The Dumbest Complaint About CASINO ROYALE...
#31
Posted 28 November 2006 - 11:58 AM
Actors should be shot in a way that we cannot recognise their face, unless trying hard.
#32
Posted 28 November 2006 - 12:46 PM
Edited by tapalapadapa, 28 November 2006 - 12:48 PM.
#33
Posted 28 November 2006 - 12:51 PM
#34
Posted 28 November 2006 - 12:58 PM
And is everyone forgetting "Rolex?" "Omega" "Beautiful!"
Taking into account how dismissive Vesper is being about guys with big watches, I think that was intended more as a good natured dig rather than promotion for Omega.
BTW
#35
Posted 29 November 2006 - 03:37 AM
#36
Posted 29 November 2006 - 03:52 AM
And I too did not know the car was a Mondeo until someone pointed it out. Again, it's a matter of people looking for the product placement.
Well said, pedro. I personally think Bond fans should be honored and thrilled that companies so desperately want their products associated with the coolest movie character of all time.
#37
Posted 29 November 2006 - 08:07 AM
#38
Posted 01 December 2006 - 01:45 AM
That being said, the Mondeo wasn't that obtrusive, even though I knew he was going to be driving it beforehand. And the Aston Martin is definitive James Bond (and they totaled how many of them to make the movie?). At least they didn't total that beautiful DB5, even if he did "nick the door."
I think Sony missed a big chance to include some slightly "private eye" idealized products, just to showcase some concept technology, or slight stretches of the imagination. Doesn't have to drive a car by itself. Just be more than what the average guy can get on eBay with a good bid and maybe a little overtime or a raise.
It didn't totally ruin the movie though...but I've kind of learned to expect it, ever since my eye zoomed in on the Pepsi logo perfectly facing the camera in Gone In 60 Seconds, right between his fingers. :-P.
#39
Posted 01 December 2006 - 01:57 AM
My only complaint about the Sony Vaio, as an IT professional, is that Sony Vaio's are over priced pieces of junk.
#40
Posted 01 December 2006 - 02:33 AM
I had no problem what so ever with the product replacement. because the film was firing on all cylinders that it didn't matter. People complaining about the Ford, the Sony Vio, and the Omega should also complain about the Aston Martin and the Brioni suits. James Bond is a government agent, so I expect him to have government issued stuff.
The most absurd complaint IMO is some people's demand for the return of the gadgets, Q, and moneypenny.
When I went with Exar Kun and his cousians, that is what their mom bickered about. Everybody else loved it.
darthbond
#41
Posted 07 December 2006 - 09:57 PM
#42
Posted 08 December 2006 - 12:05 AM
did they do it in the old movie much? moonraker per chance? lol
#43
Posted 08 December 2006 - 12:16 AM
Edited by bill007, 08 December 2006 - 12:17 AM.
#44
Posted 15 March 2012 - 01:25 AM
In fact, the only such moniker that stood out for me was the Texron designation on the side of the fuel truck at the Miami airport. Why did I notice this one and not the others? Because Texron is not a real fuel company, and the presence of a phony corporate logo in a film so predicated on realism (in a place where one would expect to see a recognizable, real world company name) momentarily caught my eye. Didn't hurt the scene, really, but it was far more incongruous than any of the real product placement.
My question is, who was taken 'out the moment' by phoney corporate names like Auric Enterprises, Osato Chemicals, WWTechtronics, Hi Fat Industries, Stromberg Shipping Lines, Drax Industries, Zorin Industries, CMGN, King Industries, Graves Diamonds, Skyfleet or Greene Planet?
Perzackly. No matter how predicated in the real world any movie is, the audience is supposed to be willing to suspend some degree of disbelief. I for one didn't care if there was a Texron company or not (for all I knew there was). Naturally, when products or companies are being used for nefarious purposes, no one wants their names associated with them (AVTAK started with a disclaimer because of the similarity between the villain's company and Zoran electronics). Give Kudos to Richard Branson for supplying aircraft for filming the Miami Airport sequence - all he got for it was a brief, off-to-the-right cameo even shorter than Florida Governor Bob Martinez's in LTK.
Sometimes product placement can work to the film makers' advantage, such as "British Airways - We'll take better care of you" in Moonraker (the hillsides in Rio really are lined with billboards like that), or the frozen pizza billboard in the background where Wednesday and Puggsly Addams were selling 'lemonade' ('What do you want on your Tombstone?')
BTW, I did a double-take when I saw a building in my city being put up by Quantum Construction - what, no disclaimer?
Edited by AMC Hornet, 15 March 2012 - 10:40 PM.
#45
Posted 15 March 2012 - 06:44 AM
Going more into real product placement, I don't really have too much of an issue with the overt moments in Moonraker: the billboard scene wouldn't have worked any better (or worse, I guess) with a fake company advertised on it and there are lots of bars/restaurants that used to have those plastic 7-Up signs on them... and I've seen some older places that still do. Die Another Day does bother me a bit, however... oh... and there's product placement in it too, I guess...
The Sony products featured in Casino Royale DO get shoved right into the viewer's face, but I think the gigantic Blu-ray logo on the security footage disc is the one that bothers me the most... it's 100% unnecessary. I guess I can get over the Ericcson and Vaio logos because cellular phones and laptop computers generally have noticeable logos on them, whereas most people don't find it necessary to print GIGANTIC logos onto custom labels for things like archived security footage media.
Edited by larrythefatcat, 15 March 2012 - 06:48 AM.
#46
Posted 15 March 2012 - 07:16 AM
I expect it was to lend a degree of authenticity to his novels, and probably reflected some of his own personal tastes, but my point is that product placement in Bond is nothing new, it's just that Ian Fleming didn't do it because Morlands tobacco, Cooper's marmalade, Bentley cars or the makers of the Walther or Berretta pistols were sponsoring him to.