Poster Blue
October 14, 2008 8:50 AM Subscribe
Antrepo Design have created an alternate set of film posters regarding the 'brand integration' ie product placement in a number of movies. Lynch on the matter (NSFW).
Product placement is lame. Unfortunately, so are these posters.
posted by doctor_negative at 9:01 AM on October 14, 2008
posted by doctor_negative at 9:01 AM on October 14, 2008
Are they selling irony or rebellion? I can't tell! One thing I know for sure is that helvetica+kerning+caps is played. out. I use that stuff for banner ads because I'm incredibly lazy and unoriginal.
posted by cowbellemoo at 9:16 AM on October 14, 2008 [2 favorites]
posted by cowbellemoo at 9:16 AM on October 14, 2008 [2 favorites]
some poison tastes bad. some tastes good. it's still poison. I'm with Mr. Lynch.
posted by philip-random at 9:17 AM on October 14, 2008
posted by philip-random at 9:17 AM on October 14, 2008
Maybe now Dennis Hopper will stop telling that story about how David Lynch won't swear?
posted by shakespeherian at 9:19 AM on October 14, 2008
posted by shakespeherian at 9:19 AM on October 14, 2008
Product placement sucks. It's also how a lot of people are able to get their movies and tv shows made. I, for one, wouldn't have a career without it. It's fine for guys like David Lynch to bitch about it, but for those of us who don't approach his level of brilliance (and are young filmmakers working in a vastly different financial landscape than he started in), incorporating brands seamlessly into stories ensures that we have jobs. While everyone would like to think differently, movies are mostly not art -- they're commerce. The instant I figured that one out, I suddenly had a career. If some art sneaks in there every now and then, great.
posted by incessant at 9:22 AM on October 14, 2008 [3 favorites]
posted by incessant at 9:22 AM on October 14, 2008 [3 favorites]
Maybe now Dennis Hopper will stop telling that story about how David Lynch won't swear?
Maybe he'll sell us a pension or something.
posted by Artw at 9:27 AM on October 14, 2008
Maybe he'll sell us a pension or something.
posted by Artw at 9:27 AM on October 14, 2008
On the other hand, what companies would have liked to advertise in, say, Eraserhead?
'We've got Perdue Chicken tonight. Strangest damn things. They're man made. Little damn things. Smaller than my fist. But they're new!' And then Henry cuts into one as it writhes around and thick dark viscous liquid oozes out.
posted by shakespeherian at 9:39 AM on October 14, 2008 [2 favorites]
'We've got Perdue Chicken tonight. Strangest damn things. They're man made. Little damn things. Smaller than my fist. But they're new!' And then Henry cuts into one as it writhes around and thick dark viscous liquid oozes out.
posted by shakespeherian at 9:39 AM on October 14, 2008 [2 favorites]
incessant, I don't honestly think most people are bothered by minor product placement. Seeing a can of Coke is better than seeing a can of NuCola (slogan: It's atomic!). It's just that a lot of the time it's not "seamlessly" integrated. It's a pair of sneakers prominently featured, with five seconds of screen time and a comment by a character; an awkward reference to T-Mobile™ Brand Cellular Service, and so on. I don't think that level of exposure and whoredom is necessary or desirable.
posted by sonic meat machine at 9:43 AM on October 14, 2008 [1 favorite]
posted by sonic meat machine at 9:43 AM on October 14, 2008 [1 favorite]
I think, sonic meat machine, that the type of placement you describe is going to fade away, as it is so horsey and obvious that it may actually put people off the product.
posted by Mister_A at 10:18 AM on October 14, 2008
posted by Mister_A at 10:18 AM on October 14, 2008
The use of Helvetica, simple design, black background, and reflection on the bottom reminds me of an Apple product. Perhaps they sponsored these posters.
posted by adamrice at 10:26 AM on October 14, 2008
posted by adamrice at 10:26 AM on October 14, 2008
I only despise it when it's really noticable - the first thing Tony Stark does is chug down a greasy burger king burger when he gets back home? Fail. It was so out of place and simply obnoxious - hell Robert Downey Jr looked as if he was about to hurl.
Or ... that Dell ad a few years back with John Travolta as the villain? Oh yeah, Swordfish...
posted by jkaczor at 10:46 AM on October 14, 2008
Or ... that Dell ad a few years back with John Travolta as the villain? Oh yeah, Swordfish...
posted by jkaczor at 10:46 AM on October 14, 2008
yeah...supersuck...super lazy design...i was expecting variations of the originals with all the products crammed in...these just seem pointless...
posted by sexyrobot at 10:51 AM on October 14, 2008
posted by sexyrobot at 10:51 AM on October 14, 2008
While everyone would like to think differently, movies are mostly not art -- they're commerce...If some art sneaks in there every now and then, great.
Wife: Was that some art there? Did we see someone expressing something?
jimmythefish: When Will Smith chugged that Mountain Dew and threw it out his brand-new Mustang as he screeched through post-apocalyptic New York where somehow the billboards are still advertising Gap jeans in stark clarity, it wasn't art until he spilled some on his Banana Republic poly-cotton blend shirt. That bit, I think, was commenting on man's inhumanity to man. It was art from 8:31 to 8:34.
posted by jimmythefish at 11:33 AM on October 14, 2008 [1 favorite]
Wife: Was that some art there? Did we see someone expressing something?
jimmythefish: When Will Smith chugged that Mountain Dew and threw it out his brand-new Mustang as he screeched through post-apocalyptic New York where somehow the billboards are still advertising Gap jeans in stark clarity, it wasn't art until he spilled some on his Banana Republic poly-cotton blend shirt. That bit, I think, was commenting on man's inhumanity to man. It was art from 8:31 to 8:34.
posted by jimmythefish at 11:33 AM on October 14, 2008 [1 favorite]
I actually deal with a bunch of this stuff in my job.
The problem is the way that it happens, not that it does it happen. We live in a world surrounded by products and so it's natural for them to show up in movies, if it's you know, natural... it just almost never happens that way.
If A) a filmmaker was just filming a scene and products naturally showed up and then they went to a company and said advertising for you give us money, then that's how it would be.
but b) that's not how it is whatsoever. You just can't do it. They own the copyright and could sue you in a heartbeat (and in fact did for years. that's why you'd spend countless money blurring out labels).
It c) all has to be pre-arranged and the filmmakers have pretty much nothing to do with it. The producers and studio marketing departments do. That's why you get car chases/transformers with shitty cars or people drinking shitty beer. I remember a great thing in a Dawson's creek episode (I didn't watch the show, this was incidental) where they were all drinking Seattle's Best Coffee all over Boston. Never mind at the time there weren't ANY Seattle'S Best Coffee stores in the city. Plus EVERYONE drinks Dunkin Donuts coffee. To me that's the most egregious. When you suspend the very reality of what you're doing FOR the product.
d) we all remember I, Robot
e) it's hard to really do it and talk about the product and seem clever
f) it's not going to stop. Movies are risky as shit and ANY WAY to bring in money is nothing but a way to lower the risk.
g) Lynch mind you constantly uses products and discussions of products in his movies. The Heiniken/PBR debate? But it's not financially motivated, it's artistically motivated. Even if it's kind of a silly artistic thing. But it's still great.
h) i dunno, there has to be a happy medium and directors need a little more say. they can put their foot down a bunch but usually it's not endearing to the studio
posted by Lacking Subtlety at 11:44 AM on October 14, 2008
The problem is the way that it happens, not that it does it happen. We live in a world surrounded by products and so it's natural for them to show up in movies, if it's you know, natural... it just almost never happens that way.
If A) a filmmaker was just filming a scene and products naturally showed up and then they went to a company and said advertising for you give us money, then that's how it would be.
but b) that's not how it is whatsoever. You just can't do it. They own the copyright and could sue you in a heartbeat (and in fact did for years. that's why you'd spend countless money blurring out labels).
It c) all has to be pre-arranged and the filmmakers have pretty much nothing to do with it. The producers and studio marketing departments do. That's why you get car chases/transformers with shitty cars or people drinking shitty beer. I remember a great thing in a Dawson's creek episode (I didn't watch the show, this was incidental) where they were all drinking Seattle's Best Coffee all over Boston. Never mind at the time there weren't ANY Seattle'S Best Coffee stores in the city. Plus EVERYONE drinks Dunkin Donuts coffee. To me that's the most egregious. When you suspend the very reality of what you're doing FOR the product.
d) we all remember I, Robot
e) it's hard to really do it and talk about the product and seem clever
f) it's not going to stop. Movies are risky as shit and ANY WAY to bring in money is nothing but a way to lower the risk.
g) Lynch mind you constantly uses products and discussions of products in his movies. The Heiniken/PBR debate? But it's not financially motivated, it's artistically motivated. Even if it's kind of a silly artistic thing. But it's still great.
h) i dunno, there has to be a happy medium and directors need a little more say. they can put their foot down a bunch but usually it's not endearing to the studio
posted by Lacking Subtlety at 11:44 AM on October 14, 2008
I only despise it when it's really noticable - the first thing Tony Stark does is chug down a greasy burger king burger when he gets back home? Fail. It was so out of place and simply obnoxious - hell Robert Downey Jr looked as if he was about to hurl.
Or ... that Dell ad a few years back with John Travolta as the villain? Oh yeah, Swordfish...
posted by jkaczor at 10:46 AM on October 14 [+] [!]
Favreau was against that with burger king, but Robert Downey Jr okayed it because burger king saved his life... really... he had just woken from a binge, gotten an awful burger king burger and was about to eat that nasty piece of crap and he realized for the first time that he had to go to rehab.
To this day he credits them with saving his life and therefore agreed.
Whatever kind of meta statement he's making I don't know, but whatever.
posted by Lacking Subtlety at 11:47 AM on October 14, 2008
Or ... that Dell ad a few years back with John Travolta as the villain? Oh yeah, Swordfish...
posted by jkaczor at 10:46 AM on October 14 [+] [!]
Favreau was against that with burger king, but Robert Downey Jr okayed it because burger king saved his life... really... he had just woken from a binge, gotten an awful burger king burger and was about to eat that nasty piece of crap and he realized for the first time that he had to go to rehab.
To this day he credits them with saving his life and therefore agreed.
Whatever kind of meta statement he's making I don't know, but whatever.
posted by Lacking Subtlety at 11:47 AM on October 14, 2008
While everyone would like to think differently, movies are mostly not art -- they're commerce...If some art sneaks in there every now and then, great.
I don't know what art is but I do know what works for me and it's generally NOT the kind of formulaic crap I think you're getting at here (ie: most movies). Most movies suck as do most pop songs, most computer games, most of pretty much everything. That's fine, avoiding crap is a survival skill I picked up a long time ago.
What I HATE is that I, as a movie maker, am not free to use the world I actually live in, in my work ... without going through a grinding, entropic, expensive permission process. I can't frame a scene against a Nike billboard. I can't shoot a scene in a coffee shop that just happens to have a Madonna song playing in the background. I can't have two guys arguing about what's better: Coke or Pepsi.
This is wrong.
posted by philip-random at 12:19 PM on October 14, 2008 [1 favorite]
I don't know what art is but I do know what works for me and it's generally NOT the kind of formulaic crap I think you're getting at here (ie: most movies). Most movies suck as do most pop songs, most computer games, most of pretty much everything. That's fine, avoiding crap is a survival skill I picked up a long time ago.
What I HATE is that I, as a movie maker, am not free to use the world I actually live in, in my work ... without going through a grinding, entropic, expensive permission process. I can't frame a scene against a Nike billboard. I can't shoot a scene in a coffee shop that just happens to have a Madonna song playing in the background. I can't have two guys arguing about what's better: Coke or Pepsi.
This is wrong.
posted by philip-random at 12:19 PM on October 14, 2008 [1 favorite]
It's a difficult situation, to be sure philip-random. I was going to post something about the reasonableness of firms wanting to protect their assets (brands) from being portrayed in a dim light on screen, but instead what I want to say is, how did the producers of American Psycho get away with associating Pat Bateman with Huey Lewis and Phil Collins? I can't recall if they actually played songs or showed album covers, that would certainly make a difference one would think. Even so, it seems like exactly the sort of thing companies are trying to avoid.
posted by Mister_A at 1:56 PM on October 14, 2008
posted by Mister_A at 1:56 PM on October 14, 2008
it's hard to really do it and talk about the product and seem clever
There was an episode of 30 Rock where Tinay Fey and Alec Bladwin are waiting on someone, and while they are, she asks him about his cell phone or pda or something. He goes into this long spiel about how great it is, bluetooth this, speakerphone that. They talk about it for like 15 full seconds, enough that it's weird. Then they both stop, look at the camera, and Tina Fey says "Can we have our money now?"
posted by nushustu at 2:50 PM on October 14, 2008
There was an episode of 30 Rock where Tinay Fey and Alec Bladwin are waiting on someone, and while they are, she asks him about his cell phone or pda or something. He goes into this long spiel about how great it is, bluetooth this, speakerphone that. They talk about it for like 15 full seconds, enough that it's weird. Then they both stop, look at the camera, and Tina Fey says "Can we have our money now?"
posted by nushustu at 2:50 PM on October 14, 2008
I agree philip-random. I dont know how we got to this place - but it seems that there is a one way conversation between the corporations and the public. They hit us with advertisements from every angle without our permission yet we are not allowed to talk back to them without their permission. Except on the internet. Fuck you Sharky's Treasure Chest.
posted by meech at 3:06 PM on October 14, 2008 [1 favorite]
posted by meech at 3:06 PM on October 14, 2008 [1 favorite]
Those posters were really boring. Pre-clicking, I expected the posters to USE the brands in question, not just list them. Yawn.
posted by rokusan at 4:42 PM on October 15, 2008
posted by rokusan at 4:42 PM on October 15, 2008
And I laughed at Downey's Burger King scene, since I knew that story. The in-joke saved me from flinching too hard at the product placement.
posted by rokusan at 4:43 PM on October 15, 2008
posted by rokusan at 4:43 PM on October 15, 2008
« Older Rocketboom Founder Fighting for Father's Life | Make Your Own Flash Game Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by sonic meat machine at 8:58 AM on October 14, 2008