-1 for the last joke.
I wonder if the recursive screen was intentional.
The content of on-set monitors is controlled by the director. The Director can put different graphics in those monitors at will, for different stories, and so on and so forth. Consequently, a human fuck-up to place the camera into that monitor is very possible, especially if the director went to punch that camera up to air - and punched it into the monitor instead by accident. The director is (at stations I have been to/worked at - other setups are possible), controlling what camera is up on the air, controlling some graphics, placing down the supers with names, and monitoring everything (and when I say everything, i mean something like 10+ monitors at least), to make sure everything is where it should be for the program. And, guiding everyone else (Audio, Cameramen, etc) as to the tempo of the show verbally. It's a tricky job, which involves a lot of multi-tasking.
Based on the notion that Olberman actually reacted to it, I'd say it was a mistake - or at very least something Olberman didn't expect.
Much love for Ebert.
And it is a great article.
|Timothy A. Bear |
I agree that this is a penis issue.
I love finding typos in places they should not be
| Register or login To Post a Comment|