By Erik Davis
Posted Jan 14th 2011 10:40AM
Twitter has become a place that can (arguably) make or break a movie. It's become a home for a film critic's first reaction (especially at film festivals), and some of the most heated film-related debates (not to mention petty little arguments) occur there on a daily basis. So if a film is popular on Twitter, does that mean it's going to cash in big at the box office? No, not necessarily, since Twitter -- as much as we'd like to see it as the center of everyone's universe -- is simply not that big a deal to a great majority of the moviegoing public (if it was, films like 'Scott Pilgrim vs. the World' would've killed at the box office). Still, though, it's fun to see which films receive the most hype on Twitter, if only to get a solid read on the types of people using the social network day in and day out.
Ad Age put together an interesting list featuring the top movies discussed on Twitter that aren't in theaters yet. The number one slot went to 'The Hobbit,' which seemed to be in the news every other day due to its various pre-production woes. Coming in at number two, surprisingly, was the recently announced 'Buffy the Vampire Slayer' remake, proving (if anything) that folks are still thirsting for more Buffy.
Fanboys, prepare yourselves for battle because Zack Snyder's 'Superman: The Man of Steel' (in the third spot) was more popular than 'The Dark Knight Rises' (in the fourth spot). Oh it's on!
Additionally, Ad Age says that an 'Edward Scissorhands' remake would've snatched up the third spot had one actually existed. Rounding out the top seven were 'Thor,' 'Fast Five,' and 'Captain America: The First Avenger.'
What do you think? Does this list represent the seven upcoming films you're most anticipating?
Moviefone
Friday, January 14, 2011
Charisma Carpenter, on Joss-less Buffy movie: “Stupid”
by Keith McDuffee
The old 'Buffy' cast members are coming out of the woodwork against the idea of a new movie without the involvement of Joss Whedon. Like that's a surprise.
Charisma Carpenter, on Joss less Buffy movie: Stupid [ccarpenter twitter 150x150] (IMAGE)I think we need to keep a running tally of the number of Buffy alums who think the reported Buffy the Vampire Slayer movie — being created without Joss Whedon‘s involvement, by Warner Bros. — is a bad idea. We’ve already heard from Alyson Hannigan, Nicholas Brendon, Tony Head and Joss himself, and they have little to say in support of it.
The latest cast member from the original series to thumb their nose at the proposed Buffy movie is Charisma Carpenter, who portrayed Cordelia Chase in the television show’s first three seasons, and then on Angel for a few more. Via Twitter, last week:
“@jprit13: @CLCarpenter1970 I was wondering what you though of the new Buffy movie? It’d be so much better if it had Cordy!” stupid. No joss? A real head scratcher.
It’s not much of a surprise that most of the original Scoobies would think any sort of Buffy-related material without Whedon’s involvement wouldn’t be a good idea. It’s no secret that Joss takes good care of those he’s worked with before, often involving them in many of his other projects. They appear to be an understandably tightly-knit group, which is partly why it’s so easy for Buffyverse fans to follow Joss and those who’ve worked with him wherever they go.
So, this begs the question: Are Buffy fans more interested in Joss Whedon’s involvement or in simply seeing their beloved series come back to life, no matter the means? The first movie wasn’t nearly as successful as the television series, and I’ve heard or read somewhere before that Joss wasn’t all that happy with how his vision was handled there. Could it be that a better movie — even without the involvement of Joss and the original cast — would be a good thing for the franchise? Might it ignite a new group of fans eager to pick up the old television series DVDs? Should we Buffy fans even care?
Who’s next to come out in non-support for the Joss-less Buffy movie?
Clique Clack
The old 'Buffy' cast members are coming out of the woodwork against the idea of a new movie without the involvement of Joss Whedon. Like that's a surprise.
Charisma Carpenter, on Joss less Buffy movie: Stupid [ccarpenter twitter 150x150] (IMAGE)I think we need to keep a running tally of the number of Buffy alums who think the reported Buffy the Vampire Slayer movie — being created without Joss Whedon‘s involvement, by Warner Bros. — is a bad idea. We’ve already heard from Alyson Hannigan, Nicholas Brendon, Tony Head and Joss himself, and they have little to say in support of it.
The latest cast member from the original series to thumb their nose at the proposed Buffy movie is Charisma Carpenter, who portrayed Cordelia Chase in the television show’s first three seasons, and then on Angel for a few more. Via Twitter, last week:
“@jprit13: @CLCarpenter1970 I was wondering what you though of the new Buffy movie? It’d be so much better if it had Cordy!” stupid. No joss? A real head scratcher.
It’s not much of a surprise that most of the original Scoobies would think any sort of Buffy-related material without Whedon’s involvement wouldn’t be a good idea. It’s no secret that Joss takes good care of those he’s worked with before, often involving them in many of his other projects. They appear to be an understandably tightly-knit group, which is partly why it’s so easy for Buffyverse fans to follow Joss and those who’ve worked with him wherever they go.
So, this begs the question: Are Buffy fans more interested in Joss Whedon’s involvement or in simply seeing their beloved series come back to life, no matter the means? The first movie wasn’t nearly as successful as the television series, and I’ve heard or read somewhere before that Joss wasn’t all that happy with how his vision was handled there. Could it be that a better movie — even without the involvement of Joss and the original cast — would be a good thing for the franchise? Might it ignite a new group of fans eager to pick up the old television series DVDs? Should we Buffy fans even care?
Who’s next to come out in non-support for the Joss-less Buffy movie?
Clique Clack
Wednesday, January 12, 2011
Josh Whedon sing Along at Zinema 2
It’s take two — or rather “Once More, With Feeling” — on the “Joss Whedon Sing Along,” which made its debut this past summer at Zinema 2.
The “Joss Whedon Sing Along” is a double feature that includes viewings — and singings — of the “Buffy the Vampire Slayer” musical and “Dr. Horrible’s Sing Along Blog” created by Whedon, the clever nerdist behind supercool sci-fi programming rich in other-worldly characters and snappy dialogue. See: “Buffy,” “Dollhouse,” “Firefly.” And, in some cases, he incorporates music. See: Guest director for “Glee.”
Season 6, Episode 7 of “Buffy the Vampire Slayer” was the episode-length musical “Once More, With Feeling.” The premise being that an evil force has taken over Sunnydale, and the Scooby Gang is unable to stop themselves from bursting into soul revealing songs like:
“Going through the Motions,” the title character’s emo expression; “Under Your Spell,” a love song for a witch (Willow) from a witch (Tara); and a sort of Fred Astaire/Ginger Rogers moment between Anya and Xander to the song “I’ll Never Tell.”
Whedon followed that with the internet-specific release of “Dr. Horrible’s Sing Along Blog,” a super hero versus not-so-super hero musical.
There is also a costume contest during the intermission. Free wearable ideas: Rubber gloves and goggles, red lingerie, vampire with a shock of Billy Idol-blond hair, a cheesy Nathan Fillion-esque smile.
Warning: This event sold out last time.
GO SEE IT
What: Joss Whedon Sing Along
When: 9:30 p.m. Friday
Where: Zinema 2, 222 E. Superior St.
Tickets: $9.50
Duluth News tribune
The “Joss Whedon Sing Along” is a double feature that includes viewings — and singings — of the “Buffy the Vampire Slayer” musical and “Dr. Horrible’s Sing Along Blog” created by Whedon, the clever nerdist behind supercool sci-fi programming rich in other-worldly characters and snappy dialogue. See: “Buffy,” “Dollhouse,” “Firefly.” And, in some cases, he incorporates music. See: Guest director for “Glee.”
Season 6, Episode 7 of “Buffy the Vampire Slayer” was the episode-length musical “Once More, With Feeling.” The premise being that an evil force has taken over Sunnydale, and the Scooby Gang is unable to stop themselves from bursting into soul revealing songs like:
“Going through the Motions,” the title character’s emo expression; “Under Your Spell,” a love song for a witch (Willow) from a witch (Tara); and a sort of Fred Astaire/Ginger Rogers moment between Anya and Xander to the song “I’ll Never Tell.”
Whedon followed that with the internet-specific release of “Dr. Horrible’s Sing Along Blog,” a super hero versus not-so-super hero musical.
There is also a costume contest during the intermission. Free wearable ideas: Rubber gloves and goggles, red lingerie, vampire with a shock of Billy Idol-blond hair, a cheesy Nathan Fillion-esque smile.
Warning: This event sold out last time.
GO SEE IT
What: Joss Whedon Sing Along
When: 9:30 p.m. Friday
Where: Zinema 2, 222 E. Superior St.
Tickets: $9.50
Duluth News tribune
Buffy Season 8 Motion Comic DVD Review
I am unaware if there have been long-standing plans to turn Buffy the Vampire Slayer season 8 from its initial comic book form into a motion comic. While it cannot have escaped your attention that the Buffy franchise is moving on without Joss Whedon, this seems like a nice sendoff that winks and says, “This is the established level you are going up against.” We can only hope that the new Buffy movie will come close to what the masterminds behind Buffy seasons 1-8 have created.
buffy motion comic
So, let’s talk about that. I’m a huge fan of Buffy the Vampire Slayer and its spin-off, Angel. A comic book fan? Meeh, not so much. Still, life is all about adapting. What we have here is a motion comic, which is not exactly animation but a far cry from static images being shown on the screen. There are voiceovers who read aloud from the pages while you view the images (which have their own method of being animated with special effects, pans and camera zooms.)
This is a newer form of media that’s hitting the mainstream, in one sense. But in another sense, I completely remember being entertained by children’s TV shows in the 80’s which used similar formats (remember the guy on PBS who would draw a picture as he read a story?) Thing is, it is entertaining so don’t write it off. While it may seem to be a tame way to present a story on DVD/Blu-ray, it’s simply a different way to present a story. With the Buffy Motion Comic you get to see the great illustrations, for instance.
When it comes to the voice-acting, you really have to get used to these new voices. It would have been amazing had they been able to get some of the original actors to voice parts, but maybe it’s better that they’re all new so that we don’t look down on the writing and storylines helped by any less familiar voices. Sadly, the voice I dislike the most is the person who voices Buffy Summers. I feel she lacks a sense of humor or sarcasm in her voice (which you need to say a lot of these Whedon lines!) So that’s a bit of a bummer. Still, the plots are really engrossing and I liked it overall.
buffy motion comic dvdWhile this is labeled as the Motion Comic for Buffy Season 8, they should have added that it’s more of a Volume One Motion Comic. Buffy Season 8 had over 40 issues, and there are 19 issues (each of the issue episodes runs about 11-15 minutes) included on this DVD/Blu ray combo. It seems highly likely that executives are just testing the water, to see if people are interested enough for them to continue down this road. (Let them know that you are interested by purchasing a copy!)
The quality of the pictures is fantastic. I love seeing the characters I’ve known for so long rendered in these artistic ways.
The packaging has cover art as removable cardboard on the outside, and then you can also see the cover as an insert which is the cover of an included comic book. It’s a little different than what you’re used to.
buffy season 8 motion comicThe Buffy Season 8 Motion Comic Special Features for the Blu-ray include a doc named “Under Buffy’s Spell”, test pilot for the motion comic, a trivia game and an art gallery of the covers of the comics. The DVD special features have all of that but also have an option to create your very own Buffy Comic using Tooncast Studio DVD-Rom. There is also the included comic.
A true sign of the changing times in technology? Get this up on Netflix Instant Watch, and the future will seem much happier for all Buffy fans.
Whether this can ever live up to your standards of the original TV series, that’s hard to say. But it’s certainly worth your time, and a must-see for all Buffy fans. Creative, artistic and gripping, Buffy and her friends always going to be a welcome sight.
You can buy each issue for 99 cents on Amazon Video on Demand. You can also buy the DVD/Blu-ray combo on Amazon for $22.99 which I think is the right price for the included content.
Disclosure: A copy was sent for review purposes.
Small Screen Scoop
‘Buffy 2.0’ – should they put a stake in it?
Tuesday, 11th January 2011
Natalija Sasic
Some of you may have read last month that Buffy the Vampire Slayer is to be rebooted as a movie for a 2012 release. Of course, as a hardcore Buffy fan, I was ready to bust out the celebratory confetti – that is, until I discovered that the “new” Buffy did not involve any of the original writing staff, cast and, most importantly, Buffy’s much-loved creator Joss Whedon.
Now, there’s no need to over-dramatize the situation – a Buffy superfan still has plenty of ways to obsess. There’s the Season 8 comic book series and its corresponding motion-comics (available to download on iTunes here), endorsed and written by the people that made us love Buffy in the first place. It’s worth making the most out of re-watching DVDs, and of course, there are always prolific sources of Buffy internet fanfiction. Whatever happens, no one is going to ‘steal’ Buffy from its fans. But it’s not about who has a ‘claim’ to it. It’s the sheer ignorance that this is a story that has travelled too far and laid its foundations too solidly to ever be able to start from scratch.
Having started out as an outrageously camp 1992 film with Kristy Swanson in the title role, even though it was pitched and written by Joss Whedon it didn’t quite fulfil his ideals ("I didn't agree with the way the movie was going,” he admitted after the TV show had wrapped). His vision was for an empowered female heroine in a supernatural-horror genre with a slight self-mocking tone, supported by a diverse catalogue of characters and a crackling witty script; it was eventually fulfilled in a formula that sizzled on television screens.
But it didn’t come without its own set of problems: “The network begged me to change the title,” Whedon recalled – it may even partly explain why its ratings were never exactly stellar. In some ways, this was what baffled me with the decision to reimagine Buffy: so much prejudice already exists for that name, there is no way a new potential fanbase will take it seriously.
But it was because Buffy was a hell of a television series that it defied the legions of eye-rolls that were triggered by its title – it was “a B Movie that had something more going on” in Whedon’s words; part of its charm. The name ‘Buffy’ in knowing TV circles became synonymous with thoughtfully executed storytelling, meaningful character development and even its own slanguage and sense of humour. It became a well-respected brand.
So as well as being taken on, as Seth Green (who played werewolf Oz) put it, to “capitalise on a trend” (movie execs think audiences will prance to the cinema just upon hearing the word ‘vampire’ nowadays), it’s because Buffy has a good enough reputation that it’s a risk worth taking. But here’s what I truly believe: some creative projects are so special and one-of-a-kind that they can only occur at a specific time with a particular roster of people involved. It will generate lifelong fans and forever be fondly looked back upon as something worthwhile. But one of the tragedies in life is to recognise that such shooting stars can never have their success replicated – one can only hope to tread upon a new fresh idea that can capture and cling on to the imaginations of millions. Real Buffy fans accept this – and will subsequently boycott Buffy 2.0, I’m sure.
If we’re faced with the grim prospect of thousands of tween girls debating over who’s hotter, Robert Pattinson or whoever plays ‘new Angel’, then I will be the first to call it the start of a trademark Buffy apocalypse. But it could also spark a renaissance in Buffy culture – a whole new generation of Buffy fandom. And that just may be worth shaking a stake at.
The Yorker
Natalija Sasic
Some of you may have read last month that Buffy the Vampire Slayer is to be rebooted as a movie for a 2012 release. Of course, as a hardcore Buffy fan, I was ready to bust out the celebratory confetti – that is, until I discovered that the “new” Buffy did not involve any of the original writing staff, cast and, most importantly, Buffy’s much-loved creator Joss Whedon.
Now, there’s no need to over-dramatize the situation – a Buffy superfan still has plenty of ways to obsess. There’s the Season 8 comic book series and its corresponding motion-comics (available to download on iTunes here), endorsed and written by the people that made us love Buffy in the first place. It’s worth making the most out of re-watching DVDs, and of course, there are always prolific sources of Buffy internet fanfiction. Whatever happens, no one is going to ‘steal’ Buffy from its fans. But it’s not about who has a ‘claim’ to it. It’s the sheer ignorance that this is a story that has travelled too far and laid its foundations too solidly to ever be able to start from scratch.
Having started out as an outrageously camp 1992 film with Kristy Swanson in the title role, even though it was pitched and written by Joss Whedon it didn’t quite fulfil his ideals ("I didn't agree with the way the movie was going,” he admitted after the TV show had wrapped). His vision was for an empowered female heroine in a supernatural-horror genre with a slight self-mocking tone, supported by a diverse catalogue of characters and a crackling witty script; it was eventually fulfilled in a formula that sizzled on television screens.
But it didn’t come without its own set of problems: “The network begged me to change the title,” Whedon recalled – it may even partly explain why its ratings were never exactly stellar. In some ways, this was what baffled me with the decision to reimagine Buffy: so much prejudice already exists for that name, there is no way a new potential fanbase will take it seriously.
But it was because Buffy was a hell of a television series that it defied the legions of eye-rolls that were triggered by its title – it was “a B Movie that had something more going on” in Whedon’s words; part of its charm. The name ‘Buffy’ in knowing TV circles became synonymous with thoughtfully executed storytelling, meaningful character development and even its own slanguage and sense of humour. It became a well-respected brand.
So as well as being taken on, as Seth Green (who played werewolf Oz) put it, to “capitalise on a trend” (movie execs think audiences will prance to the cinema just upon hearing the word ‘vampire’ nowadays), it’s because Buffy has a good enough reputation that it’s a risk worth taking. But here’s what I truly believe: some creative projects are so special and one-of-a-kind that they can only occur at a specific time with a particular roster of people involved. It will generate lifelong fans and forever be fondly looked back upon as something worthwhile. But one of the tragedies in life is to recognise that such shooting stars can never have their success replicated – one can only hope to tread upon a new fresh idea that can capture and cling on to the imaginations of millions. Real Buffy fans accept this – and will subsequently boycott Buffy 2.0, I’m sure.
If we’re faced with the grim prospect of thousands of tween girls debating over who’s hotter, Robert Pattinson or whoever plays ‘new Angel’, then I will be the first to call it the start of a trademark Buffy apocalypse. But it could also spark a renaissance in Buffy culture – a whole new generation of Buffy fandom. And that just may be worth shaking a stake at.
The Yorker
Sunday, January 9, 2011
Seth Green Points to Audience Confusion Over Buffy Remake
More reaction to the "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" remake from alumni has made its way online. This time Seth Green, who played the werewolf Oz for several seasons on the show, spoke about the upcoming film's effect on the fan base.
When asked during an interview with CNN about his thoughts on the reboot, Green replied:
"I saw that Joss wrote that open letter. Let's be fair, all he really said was, 'Hey, this isn't even 10 years old.' Are we really at the place where we're remaking 'Two and a Half Men'? Is that really still on the air, and we're remaking it? And where is the need for that other than some kind of capitalizing on a trend. You know, there's no public outcry for a remake of Buffy, there's only the opportunity in pop culture where vampires are very popular.
If Joss came out and said, 'I want to make a new Buffy movie,' even if he said, 'I want to do it like the reboot of Spider-Man. I want to put Buffy back in high school and I want to tell a different story with this character,' I think people would go with that. But the fact that people who are not connected to it and were not connected to the show or any of the mythology that was created going back to the movie -- which everyone kind of agreed wasn't a perfect version of its potential -- you know, I think that really confuses people. It confuses the audience. They're like, 'How am I supposed to feel about this?'
Couldn't agree more.
Dread Central
Friday, January 7, 2011
Seth Green talks 'Robot Chicken,' Lucas and 'Buffy'
By Ann Hoevel, CNN
January 7, 2011
Know who's one degree away from Kevin Bacon? Thanks to the new season of "Robot Chicken," it's Seth Green.
Green, known for playing characters that make a lasting impression on pop culture (like Oz from the TV series "Buffy the Vampire Slayer," Scott Evil from the "Austin Powers" movies and Chris Griffin from the irreverent animated series "Family Guy") has found critical acclaim with "Robot Chicken."
The stop-motion animated series he created with Matt Senreich won an Emmy last year for Outstanding Short-Format Animated Program and has earned Green multiple nominations for his voice work. Their "Star Wars" parody/tribute specials are endorsed by George Lucas.
Green spoke with CNN about the upcoming season. The fifth season of "Robot Chicken" premieres on Cartoon Network's Adult Swim on Sunday, January 9. (Cartoon Network, like CNN is a Time Warner company.)
CNN: You're pretty much cornering the market on stop-motion television. How hard is that?
Seth Green: The show's tricky. We do 20 episodes in a year, basically. It's 11 months from the time we start doing our writing to the time we deliver our post [production].
This year was longer because we folded an hourlong "Star Wars" special into the middle of our production, so it will wind up being 15 months when it's all over. It's a long, long process.
But we love stop-motion, and it's a really communicative medium. It looks just like film, and you see real shadows, and you see light and your brain registers something that's tactile that you've maybe interacted with. That helps you to believe that what's on film is actually happening, which makes it funnier. It's a medium that's rarely used for comedy, and I think that's a mistake.
'Robot Chicken' tackles Oompa-Loompas
Seth Green talks ControlTV
CNN: Are you debuting any new action figures or characters this season?
Green: We got some Charlie Brown, some Harry Potter, some He-Man. Gobots, Matrix, Avatar, Buck Rogers, Transformers, RoboCop, it's a good one.
Oh! The "Back to the Future" -- I don't want to tease this too hard because it's so late in the season, but we have a "Back to the Future" crossover with Jay-Z ... it's not the real Jay-Z. It's pretty cool, we got Christopher Lloyd to do it.
I'm really excited about this season. We had Jon Hamm, Bryan Cranston, Kevin Bacon, Megan Fox, what a crazy year!
CNN: Do you ever have any guest "cluckers" on the show?
Green: In the closing credits? We've never re-recorded that since the first season, except for "Star Wars," and it was all the same people. In our post department, when Chris McKay was editing the show before he was directing it, he came up with that song and got everybody together to cluck it, and we've just kept it. No one's ever asked for that!
CNN: How awesome is it, knowing that George Lucas likes your work? How hard is it to control your fanboi around him?
Green: It's crazy. It's crazy stuff. We're getting to work with him now on this new animated thing, and get to spend time with him actually writing stuff, and it is one of the more surreal experiences I've ever had.
And you have to just tune all that out and really focus on the work you've got to do to make what you're working on good. And not be overwhelmed by the fact that you're actually getting to do it. You just have to dig down and say, "All right, what are we trying to accomplish here, make this funny and good," and we can worry about the fact that we're, like, creating "Star Wars" together, later. [Lucasfilm has not yet formally announced the upcoming animated "Star Wars" comedy series project.]
CNN: Who's your dream "Robot Chicken" guest star? Maybe we can help get that out there.
Green: We've been targeting Harrison Ford pretty hard for a while now, and whenever people ask us who we're trying to get, we always go after him. Just because eventually he's going to hear it and either think we're so obnoxious that he's going to tell us to f*** off or he's going to come do the show.
CNN: What are your thoughts on the new Buffy the Vampire Slayer movie that's in the works (and does not involve creator Joss Whedon)?
Green: I saw that Joss wrote that open letter. Let's be fair, all he really said was, "Hey, this isn't even 10 years old." Are we really at the place where we're remaking "Two and a Half Men"? Is that really still on the air, and we're remaking it? And where is the need for that other than some kind of capitalizing on a trend. You know, there's no public outcry for a remake of Buffy, there's only the opportunity in pop culture where vampires are very popular.
If Joss came out and said, "I want to make a new Buffy movie," even if he said, "I want to do it like the reboot of Spider-Man. I want to put Buffy back in high school and I want to tell a different story with this character," I think people would go with that. But the fact that people who are not connected to it and were not connected to the show or any of the mythology that was created going back to the movie -- which everyone kind of agreed wasn't a perfect version of its potential -- you know, I think that really confuses people. It confuses the audience. They're like, "How am I supposed to feel about this?"
CNN: Will we see you work with Whedon again anytime soon?
Green: I have told Joss, publicly and privately, that I will do anything for him. Everybody that worked on that show gave me some of the best material I've ever gotten to work with. I'm super grateful for that experience and that opportunity.
CNN: Are you a nerd or a geek, and what's the difference between the two?
Green: Typically, by definition, nerds are interested in things that are not mainstream and may be subculture -- but subculture with usually a mythical bend or mathematic bend or scientific bend. So nerds are typically interested in subculture things that have to do with science or wizards or superpowers. Whereas geeks, I guess, usually tend to be the extreme version of that, where they're less able to relate to actual, other human beings that aren't interested in the same thing. Like geeks tend to be so focused and consumed with their subculture interests that they are incapable of communicating or interacting with other people; i.e., leaving the house or making dates or having social engagements.
Which am I? I've always been more of a nerd than a geek. ... You don't like that definition? Hold on, wait a sec, my partner disagrees. ... (Green's collaborator Matt Senreich furrows his brow at Green and speaks up.)
Matt Senreich: I'm sorry, I don't mean to interrupt.
Green: No, no, no, let's hear it, you might be an authority having dealt with ... (to CNN) This is Matt Senreich, who before I stole him away to make "Robot Chicken" was the editorial director for Wizard Publications, which in its day had five different banners that Matt was in charge of, including "ToyFare" and "Wizard," which were the premiere genre magazines for both toys and comics.
CNN: Matt, we love your nerd pedigree.
Senreich: All right! I just disagree with that [nerd/geek] definition. We always said that geeks were more into the pop culture subculture, if you will, whereas a nerd was more book-smart.
Green: So define that. So the geeks, you're saying, are into cosplay and D&D?
Senreich: Geeks are into what is considered pop culture [as if it were] a science, in a sense, where they know all the little intricacies that nobody else would pay attention to. Whereas a nerd is more book-smart, and is the guy in math class who can answer a million different scientific equations. That was the definition we always used at Wizard. We always catered to the geeks, and the nerds would end up reading if they wanted but may not. Nerds are more high brow.
Green: A slight difference of opinion here, a yin and a yang, if you will.
CNN
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)