One additional post on this Dr Pepper deal that had good intentions but didn't quite have its intended effect (although given the publicity that was spawned as a result, I am inclined to think that the campaign was more successful than either camp lets on). The Entertainment & Media Law Blog reports that Dr Pepper has given a "fizzy" response. See Dr Pepper's Fizzy Response ot the 'Chinese Democracy' Shakeup. Their sentiments echo my own and similarly bring up Taco Bell, although they refer to another advertising campaign that led the parties down a much different legal path.
Speaking of chinese democracy, I did happen to catch the series finale to Boston Legal, which is the first episode I watched since last year when I axed it from my list. Having seen the US Supreme Court in action on more than one occasion, I think they took a lot of liberty with the decor (and I don't think they would have tolerated a lot of the nonsense, including speaking past the time), although the set was sort of similar.
Overall, I don't care what David E. Kelley is complaining about (see David E. Kelley Is Frustrated With Broadcast TV and David E. Kelley: ABC Shunned Boston Legal; "Satified" with Series Run): the show was axed (from both my list and ABC) not because it doesn't have some good dialog on occasion, but because it lacked in substance what it attempted to make up in character. While I'm not a fan of the serial storylines (although I still plan on watching Lost), they certainly can work if the story is compelling enough, and the series (for me anyway) became way too outrageous and disjointed for me to keep watching at all, let alone with any regularity.
Sunday, December 14, 2008
A quick followup to the Dr Pepper and Chinese Democracy debacle
Tags:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment