![]() ![]() |
|
Commander RNVR Group: Commanding Officers Enlisted: 26 June 2003 From: New York |
|
|
Now on the CBn main page...
![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
Lt. Commander Group: Veterans Enlisted: 9 February 2005 From: Sweden |
Post
#2
|
|
The actual number of partners is less important.
I don't think the product placement in DAD was distracting, but it was much more obvious (and irritating) in CR. I hope they will be a little bit more subtle in QOS. ![]() "I'm not about to come unhinged when everything goes wrong. A fact is something to be faced, But not for very long. The good times are coming, They'll be coming real soon. And I'm not just pitching pennies at the moon" YouTube |
|
|
|
|
|
Commander Group: Veterans Enlisted: 13 December 2004 From: Buckinghamshire |
Post
#3
|
|
Product placement is annoying, but if it helps getting the films made, then so be it.
![]() ![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
Commander RNVR Group: Commanding Officers Enlisted: 26 June 2003 From: New York |
Post
#4
|
|
I hope they will be a little bit more subtle in QOS. Agreed. Casino Royale did seem to have Sony slapped all over it at times. ![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
Lieutenant Group: Crew Enlisted: 22 November 2006 From: Lilly Library |
Post
#5
|
|
Again I'm forced to go back to referencing Ian Fleming himself, who maximized, if not invented, product placements as a means of enhancing the realism and real-world connection to his James Bond thrillers.
"In the course of a homily about shaving, he managed to incur the displeasure of his editor, Harry Hodson, by recommending Gillette's new Extra-Blue blade. Ian was told to moderate the advertising...." -- Lycett, page 370. Perhaps I'm in the minority here, but to me this is about as authentic to 007 as you can get! ![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
Lt. Commander Group: Veterans Enlisted: 9 February 2005 From: Sweden |
Post
#6
|
|
Again I'm forced to go back to referencing Ian Fleming himself, who maximized, if not invented, product placements as a means of enhancing the realism and real-world connection to his James Bond thrillers. "In the course of a homily about shaving, he managed to incur the displeasure of his editor, Harry Hodson, by recommending Gillette's new Extra-Blue blade. Ian was told to moderate the advertising...." -- Lycett, page 370. Perhaps I'm in the minority here, but to me this is about as authentic to 007 as you can get! I know what Fleming wrote... But no one will take these film seriously if they sell Bond like he was some kind of plastic product. What's next? Will I get a toy model of Craig with my BigMac? Anyway, I am not worried about this for QOS, as I have a feeling that Campbell might be the one to blame... Both GE and CR had excessive product placements to a degree that we are normally not used to. ![]() "I'm not about to come unhinged when everything goes wrong. A fact is something to be faced, But not for very long. The good times are coming, They'll be coming real soon. And I'm not just pitching pennies at the moon" YouTube |
|
|
|
|
|
Lt. Commander Group: Veterans Enlisted: 13 March 2002 From: East Harlem, New Yawk |
Post
#7
|
|
Anyway, I am not worried about this for QOS, as I have a feeling that Campbell might be the one to blame... Both GE and CR had excessive product placements to a degree that we are normally not used to. Blame the suits at Sony and EON for the product placement overload in CR. I think it will still be "annoying" because the film is a Sony property, hence any Sony product that appears will stink of self-promotion. GE was still considered a "risk" when it was in production so the product placements helped offset some of the advertising costs. When GE & Bond became "hot" again, companies started scrambling to get in on the next 007 film. EON was too happy collecting those checks. ![]() Our man is in position, on the center camera... Looks like a terrorist supermarket.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lieutenant Group: Enlisting Enlisted: 20 November 2007 From: Charleston, SC, USA |
Post
#8
|
|
As long as the products being placed are really of high quality (something that Bond "himself" would use) and not merely which company bids the most, I don't have any problem with it.
![]() Proud suppoter of all the Bonds*
*except David Niven |
|
|
|
|
|
Sub-Lieutenant Group: Crew Enlisted: 21 February 2002 |
Post
#9
|
|
As long as the products being placed are really of high quality (something that Bond "himself" would use) and not merely which company bids the most, I don't have any problem with it. So, not Smirnoff vodka, for example? ![]() ![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
Commander RNVR Group: Commanding Officers Enlisted: 26 June 2003 From: New York |
Post
#10
|
|
Now on the CBn main page...
![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
Commander GCMG Group: Veterans Reserve. Enlisted: 5 June 2001 From: Lagrimas Negras |
|
|
Gross.
I would be excited about this if the marketing tie-ins introduced us to something new, now, something we might not know about, but something that would legitimately be used by a worldly man like Bond (or even the makers of the films). But Ford, Henekin, Coke Zero...come on. This is common tacky People try and excuse this by saying Fleming also tied into products, but that's not true in the same sense. Fleming showed us commercial items in his own life that he felt a man like Bond would also use. And he didn't do it for payment. His motive was to inject certain level of cool realism, and that's why it worked. Very different from what the film makers do today. ![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
Sub-Lieutenant Group: Crew Enlisted: 22 September 2008 From: United Kingdom |
Post
#12
|
|
Personaly, i prefer that there is alot of partners. The more partners the more Bond stuff like clothes, technology, and vehicles.
![]() "I take a ridiculous pleasure in what I eat and drink"
- from Casino Royale, Ian Fleming |
|
|
|
|
|
Lieutenant Group: Crew Enlisted: 22 November 2006 From: Lilly Library |
Post
#13
|
|
... People try and excuse this by saying Fleming also tied into products, but that's not true in the same sense. Fleming showed us commercial items in his own life that he felt a man like Bond would also use. And he didn't do it for payment. His motive was to inject certain level of cool realism, and that's why it worked. Very different from what the film makers do today. Not so sure about this. First off, there are any number of items that "James Bond" used that Ian Fleming did not, for example, every car up until the Thunderbird appears. Mr. Fleming did not own a Rolex when he wrote Live and Let Die, nor did he ever own a diver's watch at any time. Andrew Lycett in his biography refers to accusations that Ian Fleming did, in fact, name specific products in his James Bond stories w/ an eye toward being subsequently rewarded with those products for free. Mr. Lycett dismisses this, and I, personally, doubt this was the case. Still, the accusation remains the same. Payment or no, I'm more distracted when a film tries to mask the name of a product, or creates a generic label, a'la the "Beer" that Archie Bunker used to have to drink. The fact that they get paid for it is merely secondary; it's just business. ![]() |
|
|
|
|