Everything At A Yard Sale Was Once New, Including That X-Box

As we enter the wonders of the Christmas season, so do we enter the wonderful world of movie marketing.

I saw a recent report on CNN which stated that during the Christmas season, the number of licensed toy products grew from 60% to 80%. What this means is that instead of seeing original toys, like say Furbies, at Christmas time we see toys which are specifically designed to ride the coattails of some other phenomenon (Pokemon, Toy Story 2, etc.).

This year we're seeing an unprecedented push in movie marketing, thanks primarily to toys related to the huge number of "merchandisable" movies out there. Toy Story 2, Star Wars: Episode I and Pokemon: The First Movie are all producing tons (literally) of plastic, rubber, foam and various other synthetic junk.

Of course, we a all have a bit of Lemming in us. Who hasn't gone out and bought that "special limited edition collector's cup" from Taco Bell or the "Limited Time Offer" for that Hercules hat? We all have succumbed to the evil commercial giant, and as such, we've all contributed to this culture of corporate greed in which we currently live.

Like it or not, an increasingly significant number of movies are being made purely for the purpose of selling toys. Looking back over the "golden years" of cinema, one doesn't see films which would make a good happy Meal. In fact, before Star Wars, the majority of films had a minimal amount of merchandise attached to them.

Small Soldiers is a prime example, in that the toys were designed for the movie was written (and it shows in the mediocrity of the script). Pokemon is another example, although a little different in that the movie was made to capitalize on the popularity of the video games and toys.

Ironically, Hollywood doesn't seem to have learned the lesson that great marketing tie-ins are just as much of a fluke as a box office success. For every Pokemon, Star Wars or Toy Story there's three Wild Wild Wests, Small Soldiers and Lost In Spaces. Even looking at the marketing blitz for Star Wars: Episode I, analysts are disappointed. I've seen SW:EpI merchandise being sold at discount in liquidation stores, and we're not even through the 1999 Christmas season yet.

So what's next? More of the same. After this Christmas season is done, it'll all start anew, and a bunch of companies will make and lose a bunch of money. For the record, one great opportunity was missed: Furby, The Movie. Or was it?

Last week's article on Microsoft's X-Box generated a fair amount of mail, but the best of it came from long-time reader Ben Menix (hi Ben!). Ben stated that he felt the members of the public who used Microsoft products weren't necessarily aware they were using them. He cited examples of people who used Windows, but who claimed they'd never use a Microsoft product. It's an interesting argument, and one best presented by him.

"The well-informed (technology-wise) among us (I'm not pointing fingers or naming names, just using an expression) often overlook the fact that; despite the publicity and the presence of Microsoft Windows on just about every PC sold, most people still don't know what Microsoft is or what it does. It doesn't seem possible, but more than once people have told me that they 'don't use Microsoft products' while watching the Windows98 boot screen on their Compaq! They honestly don't make the connection. They also don't *want* to know about it."

Ben continues to say, "The bottom line is; I don't think as large a percentage of the population as one would think dislikes Microsoft, and I think even fewer are capable of making a conscientious computing purchase without involving Microsoft somehow. Saying, 'I'll never buy another computing product that has Microsoft in it!' is very similar to saying, 'I'll never buy another car that has plastic in it!' It's possible, but most people don't know where to find such a thing."

On the front of Microsoft needing hardware partners to fulfill their X-Box "dream", "Microsoft's bread and butter is the operating system. I feel that the ultimate configuration of the X-box will be OS-centric...Dell, Compaq, and Gateway all stand to benefit from using whatever OS Microsoft designates for the units. By building Microsoft's X-box to Microsoft's specifications, I imagine all three companies stand to save a bundle in Windows2000 licensing and other Microsoft products."

Of course, I could counter that by saying that moves like this are how Microsoft got into trouble with the US government in the first place (albeit, they're probably not scared by the government).

"Basically, Dell may take a hit of $200 per X-box, which will be made up by getting Windows2000, MSOffice and thousands of hours of out sourced tech support."

Ben did give agree with me wholeheartedly (sort of) on one point, though:

"You're right about the reliability and upkeep of a PC/Microsoft based gaming system. It will be a nightmare compared to a Playstation. My only response is that famous fictional but accurate conversation between Steve Jobs and Bill Gates:

Steve: 'Our product is better. We make better stuff.'
Bill: 'You don't get it, do you? It doesn't matter.'

An interesting take on the whole situation, and I'll be curious to see how it plays out over the next few years.

Last week's quote of the week was answered correctly (again!) by Daniel Morrell. I didn't honestly expect him to get it again, but kudos to him. He wins a copy of You've Got Mail this time.

This week, I'm giving away a copy of the Jeff Bridges/Tim Robbins thriller, Arlington Road. This movie is better than you've been led to believe (it's a conspiracy, I'm telling you!). To win it, just be the first person to email me at ken@dvdfuture.com with the source of the following quote:

Man: I'm fine... I'm fine...
Man: I don't think so. We just cut up our girlfriend with a chainsaw. Does that sound "fine"?