Yes, today I went to the theatre early and bought six tickets to see Borat the Movie. After reading the reviews in the paper this week (each and every single one of them overwhelmingly positive!) and some reviewers even going so far as to say it is the funniest movie they’ve ever seen (better than Caddyshack??), I’m really looking forward to it.

Alex and I, and some of the old CHUM TV pals are getting together tonight to have a good laugh, hence the half dozen tickets. I’ll post my “no-spoilers” review tonight or tomorrow as an update to this post.

Don’t like Borat? Jump on the Stop Borat bandwagon, which clearly has nothing at all to do with marketing the movie, and everything to do with having it removed from theatres. Can’t get enough of Borat? Check him out on MySpace, for plenty of YouTube hilarity.

Later: Well, it certainly was funny, start to finish. Like I said, I don’t want to play spoils for anyone planning to see it, but I have to say this; Sacha Baron Cohen makes more sacrifices for his comedy than any other comedian on the planet today. And yes, that means you too, Johnny Knoxville.

He channels Andy Kauffman, at times, with his unflinching dedication to staying in character (see any talk-show in America this week for examples of this; Cohen will appear only as Borat) and his penchant for pure shock value. Political correctness has been refreshingly abandoned for the duration of the film, and almost no group is safe from some form of ridicule.

One thing that i found a bit disappointing is that I had seen many of the gags in the film. I wasn’t exactly perusing the net for all things Borat, but I did see several trailers for the film, and I was in on a surprising number of jokes before they materialized. The thunderous roars of laughter from the rest of the audience made me wish that I wasn’t; hence my desire to keep this review “details free.”

Still, there were plenty of surprises; like when Borat visits a Confederate antique gift shop, and the ensuing gags have nothing at all to do with the obvious potential for politically-charged conflict.

Another item of note was the complete lack of actor credits, aside from Cohen and his sidekick Producer Azamat Bagatov. Everyone else is presumably an unsuspecting participant in the fun- having already signed their release form, thereby volunteering their dignity in exchange for a few laughs at their expense. I for one believe that there were several people “in on” the gags, but the beauty of the film is that you get to make up your own mind about what’s real and what isn’t.

If anyone else has seen it and wants to add their input, I’d love to hear what you thought.

Via Rob Cottingham of the Social Signal blog and Darren Barefoot, a Vancouver-based company called GiveMeaning is taking the old Unicef coin-collecting box concept to the next level.

This is cool for so many reasons; you can trace the donated money from the source right to how the charity spends it, and the “moderator” of the process is a small child; old enough to know how to operate an online blog, and to learn the importance of donating to charity:

Each BankBox has a unique serial number. At a secure  web site, children enter their box’s serial number and a password they’ve been assigned. Each child chooses a cartoon avatar and gets her or his own web page (GiveMeaning wants to protect children’s privacy, so photos aren’t used and pages are reviewed by the organization before they go live). The child chooses any charity to receive the money they’ve raised, and reports on how much they raise.

Cooler yet, each box comes with tear-off cards that kids can give to every neighbour who makes a donation. The cards also have the serial number printed on them, so donors can see the child’s web page and where their money went – and have a chance to donate again.

Once GiveMeaning collects the money and disburses it to charities, the recipients are encouraged to post a letter on the child’s web page explaining how they used the money.

Add this to the number of reasons why I miss trick-or-treating. There might even still be time to sign up, kids. More info on the project (still in its ‘pilot’ stage) here.

This is more of a business-related post than anything else, and I can’t lie; it’s a stop-gap between entries of my copywriting series, the next part of which is fairly large in scope, so it’s been sitting in the hopper as a draft that I revisit whenever I get time.

Instead, I just wanted to sing the praises of 37 Signals, who provide an excellent selection of business management software. On Nathaniel’s (NSHB) reccomendation, I started using Backpack a few months back, and it has been great. But recently I took on a client where I’m working as a third party contractor, and they’re using the full version of Basecamp.

The Project Manager, myself and the client have been back and forth several times daily, with all of our conversations neatly organized in one place, with different topics, etc. As the copywriter, I’ve made great use of the writeboards feature to upload drafts of my work. I have to say, I love Basecamp. If you’re using an archaic system for CRM, especially if that system is offline (what are you thinking?), then definitely check it out. I’ll be buying an implementing it for my needs in no time.

They offer free services if you want to ‘test the water’ first, so to speak, so you can check them out risk and investment free. Not a bad deal. If you’ve used any of these products, or something that you think is superior, let’s hear from you in the comments. I have yet to commit to a complete CRM solution, and I’m open to suggestions. (I’m not paid to evangelize 37 Signals, for what it’s worth)

Update: Eerily enough, Darren references Basecamp today too, just with a more critical eye, and a raises a good question:

What obligations do web-based applications like Basecamp have in terms of their customer data? Should they store it indefinitely or delete it when I stop paying them?

That should cause a fairly lively debate. Your thoughts?