…

August 4, 2013 by 1 Comment

What we saw happen on wall street is what is happening in the rest of America.  We are no longer a people concerned about right and wrong, ethics, customer service and satisfaction, reputation can be bought, companies can close and reopen under another name.  No one expects to have the products they buy actually function or arrive in great condition anymore.  Recently reviewing my larger purchases over the last 10 years or so, I realized that over 70% of them had to be returned due to damages or dysfunction.  Customer service was often a nightmare and human English-speaking assistance was very hard to come by.

The same lack of honor and commitment is seen from labor to professionals.  We read about bought judges, lawyers who don’t do anything for you yet expect to be paid massive amounts of money, hospital systems claiming non-profit status and charging $2 for a gram of acetaminophen!  What happened to honor, ethics, reliability, social responsibility?  I don’t know when or where it happened, but greed overtook humanity.  Now we have to take it back.

 

 

Add your thoughts below.  Have you had similar bad experiences?  What did you do about it?  Why do you think our government doesn’t seem to care about the people anymore?  What should be done?

Filed Under: Extra! Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
%d bloggers like this: