this post was submitted on 24 Aug 2023
50 points (76.0% liked)

Movies and TV Shows

2 readers
2 users here now

General discussion about movies and TV shows.


Spoilers are strictly forbidden in post titles.

Posts soliciting spoilers (endings, plot elements, twists, etc.) should contain [spoilers] in their title. Comments in these posts do not need to be hidden in spoiler MarkDown if they pertain to the title's subject matter.

Otherwise, spoilers but must be contained in MarkDown as follows:

::: your spoiler warning
the crazy movie ending that no one saw coming!
:::

Your mods are here to help if you need any clarification!


Subcommunities: The Bear (FX) - [!thebear@lemmy.film](/c/thebear @lemmy.film)


Related communities: !entertainment@beehaw.org !moviesuggestions@lemmy.world

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

It's like in a music video when the artist suddenly pulls out the new Samsung explosive device, and your heart sinks a little.

Not only is it necessary for even decent movies to be packaged within some IP, they also seem to rely on selling ad space within the movie itself.

Very bleak.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] jordanlund@lemmy.one 101 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You went to a movie that's an advertisement for a plastic doll accessory universe and... you're upset it has product placements? 🤔

[–] GCostanzaStepOnMe@feddit.de 27 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

Yes?

Edit: Even if you want to be reductive and consider the entire movie as just a big brand advertisment, this doesn't make sense. Does Burger King subsidize their commercials by running Samsung Ads within them?

Edit2: This is probably a bad retort, see my other comments for clarification.

[–] droans@lemmy.world 32 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Does Burger King subsidize their commercials by running Samsung Ads within them?

Cross-Promotion definitely exists. In the US, a lot of iPhone ads are paid for by the carriers so they can put a blurb at the end.

Burger King is actually a weird example for you to use. They use cross-promotion more than almost any other company.

BK was also a leader in cross-promotion. In 1977, they ran commercials using Star Wars advertising while selling glasses with the characters from the film.

Movie studios have been using paid promotions for products since the 90s. Iirc the very first paid movie tie-in was in ET. The studio had planned on using M&Ms in the film but were rejected by Mars. Hershey's heard about this and paid them to instead use Reese's Pieces in the movie.

It's fair to hate it, I usually do, but it happens all the time. The only one I can think of that I liked was 30 Rock, especially with their Snapple product placement.

[–] spencerwi@lemm.ee 17 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Community's Subway arc was pretty good too, IMO.

[–] teft@startrek.website 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

You’re a level 7 susceptible.

[–] droans@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I have a rule about being constructive, so I can't ask any questions right now because all the questions that I have right now are rhetorical and they end with the word idiot.

Do you know what a rhetorical- No, of course you don't know what that is, you're an idiot.

I'm sorry! I am so sorry, but you're so stupid. You have no idea, and you're the only one who has no idea, because guess why?

Don't answer that. You'll get it wrong. Aw, so dumb. You're just a dumb little man who tries to destroy this school every minute.

[–] droans@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Okay, yeah, that too.

[–] InvertedParallax@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago

Please hand me my jacket.

[–] FoxBJK@midwest.social 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)

BK made a Spiderman hamburger. Does that count?

[–] GCostanzaStepOnMe@feddit.de -3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Not really to the point I was trying to make here.

[–] FoxBJK@midwest.social 14 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I understand your point, but a movie that is itself a 2-hour advertisement doesn't lose any of its value by showing other brands.

What's bleak is that a movie about a toy grosses over a billion at the box office. Not that BMW or Samsung want you to look at their stuff.

[–] GCostanzaStepOnMe@feddit.de 8 points 1 year ago (2 children)

This critique irks me for some reason. Consider this: Imagine the latest Top Gun had some scene where Tom Cruise literally high fives Uncle Sam, then slowly whispers "Freedom" and winks into the camera. You'd rightfully find this jarring, a poor aesthetic choice, weird.

But then someone online tells you why you'd expect anything else from a franchise that's heavily subsidized and supported by the military industrial complex, and demanding a sort of artistic consistency from such a franchise is pointless to begin with.

Tldr: I think you can critique the art even if you're aware of it's ideological confines.

(This reply hinges on such a scene not being in the latest Top Gun movie, which I haven't see yet to be honest)

[–] FoxBJK@midwest.social 5 points 1 year ago

A fair point, but in your original example we're talking about a cell phone. That's a significantly more subtle inclusion than Tom draping himself in an American flag and riding off on the back of an eagle.

I don't remember the scene we're talking about, so if it was a cell phone in the real world I see no issue. If it was in Barbie's world then it should've been plastic. That would be my only complaint.

[–] Gaybees@artemis.camp 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It might not be as obvious as literally winking into the camera, but Top Gun had substantial monetary investment from the U.S. military, and they definitely tried to make being in the military look cool and fun and attractive.

They definitely don’t show what it’s really like to be a service member, and that’s for good reason.

[–] GCostanzaStepOnMe@feddit.de 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah that's kind of my point. Even knowing it's partial propaganda, you'd know when something is "off". Just like even knowing that Barbie is partially a branding campaign, You know how the car comercial scene is "off".

[–] Gaybees@artemis.camp 5 points 1 year ago

I guess what I’m saying is I don’t see either top gun or Barbie movie as “partial propaganda”, I see them as entirely propaganda. So, at least for me, having some additional propaganda for Samsung phones or car brands doesn’t seem out of place or jarring for me.

It’s honestly more jarring for me to see how the military is portrayed compared to what it’s actually like.

[–] BearJCC@lemmy.sdf.org 6 points 1 year ago

Actually , yes