TroyTyped’s Bevy of Beauties 2011

Everyone else is listing their most beautiful for the year and I’m well known for my fickle and constantly changing celebrity crushes. So here are the ladies of 2011 that make up my inaugural Bevy of Beauties List

Kat Dennings

Anyone who knows me personally knows that over the last few years Kat Dennings has become my celebrity crush of choice. She fits my “type” perfectly – womanly body shape (boobs), big beautiful eyes, full luscious lips, long brown hair. Physically (some might say superficially) Kat Dennings is my perfect woman. This year she landed a supporting role in a comic book blockbuster (Thor) and a leading role in a television sitcom (2 Broke Girls). So, although Kat Dennings has been on my celebrity crush list for a few years now, we got to see more of her in 2011 and that is why she makes the inaugural list. Not just because I was always going to include her no matter what.

Dani Venn

I always have a Masterchef crush. Every season! There has been Justine and Julia in Season 1, Sharnee in Season 2 and in Season 3 I loved Ellie and most of all Dani Venn. There was a mixed reaction in the online Masterchef fan community to Dani. She copped a lot of hate during her time on the show. This made no sense to me because she can only be described as adorable. Always smiling, always laughing. Even when she was crying she’d have a laugh. To the Dani haters I say there must be something wrong in their DNA. Dani was one of the best things about Masterchef Season 3. I think she’s just the bees knees and sweet as pie.

Jennifer Aniston

Is Jennifer Aniston getting hotter with age? I think it might be true. Don’t get me wrong, Aniston has always been a stunning woman but when she came on screen in this year’s Horrible Bosses wearing only a dental jacket and knickers my jaw dropped to the popcorn laden floor of the cinema. Flabergasted. How is it I’m only just getting butterflies when looking at Aniston now after years and years of being a huge Friends fan. And she’s still good at making me laugh. Jennifer, like a fine wine , you just keep getting better as the years go on.

Emily Browning

As the lead in Sucker Punch as Babydoll, the sexy, ass kicking heroine in a short skirt Emily Browning was every fanboys wet dream come true. I’m told Babydoll costumes were in abundence at this year’s Supernova Conventions around Australia. Browning is not just on my list because she played a girl in a short skirt. She has beautiful soulful eyes and again, like Dennings, full lips that make me melt. Her porcelain white skin, of which she bravely bared all in Sleeping Beauty, is also beautiful. I’m becoming a bigger and bigger fan of ladies with snow white, porcelain skin as there are more and more fake tanned, oompa loompa like ladies walking the streets and gracing the covers of magazines these days. Browning makes it even sexier.

Sam Stosur

Not only do I love Sam Stosur because she’s an Aussie sporting winner but when she came out after the US Open dressed to the nines in that orange dress I thought “Hello Sam! You scrub up all right!” The best thing about Stosur this year was her grace during the final of the US Open up against the downright beastly, ugly personality shown by her opponent, Serena Williams. Every interview with Stosur left me thinking that she was a lovely, gracious, hard working woman. That is just a beautiful as full lips or porcelain  skin and is why she is on the 2011 Beauties list.

Rosie Huntington-Whiteley

Breathless. Michael Bay, a rare kudos to you good sir. Replacing Megan Fox with Rosie Huntington-Whiteley was the best decision ever made on a Transformers film. The moment she came on screen… breathless. Huntington-Whiteley is plain and simply beautiful. I don’t know another man who wasn’t left with the same feelings in the nether regions after seeing the third Transformers movie. In fact I know plenty of women who have found themselves a new lady crush. Although graced with an acting ability that leaves a lot to be desired Huntington-Whiteley was still the best thing about Transformers 3.

Jessie J

The moment I saw the film clip for Pricetag I was in love with Jessie J. She’s alternative rock chick (maybe a bit manufactured that way) but she’s still got a cuteness about her. I also enjoy her music and am not ashamed to admit it. With her fringe and her bright lipstick (again with the lip love) and her rock girl outfits she’s hitting all the right buttons for me. I also am a bit partial to a girl with a tattoo or two. Jessie J has some spunk about her and she was by far my biggest singer crush of 2011.

 

My Top 5 Christmas Carols

Last night I fell asleep after copious amounts of red wine with my iPhone next to me playing my Christmas playlist on repeat. I woke up in an incredibly good mood this morning. Had the cheeriness of a night full of subliminal Christmas carols put me in this good mood? Perhaps. Then I checked the Oz Lotto results and found I didn’t win the 20 million. Oh well, never mind… off I went to catch the bus to work, smile on my face and perhaps quietly singing “I don’t want a lot for Christmas, there is just one thing I need…”

I do enjoy a good Christmas carol session these days. So I got to thinking, what are my 5 favourites. And here they are:

5. All I Want For Christmas Is You

I didn’t realise this was a Mariah Carey song until just recently. I wasn’t a big Christmas carol fan in the 90′s when I was a teenager. The first time I really heard this song was in Love, Actually. It’s just so saccharine sweet and upbeat it doesn’t fail to bring a smile to my face. Michael Buble slows it down on his latest Christmas album and I enjoy his version as well. It’s just a fun song for suckers for love and suckers for Christmas.

4. River

The first time I heard this song was on an episode of Ally McBeal sung by Robert Downey Jr. It is of course originally a Joni Mitchell song from 1971. As opposed to All I Want For Christmas Is You it is an incredibly sad song about the end of a relationship. But I love it. It’s perfect for the heartbroken at Christmas and I love the arrangement at the beginning with the reference to a much more upbeat Christmas song, Jingle Bells. This is just a beautiful song.

3. Jingle Bells

Speaking of Jingle Bells… It comes in at number 3 of my favourite Christmas songs. Again for the simple fact that it is light and fun. Everyone knows this song from their childhood, it’s probably among the first one learns. Jazz it up with some brass and speed it up a little and it’s even better than the version you learn as a kid. Also a smile bringer and an ear worm once it gets into your head.

2. Maybe This Christmas

Ron Sexsmith’s song from 2002 featured in a Chrismukkah episode of the TV series The OC. Like River it is a slower song but this time with more hopeful, happier themes. It’s a simple and pretty Christmas song that makes you feel warm and fuzzy on the inside.

1. Let It Snow

For a guy from Australia, a land where Christmas is celebrated in the sweltering heat of summer, in the backyard, with BBQ’s, cricket and swimming pools it might seem a bit odd that Let It Snow is my favourite Christmas carol. This is a major ear worm for me. Once it’s in my head not only will I be whistling or humming it all day I’ll be tapping my toes and bopping away at my desk. This is one song I’m not a fan of slowed down. The jazzier the better as far as I’m concerned. It’s a regular repeater on my Christmas playlist every year. Honestly, I can’t figure out why I love it so much. It just rocks my Christmas socks.

 

Remake Is Not A Dirty Word: Part 3

This morning in Part 2 of this “blog trilogy” I argued that Citizen Kane is such a great movie that it could possibly be remade today and still be fantastic. I argued that if a story is timeless then it should be able to be told over and over again, from many a perspective, in many a style and it could still be a great story.

Please note the “could” in that sentence. This whole argument is based around my view that remakes can have merit, they can be good and therefore all films should be candidates for remake even if they are considered classics already. I’m not for a moment arguing that all remakes are good or that if a classic would be remade that it would be better than the original. Just that it’s possible.

This afternoon I want to use Singin’ In The Rain as an example for the last part of my Remake Is Not A Dirty Word argument. Unlike Kane I had first seen Rain over a decade ago when I was a teenager. Although it is my second favourite musical of all time (Moulin Rouge is my favourite musical and second favourite movie) when I take personal feelings for films out of the equation then I rate Singin’ In The Rain as the best musical of all time. Just like in Part 1 of these blogs with what I said about Jaws, we’re talking a movie that I have great respect for. A movie that spurred on my interest in film and made me want to make movies. Singin’ In The Rain is a movie I absolutely adore!

Singin’ In The Rain has already been remade. As a stage production. Unfortunately I have not seen it but I do remember when it came to Brisbane in the early Noughties. I knew a few people who went to see it. I knew a few people who loved the movie as much as I do. People who, when told there was a stage version of the movie, got all excited. People who, if I brought up the topic of a remade movie version of Rain, would run me out of town.

Why the double standard? Broadway has stolen from Hollywood for a slew of musicals for a very long time now. Legally Blonde, The Lion King, The Producers, Hairspray, Mary Poppins and Shrek just to name a few. Spamalot is based on Monty Python and the Holy Grail. Legally Blonde: The Musical was so good that when I watch the movie now I kind of miss the songs!

One may argue that adaptations and remakes are not the same. I disagree, they are exactly the same. Personally, the remake is different to adaptation is just an argument for movie snobs to justify why 8 of the Top Ten films mentioned in Part 1 of these blogs are all adaptations of some other form of storytelling. To justify the fact that, while many films really lack in originality in story, film is still the supreme and most untouchable of storytelling mediums. Yeah, I’m generalising and assuming with what film snobs might think but I know a few and I’m pretty much hitting the nail on the head with that statement when it comes to the ones I know.

But back to Singin’ In The Rain and remaking it into a modern day movie. An argument was raised in the comments of Part 1 of these blogs that it could “not be remade because it is entirely reliant on the performing abilities of Gene Kelley and there are no contemporary dancers who could EVER do the part justice.” This is the most infuriating, film snobbery, I hear from anti-remake people. No, this isn’t the first time I’ve heard similar comments made (I have remake arguments a lot). Not only is film the most awesome medium that is set in stone and untouchable by the hands of others but in addition to that, actors and performers captured on said film and the directors responsible for what is captured on said film also cannot be outdone by a remake.

In the first half of the 20^th century, I don’t have a date exactly, tennis great Bill Tilden once said of another tennis great, Donald Budge, that Budge was “the finest player 365 days a year that ever lived.” Now, about 60 or 70 years later we have Roger Federer.

Swimmer Mark Spitz won himself 7 Gold Medals in swimming at the Munich Olympics in 1972 breaking records to win all of them. Then came Michael Phelps in Beijing. Eight. Eight gold medals.

Thomas Edison profited from more than 1300 patented inventions while changing the way people lived. He must be the greatest, never to be outdone! Then came Henry Ford, Richard Branson and Steve Jobs.

If we apply film snobbery to the rest of the world, records never get broken, industry never innovates, explorers don’t go further, higher, deeper, scientists don’t discover. Apply film snobbery to the rest of the world and once someone has done something right then we best not keep trying to see if maybe, just maybe it could be done better. Or at least just as good but more fitting for a modern time.

Thankfully Christopher Nolan didn’t apply film snobbery to The Dark Knight. Otherwise, the only Joker we would have been able to enjoy would have been Nicholson’s. Jack Nicholson. THE Jack Nicholson. Oscar winning actor Jack Nicholson! The bloke that wears his sunglasses to the Oscars and sits in the front row (or at least used to). Some kid from Perth could never give a better performance of a character than Jack! Luckily film snobbery wasn’t applied or Heath would never have won his Oscar and “Why so serious?” wouldn’t be one of the great and memorable film quotes of the Noughties.

Back to Singin’ In The Rain. The view of the same commenter that “Hugh Jackman would be an epic fail” as he could never do Kelley’s dances justice (this stems from a Facebook status said commenter saw where I suggested Jackman for the role of Don should Rain be remade) I just wonder how anyone can know this to be an absolute certainty of failure without seeing Hugh give it a shot.

Apply this film snobbery to the rest of the world and we the public might turn our nose up at the idea of a Broadway musical starring some guy who played a bumbling fool on Some Mother’s Do ‘Ave ‘Em as the Phantom of the Opera, not wanting to turn up to see it and never hearing Michael Crawford’s amazing singing voice. Who’d have ever thunk it!?! The guy plays an idiot, that’s all we’ve ever seen of him so that’s all there is to him. Right?

Sidenote: Yes, I’m aware Crawford had a career on the stage prior to both Mothers and Phantom but I’m assuming the average Joe punter probably didn’t have Wikipedia at the time to find that he had been singing for a long time and was in fact a valid choice for Phantom.

If there is no excuse to remake an already well told, filmed story then we wouldn’t have the likes of The Magnificent Seven, The Ring, Insomnia, Let Me In or the 2007 Academy Award for Best Picture winning film The Departed. Why? Because all these films are remakes of foreign language films. Language is no barrier to determining a good film. If film is truly a visual medium then the fact these films were remakes of films in another language should be no barrier to the argument against remakes. Apply anti-remake sentiment to these films and we don’t get to see some pretty damn good movies (the critics back me up on that statement).

There is only one legitimate argument for writing off a remake before seeing it in order to compare it with the original. It’s purely an emotional, personal thing. If you love a film, the thought of it being ruined by someone else can be unbearable. As pro remake as I am, trust me when I say, if I did hear an announcement that Jaws, Citizen Kane or Singin’ In The Rain was being remade there would be a part of me that would start to freak out, want to light the torches and grab the pitch forks. I was once anti-remake. Until I realised how many good films out there aren’t the original telling of the story the focus on. When I was finally able to put the emotion of loving, adoring, worshipping my favourite movies then I was able to sit down to any remake with an open mind and not judge it until the end credits. Some will be terrible, some will be passable, some will be on par with the original. Occasionally, we may even get some that surpass the original. When I do judge a remake I judge it on how it decided to tell the central story and not solely judged on how it stacked up to the original.

Remakes aren’t a dirty word. You just have to get over your attachment to the classics, to your favourites and then you open yourself up to, a kind of cool, world of story retelling.

 

Remake Is Not A Dirty Word: Part 2

(back to Part 1)

Until half way through writing this blog (which was originally intended to be just one entry and not this trilogy that it has since turned into) I had not seen Citizen Kane. I was barely half way through when I started to fall in love with the movie. It was at about the same time I thought “Holy crap this would be good if it were remade today, by the right director, in colour and with the camera not so locked down as it was in shooting the original.  Now I’m not taking away from what the original is. I fell in love with it as it was, in black and white, with very simple camera work and kind of hammy acting. It is a great, classic film. I wouldn’t argue against that any day.

It’s just that Citizen Kane is such an enjoyable story! As I mentioned above it would look absolutely grand in widescreen and in colour. There is vastly more technology around today that could make telling this story even better than it could ever have been told in 1941. Now I’m not saying new technology automatically means you can make a movie better. Tim Burton’s 2001 remake of Planet of the Apes proved that to be false. New technology can help though when coupled with good story, good direction, good actors and so forth. Funnily enough 2011’s Rise of the Planet of the Apes, which critics gave an overall good wrap to, proves that it is very possible.  Why can’t a modern brush be used to retell the story of Charles Foster Kane?

The story doesn’t get old. If it did, people wouldn’t watch it today and still think it was a classic. In fact after 2011’s News of the World scandal the story of a news paper magnate who at one stage “creates his own news” has actually become very relevant. Media magnates still exist and we still find them fascinating. As we do rich people in general. Rich people still put their hands in the political sphere, just like Charles Foster Kane did. Rich people’s lives are still rocked with scandal, which we lap up. I think the story in Citizen Kane stands to make a marvelous remake if anyone ever decides to do so. The potential is there for it to be a marvelous story every which way it is told in any day or form.

Yesterday I finished the first part of my blog with slightly different language than I started it. I’ve continued it during the beginning of this blog. Instead of referring to Citizen Kane and Singin’ In The Rain as film, for the sake of this argument I want to refer to them as stories. Good stories are worth telling time and time again. Bringing them to new generations, using new techniques to add to the storytelling. It’s what happens when we adapt a play or a book or a song or a video game or anything for the screen. We remake the story for a new medium. No one seems to have any issue with doing this. The problem everyone has with remakes seems to begin when you retell a story that was first told in the same medium as the remake.

Unless it’s in the theatre.

Each time a play or a musical is performed by a different theatre company it is essentially a remake of the original. The staging and set can change. A new director might want something different from his new actors. The choreography can be different. The script might even be tweaked! A lot of this is out of necessity of the medium of theatre. Where a play is performed by a different theatre group in a different part of the world it is expected that there will be a different interpretation of the original story from it’s first ever performance. It’s a given we all seem to accept. We don’t call them remakes in the theatre world. Essentially, that’s exactly what they are.

With movies, once the story has been committed to film the the story can be shown anywhere, can remain the way it was intended to be for all of time and in all of space. Reinterpret a story as many times as you like if it was originally a play but if it was a film… hands off! Like the Ten Commandments, film, it appears, is set in stone! Well, at least if you’re a film snob.

Yes I’m name calling. Sorry, but it is just a bit pretentious. Film, a medium only a hundred years old, is so good a medium it’s stories are better and more untouchable than those of the theatre, a medium that’s been around since Ancient Greece. That’s about two thousandish years for those keeping score. Film is such a wonderful storytelling invention there is absolutely no need to retell a good story if it is already considered a classic the way it was originally committed to stone… I mean film. That’s what I hear when I hear someone immediately jump up in arms when the word remake is mentioned.

But what if a film is remade in a different medium is that okay? My rant on that hypocrisy this afternoon when I tackle remaking Singin’ In The Rain.

(on to Part 3)

 

Remake Is Not A Dirty Word

Remake.  In film circles the word is pretty much mud. Remakes are rarely given the time of day. Of course there are very good arguments supporting the view that remakes are horrible, especially if it involves a “classic”. The 1998 Gus Van Sant, shot for shot, carbon copy of the 1960 Hitchcock thriller Psycho comes to mind for a reason not to remake a classic. What an absolutely pointless endeavor that was! However, remakes can also be good. Some remakes are more so “re-imaginings”, a term used a fair bit these days. Perhaps it is to try and lure the naysayers in. Recently Christopher Nolan’s Batman Begins and The Dark Knight re-imaginings or even reboots of the Batman franchise and the Cohen Brothers’ remake of True Grit come to mind of films that have worked as remakes. They’re not the only ones either. There have been a number of critically successful, box office hit remakes in the past ten years: Ocean’s 11 (2001), The Ring (2002), Freaky Friday (2003), King Kong (2005), The Departed (2006) just to name a few. To me, it just seems that when arguing the topic of remakes, many seem to forget the good ones. Let’s face it, in any genre or style of film the number of bad movies usually outweighs the good. I, for one, am someone who enjoys a remake and won’t write a film off before seeing it just because it is one. I know many people who imediately cringe as soon as they hear it announced that a film is being remade. Surely there isn’t only one way to tell a good story! There is a movie that I always come back to when I think about what I wouldn’t mind seeing remade. Hell, I’d love to have a crack at remaking it if I was in the position to do so. There is, of course, absolutely no need to remake it. It is already, without question, as a classic. A brilliant movie as it is, but for shits and giggles, I wouldn’t mind seeing someone elses take on it. It is afterall a retelling of the novel it was based on. A novel that was vastly different to the final film. I’m talking about the mother of the summer blockbuster, directed by the king of the summer blockbuster and one of the reasons I love movies. It’s also possibly the reason why the majority of the movie going public from the late 70’s hears a menacing tuba when they set foot into water where they can’t touch the bottom (well, that’s what happens in my head at least). Yep, I want a crack at remaking Jaws! Of course I’d have to leave it to one of today’s better directors – maybe JJ Abrams or even Christopher Nolan, perhaps even David Fincher. Whenever I tell my film buff friends that I feel this way I’m pretty much buffeted with rotten fruit and vegetables while they boo and hiss and retract their friendship. Would a remake necessarily be better than the original? Perhaps not. Could it possibly be just as good in an entirely different way? I believe so. If a new director was to remake Jaws from the book and not the film (as the Coen Brothers recently did with True Grit) then we could end up with a familiar story told on screen in a completely new way. In the book there are some big difference to what plays out in the film. Brody’s marriage is on the rocks, Hooper has an affair with Mrs. Brody, at one stage Brody almost strangles Hooper to death, Quint is a far quieter character, the mayor wants to keep the beaches open because he owes money to the mob, Hooper is killed by the shark and in the end the shark doesn’t even blow up! There is a far darker film lurking in the pages of Peter Benchley’s Jaws than was apparent in Spielberg’s filmic take on the novel. In the hands of someone like Christopher Nolan or David Fincher I believe a Jawsremake could perhaps be almost as good as the original and yet in an entirely different sense. Remaking a movie using the original book as reference, or the original play or some other material, is an easy argument for those like me who are pro remake. If the source material is good enough you could probably make three or four good films in the hands of the right people. What if the original classic film is an outright classic on it’s own without drawing from prior material. Let’s take a look at a few classics that, God forbid, ever be remade. I’ll use the American Film Institute’s Top 10 Films from their 1998 list “100 Years…100 Films”

1. Citizen Kane
2. Casablanca
3. The Godfather
4. Gone With The Wind
5. Lawrence Of Arabia
6. The Wizard Of Oz
7. The Graduate
8. On The Waterfront
9. Schindler’s List
10. Singin’ In The Rain

Wait a second! Hold the phone! There’s only 3 films there that aren’t based on other material: Singin’ In The Rain, Lawrence of Arabia and Citizen Kane. The rest are based on books (3, 4, 6, 7 and 9), plays, albeit unperformed (2) or newspaper articles (8).  That means any of the rest could possibly be remade in the same vein as I mentioned above for Jaws, with a different take on the source material. One could even argue that, as Lawrence of Arabia is based on the life of T. E. Lawrence, it too is an adaptation. The story of Lawrence’s life could easily be portrayed from new angles for a remake. So let’s rule out that film as well. It’s been proven that going back to the source material and making a good, new, film version of the story can be done. The only stories in that list that aren’t already being told again are Singin’ In the Rain and Citizen Kane. So let’s remake them shall we? We’ll do that in tomorrow’s blog, starting with Citizen Kane in the morning and Singin’ In The Rain in the afternoon. If you can’t wait to hurl abuse at me for suggesting such a thing, go ahead. The comments section is below.   (on to Part 2)

 

I Tweet and I Shop

I follow a lot of brands that I use and purchase. Some I’m a regular customer of. Some I only follow because I’m interested by social media and how companies use it to market their products. Some I follow not only because I like their brand or product but also because they are actually fun to interact with. Others I follow just to watch them dig a social media grave for themselves, while I sit back and laugh in hysterics at what they think will be cool and possibly go viral.

Recently Qantas attempted to connect with their customers via a Twitter hashtag competition #qantasluxury. After the grounding fiasco a few weeks earlier the hashtag quickly became a forum for making fun of Qantas instead of interacting positively with the brand. It got me wondering. Who’s doing it right? What businesses on Twitter and Facebook do I actually enjoy following or “like”-ing? Now I have no degree in marketing or in social media. I do, however, use Twitter and Facebook and I also buy stuff. From a consumer’s point of view, there were a few that stood out.

Pintxo Spanish Taperia – Twitter account: @pintxonewfarm

Pintxo is a small Spanish tapas bar in the Brisbane suburb of New Farm. It was Pintxo that actually first raised my interest in business using social media to reach their customers. They were one of the first commercial Twitter accounts I followed on Twitter. The thing that struck me was that even though I knew I was following a business they made me feel like I was following a person. For a small, local eatery this is a lot easier to do than it would be a big, global, corporate chain.

I had never eaten at Pintxo before but when I finally did I felt like I was going to someone’s place that I knew. Pintxo regularly #FF (Follow Friday) follower that they have recently interacted with, something you usually see between personal Twitter accounts and not coming from a business. They regularly take part in conversations and don’t even throw in a quick marketing name drop for their restaurant. When they finally do, it seems a normal part of a Twitter interaction and doesn’t feel like marketing at all. When they mention that they have a special in reply to one’s tweet about what to do on a Sunday afternoon it almost seems like a friend has said – “Hey, Pintxo has cheap sangria, let’s go there!” Now don’t get me wrong they still tweet up their usual marketing stuff. Specials, what’s cooking etc. It’s when they interact with their followers that they do everything right. For a small local business Pintxo has Twitter down.

Dominos Pizza Australia – Facebook Page www.facebook.com/DominosAustralia

Now first things first. I worked for Dominos for 4 years. I left with a very bitter taste in my mouth at the company and their treatment of their corporate office employees. The do make good, cheap fast food level pizzas and I still go to them most of the time for just that. So I follow their social media accounts. I also know the girls running said accounts and this section isn’t just because I know them and are giving ex colleagues a good wrap.

The Dominos Australia Facebook page once taught me that a bogan’s favourite pastime (when they weren’t sticking My Family stickers to their cars and relaxing with a VB in front of Today Tonight) was to complain on Facebook pages of companies they could afford to buy products from. I noticed that the Pizza Capers site was generally clear of the kind of complaints (and volume of them) that the Dominos page had. Just looking at their Facebook page made me wonder why I even ate their pizza even if it was free at lunchtimes. Then along came their new social media marketing guru who’s job it was to run their social media sites. Now the complaints are still there, for example (word for word, spelling mistake for spelling mistake):

“DOMINOS use are so rude to ure loyal customers 1st use stuff my order up. i complain i ask for a refund NO ( it says 100% money back garunteed) then use replace the order and put CAPSICUM AND TOMATOE ON A BBQ MEAT LOVERS PIZZA. im alergic to CAPSICUM..then i ring head office get told i can have a cash refund use will send a delivery driver to my doore today NO BLOODY MONEY HERE NO DRIVER HAS BEEN HERE..ring the store get a curry muncher. he knows nothing about this no bloody managers on shift. i am dissapointed in ure service…IPSWICH CITY. QLD”

Side note: the WordPress spell checker just had a heart attack!

Nowadays, in between these bogan rants, you’ll find a lot more content that has begun to engage their audience, positively. Seriously, it was once a daily lunch time laugh for myself reading through the hatred for Dominos on their very own Facebook page. So why are they on my list of brands doing things right on the social networks. Two reasons, firstly, no matter how ridiculous and high school English teacher offending a complaint is, they respond to them all. Secondly, they’ve started to turn around a page that was insanely negative and invoke positive interaction from their Facebook fans. I honestly thought I would never see the day a positive post appeared anywhere on their Facebook page. For that, I give them kudos.

Coca-Cola Australia – Facebook page: www.facebook.com/CocaColaAustralia 

Four words… “Share a Coke with…”

I really think that’s all that needs to be said about that. We’ve all seen how that little marketing campaign got the lot of us marketing their product for them. I’ve even heard people with no interest in marketing or business give kudos to this campaign based simply on how often tehy see pictures of a bottle of Coke in their social media feeds on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram… You name it, there’s been a picture of a Coke bottle with a friend’s name on it in the feed.

Brilliant. Just, plain brilliant.

National Basketball League – Twitter @NBL Facebook Page – www.facebook.com/NBLHoops

Although it is a national sports league the NBL is still selling a product. Of the two main sports league that I follow on social networks the NBL has won my admiration for one simple reason. They cover games live without ruining the score for those who can’t watch it live (mostly because ONEHD doesn’t show the games live in a good time slot).

How is this possible? Their tweets will simply say what time of the game it is ¼, ½, ¾ or full time and provide a link to the live score. If I want to check the score I can click the link. It also means that I can use Twitter during games and not have the game ruined (unless it’s by a regular twitter user who’s giving away the score. That doesn’t bother me. When the league does it though it annoys me to no end.

There are many an NRL team that will give live score updates via their Facebook page statuses or tweets. Many a Broncos Sunday afternoon game has been spoiled because I open Facebook to respond to a message and I see the score. Facebook and Twitter are now becoming more and more of an instant communication tool. If I am at risk of ruining a sports match by using them on my phone the way I wish to use them then I just won’t follow a team or a leagues Twitter or Facebook page. I’m no expert but I’m pretty sure this isn’t the aim of what having a Facebook or Twitter for your brand is. One wants followers and fans and doesn’t want to annoy them by giving away the results of what they want from your product – an entertaining sports match. I’ve seen responses from the absolutely useless social media team from the Broncos NRL team respond to complaints about ruining games with something along the lines of “We have many fans who are relying on our live scores on Facebook to follow the game. If you want to watch the game without knowing the score we suggest you don’t look at Facebook or hide us for the duration of the game.” Seriously Broncos SM team!? Seriously!?!? How bout I just don’t follow you at all, ever. You pretentious twits!

The NBL’s way around Facebook live scores is fantastic. They will post the results on their Facebook page but they will first write the two teams playing, they then enter down with dots far enough so that when appearing on people’s Facebook news feeds a user has to click “read more” for the actual live score to be revealed. Simple and yet it caters to both types of fans (the live score follower and the follower there for non-score related news) without annoying anyone or the need to hide the social media page for the duration of a match. The NBL might be a minority sports league in Australia but the big guns could take a leaf out of their social media policies.

They’re a few of my favourite social media sites that brands have put in place. Do you have some that you think do a great job. Big or small. Local or international. Who have you seen doing it right? Who have you seen doing it wrong? Let us know in the comments below.