Saturday, June 23, 2007
Sunk Costs and Storytelling
Went to the cheap movies last night. I left in awe and in question. I had heard that Spiderman 3 wasn't that great. But the people that take a not that great movie and make trailers for it do an amazing job. Plus it was the cheap theater. So, here are some questions:
1. In a day when amazing storytellers abound, how does a company or individual allow such a story to be told? I'm no expert, but I find it unusual that the producers took the director of Spiderman and Spiderman 2 and had he and his brother write the story for Spiderman 3. Just a little IMDB background, Sam may have done a descent directing job in the past, but his screenplay abilities are centered on Hercules and Xena princess warrior. I'm not trying to critique him, I'm just asking how does a story like that actually sound appealing to a group of seasoned producers? Do they not listen to stories anymore? Were they so emotionally involved or thinking that Spiderman 3 had to come to market no matter the story that they were willing to accept anything? I'd really be interested to know how that all took place
2. Here's an economics lesson. It doesn't matter how much you've invested in a certain decision or path. What you've spent on that decision is already spent. You can't get it back. It's called a 'sunk cost.' When you're deciding whether or not to move forward with the remainder of the decision you began, don't take those sunk costs into consideration. They're gone. Only take the further investment and return into consideration. For example, if you have been in a relationship for a long time and are not happy and now looking at the possibility of marriage, don't say, "I've been with him/her for so long. I feel like I need to keep moving forward with this and see how it goes." It doesn't matter how long you've been with that person. Will it be worth the continued investment? Same with business decisions. Yeah, you've already spent $300,000 developing this new facility. Then you find out that it's not going to have the return you thought it would. Do you continue with construction? It doesn't matter how much you've already spent. So now, no matter how much you've spent producing a movie, when you see the final product on your desk and it is Spiderman 3, don't say, "We've spent so much on this, we have to continue and release it." You've already spent the money. It's gone. Is it worth the embarrassment to release such a picture from here on out? That's the question.
3. How did my friend, who had already seen this movie and said that he didn't really like it, actually go with me a second time and allow me to spend 2.5 hours and $3 dollars on the film? How did he not physically restrain me from continuing? What kind of a friend does that to someone? How did all of my other friends that had seen it and said, "I didn't really like it," not describe just how horrible it was? How could they be content with allowing me to think that it was cheap theater acceptable, just not big theater acceptable? I know that misery loves company, but please, we're friends. Have some class.
1. In a day when amazing storytellers abound, how does a company or individual allow such a story to be told? I'm no expert, but I find it unusual that the producers took the director of Spiderman and Spiderman 2 and had he and his brother write the story for Spiderman 3. Just a little IMDB background, Sam may have done a descent directing job in the past, but his screenplay abilities are centered on Hercules and Xena princess warrior. I'm not trying to critique him, I'm just asking how does a story like that actually sound appealing to a group of seasoned producers? Do they not listen to stories anymore? Were they so emotionally involved or thinking that Spiderman 3 had to come to market no matter the story that they were willing to accept anything? I'd really be interested to know how that all took place
2. Here's an economics lesson. It doesn't matter how much you've invested in a certain decision or path. What you've spent on that decision is already spent. You can't get it back. It's called a 'sunk cost.' When you're deciding whether or not to move forward with the remainder of the decision you began, don't take those sunk costs into consideration. They're gone. Only take the further investment and return into consideration. For example, if you have been in a relationship for a long time and are not happy and now looking at the possibility of marriage, don't say, "I've been with him/her for so long. I feel like I need to keep moving forward with this and see how it goes." It doesn't matter how long you've been with that person. Will it be worth the continued investment? Same with business decisions. Yeah, you've already spent $300,000 developing this new facility. Then you find out that it's not going to have the return you thought it would. Do you continue with construction? It doesn't matter how much you've already spent. So now, no matter how much you've spent producing a movie, when you see the final product on your desk and it is Spiderman 3, don't say, "We've spent so much on this, we have to continue and release it." You've already spent the money. It's gone. Is it worth the embarrassment to release such a picture from here on out? That's the question.
3. How did my friend, who had already seen this movie and said that he didn't really like it, actually go with me a second time and allow me to spend 2.5 hours and $3 dollars on the film? How did he not physically restrain me from continuing? What kind of a friend does that to someone? How did all of my other friends that had seen it and said, "I didn't really like it," not describe just how horrible it was? How could they be content with allowing me to think that it was cheap theater acceptable, just not big theater acceptable? I know that misery loves company, but please, we're friends. Have some class.
Thursday, June 21, 2007
Resistance
Scott Young posted this morning on the zen of folding laundry. Basically, he had to fold laundry, but didn't want to. Within his own mind, he had turned it into a horrible task because he didn't want to be doing it. He was resisting it. Once he realized what he was doing, he was free to accept the fact that he was actually doing it. Peace then had room to enter. He relates this to a few circumstances, including depressed or lonely moments. If we can accept that we are feeling certain emotions, like loneliness, which we might try to resist, "as if they were the color of your shirt rather than a symbol of your character. Not something to resist or feel ashamed of but just a fact" then peace would have room to enter our lives as well.
I think the same is true of temptation. You know that we discuss the road to recovery a lot here. I've related this before to waves at the beach. When a wave is coming, you actually start to feel the water pull into the wave first. The water recedes. That's your first indication (if you aren't looking) that a wave is coming. The wave would pull you in. You can stand and resist it and get knocked down, or dive down and let it roll over you. We've talked many times of letting temptation roll over, just accepting that the temptation is occurring. I think Scott hit it perfectly by describing it as a situation that is occurring, a fact rather than a symbol of your character. We often use the term "resisting temptation." I wonder if that is the wrong way to handle it. Yes, avoid temptation. But when it finds you, and it will. Accept that it is occurring. You're actually in the middle of it. Acknowledge it because it happens. One of the best ways I've found to stop resisting and accept is to start writing in a journal. It validates your situation but allows a forward thinking moment that separates you from your circumstances. You are, suddenly, no longer emotionally connected to the tempting situation, but rather to the writing or to those that will read it later (if you write with others in mind). The emotional connection is that same wave that tries to pull you in and I think finding an alternate activity that allows you to validate your situation creating an emotional connection to something else is the way to let the wave roll right over you. I've really come to enjoy Scott's blog.
I think the same is true of temptation. You know that we discuss the road to recovery a lot here. I've related this before to waves at the beach. When a wave is coming, you actually start to feel the water pull into the wave first. The water recedes. That's your first indication (if you aren't looking) that a wave is coming. The wave would pull you in. You can stand and resist it and get knocked down, or dive down and let it roll over you. We've talked many times of letting temptation roll over, just accepting that the temptation is occurring. I think Scott hit it perfectly by describing it as a situation that is occurring, a fact rather than a symbol of your character. We often use the term "resisting temptation." I wonder if that is the wrong way to handle it. Yes, avoid temptation. But when it finds you, and it will. Accept that it is occurring. You're actually in the middle of it. Acknowledge it because it happens. One of the best ways I've found to stop resisting and accept is to start writing in a journal. It validates your situation but allows a forward thinking moment that separates you from your circumstances. You are, suddenly, no longer emotionally connected to the tempting situation, but rather to the writing or to those that will read it later (if you write with others in mind). The emotional connection is that same wave that tries to pull you in and I think finding an alternate activity that allows you to validate your situation creating an emotional connection to something else is the way to let the wave roll right over you. I've really come to enjoy Scott's blog.
Powered by ScribeFire.
Wednesday, June 20, 2007
Rescind

Powered by ScribeFire.
Google goes Green?

Powered by ScribeFire.
Goodness Whispers
Friday, June 15, 2007
Happy Smile Day

Powered by ScribeFire.
Thursday, June 14, 2007
CNN/YouTube Debates
This summer and fall, CNN will host both democratic and republic debates based off of questions submitted by YouTube viewers. I think this is exciting. Without a doubt, some of the questions will be incredibly dumb. Also, without a doubt, we'll look back on this and think, "I can't believe we got excited about such interaction. If only we could have seen what was lying in the future." Check out YouTube Debates.
Powered by ScribeFire.
Storytellers

Powered by ScribeFire.
Wednesday, June 06, 2007
True Community
Last week I caught the stomach flu. I don't normally get sick and this was bad. I haven't been sick like that in a long time. After the 9th visit to kneel by the toilet bowl within a short amount of time, I thought to myself, "I've got to tell whoissick.org about this. I didn't even know the stomach flu was going around."
Now, compare that with websites that are desperately trying to get interaction out of their users. How does one build a site, or rather a community of users that is involved to the point that when kneeling by a toilet bowl in pain, their thoughts turn to this website? Well, what good is my participation going to do? On whoissick, I might be able to alert some elderly man that there is a stomach flu going around and he might want to be drinking more orange juice until it passes. On some retail store, my comments might be aggregated to provide customer service feedback to investors or managers. The good feeling that I have from participating isn't the same.
Now, compare that with websites that are desperately trying to get interaction out of their users. How does one build a site, or rather a community of users that is involved to the point that when kneeling by a toilet bowl in pain, their thoughts turn to this website? Well, what good is my participation going to do? On whoissick, I might be able to alert some elderly man that there is a stomach flu going around and he might want to be drinking more orange juice until it passes. On some retail store, my comments might be aggregated to provide customer service feedback to investors or managers. The good feeling that I have from participating isn't the same.
Powered by ScribeFire.
Imitation better than real

(Picture from Threadless.com by Cameron McEwan)
Powered by ScribeFire.