This being video game week and all, it is only fitting to mention this here. The annual Game Developer's Conference is going on as we speak, er read, and Sony just announced it's new motion controller, the Playstation Move. Check it out in all it's glory in the links below.
http://kotaku.com/5490535/sonys-motion-controller-is-the-playstation-move
http://kotaku.com/5490554/first-look-at-the-delicious-playstation-move/gallery/
http://kotaku.com/5490574/how-the-playstation-move-is-not-a-wii-remote
Enjoy the read folks.
~JV
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I wanted to throw something out just to see if anyone else has heard this. Years ago, I heard on some history channel type show that the original 1977 Star Wars was the first movie made for the sole purpose of selling merchandise--lunch boxes, toys, etc. It was explained that movies were made "in the good old days" for the purpose of art and entertainment (Casablanca, All About Eve, Gunga Din, etc.), not as marketing ruses. According to this program, which I wish I could remember more about, then ET--Extraterrestrial did the same thing, followed by all of those Indiana Jones movies and even some of the Die Hards, etc. If this is really true, what does that say about commercialzation of art? I mean, when the bottom line is the dollar, then the focus on the industry is warped. Would we even have great movies to study if all we were concerned about was selling junk to little kids? Could this be why great movies went from being Casablanca to Pretty in Pink? Whatever happened to serious films with adult (not sexual or vulgar, but mature) themes like life, death, aging, etc.?
ReplyDeleteEven Titanic, as epic an historical event that was, turned into just another silly love story between two mismatched teens. How will future filmakers interpret their world? Is there anything worth doing if there isn't a big financial payoff, and should we be guided or led by the desire for profit above all else?