Lordmandeep Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 Apple doesn't pay for product placement, though. Apple doesn't pay for product placement, though. They don't need to. The cool people promote it for them. Its not ethical reason why they dont, its just they dont have to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ezen Baklattan Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 One word : APPLE. Except for Sony movies for very obvious reasons, Apple products have been present for the last 15 years in 98% of American films, from blockbusters, to comedies, to Sundance indies to horror and everything in between, every fucking time, it s an Apple computer they are using. Steve Jobs was a very smart salesman. So basically in Epic, that animated movie about tiny warriors protecting the forest, the characters use an iPhone to save the day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grim22 Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 (edited) One word : APPLE. Except for Sony movies for very obvious reasons, Apple products have been present for the last 15 years in 98% of American films, from blockbusters, to comedies, to Sundance indies to horror and everything in between, every fucking time, it s an Apple computer they are using. Steve Jobs was a very smart salesman. Apple doesn't pay, they get promotion free of cost. The most successful "free of cost" promotion was probably Ray-Ban in Men in Black. Edited June 10, 2015 by grim22 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Scottb Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 I don't really care, as long as it fits with the movie. In fact I find that some product placement makes movies feel more realistic to me rather than using generic made up products. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CJohn Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 Walter Mitty had too much. Besides that one it never bothered me. Hell, I barely even notice it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baumer Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 It makes a film more believable when they are drinking Coke instead of Bob's cola. Never got the fuss about product placement. We all use the same products but for some reason film makers or producers are Satan if they show the Ferrari symbol. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avatree Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 The most successful "free of cost" promotion was probably Ray-Ban in Men in Black. Men in Black?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dementeleus Posted June 10, 2015 Author Share Posted June 10, 2015 (edited) It makes a film more believable when they are drinking Coke instead of Bob's cola. Never got the fuss about product placement. We all use the same products but for some reason film makers or producers are Satan if they show the Ferrari symbol. I think the breaking point for most people is if the logo/product/discussion becomes so overt it starts becoming a distraction from the story, or if it's for a product that simply makes no sense given the location/character using it. Edited June 10, 2015 by Telemachos 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baumer Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 I think the breaking point for most people is if the logo/product/discussion becomes so overt it starts becoming a distraction from the story, or if it's for a product that simply makes no sense given the location/character using it. But why does that bother people? I understand if you have a movie set on the Mars and a can of Coke shows up on that planet, then yes, that would be distracting and stupid, but what is it that bothers people about it otherwise? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeeCee Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 (edited) The story of the upside down Apple logo is funny. http://thenextweb.com/apple/2012/05/21/steve-jobs-sex-in-the-city-and-the-tale-of-the-upside-down-apple-logo/ Edited June 10, 2015 by DeeCee Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deep Wang Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 But why does that bother people? I understand if you have a movie set on the Mars and a can of Coke shows up on that planet, then yes, that would be distracting and stupid, but what is it that bothers people about it otherwise? How about M&M's instead of a coke? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kvikk Lunsj Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 If Coke wanted to fuck with you, they could do exactly that. Or if Coke is a sponsor, maybe you want to avoid anything that would annoy them. If you're gonna prominently display/use another company's logo or product, you have to have their permission. Sure, you could try to sneak by and not do it, but if that company found out and wanted to cause trouble, you're basically bankrupted (assuming you were a small production company trying to do this). Legal's whole job is to categorically avoid the situation to begin with. Nolan's movie Following had Dunkin Donuts and a Batman logo. I wounder what Dunkin Donuts and DC thought of that. DC should sue Nolan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Marston Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 Watching this 7.000 costing movie called Primer that had Chevrolet and U Haul logos. If they got product placement deals would that more than cover the whole 7,000 budget? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Marston Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 But why does that bother people? I understand if you have a movie set on the Mars and a can of Coke shows up on that planet, then yes, that would be distracting and stupid, but what is it that bothers people about it otherwise? I think people on the internet like to just use it to bash certain films and director. Though will ignore it in other films 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deep Wang Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 Watching this 7.000 costing movie called Primer that had Chevrolet and U Haul logos. If they got product placement deals would that more than cover the whole 7,000 budget? I'm sure there are some movies that aren't worth their time to try and bust. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozymandias Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 I don't mind product placement at all if its woven in seamlessly and not overt. Its when its obvious that a product is only there because the owner of that product paid the filmmakers and/or studio a shitload of money is when I find it obnoxious/distracting. The product placement in Man of Steel was pushing it, and I heard the product placement in Transformers 4 was off the charts stupid, so much so that I almost watched it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeeCee Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 I don't mind product placement at all if its woven in seamlessly and not overt. Its when its obvious that a product is only there because the owner of that product paid the filmmakers and/or studio a shitload of money is when I find it obnoxious/distracting. The product placement in Man of Steel was pushing it, and I heard the product placement in Transformers 4 was off the charts stupid, so much so that I almost watched it. I have this sudden desire for a Bud Light. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasmmi Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 Never got the fuss about product placement. We all use the same products but for some reason film makers or producers are Satan if they show the Ferrari symbol. I agree. It needs to also fit character though too. If the guys from furies 7 are all driving ferraris that makes sense that those people would want those cars. However if a character is playing a french millionaire gourmet art critic/snob and he orders a Corona at the hotel bar of the Ritz hotel. He just wouldn't do that and that could pull somebody or of the movie whereas him ordering a glass of jacques selosse substance would make more sense and be fine even though it's also a brand albeit infinitely smaller 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bartonfink Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 Naturally we live in ultra-commercial world and branded goods are everywhere. Movies are just mirror of the status quo. Eventually filmmaking is not just pure art, but more like output of compromise, fruit of artistic vision & coldly commercial calculation. I don't give a shit about product placement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dashrendar44 Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 (edited) Yeah, product placement don't bother you...Do you know that people began to smoke just because they saw glamourous actors and actresses smoking tobacco and such cigarette brands all over the screen in the Hollywood golden era, the worming message that it was the coolest thing ever to smoke, then creating a surge in throat and lung cancers throughout the years? There has been studies how movies and entertainment influence youth in starting to smoke. See how Mad Men surf on that trend and all the idiots that try to be as "cool" as Don Draper Corporate branding invading the movies contribute to shape the world we live in as people mirror the entertainment they're showcased. We're already living in Minority Report's world. Basically, a shallow world where everyone sports a polluting car just because x actor has a Chevy, diet on junk food and heavy calories because x actress is a Starbucks addict, surf the internet using devices made by slave workers in Asia because x actor is an Apple junkie. To indulge and allow that, you contribute to that. Edited June 10, 2015 by MADash Rendar 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
