The most shameless product placement seen in a movie. (and ruins the movie for you)

Cafe Society
101

FEISTAR ROOLZ! :smiley:

Considering how cheap Atari Corp. was at the time (thanks to the Tramiel family’s infamous penny-pinching techniques), I seriously doubt Atari paid for the endorsement in T2. The Portfolio was probably selected solely due to its small size.

Not sure if Atari Games paid for the Missile Command placement, but I doubt it – I imagine it was used just because it tied in to the movie’s subtext of nuclear war. Its presence in the arcade was especially noticable IMO, just because it was really dated compared to the other games at the time.

102

I thought it may have been an in-joke of some kind, but then why not show the palmtop computer more prominently, so at least the logo could be glimpsed? Perhaps they thought it would have been too much? Anyway, as I recall there was a connection of some kind between some of the makers of T2 (possibly the director himself) and Atari, and a few years ago I did glimpse a site that mentioned some sort of connection–could not find it again though.

It’s also entirely possible that Missile Command was picked simply because it was an established game that would have been recognized by many people and, as you say rjung, because it’s a good fit to the nuclear war theme.

103

I thought of this thread as we were watching Sum of All Fears last night. The movie was mildly entertaining for about the first 20 minutes, then a couple product placement situations ruined it for me…

Absence of Product Placement: The major characters (including the POTUS and several members of the cabinet) go to an important football game (Super Bowl? Playoff game? This is not made clear) in Washington (or was it Baltimore?). The teams wear very conspicuous non-NFL uniforms, which brings the movie to a screeching halt for me. I guess the NFL said, “We don’t support Ben Affleck movies” when asked for permission to use actual football uniforms/team names. But it wasn’t nearly as annoying as the–

Shove it Down Our Throats Product Placement: OK, this is a mild spoiler, but there is a bomb hidden in a certain place midway through the “story”. Said bomb is hidden in, of all things, a cigarette machine!!! The camera zooms in and pans down lovingly from the top of the machine’s brightly colored and clearly marked Marlboros, Camels and Marlboro Lights to show us that the bomb is hidden inside this machine. We would have been able to figure this out even without the 5-minute examination of cigarette packaging.

To add to the implausibility (as if Ben Affleck as Jack Ryan wasn’t enough), the cigarette machine looked like a regular candy machine, where you just put in your coins and the pack drops down. Not only are cigarette machines all but illegal now, they definitely won’t be found in a major sporting venue and have never looked like a candy machine. God was that annoying!!!

104

I agree with Baldwin: What Women Want was mostly a long Nike ad, and it ruined the movie.

105

Tee hee. I worked for Fisher Scientific at the time, who also loaned a lot of lab equipment for the set. I had to return all of our items to stock when they came back, testing for proper operation and refurbishing as necessary.

I wondered why that Marathon centrigufe had a Zeiss logo on it.

106

In T3, surprisingly, there weren’t too many gratuitous product placements. The ones I can remember were a US Rentals building across from the animal clinic, and of course, the shameless one going to the Xenadrine EFX trailer that was shown for in clear view for at least 10 seconds.

107

I have to agree with Abe. I’m not sure why this board objects so stridently to a forty-foot tall advertisement for Coke on your movie screen when there’s probably one right outside your window anyway, sitting in the quadrangle of your local high school or university, plastered in the pages of a history book, or filling space at the front of your VHS copy of Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade. As Abe noted with Stephen King, part of immersion and characterization is about the quick-hit product identification.

With Macintosh, it has two things going for it, product-wise. One, a recognizable logo. Two, it has the reputation of being the underdog, the little guy, used by creative types and people who (forgive me) think different. If you’ve got a fifth of a second on a movie screen to show that a character is a rebel who carves his own path, what do you show? A generic plastic box devoid of character? Or a bright colored box with an underdog reputation?

Ditto for beer: show a character who drinks Schlitz or Coors and you’ve got an everyday kinda guy (in American terms, that is). But show him drinking Fish Tail Ale, or Pyramid Brown, or Guinness, or that funky Japanese beer that’s sold in the plain silver can, and you’ve got a completely different take on the character.

This was the case in The Whole Nine Yards when Rosanna Arquette’s character was shown driving a bright yellow new-model VW Beetle. The movie took no money for the ad, according to Jonathan Lynn’s commentary. He said VW would have paid them if Matthew Perry had driven the car. Lynn said no, that was the wife’s car, because that was appropriate to her character. VW said no thanks, we’ll pass; we’ve already got the demographic that petite cutesy women drive Beetles, we want to expand our product line’s image. Matt drives, we pay. Otherwise, go away.

I have to say that sometimes, yes, the product logo is particularly irritating when it’s obvious. The Coke can in Ghostbusters was mentioned. Why? Because not only was it logo placement, but a continuity error. The camera shifts position a few feet for a two-shot, and yet the Coke can turns 180 degrees to show both sides of the can, each perfectly aligned.

I always notice it, during that scene. Doesn’t ruin the movie, though.

FISH

108

I’m about 33 minutes into the Josie movie right now. Even if it’s suppose to be a joke, the amount of product placement in this movie is one of the most off puting things I’ve ever seen in a film.

109

I hated “Twister” passionately from start to finish, but one thing that REALLY annoyed me was:

Helen Hunt and Bill Paxton kept making snide remarks about Cary Elwes and his team. Paxton sneers that Elwes & his researchers aren’t even “real” scientists because they accept corporate sponsorships.

God, what hypocrisy! The entire movie is one long ad for Pepsi Cola!!! If Elwes’ character is evil and desevres to be killed because he accepts corporate sponsorship, then EVERYONE associated with “Twister” deserves to die a slow, painful death.

And on a smaller but still relevant point: I’m from New York City, where there are good, locally owned pizza joints on every corner. NO self-respecting New Yorker gets his pizza from Pizza Hut. But I’ve seen numerous movies (most notably Tom Hanks’ “Big”) in which New Yorkers are shown bringing home a pie from Pizza Hut.

I would only bring my family in New York something from Pizza Hut if I were feeling suicidal.

110

flees the zombie thread

I was reading through this thinking… These are some old movies people are bitching about! And who is this user I’ve never heard of?

:smack:

111

I revived this thread because I wanted to comment on the product placement in a movie I was watching. As I’ve seen so many here criticized for starting a new thread when there are exixting ones on the same subject, I did a search and found this one. So now there’s criticism for reviving a year old thread.

I don’t know who the user is you are refering to or if it’s me or not, but I can’t believe you’re familiar with everybody who has ever posted at this forum.

112

In Time After Time there’s a whole scene in a 1979-era McDonalds. I listened to the commentary and Nicolas Myer, the director, said he never intended it to be a product placement. Maybe it didn’t seem like that then, but today it does.

113

good morning friends,

my older brother worked in advertising in the 70’s and 80’s. he was responsible for purchasing space for stp oil products. he did some of the product placement ads, but mostly determined markets and time slots for brodcast commercials.

he described the perfect place for a brodcast commercial: the first network television brodcast of “gone with the wind” scarlet, home to find the devastation the war has left around tara finds a radish field and falls to her knees and eats one. she chokes on it and then shakes her fist at the heavens. “i’ll never be hungry again! if i have to lie, cheat steal or kill, as god is my witness i’ll never be hungry again!” fade to black, cut to a kentucky fried chicken commercial…

114

The one that bugged me the most was all that Blue Sun product placement in Firefly.

115

Yoyodyne Propulsion

116

From ATMB:

Just giving you the information, I personally don’t see anything wrong with it but you asked why you were getting criticism.

117

In Micheal Almereyda’s lackluster 2000 Hamlet takes place in the modern day. Denmark is a corporation. Hamlet’s an amateur filmmaker rather than a playwright. Okay, so far so good, exept that it also opened the door to introducing product placemnet in Shakespeare!

In the first glimpse of the ghost, he fades away before Horatio’s eyes, revealing, in full glory the Pepsi (Coke? I don’t recall) machine the spectre was in front of. Also, Hamlet delivers “To be, or not to be”, the most famous and celebrated lines of dialogue in teh English language, while strolling through what’s clearly a Blockbuster video. Shameful.

Bill Murray was a hoot as Polonius, however.

118

First of all, I was just kidding. I was just making a comment on the fact that all the movies mentioned were older ones, and I felt silly when I realized that it was because it was an old thread. It was just a good-natured comment. Thus the smack. If I were criticizing YOU, I would have used the putz smiley. Or a roll-eyes, or something similarly rude.

Secondly, if you really pay attention, you’ll see that the “rule” is that you bump a thread less than 3 months old; otherwise you start a new one. I really don’t care one way or the other, but since you seem to be eager to jump down my throat for making a light-hearted comment, I’ll just clarify that point for you.

And finally, I don’t claim to know everyone, or even a vast majority of people on this board. However, when there’s a much higher than average number of strange names in a Cafe Society thread, I scratch my head.

119

After a few minutes of reflection, I apologize for anything in the previous message that comes across as less-than-civil.

I’m really just having one of those days.

120

Thanks for the clarification. I realize it’s hard to read “tone” in a post and when I saw the smack in the head thing, I took the whole thing as criticism. And like it’s “one of those days” for you, I had just gotten out of bed and checked my email when I clicked on this thread. I have never seen the “3 month rule” and I thought I was doing the right thing. Like I said before, I see so many posts that say something in the vein of “there is already a thread on this subject here.”

As for not being familiar with my name, I have been on a hiatus from here for several months as it was getting too addicting and interfering with work. Up to about February, I was pretty active on this board and only returned this week.

And Loach, what is the ATMB? I don’t see the rule you quote in the SDMB FAQs or Forum Rules.

Anyway, I’m sorry for the post above. And this hijack I’ve caused too.