#about zack is that he's the reason in a silly anime plot pointing out that 'this is weird!' and. i mean. the new actor has that going for

[oveliagirlhaditright]

.

[fycarmensandiego]

1995 Animation Magazine article

After months of trying to find a library to supply this over interlibrary loan, I’ve finally managed to get a copy of the cover story from February 1995′s Animation Magazine, about Where on Earth. Aside from the truly cringetastic headline on the cover, the article itself is poorly written and just as poorly researched (for example, saying that Carmine appears on the cartoon), but it does have snippets from interviews with several execs at both Brøderbund and Dic.

A scanned copy of the article (featuring some concept art of Carmen, Ivy, Zack, and a nameless goon in regrettably low quality) is available in my online archive, or read the text (with some spelling and punctuation corrections) below the cut.

Lady in Red by Morrie Gelman, special to Animation Magazine

The commercial television version of Carmen Sandiego, the lady in the stylish red hat and shoes who steals national treasures such as all of the sushi in Japan is, surprisingly, the most successful program ever produced by DIC Entertainment. Maybe not so surprising, since with more than 4 million units sold since 1985, Where in the World Is Carmen Sandiego?, currently out in a junior version on CD-ROM, is computer software’s best-selling history and geography title ever.

Carmen is the first software character ever to make the leap to television. In addition to the DIC-produced Where on Earth Is Carmen Sandiego? educational/entertainment series for Fox, Where in the World Is Carmen Sandiego?, a game show, is in its fourth season on PBS.

It was four years from the time Andy Heyward, president and C.E.O. of DIC, spotted Carmen as a computer game designed by Brøderbund Software to provide young people with exposure to world geography and cultures before it ever got on commercial television.

Heyward read a story about Where in the World Is Carmen Sandiego? in the business section of the Los Angeles Times. He went to the Northern California community of Novato, where Brøderbund Software is based, and met with company officials. He said at the time, “I would like to option the property,” and then took it over to CBS.

DIC had the property in development at CBS for three consecutive years. It was still in the running when Heyward had lunch with Margaret Loesch, president of Fox Children’s Network at the Big Boy restaurant in Burbank.

“CBS developed it and at the final bell decided that educational programming was too risky,” Heyward recalls.

At a NATPE in the early ’90s, Barbara Kriesman, the FCC attorney in charge of the Video Services Division, was the main speaker at a children’s seminar. The seminar was focused on compliance with the recently enacted Children’s Television Act requiring broadcasters to air programming that meets the educational and informational needs of children. Stations were told, in effect, they would lose their licenses if they did not comply.

It was clear that Fox had to protect itself. Margaret Loesch is a very competitive person. She was ready to take a chance.

Heyward told her of DIC’s developing Carmen Sandiego with CBS. She asked if it was picked up yet and he said, “No, it wasn’t.”

Loesch said Fox would pick up the series if it could have an exclusive.

According to Heyward, Loesch made “a big pitch” on why Fox would be a more competitive environment for Carmen Sandiego. Heyward listened and agreed, finally saying, “OK, let’s go.” The show made its debut on Fox’s Saturday morning line-up from 11:30 to noon last February as Where on Earth Is Carmen Sandiego?

By Heyward’s evaluation, Carmen has been more successful than any “educational” show, ever, especially because “kids don’t think of it as an educational show.”

That it be highly entertaining was DIC’s hope and aspiration from the start.

“We work very hard to get a lot of stuff in there that kids learn from,” Heyward says. “The production has not only cel animation but computer graphics, source footage and live action.”

Heyward confirms that “Carmen Sandiego is far and away the most successful program we’ve ever produced.”

For Robby London, senior vice president, creative affairs at DIC, Carmen Sandiego is the company’s “flagship” program and one of his “favorite, favorite topics to talk about.”

While London admits that everybody always says that some show or another is “unique,” that label is totally valid for Carmen.

Some of the things that make Carmen unique are the many disparate production elements not often seen on Saturday morning television.

Carmen includes regular cel animation to carry the narrative forward. Silicon Graphics Inc.’s computer animation takes characters from place to place throughout the world, allowing viewers to learn about the places. Within the SGI platform, still photos are used, such as source footage of Franklin Delano Roosevelt making a speech, along all sorts of other visuals, including graphs.

Another component is “limited animation,” which is quick, little, perhaps 5-second, images of a rather silly animation that is in a completely different style from the regular cel animation. Live action appears throughout the episodes in terms of the players playing at home on the computer against Carmen Sandiego. This is the whole basis by which DIC tells the story.

Michael Maliani was executive producer and producer of Where on Earth Is Carmen Sandiego? the first season of the show. With DIC currently working on the third season, Joe Barruso, who previously directed the show, is now producer.

Maliani, who was in at the earliest stages of development, remembers that “What we were trying to do was make something entertaining and educational. We wanted to be different. We really wanted to make it interesting to watch. That’s why we wanted to have so many elements.”

Kids like variety, Maliani contends. With that in mind, DIC decided to produce Carmen with different media, including standard cel animation, other computer graphics and some live-action added in. “We thought we could show the educational stuff without being boring,” Maliani explains. “We didn’t want to make the show a lecture. We wanted to weave the education into the plot.”

Like the computer game, the DIC series is full of visual and spoken clues about the mysteries Carmen Sandiego, her cunning cat Carmine and her gang of goofball thieves stealing such ambitious treasures as the roof off the Taj Mahal and statues from Easter Island. Viewers (players in the computer game) get help in trying to stop Carmen and her henchmen form the ACME Detective Agency. The DIC series (and now Where in the World Is Carmen Sandiego? Junior Detective Edition on CD-ROM as well) features the young characters Zack and Ivy who report to The Chief. The plot of each episode (and the objective of the computer game) is to follow geography-based clues and “bag the bad guys, recover the stolen loot and put Carmen Sandiego and Carmine in the clink.”

Along the way, viewers learn such facts as the height and location of Mt. Everest, and that the Sphinx in Egypt has the body of a lion with the head and breast of a man.

“We knew we were going to fit right in the 6 to 11 age demographic,” explains Maliani, “but we wanted to make Carmen a little more sophisticated so we could get the older kids.”

A major difference between Carmen the computer game and the commercial TV series is in visualizing the capers. The computer game offers as a premise that the Eiffel Tower or the Taj Mahal is stolen. DIC’s production team had to estimate the weight of the Taj Mahal and then figure out what it would take to lift it.

DIC’s researchers established that four Russian helicopters could hoist the estimated weight of the Taj Mahal roof.

The next problem was how to accomplish the feat. DIC’s solution? Use a laser to cut off the roof. Add hooks to it and lift it off.

“We had to figure this stuff out,” Maliani notes. “It’s kind of fake but almost real.”

London explains that many shows on Saturday morning have had a degree of pro-social values. One of the things that is different about Carmen from all these other shows, according to London, is that Fox and DIC took the “conservative high road” that pro-social is not sufficient to fulfill the mandate of the Children’s Television Act.

“Carmen can’t just show good moral values and teach little lessons in living,” he points out. “It must have a measurable curriculum that actually teaches information, not just lessons in living.”

Among the consultants on Carmen is Dr. Peter Kovaric, a professor at UCLA in the Graduate School of Education, who is also director of the school’s educational technology unit. Kovaric is an acknowledged expert on using technology, such as television, to teach kids.

He reviews all Carmen scripts and helps DIC’s production team conceptualize shows. “It’s an exemplary relationship,” affirms Kovaric.

“One of the very good things about Carmen is that it is a commercial venture and is reasonably successful. That may help lower the reluctance of broadcasters to try something new and different,” he observes.

DIC also employs Barbara Wong, a teacher and principal of Baldwin Middle School in the Alhambra (Calif.) school district. Wong credits the DIC production team with being “very concerned” about having quality programming for kids. “They’re very in tune with people like myself and very open.”

Carmen, she points out, “has a lot of elements in it that readily apply to a teaching situation.”

Wong explains that while Carmen is not a “surrogate teacher,” the show does quality as “a nice addendum – a nice resource to have.”

Wong gets screen credit as Curriculum Consultant. Kovaric is Educational Consultant.

According to London, Carmen, in addition to gaining an educational seal of approval, invariably wins its time period. In the Sept. 1993 to July 1994 Nielsen data, Fox’s Saturday morning line-up, which includes Mighty Morphin’ Power Rangers, X-Men, Bobby’s World, Tiny Toons, Taz-Mania, Eek the Cat and Carmen demonstrates the last is one of the top shows not only with kids 2 to 11 but with persons 6 to 17.

It averaged a 6.0 rating with kids 2 to 11 and 5.1 with the older demo, suggesting that as an educational program it’s holding its own handily against traditional animated entertainment, including action/adventure.

Another measure of Carmen’s appeal is that in the same Nielsen measured time-span, “the lady in the red hat” has more viewers than Beekman’s World and Bill Nye combined – not only with kids 2 to 11 but with persons 2 and over.

“It’s by no means a loss leader,” emphasizes London. “It’s not even number one by default. It really holds up Fox’s ratings.”

Maliani, who is senior vice president in charge of development, knows he risks sounding hokey but points out that in his 10 years with DIC he has wanted to try “to make a difference.” In Carmen Sandiego, he says, “we have a property where you could actually learn.”

In large measure, Maliani speaks for everyone connected with the Carmen Sandiego property when he comments: “This is the one show that really meant a lot to me and I gave it my all. I gave it everything I had and everything I could think of creatively. I wanted it to be special.”

————————————

Carmen Sandiego began life as a computer game – a history, geography, educational title – by way of Brøderbund Software Inc., Novato, Calif., a diversified consumer software company. Founded by Douglas Carlston, Brøderbund is one of the hottest names in educational software publishing.

For the recent holiday season Brøderbund published Where in the World Is Carmen Sandiego? Junior Detective Edition, an icon- and dialog-based CD-ROM product designated for 5- to 8-year-olds.

But Carmen Sandiego isn’t just a game. The software series inspired two TV shows for kids: DIC Entertainment’s animated adventure Where on Earth Is Carmen Sandiego? On the Fox Kids Network, and the PBS game show, Where in the World Is Carmen Sandiego? produced by WGBH Boston and WQED Pittsburgh.

Brøderbund constantly works at new ways to update the original product. Software titles include Where in the USA Is Carmen Sandiego?, Where in Space Is Carmen Sandiego?, Where in Time Is Carmen Sandiego? and Where in America’s Past Is Carmen Sandiego? in addition to the signature Where in the World Is Carmen Sandiego?

Brøderbund has creative input on every Where on Earth Is Carmen Sandiego? script, but not necessarily every storyboard.

Ken Goldstein, publisher of Brøderbund’s Education and Entertainment Products Group, describes his company relationship with DIC Entertainment as “very healthy.”

He was deeply involved in the first season of the DIC/Fox series, establishing the working relationship and the new ground rules. Since then he’s passed on regular contact to his staff, yet still signs off on every set of script notes (drafts of every script are read by Brøderbund staff and every storyboard reviewed).

For the most part, the DIC series scripts are different from those used by Brøderbund, but there’s some synergy. Brøderbund has introduced a new character into its most recent software, Stretch the Crime Dog, described as “a lovable, clue-sniffing, crime-busting canine” who works for the ACME Detective Agency.

Reciprocally, the software is now using agents Zack and Ivy and The Chief from the DIC animated TV series.

“Carmen is a perennial for us,” notes Goldstein. “It really is an evergreen product, a premier intellectual property. I’m delighted to manage its existence.” According to Goldstein, Carmen Jr. will probably go Gold in the software business, which is 100,000 pieces, within a couple of months.

Brøderbund, Goldstein also reports, does a lot of licensing, including T-shirts, mouse pads and backpacks, among other items. Carmen is also very much an international product. Goldstein says Carmen software is “very big” in Spain and Mexico, and also especially popular in Israel.

There’s a Japanese version of Carmen, plus a cartridge version on Nintendo and Sega, which has not done as well as Brøderbund would like. “I don’t think it’s the right venue for that product,” Goldstein remarks.

Brøderbund is stepping up to a new level of international distribution on March 1, opening its own Brøderbund Europe office and publishing localized versions of new Carmen products from that time forward.

By Brøderbund’s design and demand, there are no guns or other weapons in the Carmen Sandiego TV show or software. The Carmen character does have henchmen, but, points out Goldstein, “it’s very much ‘Three Stooges.’ They botch things and they use such things as big suction cups, funny gadgets and outlandish vehicles, but there are never any guns, no bombs, no grenades, no violence. They never threaten the detectives. It’s all a game of wits.”

Brøderbund also has been very careful not to portray stereotypes, to make sure with the software that all different types of international cultures are reflected positively. DIC is equally sensitive about portraying stereotypes and respecting different cultures.

“Computers have revolutionized the teaching world, and now classrooms will never be the same,” suggests one reviewer of Carmen software.

“Programs like Carmen let students explore their own paths of learning,” points out another.

Morrie Gelman is the president of Ventures in Media, a market research, information packaging and television development firm.

[ultrahpfan5blog]

Rewatching Snyderverse Part 2 - Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

Before this movie came out, I was unimaginably excited. I am a 90′s kid, so I grew up watching BTAS and STAS and then Justice League and Justice League Unlimited. So watching Batman and Superman interact on screen for the first time was something I was so ready for. Plus, on top of that we had Wonder Woman in the movie as well. There was no way this movie could be less than awesome. I hadn’t loved Man of Steel, but I thought it was decent enough that Snyder could build on it if he kept his worst impulses a bit more restrained. Unfortunately what happened was that he just doubled down on a lot of things that I had a problem with in MoS and introduced a host of new issues as well. When I had initially walked out of the theatrical edition, I was desperately trying to convince myself that I liked the movie. It took a couple of more rewatched to get over my denial that I really didn’t like it much at all. I watched the UE much later and while its an improvement, it doesn’t convert it into a good movie.

Firstly the good parts, Ben Affleck essentially carries the film. When he was cast, I was indifferent because I hadn’t seen enough of him to have an opinion either way. But he was really good. He’s not quite Christian Bale, but Bale had the benefit of better writing. But he really delivers as the bitter and hardened Bruce Wayne/Batman. He carries off the charismatic womenizing business man side as well as the brutal Batman side of the character with equal ease. Jeremy Irons is also an excellent Alfred. I quite enjoyed how Snyder made the Bruce/Alfred dynamic more of two colleagues working together compared to the more father/son relationship of the Nolan movies, Irons really delivers the only bits of humor in the movie. Gal Gadot as WW was a surprise bit of casting. I didn’t think much of her as an actress from the F&F movies and sometimes her dialogue delivery is still a little suspect but she was quite a badass as Diana/WW. And her appearances and scenes, especially alongside Affleck, are pretty good. The visual aspect of this scene is impeccable. There are some glorious shots accompanied perfectly by the score. The shot of Superman saving the girl from a burning building and the people treating him like a god, the Superman memorial sequence, its all very well shot and composed. The entire opening sequence is glorious and you truly get the weight of the horror that regular people would have experienced when the battle of Metropolis happened. You can never make complaints of Zack Snyder as a visual director. The action is superb. The Batman warehouse scene might be the most badass superhero fight sequence I have ever seen, rivalled only by the Spider-man 2 train sequence and TWS highway fight. The Batman and Superman titular fight is also well done as is the final fight sequence. There are interesting ideas planted in this movie. The idea of a world grappling with the existence of Superman and how he fits within our society is genuinely fascinating.

But unfortunately, Snyder does a lot more wrong in this movie than he does right. Firstly, I just felt embarrassed for Henry Cavill in this movie. Any charisma and warmth he showed in MoS is just sucked dry by the layers of misery the film just piles on. Cavill spends the entire movie just scowling and grimacing and I don’t even feel I can blame him because that’s what Snyder has him do. Its just a royal waste of an actor who looks like he is the perfect casting for the role. Amy Adams has a reasonably substantial role and Lois and she’s fine, but it feels throughout that the film is trying to find a way to keep her relevant because they have committed to the idea of her being the key. There is an entire sequence where she throws away the Kryptonite spear, then has to retrieve it, and then almost drowns in the process. That’s where the film feels like its trying way too hard to give Lois Lane something to do. Like with MoS, I just don’t buy the Cavill and Adams chemistry and therefore its all the more difficult to accept the idea that she’s the key to Superman. Jesse Eisenberg is pretty terrible as Lex Luthor. I don’t know what Snyder was thinking. Again, I kind of have difficulty laying blame on Eisenberg because he gives a very Eisenberg performance, which is what Snyder must have been going for. It just doesn’t work at all. He just comes off as an unstable person right from the beginning. There are one or two scenes where he hits the right note, but otherwise its a very cringey performances and it really affects the film negatively. There is a whole host of talented actors who are wasted like Holly Hunter, Laurence Fishburne, and Diane Lane. 

The film is just so over plotted. Its like 3 movies fighting for space in one movie and it works against each movie. There is a compelling Batman movie in here, along with a pretty dull Superman movie, along with a Justice League setup film. The theatrical edition had some terrible editing and there were subplots that just didn’t make sense. The UE is definitely a more coherent movie as it makes the africa plot make more sense and gives some of the scenes more room to breathe, but the truth is that I was bored for about 2 hours of the UE. So much of it is just dull conversation and posturing between characters. The only parts where the film comes to life is when Affleck and Irons are on screen. I have no problem with an action lite superhero movie, but then the dialogue and the situations need to be compelling and not so monotonous. The film also just does not have enough time to suitably come up with a reason why Batman and Superman would want to fight. I mean, I really liked Affleck but the justifications he comes up with to want to straight up murder Superman make no sense. He’s a bit of an idiot and gets manipulated by Lex way too easily. If you really pick apart the Lex Luthor plot, it would unravel so easily because it relied on some many things that were beyond his control. Superman’s reason to be against Batman has a bit more in the UE, but its still not enough. Then there is the completely ham handed Justice League setup. I mean, someone who has no idea of Injustice or deep DC mythology would have no clue what the Knightmare sequence was and what the Flash cameo meant. I now have more context having read what Snyder planned to do, but at the time it didn’t make any sense. We still have no clue why Bruce is having these future memory flashes/dreams. Not to mention the ridiculous JL setup videos, set with logos for all the heroes. The idea that someone at Lexcorp spent the time to come up with the superhero logos for WW, Flash, Aquaman, and Cyborg was just too funny. Its just the most lazy way to do a JL setup. Of course there is the infamous Martha scene which is a ridiculous scene no matter how you choose to explain it. I know what the point was. Doesn’t make the execution an less silly. Then on top of that we get thrown into a Doomsday/death of Superman story in the last half hour. Doomsday basically looks like a big mutated turtle. I recognize that Doomsday is not the most nuanced character, even in the comics, but surely he deserves better than this. There have been animated films and cartoons that have adapted Doomsday much better. Like with MoS, this film also ends with an three back to back action sequences with no room to breathe, though I admit that I enjoyed the action sequences here more than in MoS.

Anyways, the film ended up a big disappointment for me and a lot of my issues stem with decisions that Snyder clearly made with the characters and with the story. The UE was definitely better but not by a huge amount. The theatrical edition was a 3/10, and the UE was about a 4-4.5/10 for me. I have heard that ZSJL is the best of his DC movies. Hopefully that turns out to be the case.

[drink-n-watch]

Genre : Josei, Horror, Mystery, Psychological Thriller

Studio: J.C.Staff

I’ve been on a business trip for most of the week. This means no Buddy, no anime and very little sleep. For those of you who aren’t forced to go on those and think they sound like fun, let me tell you right now, they are not. If you take nothing else from this review, remember this, you should get paid more if you have to travel, it’s not a benefit. I finally stumbled home on Friday evening and first (only) thing I did was watch Angels of Death. Priorities!

we all know what Alice in Wonderland was really about, right?

I mentioned the obvious Alice in Wonderland motif running through Angels of Death in my episode 1 review. In fact, I have noticed that anime in general seems to be very inspired by Alice, even more so than western fiction. I wonder why. It’s a great story don’t get me wrong . I hope we get a wave of little prince next, I love that book.

The ghost of Alice is back in fine form as Ray gets thrown right back into Wonderland. I’m pretty sure she’s hallucinating (dreaming) at this point but the rules of the Angels of Death universe have always been shaky at best so it’s hard to tell. In any case, Rachel finds herself once more separated from her port in the storm, Zack so of course she immediately follows a suspicious white rabbit down an enormous hole. Not a metaphor, this is literally what happened.

And just as Alice, she landed herself in a trial rigged from the start against her. There were a few things I really liked about this episode. The entire trial conceit is a nice sneaky way to essentially put together a recap episode just before the finale, even throw in some clips and everything, while making the whole thing feel new and as if it’s actually advancing the narrative.

progress!

It also made me realize just how much of a brick Rachel is as a character. I mean Rachel is just the basic materials of a character not an actually realized person. She could become anything but she is still pretty much nothing. A plot device to move the story forward. As such, other characters don,t have much to work with when they share a scene. It’s fine for Zack, even great, as all Ray needs to do is temper him for the dynamic to work. But for everyone else…

Fact is, all the previous characters were way more interesting and somehow felt more fleshed out this episode, and I really believe that it’s because they got the chance to play off each other. Not that anyone had evolved or anything. Cathy, Eddie, Danny and the Padre (Abraham Gray – I had to look it up) are still exactly the same people we met before, but they work well as a group. They are simply much better as supporting characters. Of course they do go a bit extravagantly crazy again, that’s the show’s signature after all. But it really didn’t bother me at all. It worked well within the fever dream atmosphere of the episode.

even Cathy’s design seemed better…

Angels of Death has never been shy about it’s thematic representations. Once again Rachel had to face her demons as both illusionary ghosts and judges. Danny, represents the judgement of rational as his own sanity splinters and breaks, as Ray defies logic. Eddie is the judgement of the heart, constantly betrayed and disappointed by the uncaring and selfish Rachel. He is all about feelings but Ray has no consideration for the feelings of others and few of her own.

Cathy is the most literal judgement of law and society. We do know that Rachel is not particularly interested in the rules of men. She shows little hesitation in doing what she needs to achieve her ends in the fastest way possible. I would not be surprised to find out that Ray has a criminal past of some sort. As for Mr. Gray, the good reverent has appointed himself as representative of the judgement of God. By now we all know how that goes.

That ending shot of a crucified Ray about to be burned as a witch was a bit much for my tastes however on the whole I enjoyed the episode a lot. The purity and extent of Rachel’s faith has been put into question repeatedly over the course of the season. Most notably the Reverent keeps asking what Rachel will do if God has a different plan than what she had in mind. But to me, this boils down to an even simpler and more intriguing question, what if God doesn’t like you? No real reason really, but you know how you sometimes just don,t mesh with someone, what if that was your relationship with God?

They found you sort of annoying or maybe a little boring and just didn’t really see things the same way you did. What then? Maybe it’s a silly question, but I would watch a show about that.

relax I’m still going to watch this show too!

Here are a few more – once again the show is making me want to play the game. Have any of you guys reviewed it?

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Angels of Death ep 10 – Back in Wonderland Genre : Josei, Horror, Mystery, Psychological Thriller Studio: J.C.Staff I've been on a business trip for most of the week.