|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
May 29, 2009 - 1:28 PM
|
|
|
By: |
manderley
(Member)
|
For decades and decades, it was common for the studios NOT to use real product identifications in the movies. If the character opened the refrigerator or cupboard door, you never saw any product you recognized. Money shown on camera was fake. The cereal box and the milk bottle the character placed on the breakfast table was fake. The on-camera newspaper was fake. And on and on. I think part of all of this stemmed from the fact that the studios didn't want to endorse any product for free---they'd sign up their stars to do it in print ads for real money which accrued to them in that medium. They also didn't want to be sued if the product was used negatively within the scene, itself. Today, everyone goes for product placement, and it's a big business, and, at least on smaller pictures, lays off some of the cost of the picture's production. But those contracts are very finely written, and sponsors still have qualms and demands about how their product will be seen or used on camera and those are laid out very carefully in the contracts. The smart sponsors will then get tie-ins like THE LOVE BUG!!! There is a fascinating short subject which runs on TCM occasionally, called JUNGLE SAFARI. It is a Technicolor film, shot simultaneously in Africa in 1949 with the shooting of the 1950 MGM production, KING SOLOMON'S MINES, which shows the massive fleet of Dodge trucks and support vehicles used for hauling equipment and personnel across the grueling African landscape, from rocky dry creekbeds and ravines, up-hill and down-dale, through muddy and jungle-y terrain---with all these vehicles holding up incredibly well over these difficult conditions---all to get those "necessary" shots for the film. I'm sure the studio DID use those trucks for the film, but you can bet that they were also donated, or practically donated, by DODGE, to the studio in exchange for the the studio's production and release of this short film to the buying public.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm still not getting what it is that gripes most of you about actual product signs along the streets, in the homes, etc., in films. These signs are in our everyday lives...do you want made-up product signs? WHEN A SCENE is specifically written to showcase a product it is a COMMERCIAL. example: MOONRAKER features a car ride up a winding road in Brazil. At EVERY turn there is a blatantly placed BILLBOARD for another product. This scene was written into the script just to showcase the products. example: in GOLDENEYE when Q introduces Bond to his new car, a Mercedes sports car. Its only there to plug the product as 007 simply drives it away. Compare that to Q showing him hi Aston Martin in GOLDFINGER. The scene is important to the plot so it doesn't come across as product placement. Ron, to quote Christian Bale..."what dont you #$#$$#%$ understand?" Love ya' bruce
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
May 30, 2009 - 12:38 PM
|
|
|
By: |
ScottDS
(Member)
|
Not a placement, but I love how many "no fur" signs are littered throughout ASSASSINS. Guess it's ok to kill a zillion people, but no chinchilas! Apparently, Richard Donner has become a big anti-fur person. In the You Will Believe: The Cinematic Saga of Superman documentary, he's wearing a pin with the word "fur" in a circle with a line through it. And the Donner Cut of Superman II has this message in the end credits: "Since the making of this film in the late 1970s, a greater awareness has developed regarding the cruelty to animals in connection with the fur business, and the health risks associated with smoking and second hand smoke. Therefore, I do not condone the use of tobacco and fur products as depicted in this film." -Richard Donner Having said that, when I was little (I'm 26 so I'm talking about the late 80s/early 90s), HBO aired a special titled Buy Me That (and later a sequel titled Buy Me That Too) hosted by Jim Fyfe who also appeared in HBO's educational series Encyclopedia (and I seem to be the only one who remembers it). Anyway, they actually talked about product placement so I've known what it is for years. They showed clips of then recent films (like King Ralph when he goes to McDonalds or Burger King... one of those). Ever since then, it's been something I notice. Sometimes it's blatant (cough, The Island), other times, not so much. I find it more distracting when the product is fake (like on a sitcom when the can just says "Cola" even though it's obvious the art department simply altered an existing Pepsi can).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm still not getting what it is that gripes most of you about actual product signs along the streets, in the homes, etc., in films. These signs are in our everyday lives...do you want made-up product signs? WHEN A SCENE is specifically written to showcase a product it is a COMMERCIAL. Casino Royale has that scene in the Bahamas where the rookie Bond is driving up the coast and is checking his messages on his Sony Ericcson™ mobile phone. That scene was lifted and dropped into a commercial that very same year. What did that teach me? When I eventually get a mobile phone of my own, it *has* to be a Sony Ericsson™, because Daniel Craig used one! the Bond films have really degenerated due to this. TOMMOROW NEVER DIES was one big commercial; months before the film even opened, ads featuringBrosnan shilling for watches, booze, cars, ad nauseum, were unavoidable. Then the film itself continued the disgrace; the scene where Q gives 007 his 'new' BMW will suffice one reason i am not the fan i used to be
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
VIOLENT CITY there is a scene where Bronson has set up a sniper's nest on a hillside overlooking a race track. On the ridge above him, directly BEHIND him is a Pan Am sign There is nothing else on the hilltop. Nothing. But, Chuck just happened to settle in front of that sign, It's Bondian in its blatant audacity the whole film is filled with Pan Am plugs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|