What if I told you to picture a Star Wars cartoon that is shown in three minute segments and was created by the same people who brought us Dexter's Laboratory, The Powerpuff Girls, and Samurai Jack. You might come away thinking how can this possibly be any good, but you will be surprised to find out that it is an immensely pleasurable series to watch and adds some great material to the Star Wars universe, a universe that has just been expanded with the highly anticipated release of Star Wars: The Force Awakens.
Clone Wars was created in 2003 by Genndy Tartakovsky, and is set a few months after Star Wars Episode II. The Jedi are leading the new Grand Army of the Republic against the Separatist droid army on multiple worlds. The primary focus is on Anakin Skywalker and Obi Wan Kenobi, although a few other characters receive feature episodes of their own. Along the way, Anakin becomes a Jedi knight and experiences tests of character that foreshadow his eventual fall to the dark side.
For each episode's short length it is incredible how much Tartakovsky was able to fit into each episode. Viewers are given just enough material to be left satisfied while eagerly anticipating the next installment. One of the biggest shortcomings of the theatrical movies is how much the Clone Wars is overlooked. The first battle of the Clone Wars take place near the end of Attack of the Clones, while only a few final battles are given attention in Revenge of the Sith. There is a three year gap that leaves viewers wondering what happened in between, and how exactly the Clone Wars became the stuff of legend that Luke Skywalker asks Obi Wan about in A New Hope.
Star Wars: Clone Wars is great in that it successfully bridges the gap between Episode II and Episode III. Episode III starts with Obi Wan and Anakin leading a mission to rescue Chancellor Palpatine from the clutches of the Separatists over Coruscant. If you only watch the movies, you might be wondering how Palpatine managed to get captured. In Clone Wars, we see the entire battle of Coruscant unfold and watch the evil General Grievous fight off the Jedi and escape with Palpatine.
Speaking of Grievous, he was first introduced to the Star Wars universe about halfway through this series, and was easily one of the coolest characters of the show. Viewers see him in his debut episode fighting six Jedi at once and handily defeating them without breaking a sweat. Grievous does things with lightsabers that I had never seen before, tossing them from his hands to his feet in a deadly breakdance to gain an edge in the fight. After watching Clone Wars, I fully understand why Grievous' name is spoken in fear, if this portrayal is anything to go by.
Another new character first introduced in this series is Asajj Ventress. She is recruited by Count Dooku and Darth Sidious to kill Anakin Skywalker. She lures Anakin to Yavin IV and engages him in a ferocious duel that is shown over the course of three episodes. Anakin is finally able to defeat her after tapping into the dark side of the Force, and he angrily watches her fall into an abyss. It is clear that Ventress was little more than a pawn in Sidious' scheme to see how willing Anakin would be to use the dark side to defeat an opponent.
The series has an epic conclusion with Anakin and Obi Wan travelling to the planet Nelvaan to find General Grievous, but instead Anakin sets out on a quest to rescue of a group of Nelvaanians who have been mutated by the Separatist-aligned Techno Union. Obi Wan muses that this will be an important test of Anakin's character, and indeed Anakin has a vision of himself becoming Darth Vader in a cave. Anakin is able to free the Nelvaanians, but only after once again drawing on his anger to defeat the Techno Union scientists. Meanwhile Grievous leads a massive invasion fleet to the Republic capital of Coruscant and kidnaps Supreme Chancellor Palpatine despite the best efforts of Yoda and Mace Windu. The ending scene shows Windu contacting Obi Wan and Anakin asking them to rescue the Chancellor, thus leading directly into Revenge of the Sith.
Fans and critics alike praised Star Wars: Clone Wars. Each season won an Emmy award for Outstanding Animated Program, and the final season won an Annie award for Best Animated Television Production. Unfortunately, Clone Wars was deemed non canon in the official Star Wars universe after Disney purchased Lucasfilm in 2012. The series is now classified under the Star Wars Legends banner, along with several novelizations and video games. This is a shame since Clone Wars added so much depth to the Star Wars saga and introduced a number of great characters while performing a deeper exploration of existing ones. The series got a reboot of sorts with the 2008 film, Star Wars: The Clone Wars, and the accompanying CGI animated TV series. I will publish my review of that series sometime next month.
Monday, December 28, 2015
Thursday, November 19, 2015
Calvin and Hobbes Retrospective
It seems incredible to believe, but this Wednesday marked the thirtieth anniversary of the syndication of the first Calvin and Hobbes strip by Bill Watterson. Calvin and Hobbes is arguably one of the greatest comic strips of all time, and it was a major part of my childhood. I am extremely thankful to my dad for sharing his collection of Calvin and Hobbes books with me, because many aspects of my understanding of the world and my childhood interests were influenced by paging through those books.
Like Calvin, I am very interested in dinosaurs. Walking with Dinosaurs had just come out when my dad first showed me his Calvin and Hobbes books, and I was immediately attracted to the dinosaur fantasy sequences. It is interesting to compare Bill Watterson's early dinosaur strips to his later ones. At first, the dinosaurs appeared in a very cartoony style, but as the strip evolved, the dinosaurs were drawn with greater scientific accuracy.
Another of my interests was outer space, and the Spaceman Spiff fantasies blended with my own fascination with space exploration. Spaceman Spiff was one factor that helped inspire me to write my own superhero adventure books. My sister and I enjoyed reading Calvin and Hobbes together, and we started a club based on Calvin's Get Rid Of Slimy girlS club. We mostly just sat around in a fort making secret codes and planning grand adventures. It was a lot of fun, and helped us bond as siblings.
I think that everyone who appreciates comics should thumb through a collection of Calvin and Hobbes. There is so much about it that puts today's comic strips to shame. For one thing, the strip is simply amazing to look at. Back when Calvin and Hobbes appeared in newspapers, cartoonists were given an entire page to work with for Sunday strips. This allowed cartoonists to write detailed stories and draw lavish illustrations. It's too bad the current format has reduced available space to such a degree that cartoonists can only put in a couple talking heads within a handful of tiny panels.
Although it was written in the eighties and nineties, there are some political and societal references that have held up the test of time. Of course there are also some exceptions. One dated gag that appears frequently is Calvin's desire to rent a VCR to watch bad movies. But overall, the strip contained some insightful critiques of consumerism, public education, and instant gratification. As a kid, I paid more attention to the pictures and the simpler storylines, but now I look back and see how many of the problems with American culture Watterson pointed out in his strips are still the norm today.
Watterson was a unique individual within the comic strip industry. As opposed to giants like Garfield and Peanuts, Watterson steadfastly refused to merchandise Calvin and Hobbes. He viewed people like Charles Schultz and Jim Davis as sellouts who cheapened the integrity of the comic strip by plastering their characters on all sorts of consumer products. Watterson wrote a detailed account of his experience battling with newspaper syndicates to retain the merchandising rights to his characters in the Calvin and Hobbes Tenth Anniversary Book. Although I personally would love to see some official Calvin and Hobbes products and animation, I respect Watterson's desire to keep his work in the realm of comics. By not allowing Calvin and Hobbes to saturate popular culture, he has maintained the imaginative spirit the strip embodies. This way, everyone reading it takes away something different upon entering the strip's world.
Much like his creator, Calvin is quite unlike any other character in newspaper comics. A collaborative article on Progressive Boink eloquently describes what makes Calvin unique, and I will paraphrase and add my own observations to what it had to say. It is quickly established that Calvin is an intelligent boy, and far from a literal six year old. His vocabulary is very advanced, and I learned many new words from reading Calvin and Hobbes. He is also a mischievous boy, actively doing things he knows to be wrong, but does anyway because they make make him feel good.
More importantly, Calvin is very much alone in his world. He has no social life, he has a difficult relationship with his family, and everyone else he interacts with can't stand him. His one true friend exists only in his imagination. One author remarks that this is not the type of character you make the star of your show, but the strip became extremely popular regardless. I think the reason for this is that Calvin embodies individualism in a world where everyone is expected to conform to some standard. In the strip, Calvin gets pleasure from throwing snowballs at his neighbor, Susie; he fantasizes about blowing up his school with a fighter jet; and when things are too quiet, he throws a water balloon at his mom.
Stuff like this wouldn't fly in today's funny pages, but this is what being a kid is all about. Kids live for Saturday morning cartoons, exploring the wilderness, and finding adventure in ordinary situations. Not everyone is perfect, and Calvin and Hobbes, in the words of the article, "managed to truly express the idea-without being preachy, without being sappy, perhaps even without trying-that it was okay to be different."
I encourage you to read the article on Progressive Boink. It showcases 25 strips which the contributors of the website feel best represent the spirit of the strip. If you like what you see, I also recommend going to your local bookstore and picking up a Calvin and Hobbes collection for yourself. Calvin and Hobbes is unlike anything produced today. It's entertaining, insightful, and suitable for all ages. Happy birthday, Calvin and Hobbes!
Friday, October 30, 2015
My Car
Car enthusiasts are asked a lot of questions. "What is your favorite car?" or, "what car do you recommend I buy?" A question that is less frequently asked is, "What kind of car do you have?" As connoisseurs of automobiles shouldn't it be expected that we own the best cars? Not necessarily. Sometimes fate and fortune put less than perfect cars into our possession. My car is a 2006 Chevy Malibu Maxx SS. I purchased it from a neighbor who was selling it before a move. He knew I needed a car and gave me a wonderful deal on it. I knew it was in excellent condition considering it was washed every weekend and sat on a mat inside my neighbor's garage. The car became mine on Halloween last year. Since then, it has become a valued travelling companion as I drive between home, work, and school.
The Malibu Maxx SS was introduced at a time when Chevrolet was proliferating its fabled Super Sport badge. Cobalts, HHRs, Impalas, Monte Carlos, and even Trailblazers were all getting the SS treatment. More than just a badge job, the SS transformation included an updated powertrain. At the heart of that is a 3.9 liter V6 engine making 240 horsepower. A three spoke leather wrapped steering wheel, sport cloth and leather seats, chrome trimmed instruments, twin exhaust pipes, 18 inch alloy wheels, a rear spoiler, side skirts, more aggressive front and rear clips and a honeycomb grill complete the visual differentiation from lesser models.
Performance and appearance is secondary to the best part of the Maxx body style, that being the second row seats. The seat backs recline in three positions and twin skylights with shades are much appreciated by occupants. Cargo capacity is a generous 23 cubic feet with the seats up and 41 cubic feet with the seats down.
The thing that I like the most about the Malibu Maxx SS is how exclusive it is. At best guess based on searching the Internet, only 2,899 were built in 2006 and 2,636 were sold. The car was only on sale for two years, so it can be estimated that no more than six thousand were ever built. Indeed I only ever recall seeing one other on the road. The driver of the other one gave me a friendly honk in acknowledgement as he drove past.
Everyone wants a flashy sports car to drive around in, but that is not always the most practical choice for certain climates. I am very happy with my car. It is a rare vehicle that I enjoy driving, and I hope it will serve me well for several more years.
The Malibu Maxx SS was introduced at a time when Chevrolet was proliferating its fabled Super Sport badge. Cobalts, HHRs, Impalas, Monte Carlos, and even Trailblazers were all getting the SS treatment. More than just a badge job, the SS transformation included an updated powertrain. At the heart of that is a 3.9 liter V6 engine making 240 horsepower. A three spoke leather wrapped steering wheel, sport cloth and leather seats, chrome trimmed instruments, twin exhaust pipes, 18 inch alloy wheels, a rear spoiler, side skirts, more aggressive front and rear clips and a honeycomb grill complete the visual differentiation from lesser models.
Performance and appearance is secondary to the best part of the Maxx body style, that being the second row seats. The seat backs recline in three positions and twin skylights with shades are much appreciated by occupants. Cargo capacity is a generous 23 cubic feet with the seats up and 41 cubic feet with the seats down.
The thing that I like the most about the Malibu Maxx SS is how exclusive it is. At best guess based on searching the Internet, only 2,899 were built in 2006 and 2,636 were sold. The car was only on sale for two years, so it can be estimated that no more than six thousand were ever built. Indeed I only ever recall seeing one other on the road. The driver of the other one gave me a friendly honk in acknowledgement as he drove past.
Everyone wants a flashy sports car to drive around in, but that is not always the most practical choice for certain climates. I am very happy with my car. It is a rare vehicle that I enjoy driving, and I hope it will serve me well for several more years.
Friday, October 9, 2015
Are Pixar's Glory Days Over?
When I was growing up, it appeared that Pixar Animation Studios was unstoppable. They churned out one smash hit after another on a regular basis. It was always refreshing to see a Pixar film, particularly when so many others are based on earlier films, or are adaptations from novels.
A character in Transformers: Age of Extinction accurately describes the movie industry nowadays as "sequels and remakes, bunch of crap." It's an inappropriate joke in a movie that is literally what this character is talking about, but I will cover my thoughts about Transformers at a later date. For now, let's talk about Pixar. Yesterday Pixar released a schedule of release dates for its upcoming films through 2019. After looking at the list of six films and noticing that four of them are sequels, I fear that Pixar is sliding away from innovative, thoughtful productions to making soulless money grabs meant to feed merchandising machines.
I have good reason to be concerned. Pixar is not exactly on a roll at the moment. I feel that the studio peaked with 2010's Toy Story 3. Up until then, almost every Pixar movie has received a Rotten Tomatoes ratings in the 90-100% range. After that, scores have been significantly lower. Brave and Monsters University each have a 78% rating, and Cars 2 has an abysmal 39% rating. Inside Out was a surprise at 98%, suggesting a return to form, but the future movies will determine whether the studio just got lucky this time around.
First up is Finding Dory, due on June 17, 2016. Of all the sequels, this is the one I have the highest hopes for. It's the only film that has potential to build upon its predecessor. Dory was a very likeable character in Finding Nemo despite not really getting her backstory explored in great detail. The sequel appears to go into that, and has the potential to make her into a more rounded character, while providing an opportunity to see how Marlin and Nemo have changed following the events of the first film. We were shown at the end of Finding Nemo that Marlin is less insecure about himself, and trusts Nemo's own judgment. It would be interesting to see if he maintains that characterization into the second film.
Next is Cars 3 for June 16, 2017. Unfortunately, I know exactly why this movie is being made. I believe that the first Cars was good. The use of cars to explain that life is more about the journey than the destination made sense. However, I believe one needed to be a bit of a car enthusiast and a NASCAR fan to get the most out of it. I, being just such an enthusiast, understood and appreciated all the cameos and Easter eggs scattered throughout the film. I have not seen Cars 2, but have no doubt it fully deserved its 39% rating on Rotten Tomatoes. I have full confidence that Cars 3 will likewise do little to improve the narrative merits of the franchise. That being said, these films have been a merchandising dream come true. I see all kinds of toys and clothes featuring characters from the Cars universe. It is entirely possible that a new generation of enthusiasts will be introduced to cars and racing through Cars. Every new character is a new opportunity to make more money from merchandise sales. Don't get me wrong, I want Pixar to make money, but I want it to be on the merits of movies themselves rather than the accompanying product lines.
Two years later on June 18, 2018, Toy Story 4 will hit theaters. This is without question, a mistake. Toy Story is the groundbreaking CGI masterpiece that jump started Pixar back in 1995. It is extremely fortunate that Toy Story 2 and Toy Story 3 have lived up to the expectations of the original. Each film built upon an overall narrative that began with realizing that you are a toy, and going on to examine what it means to be a toy, in particular the possibility of being replaced. Woody, Buzz, and the gang have gone through that arc with the best possible result, beginning again with a new owner. I like what Pixar has done since by making short TV specials featuring the characters having adventures in their new home, but there is little more that can be done at a theatrical level. I've heard that Toy Story 4 will focus on a romantic relationship between Woody and Bo Peep. I cringe just thinking about it.
Lastly, June 21, 2019 will be the debut of The Incredibles 2. Brad Bird is going to have his work cut out for him to write a story at least as good as the original. What made The Incredibles special was that the superhero aspect was secondary to the dynamic relationships between the characters. We got to see Mr. Incredible overcome his longing for the glory days and appreciate his life now with his family. Without something like that, The Incredibles 2 will be just another superhero movie in a saturated market. In addition, The Incredibles 2 will inevitably face comparisons to last year's Big Hero 6, another film that managed to inject the superhero genre with some genuine emotion to go with the thrilling action.
As of now, all these movies are still in the development stage and it is too early to say for sure how they will turn out. As I said before, Inside Out was a return to form, and I am cautiously optimistic about this Thanksgivings' The Good Dinosaur. However, sequels have traditionally not been Pixar's strong point. It's as if they come up with a brilliant idea, make a movie about it, but don't know where to spin the story next. The Toy Story trilogy works, but no other follow ups have had the same success as their originals. If there is nothing more to add, don't tinker with something that isn't broken. Unfortunately, the lure of an easy buck puts thoughts of maintaining a franchise's integrity out of people's heads, and we end up with an industry that spits out unoriginal mediocre movies. I pray that Pixar doesn't screw everything up.
A character in Transformers: Age of Extinction accurately describes the movie industry nowadays as "sequels and remakes, bunch of crap." It's an inappropriate joke in a movie that is literally what this character is talking about, but I will cover my thoughts about Transformers at a later date. For now, let's talk about Pixar. Yesterday Pixar released a schedule of release dates for its upcoming films through 2019. After looking at the list of six films and noticing that four of them are sequels, I fear that Pixar is sliding away from innovative, thoughtful productions to making soulless money grabs meant to feed merchandising machines.
I have good reason to be concerned. Pixar is not exactly on a roll at the moment. I feel that the studio peaked with 2010's Toy Story 3. Up until then, almost every Pixar movie has received a Rotten Tomatoes ratings in the 90-100% range. After that, scores have been significantly lower. Brave and Monsters University each have a 78% rating, and Cars 2 has an abysmal 39% rating. Inside Out was a surprise at 98%, suggesting a return to form, but the future movies will determine whether the studio just got lucky this time around.
First up is Finding Dory, due on June 17, 2016. Of all the sequels, this is the one I have the highest hopes for. It's the only film that has potential to build upon its predecessor. Dory was a very likeable character in Finding Nemo despite not really getting her backstory explored in great detail. The sequel appears to go into that, and has the potential to make her into a more rounded character, while providing an opportunity to see how Marlin and Nemo have changed following the events of the first film. We were shown at the end of Finding Nemo that Marlin is less insecure about himself, and trusts Nemo's own judgment. It would be interesting to see if he maintains that characterization into the second film.
Next is Cars 3 for June 16, 2017. Unfortunately, I know exactly why this movie is being made. I believe that the first Cars was good. The use of cars to explain that life is more about the journey than the destination made sense. However, I believe one needed to be a bit of a car enthusiast and a NASCAR fan to get the most out of it. I, being just such an enthusiast, understood and appreciated all the cameos and Easter eggs scattered throughout the film. I have not seen Cars 2, but have no doubt it fully deserved its 39% rating on Rotten Tomatoes. I have full confidence that Cars 3 will likewise do little to improve the narrative merits of the franchise. That being said, these films have been a merchandising dream come true. I see all kinds of toys and clothes featuring characters from the Cars universe. It is entirely possible that a new generation of enthusiasts will be introduced to cars and racing through Cars. Every new character is a new opportunity to make more money from merchandise sales. Don't get me wrong, I want Pixar to make money, but I want it to be on the merits of movies themselves rather than the accompanying product lines.
Two years later on June 18, 2018, Toy Story 4 will hit theaters. This is without question, a mistake. Toy Story is the groundbreaking CGI masterpiece that jump started Pixar back in 1995. It is extremely fortunate that Toy Story 2 and Toy Story 3 have lived up to the expectations of the original. Each film built upon an overall narrative that began with realizing that you are a toy, and going on to examine what it means to be a toy, in particular the possibility of being replaced. Woody, Buzz, and the gang have gone through that arc with the best possible result, beginning again with a new owner. I like what Pixar has done since by making short TV specials featuring the characters having adventures in their new home, but there is little more that can be done at a theatrical level. I've heard that Toy Story 4 will focus on a romantic relationship between Woody and Bo Peep. I cringe just thinking about it.
Lastly, June 21, 2019 will be the debut of The Incredibles 2. Brad Bird is going to have his work cut out for him to write a story at least as good as the original. What made The Incredibles special was that the superhero aspect was secondary to the dynamic relationships between the characters. We got to see Mr. Incredible overcome his longing for the glory days and appreciate his life now with his family. Without something like that, The Incredibles 2 will be just another superhero movie in a saturated market. In addition, The Incredibles 2 will inevitably face comparisons to last year's Big Hero 6, another film that managed to inject the superhero genre with some genuine emotion to go with the thrilling action.
As of now, all these movies are still in the development stage and it is too early to say for sure how they will turn out. As I said before, Inside Out was a return to form, and I am cautiously optimistic about this Thanksgivings' The Good Dinosaur. However, sequels have traditionally not been Pixar's strong point. It's as if they come up with a brilliant idea, make a movie about it, but don't know where to spin the story next. The Toy Story trilogy works, but no other follow ups have had the same success as their originals. If there is nothing more to add, don't tinker with something that isn't broken. Unfortunately, the lure of an easy buck puts thoughts of maintaining a franchise's integrity out of people's heads, and we end up with an industry that spits out unoriginal mediocre movies. I pray that Pixar doesn't screw everything up.
Friday, September 18, 2015
Is Cool Blue the New Hot?
Yo, listen up, here's a story. Right now the 2015 Frankfurt Motor Show
is in full force. Many new production and concept cars have debuted in
the past few days to great acclaim from automotive enthusiasts. The
biggest trend I can take away from the slew of debuts is that blue is a very
popular color for show cars.
From the Frankfurt
show alone, the Audi S4, the Bugatti Vision Gran Turismo Concept, the Ferrari
488 Spider, the Jaguar F-Pace, and the Lamborghini Huracan LP610-4 Spyder are
on display in varying shades of blue. Earlier this year, Ford debuted the
GT supercar, the F-150 Raptor, and the Shelby Mustang GT350R all in blue.
The Lexus GS F has so far only been displayed at shows and in press photos
painted blue.
Car and Driver published a piece looking at the various colors one can specify on a car. The study found that there are 1284 distinct colors on the market. This total accounts for overlap across multiple brands, for example, Crystal Red Tintcoat is available across multiple General Motors brands. Of all the brands selling cars in the United States for 2015, all but one of them offer a shade of blue. The lone abstainer is Alfa Romeo, whose 4C only comes in black, gray, two reds, and two whites. The 4C Spider will add a yellow to the mix when it goes on sale. Blue is the second most varied color on the market with 191 shades. Only grayscale with 237 shades is higher. Despite the popularity of blue on a car maker's pallet, it is not terribly popular on the road. Last year auto industry paint giant PPG determined that white is the most popular color for the fourth year in a row, accounting for 28% of all new cars to roll off dealer lots. Blue ranked even lower than natural colors and red with a take rate of 7%.
Something is not adding up. Why are car makers using blue to advertise their newest products if the color doesn't reflect customer purchases? I can only speculate as to why this might be the case. Perhaps people fear that blue will hurt the resale value of their car. Some cars simply look better in other colors. For example Ferraris tend to look best in red or yellow, but here is the company itself disregarding that by showing off its latest car in bright blue. Maybe people don't want to draw too much attention to their cars. My mom chose blue for her 2013 Honda Fit as a means to stand out. Suffice to say, it looks good, infinitely better than gray, silver, black, or white. But not everyone is as free spirited. Bankrate describes blue as a practical happy color for many; more lively than grayscale, but not as in your face as red or yellow. According to Bankrate, blue projects stability, truthfulness, and serenity, and acts like a flash of blue sky against gray roads.
Will blue ever reach the popularity in people's driveways as it does at auto shows? Who knows. But as a way to express one's desire to be coolly different, there is no other color better suited to the task.
 |
| Ferrari 488 Spider proudly wears its blue paint |
Car and Driver published a piece looking at the various colors one can specify on a car. The study found that there are 1284 distinct colors on the market. This total accounts for overlap across multiple brands, for example, Crystal Red Tintcoat is available across multiple General Motors brands. Of all the brands selling cars in the United States for 2015, all but one of them offer a shade of blue. The lone abstainer is Alfa Romeo, whose 4C only comes in black, gray, two reds, and two whites. The 4C Spider will add a yellow to the mix when it goes on sale. Blue is the second most varied color on the market with 191 shades. Only grayscale with 237 shades is higher. Despite the popularity of blue on a car maker's pallet, it is not terribly popular on the road. Last year auto industry paint giant PPG determined that white is the most popular color for the fourth year in a row, accounting for 28% of all new cars to roll off dealer lots. Blue ranked even lower than natural colors and red with a take rate of 7%.
Something is not adding up. Why are car makers using blue to advertise their newest products if the color doesn't reflect customer purchases? I can only speculate as to why this might be the case. Perhaps people fear that blue will hurt the resale value of their car. Some cars simply look better in other colors. For example Ferraris tend to look best in red or yellow, but here is the company itself disregarding that by showing off its latest car in bright blue. Maybe people don't want to draw too much attention to their cars. My mom chose blue for her 2013 Honda Fit as a means to stand out. Suffice to say, it looks good, infinitely better than gray, silver, black, or white. But not everyone is as free spirited. Bankrate describes blue as a practical happy color for many; more lively than grayscale, but not as in your face as red or yellow. According to Bankrate, blue projects stability, truthfulness, and serenity, and acts like a flash of blue sky against gray roads.
Will blue ever reach the popularity in people's driveways as it does at auto shows? Who knows. But as a way to express one's desire to be coolly different, there is no other color better suited to the task.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)