Product Placement

[Heretic]

It doesn't matter if the idea sprang from a company ad execs mind and they went out and hired a screenwriter and director (though that IS probably coming in the near future). I have no knowledge about that particular film...but I'd be shocked if Google didn't fork over some serious cash. And frankly, I bet that part of the reason why it bombed is because people (possibly subconsciously) thought they were being asked to pay to see a commercial.

 

[Ultimatehero]

It doesn't matter if the idea sprang from a company ad execs mind and they went out and hired a screenwriter and director (though that IS probably coming in the near future). I have no knowledge about that particular film...but I'd be shocked if Google didn't fork over some serious cash. And frankly, I bet that part of the reason why it bombed is because people (possibly subconsciously) thought they were being asked to pay to see a commercial.

If you've just read what I said it didn't spring from an ad execs' mind - I said it sprang from Vince Vaughn's mind and he had to get permission from Google in order to make it.

The ending though is sadly most likely correct. I say sadly because the idea came from an entirely creative place without thinking of product placement at all. And that the world has gotten to the place where it thinks seeing any product in a movie is product placement when that's not the case at all.

To me, the creative team should be able to do what the creative team wants to do. And if I want a Burger King in my story because I think it will help further what I want to say and the characters, by god darn it - I'm going to have that BK!

To those pissed about product placement, how the above paragraph may have read to some -- "I'm going to have a BK in Mighty Max because it makes all of you think you want to go eat some BK! GNIKREGRUB_GNIKREGRUB_GNIKREGRUB!!!"

Also, interesting note - IM didn't have a BK placement either, that came from RDJ wanting an in-joke. One of the things that made him want to quit his drug habit was getting a burger from BK when he thought "what the hell am I doing at this place?! I have to quit!" So that's why the BK is there. It marked what inspired him to quit taking drugs, and it marks the film that epitomizes his comeback. But many possibly think that was product placement.

To me, there's a difference.

 

[Heretic]

If you've just read what I said it didn't spring from an ad execs' mind - I said it sprang from Vince Vaughn's mind and he had to get permission from Google in order to make it.

The ending though is sadly most likely correct. I say sadly because the idea came from an entirely creative place without thinking of product placement at all. And that the world has gotten to the place where it thinks seeing any product in a movie is product placement when that's not the case at all.

To me, the creative team should be able to do what the creative team wants to do. And if I want a Burger King in my story because I think it will help further what I want to say and the characters, by god darn it - I'm going to have that BK!

To those pissed about product placement, how the above paragraph may have read to some -- "I'm going to have a BK in Mighty Max because it makes all of you think you want to go eat some BK! GNIKREGRUB_GNIKREGRUB_GNIKREGRUB!!!"

To me, there's a difference.

I read what you said, and responded with IT DOESNT MATTER (though I could have worded it poorly). Google likely forked over the money to help out...and other companies are probably looking to hire directors to make movies about their products EVEN THOUGH Google's was apparently a different situation.

Also...you do have to get permission, right? I mean...if you want a Burger King in your Mighty Max, if Burger King said no, you'd have to change plans, right? Not saying that money has to change hands...but you'd need permission to show their logo etc, right?

 

[Ultimatehero]

I read what you said, and responded with IT DOESNT MATTER (though I could have worded it poorly). Google likely forked over the money to help out...and other companies are probably looking to hire directors to make movies about their products EVEN THOUGH Google's was apparently a different situation.

Also...you do have to get permission, right? I mean...if you want a Burger King in your Mighty Max, if Burger King said no, you'd have to change plans, right? Not saying that money has to change hands...but you'd need permission to show their logo etc, right?

To me it does, because the creative team should never be restricted in my mind. At all.

That said, I don't agree with companies hiring people out for product placement unless it's a character property (for example having a movie about Superman could be product placement for Superman comics). I only agree with it when it's the creative team first and getting permission later.

Yes, you do need to get permission. If not, you could switch locations. But, in my mind the scene works better there because it says a lot more than any other location could. Indie films would have difficulty, even more indie films would have it be practically impossible, big studios would not. That's all I want to say about it here.

 

[DorneyDave]

Seeing places like "Sears" "Ihop" etc....actually makes the movie feel more real to me. These places all exist in my life so why not in the movie. Plus ya know, it pays the bills for the movie.

I mean, it's not like the 1950s at all. Superman didn't turn to the camera and say

"The only thing lower than the morals of General Zod are the prices at your local sears" -smile...wink-

 

[bullets]

effing LexCorp and Wayne Enterprises product placement all over the place. Greedy bastards.

t:



This might be one of the saddest complaints out there. Superman crashed into an IHOP and people act like it was a commercial.

 

[dnno1]

This film had some of the most obtrustive product placement that I've ever seen. It was like watching a 1950's TV show.

I don't mind when logos on everyday products are visible, the nokia cellphones for instance.

But man in some scenes it was bad. Like the end of Smallville fight, when Christopher Meloni says "This man is not our enemy" and Supes flies off and the scene just lingers on the sears sign.

And then they keep cutting to the Ihop even staging a fight there.

There were several others that just kind of took me out of the film because they were inserted at fairly dramatic moments and tended to clash with the overall aesthetic of the film.

Really its one of my only complaints with the film.

I think the whole idea of using the product placement in the film was in keeping with the goal of grounding the story in realism. If you noticed some familiar and iconic things in the picture (like and IHOP restaurant, a Nokia cell-phone, or a Sears department store) then it makes you think that this could be happening in your own town in present day. I will tell you, when I took my two sons to see the film, they were delighted to see the IHOP in the film and kind of disappointed to see it damaged (we frequent IHOP a lot) and it was far from annoying.

 

[4NutzinYoface]

If I got up and went into town, I'd see IHOP, 7 Eleven, Sears....it's not product placement, it's real life. My town looks very much like Smallville

You know, I was kind of torn on the whole 'product placement' thing. I am aware that Hollywood is a machine with a strong mandate and inclination to make the all mighty dollar and what better way to do that than with product placement, so yeah...I get it. Some movies it's all over the place and it's annoying, however after reading the above quoted post from Kal-El I have a different opinion now lol thanks man! It's so true! it IS real life as a matter of fact!

I do have to say the ONE thing that was a little eye rolling/groan inducing was the shot where after Superman gets up after pummeling Zod through the 7-11 explosion there just happens to be a 7-11 sign facing the camera that fell off RIGHT by his feet lol...but other than that, if you really think about it 'eh...who cares. I guess it is kind of jarring to some where at the time you are engaged in this awesome battle or conversation between characters and BAM there's a giant crystal clear 'SEARS' sign right behind them...just kind of takes you out of it, but as I say, if you have the mentality of the above poster, it's actually not all that bad

 

[redhawk23]

just because they put real world businesses in a movie they were trying to give a realistic feel to automatically makes it product placement?? I'm not buying it...it's just the simple fact that they wanted the movie to look and feel realistic

Staging dramatic scenes in front of Sears signs and lingering on it after the scene ends is purely advertisement.

 

[redhawk23]

t:



This might be one of the saddest complaints out there. Superman crashed into an IHOP and people act like it was a commercial.

They return to the IHOP more than once, it WAS a commercial.

These werent just signs in the background. They had to plan their set pieces specifically around including these locations.

It often felt like the commericals we sometimes see like restaurant commercials that edit and incorporate film footage when they're having a tie-in, except instead this was the actual movie itself.

 

[jacobed]

I don't understand the complaint about product placement. If it helps get the movie made than the more the merrier

 

[redhawk23]

I don't mind product placement in general, I just think there were several occasions in this film in which it was not particularly well done.

 

[Ms. Marvel]

I never notice product placement. Ever. 100 products could be advertised in one scene and I wouldn't notice till someone points it out.

 

[Still Wynning]

I think the only time where I noticed the product placement was when the Jenny character is holding her phone right before Zod gives his "You are not alone" speech, the IHOP logo, and the Sears logo. That was about it.

As matter of fact, I'm really amazed at how little product placement was in this movie.

 

[jacobed]

I love stuff like that because it sets it in the real world

 

[scifiwolf]

My understanding is that the production sought out the brands because they wanted real-world, American venues to populate Smallville. I'm sure they negotiated with a few department stores, a few restaurants, and a few gasoline companies. If it hadn't been those brands, it'd have been others. You want awkward, horribly executed product placement? Watch Bones. Man, that show goes out of their way to bend over for Toyota sometimes.

 

[The Guard]

Staging dramatic scenes in front of Sears signs and lingering on it after the scene ends is purely advertisement.

They were lingering on the destruction of a store and a wide shot of the military after Superman flew off. And they didn't linger long, either.

It's not an advertisement. It's a wide shot.

You know what really annoyed me? WB sneaking that Superman logo into the movie everywhere.

Sheesh.

 

[gdw]

The only time it REALLY stood out to me was when Lois was taking pictures in the ship. The logo on the camera was just starring you in the face.
I'm usually pretty oblivious to product placement type shots, but that one jumped right out to me.

 

[scifiwolf]

I didn't even notice the brand of camera. It may have been staring me in the face, but I certainly wasn't staring back.

IMO, unless it's completely hammed, people tend to see the product placement if they're looking for it. I suspect they were with this movie more than normal because the news articles about product placement making the movie profitable prior to ticket sales.

 

[Rowsdower!]

I don't give a damn about the product placement. Aside from IHOP, 7-11 and Sears, I really didn't even notice it. And the latter two I only noticed because I've been studying the clips and set photos from this movie for months. Some people are acting like this movie reenacted the product placement scene in Wayne's World.

But damn, Pete Ross. You could have been so many things. President of the United States. West Coast oxycodone distributor. But in the end, you settled on IHOP. Such a shame.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

I think they were damned if they did and damned if they didn't. If they had used a fake. store like "Gears" and it looked kinda liked Sears I'd be like why didn't they just use Sears? And using Sears does lead you to think oh they have a deal with Sears. Either way it's ever so slightly distracting. Overall I was okay with the product placement really.

 

[Rowsdower!]

Gears, lol.

Yeah, that would have been even more distracting if they had used fake retail names based on real ones. Superman smashes Zod through a 24-7 convenience store. And Pete Ross works at IHOC (International House of Crepes).

 

[Kal-El.9859]

You know, I was kind of torn on the whole 'product placement' thing. I am aware that Hollywood is a machine with a strong mandate and inclination to make the all mighty dollar and what better way to do that than with product placement, so yeah...I get it. Some movies it's all over the place and it's annoying, however after reading the above quoted post from Kal-El I have a different opinion now lol thanks man! It's so true! it IS real life as a matter of fact!

I do have to say the ONE thing that was a little eye rolling/groan inducing was the shot where after Superman gets up after pummeling Zod through the 7-11 explosion there just happens to be a 7-11 sign facing the camera that fell off RIGHT by his feet lol...but other than that, if you really think about it 'eh...who cares. I guess it is kind of jarring to some where at the time you are engaged in this awesome battle or conversation between characters and BAM there's a giant crystal clear 'SEARS' sign right behind them...just kind of takes you out of it, but as I say, if you have the mentality of the above poster, it's actually not all that bad

Thanks...I mean it literally is real life...and some product placement along the way!


I think I might just get up and go to the 7 Eleven that is literally right down the street from my house and buy some beer and pretzels. Now of course these companies that had Man of Steel commercials are going to get the most bang for their buck. I mean Sears, come on folks...they had Martha working at Sears for crying out loud!

 

[bullets]

They return to the IHOP more than once, it WAS a commercial.

These weren't just signs in the background. They had to plan their set pieces specifically around including these locations.

It often felt like the commercials we sometimes see like restaurant commercials that edit and incorporate film footage when they're having a tie-in, except instead this was the actual movie itself.

I didn't think anything of it. The only thing slightly distracting to me was Jenny showing that her Nokia phone was picking up Zod's message.

 

[GREEN =w= DAY]

Seeing places like "Sears" "Ihop" etc....actually makes the movie feel more real to me. These places all exist in my life so why not in the movie. Plus ya know, it pays the bills for the movie.

I mean, it's not like the 1950s at all. Superman didn't turn to the camera and say

"The only thing lower than the morals of General Zod are the prices at your local sears" -smile...wink-

my thoughts exactly

i wasn't really bothered by the product placement