Product placements may soon be added to classic films(bbc.com)
bbc.com
Product placements may soon be added to classic films
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-56758376
79 comments
I too am doing the same. I own hundreds of these things. The part where I am a bit 'afraid' is they just decide 'who buys dvds anymore'.
Or your smart TV will detect what you're watching and add product placement from its library (using an offline cache if necessary).
https://www.vice.com/en/article/mg7ek8/youre-going-to-need-a...
https://clearcode.cc/blog/ott-advertising/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2019/09/18/you-wat...
https://www.vice.com/en/article/mg7ek8/youre-going-to-need-a...
https://clearcode.cc/blog/ott-advertising/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2019/09/18/you-wat...
Good point. I've been happy with our current 2016 LG device but will only buy dumb TVs/monitors/panels going forward.
Can't wait for Rosebud to be the latest Ford EV Truck.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IH1PJTY9AVA
oh, wait, that's terrible. i quit!
oh, wait, that's terrible. i quit!
Oh man, The Critic was amazing!
Remember when the internet was going to be this amazing thing ?
These days it seems to be a machine for making me think "FFS" an increasing amount of times a day.
These days it seems to be a machine for making me think "FFS" an increasing amount of times a day.
It still is an amazing thing.
It's true: it is, but you have to strip away all the shit that's been piled on top to find the beauty. It reminds me of beautiful natural places like Yellowstone that have been ruined by over-tourism and careless people.
I think the World Wide Web is amazing. I can gripe about Google, Amazon, Big Tech all day, but at the end of it, their products and services are fantastic.
This doesn't have anything to do with the Internet. Corporatism and wealth consolidation is the problem here.
The internet makes it practical to distribute and archive the uncorrupted versions of these cultural artifacts, even when it's illegal.
> The internet makes it practical to distribute and archive the uncorrupted versions of these cultural artifacts, even when it's illegal.
Not really. If "uncorrupted versions of these cultural artifacts" are illegal, what the internet does is make it easy to track down the people sharing them for punishment.
The internet is far more amenable to automated surveillance at scale than the offline world.
Not really. If "uncorrupted versions of these cultural artifacts" are illegal, what the internet does is make it easy to track down the people sharing them for punishment.
The internet is far more amenable to automated surveillance at scale than the offline world.
Well, that's kind of what I thought when I was first FTPing popular music from sounds.sdsu.edu in 01994: this can't last! They'll shut it down! And indeed sounds.sdsu.edu did get shut down eventually... and eventually alt.binaries.* got mostly swamped with spam... and Napster got sued... and endless etc.
But you know what? There was a lot more stuff being shared on the internet in 01998 than in 01994, despite sounds.sdsu.edu getting shut down. There was a lot more in 02002 than in 01998, despite Usenet having mostly died. There was a lot more in 02006 than in 02002, despite the Napster suit. And that trend doesn't seem to be slowing down even today, despite the automated surveillance at scale.
But you know what? There was a lot more stuff being shared on the internet in 01998 than in 01994, despite sounds.sdsu.edu getting shut down. There was a lot more in 02002 than in 01998, despite Usenet having mostly died. There was a lot more in 02006 than in 02002, despite the Napster suit. And that trend doesn't seem to be slowing down even today, despite the automated surveillance at scale.
We'll always have <strike>Paris</strike>Cincinatti, the affordable tourist destination
> Mr Beringer says that the next leap forward will be the ability to digitally add product banners to live sports or concert broadcasts "in real time, or milliseconds after".
Hasn't that been possible for quite some time now?
Hasn't that been possible for quite some time now?
Yea this has been happening in F1 broadcasts for a while already.
Weaving a product into a film or television program may be just about acceptable - whether payed for or not (the Modern Family Apple episode or advertising in Blade Runner stand out).
But adding/replacing ads in “classic” well regarded movies really destroys any notion that these are works of art or classics in any way.
But adding/replacing ads in “classic” well regarded movies really destroys any notion that these are works of art or classics in any way.
Do we need any more reason to completely abandon mass media movies, music, etc.? If nothing is sacred to them, why should it be to me?
I am well aware of the history of product placements, but this just brings the reality to the forefront: you and I are viewed as nothing more than marketing targets and advertisement receptacles. It's dystopian.
I am well aware of the history of product placements, but this just brings the reality to the forefront: you and I are viewed as nothing more than marketing targets and advertisement receptacles. It's dystopian.
Just another variant of deepfakes. All movies are “fakes” by definition. They also retrofit ads into live sporting events covering other billboards for over a decade now. None of this is new in fact.
Some people might even prefer the tracking part:
“So if you like wine then the hero of a film could be drinking a particular bottle that you might be tempted to try. Or if you are teetotal the star might be sipping on a bottle of branded water.”
-
Wonder how they will redo the dystopian The Running Man with ads:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Running_Man_(1987_film)
-
And while at it we already edit text and whitewash news and books. How about adding product placements from finance companies to The Merchant of Venice:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Merchant_of_Venice
Some people might even prefer the tracking part:
“So if you like wine then the hero of a film could be drinking a particular bottle that you might be tempted to try. Or if you are teetotal the star might be sipping on a bottle of branded water.”
-
Wonder how they will redo the dystopian The Running Man with ads:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Running_Man_(1987_film)
-
And while at it we already edit text and whitewash news and books. How about adding product placements from finance companies to The Merchant of Venice:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Merchant_of_Venice
How far away are we from adding product placement to reprints of art like the Mona Lisa, Sistine Chapel, etc?
How long until product placement creeps into everyday speech?
https://www.newyorker.com/humor/daily-shouts/l-p-d-libertari...
>“Subway™ Eat Fresh and Freeze, Scumbag!®” I yelled.
https://www.newyorker.com/humor/daily-shouts/l-p-d-libertari...
>“Subway™ Eat Fresh and Freeze, Scumbag!®” I yelled.
I can't remember which book, but I'm pretty sure Phillip K. Dick incorporated this somewhere too.
No issue with movie product placements in general, though they are sometimes a little bit absurd. Film makers should be a little bit more discerning. But i think to revise old movies is unacceptable. For one thing, the actors/ directors may not have agreed with the ethos of the products they are "advertising". And i think it would be plain vandalism almost revisionism. I don't particularly want to watch the great escape and be forced to see a great big "drink heineken" sign, or a billboard promoting Amazon Prime. It's a no from me.
Now do it with books.
People don't read as much anymore, so I think books are safe for now.
Similar things have been done, the German edition of one of Terry Pratchett's novels contained advertisements for soup shoved in the middle of the story.
I can't wait. The Cat in The Hat will be using Flash spray. Saruman will harm the environment with CAT excavators. Harry Potter... OK they already are milking the franchise for all its worth. At least the copyrights expire eventually.
> Saruman will harm the environment with CAT excavators
Because all that infra you rely on builds itself magically !
Because all that infra you rely on builds itself magically !
Movie studios are conspiring to remove any last bit of guilt I had about pirating.
Indeed. I started rewatching Community on Netflix some months ago, and I noticed the general synopsis said "(One episode of Season 2 is not available.)". I assumed that with so many brands and cultural references that are parodied there may be some weird legal reason why they couldn't distribute a specific episode, either in Spain or in general.
When eventually I got to Season 2 I compared their episode listing with that on Wikipedia, and saw that the unavailable episode was S02E14, Advanced Dungeons & Dragons. At first I thought it had to be some weird copyright challenge from D&D... but no. It was because the comedically unlikeable character of Ben Chang obliviously and with no bad intent makes what is a cultural faux-pas in the USA, for which he is criticised, as a minor side joke in the episode [0]! And of course Netflix, in their infinite cultural sensitivity, decided to make the episode unavailable worldwide, as if Netflix users in Spain should even give a damn about a minor American cultural taboo being played for laughs.
Thank God that file sharing of copyrighted files is not illegal in Spain [1], so I was able to carelessly download such an objectionable and immoral episode via The Pirate Bay! Hello Torrent my old friend...
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Dungeons_%26_Dragons_...
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_aspects_of_file_sharing#...
When eventually I got to Season 2 I compared their episode listing with that on Wikipedia, and saw that the unavailable episode was S02E14, Advanced Dungeons & Dragons. At first I thought it had to be some weird copyright challenge from D&D... but no. It was because the comedically unlikeable character of Ben Chang obliviously and with no bad intent makes what is a cultural faux-pas in the USA, for which he is criticised, as a minor side joke in the episode [0]! And of course Netflix, in their infinite cultural sensitivity, decided to make the episode unavailable worldwide, as if Netflix users in Spain should even give a damn about a minor American cultural taboo being played for laughs.
Thank God that file sharing of copyrighted files is not illegal in Spain [1], so I was able to carelessly download such an objectionable and immoral episode via The Pirate Bay! Hello Torrent my old friend...
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Dungeons_%26_Dragons_...
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_aspects_of_file_sharing#...
Another example of capitalism's relentless pursuit of value extraction from anything and everything with no consideration given to the side effects, because money is the only way to measure success and importance in our society. We should be building a society for the benefit of everyone, instead of building a society optimized for value extraction for the benefit of a small few.
It's worth keeping in perspective what's already done to many films. Namely, air them on television in an edited form with lots of commercial breaks. This was certainly not the original intention of the directors--at least until modern times.
On odd occasion I would watch a movie when visiting my parents, every single time I am just shocked when commercials pop up, and it lasts for ever.
I can't believe I was used to that. Now its just unacceptable.
I can't believe I was used to that. Now its just unacceptable.
Or even more egregious the channel logos and promos that routinely appear over content. It had been a long time since I had watched linear TV and saw one of these again. I forgot how annoying they are.
[deleted]
I don't mind product placement where it's credibly part of the artistic vision of the director - the classic examples here from my point of view include the Atari placement in Blade Runner.
The things that stick out like a sore thumb are where there's an element that has clearly been scripted by the advertiser to inject into a script.
Like: we're in a police procedural TV show and the detective's interactions with the GPS/entertainment system on vehicle Brand X suddenly become a focal point of dialog or the scene.
That stuff's just obnoxious.
The things that stick out like a sore thumb are where there's an element that has clearly been scripted by the advertiser to inject into a script.
Like: we're in a police procedural TV show and the detective's interactions with the GPS/entertainment system on vehicle Brand X suddenly become a focal point of dialog or the scene.
That stuff's just obnoxious.
This is... yeah:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oQYwFND7rHE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oQYwFND7rHE
Feels a bit too 1984 to me…
I wonder if / how this sort of thing might be implemented in video games (like classic micro console releases or video game remasters).
David Lynch on contemporary product placement, 14 years ago: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F4wh_mc8hRE
Perfect. His take on watching movies on your phone is great too:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wKiIroiCvZ0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wKiIroiCvZ0
A possible and troubling outcome of this may be that "controversial" scenes are removed from classic films entirely, because advertisers don't want to be associated with them. We've already seen disclaimers added to movies that are "problematic" like Gone with the Wind or Breakfast at Tiffany's.
When push comes to shove, will Media Co. turn down millions from Coke just to keep a 30-second scene in a film? I'm not optimistic.
When push comes to shove, will Media Co. turn down millions from Coke just to keep a 30-second scene in a film? I'm not optimistic.
I don’t like any product placements —but even less so when they’re injected after the fact.
I don’t care if I “recognize” a car being a Toyota, if it’s necessarily incidental to the scene.
I do care that things may be artificially plastered in a scene, whether cereal box in a movie before breakfast cereals were a thing or a billboard on a building for a brand that didn’t exist. At that point it’s not a film and it becomes an advertising cartoon.
It’s a bit repulsive to be honest.
I don’t care if I “recognize” a car being a Toyota, if it’s necessarily incidental to the scene.
I do care that things may be artificially plastered in a scene, whether cereal box in a movie before breakfast cereals were a thing or a billboard on a building for a brand that didn’t exist. At that point it’s not a film and it becomes an advertising cartoon.
It’s a bit repulsive to be honest.
I agree that products just being in movies doesn't bother me, but the so-common-it's-getting-tropey waist-height shot focused primarily on the car's (logo'd) grill as it approaches to a stop directly in front of the camera is starting to bug me quite a bit.
I agree that removing scenes or adding product placement into existing works of art is very troubling but I'm not sure I would equate that to adding disclaimers to the start of a film. In my mind it's like an age rating - it's additional information which gives someone the information they need to decide if a film is appropriate for them or their family.
I somewhat agree with you, but I also think when you add moralistic disclaimers to the beginning, or claim that the movie should be pulled from streaming catalogs, [1] it’s a small “compromise” to just remove the uncomfortable scenes. Especially if everyone involved will otherwise lose money.
1. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/10/movies/gone-with-the-wind...
1. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/10/movies/gone-with-the-wind...
This is why I got into piracy. I don't have to care what modern woke politics dictate as allowable or not, nor do I have to deal with corruptions of art from their original forms for the sake of advertisement or profitability.
So then the next piratebay will have the -original, the -coke and the -redbull version?
Not related this directly, but it brings to mind the whole saga around the (failed) attempt to remove the rat from the final scene of The Departed:
https://www.indiewire.com/2019/02/warner-bros-shuts-down-kic...
https://www.indiewire.com/2019/02/warner-bros-shuts-down-kic...
I just don't understand why an advertiser would risk doing this. Seems like it could very wrong if the inserted material rubs people the wrong way. It reads as a tacky thing to do to me.
I remember reading a satirical article about a remake of 2001: A Space Odyssey, redoing all the product placement (of which there was a lot more than I noticed: https://everything2.com/title/Product+placement+in+2001%253A... basically replacing defunct companies with newer/modern counterparts. Can't find it, but I don't think it was The Onion.
Anyway... good lord stuff like this might actually happen.
Anyway... good lord stuff like this might actually happen.
We continue to develop our ability to turn inward from the world, to shut out or edit what we don't like about it and construct ever more convincing fantasies by tricking our brains. Advertisement wants to be there with you in your most private thoughts, manipulating your private fantasies.
This has been proposed as a technical possibility for a long time -- and yes, it is a terrible possibility! And yes, you can find an example of it happening, like the Chinese TV example! -- but "may soon" is doing a lot of heavy lifting in the title. They talked to a couple of business people who said, more or less, "making money is good". They reaffirm the technology is good. There's no real evidence they're in discussions with any actual studios or there are any actual advertisers planning to do this. There's no discussion of how the logistics would work in terms of streaming services. The only western example given in the article is Modern Family, which I'm pretty sure is referring to contemporaneous product placement (e.g. an episode was shot without product placement, but the intent was always to key it in in editing)
I don't think this is impossible and if it happened I would be frustrated and angry. But let's hypothetically say that I'm right, and this is not going to happen. That would make this article almost definitionally clickbait: a remote possibility is brought up with an infuriating headline designed to share, and the comments section is filled with people who clicked and are riled up emotionally. I think both journalists and people sharing things should be as conscious as possible about this and not participate in the click-attention game.
(I recognize a certain irony in commenting to say that no one should react to this, when I'm reacting to the reactions.)
I don't think this is impossible and if it happened I would be frustrated and angry. But let's hypothetically say that I'm right, and this is not going to happen. That would make this article almost definitionally clickbait: a remote possibility is brought up with an infuriating headline designed to share, and the comments section is filled with people who clicked and are riled up emotionally. I think both journalists and people sharing things should be as conscious as possible about this and not participate in the click-attention game.
(I recognize a certain irony in commenting to say that no one should react to this, when I'm reacting to the reactions.)
This is what it looks like when a handful of giant corporations run the world.
Go ahead, push more people into piracy and then cry how those evil people pirate stuff cuz they hate big media...
Although I'm a bit scared of the advertisement industry, I'm hopeful this can turn out to be good. Most product placement are very subtle and non-intrusive, so they don't bother me too much. It may eventually lower the price of streaming services because it is a new revenue stream and may possibly enable a service were costumers don't have to pay for, like old non-cable TV but without intervals.
Also, this creates incentives for preservation and re-launch of classic films.
Ideally this could trigger a flow where producers create content; post-producers gather resources from advertisers pay the producers, digitally place products and distribute to consumers. If every step is healthy, it can even get to the viewers without the need to pay for it.
This could be a boom for entertainment in poorer countries where a good deal of the population can't pay for streaming. Some people simply wouldn't mind watching a five year old blockbuster with product placements if they don't have to pay for it.
Of course, it is possible that I'm being optimistic here... we'll have to see how this turns out.
Also, this creates incentives for preservation and re-launch of classic films.
Ideally this could trigger a flow where producers create content; post-producers gather resources from advertisers pay the producers, digitally place products and distribute to consumers. If every step is healthy, it can even get to the viewers without the need to pay for it.
This could be a boom for entertainment in poorer countries where a good deal of the population can't pay for streaming. Some people simply wouldn't mind watching a five year old blockbuster with product placements if they don't have to pay for it.
Of course, it is possible that I'm being optimistic here... we'll have to see how this turns out.
I sometimes prefer subtle product placement. It looks weird when a character asks for a "beer" at a bar or a "pack of cigarettes" at a bodega. It would feel much more natural they just asked for a pack of Camels.
I'd prefer blatant product placement, e.g. Kermit the Frog emerges from Greedo's corpse in the "Han Shoots First" version of "Star Wars", looks directly at the camera, and tries to sell the audience cigarettes.
Max Headroom (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Headroom) seemed like such a funny lark when I was 15. Now... I'm nearly living in that world. It's sad.
"Bullshit. That's how I feel. Total fucking bullshit."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F4wh_mc8hRE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F4wh_mc8hRE
Horrible idea; this is not a positive thing from a cultural heritage point of view. I am not a fan.
Can’t wait to watch a classic noir just to see humprhey bogart whip out his iqos vape and follow it up with a 2019 name brand bourbon before getting in his tesla.
Given that they've all been pirated I expect this will just fuel trading of pirated classics.
This is some kind of race to shit. Adtech is a scourge of humanity.
Sorry for the low effort post but fuck this and fuck the people trying to make it happen.
We've already seen where this goes with Star Wars: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harmy's_Despecialized_Edition
Can’t wait for the Google recruiting billboards in On the Waterfront.
Discussed at the time:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26860643
(42 points/36 days ago/60 comments)
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26860643
(42 points/36 days ago/60 comments)
Is there really a lack of space for companies to advertise on? Seems like we’re opening up more and more room because the biggest companies take up the best 50% of advertising space. I’d support a cap on how much one company can advertise on one platform (e.g. only so many hours of ads on television so that everyone is able to participate). That way, we don’t see ridiculous attempts like the headline to open up more advertising space.
Han shot first !
Why should we care about people defacing fiction when the inflation of fiction is responsible for drowning out non-fiction? Even things intended to be non-fictional, like documentaries, are loaded with fiction.
What's Amazon going to do to the MGM back catalog?
And note the nascent free video exodus beginning with the upcoming removal of "Charlie Bit My Finger".