Would you have taken up this challenge? Coke Zero challenged unsuspecting train passengers to unlock the 007 in them for their chance to win exclusive tickets for the new James Bond movie Skyfall. However, the tickets weren't free. People had to go the extra mile and unlock their inner 007 in less than 70 seconds to win.
A Guardian film blog on the product placement in Skyfall, which raises the bar, from Tom Ford tailored suits to Q's Sony Vaio hardware. As well as offscreen alliances from Coke Zero to perfume retailers, and not forgetting Bond's new tipple of choice Heineken. The blog goes on to state that while few of Bond's brand of choice are British, much of the marketing has worked towards underlining his British heritage. Also mentioned is Skyfall's "ace in the pack" Shanghai, and the blog finishes with box office predictions.
I've heard quite a few jokes on various radio shows about how Bond has ditched
the Martinis for Lager. Even the Alan Tichmarsh show On their Bond segment made
a joke about it. )
"I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."
I've heard quite a few jokes on various radio shows about how Bond has ditched
the Martinis for Lager. Even the Alan Tichmarsh show On their Bond segment made
a joke about it. )
And the Heineken 'moment' is pretty much blink and you will miss it...I think you would have to be looking for it to spot it...but I know we are all looking for it, so you will see it )
Coke Zero was in QoS too, but I didn't realize it until I read about it on this forum. There's a Coke Zero being carried on a tray by an extra at the Green Planet party. You have to actively look for it to find it. This is why I'm not concerned about product placement.
I actually noticed it more in Casino Royale, when it seemed a Sony logo was in your face every five minutes, but it still didn't hurt that film.
A Guardian film blog on the product placement in Skyfall, which raises the bar, from Tom Ford tailored suits to Q's Sony Vaio hardware. As well as offscreen alliances from Coke Zero to perfume retailers, and not forgetting Bond's new tipple of choice Heineken. The blog goes on to state that while few of Bond's brand of choice are British, much of the marketing has worked towards underlining his British heritage. Also mentioned is Skyfall's "ace in the pack" Shanghai, and the blog finishes with box office predictions.
This article is a bit of something and nothing, I think. Firstly, what tiny percentage of the film-going audience will even know that DC is wearing Tom Ford? And of those who do, how many could care less? How many people would ever have noticed that DC swigs a Heineken or a Coke Zero or had a Mount Gay in CR if it wasn't pointed out to them? And again, how many of those will care. How many will consciously notice that he's using a Sony mobile or laptop just because it's a Sony and not because Sony own the studio? Why shouldn't Visit Britain have a marketing campaign around Skyfall? Tourism NZ used 'Lord of the Rings' for years. And again...how many will care. Most non-Bondies that I know think the Heineken ads are cool and fun. I've yet to meet a single person who thinks they're tacky or a sell-out, Bondies and non-Bondies alike.
If the difference between SF having a £93.7m budget and looking slick and impressive is a £28m Heineken campaign that includes some enjoyable television adverts, a few posters and some tins/bottles of beer with a silhouette of Bond on them, then I'm completely in favour of the Heineken connection.
The bottom line is that I'm there to enjoy a film. Product placement only becomes an issue for me if it detracts from that film or drags the character in a direction that it shouldn't be dragged - ie if DC was wearing baggy jeans hanging below his bottom with JUICY stencilled across the seat. Bond is not high art and therefore it's not a sell-out to have a three-second shot of Bond quaffing a bottle of beer in a less than salubrious joint (it would be more ridiculous if he was sipping a martini in a setting like that) as it would be if the Louvre tattooed Microsoft onto the Mona Lisa's cheek.
As long as product placement isn't 'in my face' or completely untrue to the storyline/character, then long live product placement!
As I said before, and I'm fairly critical especially when it comes to Bond, the movie is good enough to ensure that you don't even notice the placement, I've found it more intrusive in previous films, going back as far as MR. Well done Mr Mendes, BB, MGW et al {[]
I've never really understood the fuss people get over with product placement in Bond films, the way i see it, Bond lives in our world and would use real world products such as Sony, now as long as there's no blatant shoe-horning in of a product im more then OK with it, in fact i prefer it over a fabricated product.
One aspect of the rise of Product Placement that I do hate and which thankfully only happens on TV reality shows and not in films (as yet, any way), is when they blank out the label of a product in a cooking or home reno programme. That's madness and pure greed. If the item is good enough to be used by the star/host of the programme in the action for which we've tuned in to watch the programme, then surely it's good enough to be seen on camera without having to worry that they didn't pay a fee.
Well that first picture's actually in Birmingham taken near Moor Street station. Either way it looks really good on the side of the tatty Travel West Midlands buses.
Thankfully someone noticed the first pic above was Birmingham.
The prdouct placement in SFwas fine not as in ur face as in Brosnan movies. Although I did think the shot of the omega in the PTS did linger a second or 2 longer than required.
An article from The Independent focusing on the marketing of Skyfall in the UK, which is estimated to have cost between £5 million and £8 million. A film marketing executive not involved with Skyfall is quoted: "I've never seen anything like this. But the studio needs the film to be a success, as the UK is leading with the release. It is a matter of confidence worldwide." Skyfall marks the widest release ever by Sony Pictures in the UK, at 587 cinemas on more than 1,500 screens.
The adverts in the movie itself didnt bother me at all..rarely do..in fact almost 'ground' the movie in a reality. And besides, although we clearly saw Bond drink in hand covering logo..again..that was all fine..rest of the adverts again aware of them but heck didnt detract from the movie.
However...what did ..i think..no do the movie any good at all were..the use of about 4 Bond adverts BEFORE the movie. It really was a joke...I mean..when you get JB aftershave promoted, the watch, the mobile...an advert..then a ( usually ) computer game ad then another Bond advert...I mean...it really cheapens the movie.
Never a fan of advertising in the cinema..you pay enough, for the overpriced sweets too, let alone then have to sit though a ton of adverts before the film trailers etc..and all the while you have kids behind and in front yappying away, their phone going/lighting up etc...But to get back to the thread, No..Skyfall ( although not a fan of the movie ) did not suffer in the slightest from an inavertising in my view.
I do recall however Kodak...in the opening credits of Licence to Kill..on the camera...never forget that one...
I cannot properly comment on this as I will not be seeing Skyfall until tomorrow, at least I have been forewarned. An article in the Mail Online claims fans are sitting through thirty minutes of adverts before the film starts. Apparently, the onslaught of brands prompted many fans to complain on Twitter. One tweet: "Wow, sickening number of Bond product placement ads. Am sick of 007 and Skyfall hasn't even started yet!"
Very mild spoiler alert, don't read if you don't want to know exactly what Bond says about his drink in scene 113 )
Heineken... I thought it was token, unsubtle and utterly pointless. Although I quite liked the fact that as his character refined and became more the Bond we know (in other words as he became better!) he moved from beer to the proper -{ with the satisfied expression of "perfect" as the waitress shook the cocktail for him!
Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice and everyone dies.
One tweet: "Wow, sickening number of Bond product placement ads. Am sick of 007 and Skyfall hasn't even started yet!"
I haven't read the article, but I think people are confusing ads with product placement. They're not the same. Ads, adverts, commercials are just that...advertisments. Be they posters, on TV or in the newspaper. Anyone can advertise wherever they like as long as it's not offensive and there's space/time available.
Product Placement is the appearance of a product in a non-advertising situation...ie Bond using a clearly-identifiable Sony Vaio laptop, a close-up of him checking his clearly-identifiable Omega, or drinking a beer with the label aimed squarely at the camera. That's product placement.
I hate ads before a film (except for previews of other films). I've paid way too much money to sit and watch that film and I resent being subjected to adverts when I can't change the channel or get up and leave. However, this is not unique to Skyfall and I believe that those ads in the cinema are sold by the cinema and not by the prdouction company.
Bond will sell anything, He even has a Lock-up Garage to keep the stock.
I half ecpected him to open the Boot of the car to sell a few Leather Jackets
and some " Four lighters for a quid " )
Only Joking,
Sadly All films have to use Product placement these days. I had worries
over the amount Skyfall had But have to admitt. I thought they did a great
job at keeping them unobtrusive.
Only we are in the know after months of leaks over which Brands etc would
be in it, On screen you'd blink and miss them.
NO discussing watch brands in Skyfall.
"I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."
FelixLeiter ♀Staffordshire or a pubPosts: 1,286MI6 Agent
I cannot properly comment on this as I will not be seeing Skyfall until tomorrow, at least I have been forewarned. An article in the Mail Online claims fans are sitting through thirty minutes of adverts before the film starts. Apparently, the onslaught of brands prompted many fans to complain on Twitter. One tweet: "Wow, sickening number of Bond product placement ads. Am sick of 007 and Skyfall hasn't even started yet!"
That article does not seem to separate 'adverts' and 'product placement' and personally I've seen no one complaining about the product placement on Twitter.
I did sit through over 30 minutes of adverts which felt ridiculous, especially for such a long movie, and I ended up missing my last bus home. I'm planning on going again for a daytime showing so am hoping that there won't be so many adverts then. I was pleased with the adverts shown though. Yes, they were almost all Bond products/sponsorship but then I felt that they were appropriate for the audience that had come to see it. I felt the same with the film trailers that followed, right up until they showed the Twilight trailer. )
I found the product placement perfectly fine and agree with some of the things that have already been said; I really only noticed it because I was on the lookout for them and was expecting them. The only exception to this was the PTS lingering on the watch, which did feel a bit too long a shot.
I cannot properly comment on this as I will not be seeing Skyfall until tomorrow, at least I have been forewarned. An article in the Mail Online claims fans are sitting through thirty minutes of adverts before the film starts. Apparently, the onslaught of brands prompted many fans to complain on Twitter. One tweet: "Wow, sickening number of Bond product placement ads. Am sick of 007 and Skyfall hasn't even started yet!"
That article does not seem to separate 'adverts' and 'product placement' and personally I've seen no one complaining about the product placement on Twitter.
I did sit through over 30 minutes of adverts which felt ridiculous, especially for such a long movie, and I ended up missing my last bus home. I'm planning on going again for a daytime showing so am hoping that there won't be so many adverts then. I was pleased with the adverts shown though. Yes, they were almost all Bond products/sponsorship but then I felt that they were appropriate for the audience that had come to see it. I felt the same with the film trailers that followed, right up until they showed the Twilight trailer. )
I found the product placement perfectly fine and agree with some of the things that have already been said; I really only noticed it because I was on the lookout for them and was expecting them. The only exception to this was the PTS lingering on the watch, which did feel a bit too long a shot.
Thirty minutes of ads and trailers is rather ridiculous. Luckily, I knew about it beforehand. I could have wandered around outside for a bit but decided to close my eyes and relax through most of the ads. I was distinctly unimpressed by the trailers, so much that I can only remember one of them and that was for The Hobbit.
On first viewing I also found the product placement perfectly fine. I wasn't bothered by the lingering shot on the watch, the only thing that was remotely intrusive was Eve's mention of V W Beetles in the PTS. One or two people have mentioned a scene in MI6 where Tanner drinks Heineken, I didn't notice that.
Moore Not Less 4371 posts (2002 - 2007) Moore Than (2012 - 2016)
I suspect that the people who complain about too much product placement in Bond films have never read a Bond book: Fleming used brand names freely and frequently, to add verisimilitude to his stories, and to help paint a full picture of Bond's lifestyle.
There's far more product placement in the books than in the films - it's one of the things that helped them to grab the readers' imagination in the austere, post WW2 years.
I have noticed that the Omega watch Gets a LOT of screen time in Skyfall.
Even in at M's briefing it's in clear view.
Yes it does, doesn't it? All those people worried about Bond becoming a Heineken man were put to shame, as a Heineken bottle only pops up twice - and even with the label covered. The Omega watch gets it's own screen time, along with the Tom Ford glasses (remember Silva's island?).
I thought the second time the Heineken bottle came into view was much more 'shoe horned in' than the first time. I also think the references to car brands and Omega were much more annoying and blatent.
Comments
http://twitpic.com/b4mwfr
Unlock the 007 in you. You have 70 seconds!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RDiZOnzajNU&feature=youtu.be
The Skyfall's the limit on James Bond marketing
http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/filmblog/2012/oct/23/skyfall-marketing-james-bond
the Martinis for Lager. Even the Alan Tichmarsh show On their Bond segment made
a joke about it.
http://www.hm.com/es/product/99092?article=99092-B
And the Heineken 'moment' is pretty much blink and you will miss it...I think you would have to be looking for it to spot it...but I know we are all looking for it, so you will see it
I actually noticed it more in Casino Royale, when it seemed a Sony logo was in your face every five minutes, but it still didn't hurt that film.
This article is a bit of something and nothing, I think. Firstly, what tiny percentage of the film-going audience will even know that DC is wearing Tom Ford? And of those who do, how many could care less? How many people would ever have noticed that DC swigs a Heineken or a Coke Zero or had a Mount Gay in CR if it wasn't pointed out to them? And again, how many of those will care. How many will consciously notice that he's using a Sony mobile or laptop just because it's a Sony and not because Sony own the studio? Why shouldn't Visit Britain have a marketing campaign around Skyfall? Tourism NZ used 'Lord of the Rings' for years. And again...how many will care. Most non-Bondies that I know think the Heineken ads are cool and fun. I've yet to meet a single person who thinks they're tacky or a sell-out, Bondies and non-Bondies alike.
If the difference between SF having a £93.7m budget and looking slick and impressive is a £28m Heineken campaign that includes some enjoyable television adverts, a few posters and some tins/bottles of beer with a silhouette of Bond on them, then I'm completely in favour of the Heineken connection.
The bottom line is that I'm there to enjoy a film. Product placement only becomes an issue for me if it detracts from that film or drags the character in a direction that it shouldn't be dragged - ie if DC was wearing baggy jeans hanging below his bottom with JUICY stencilled across the seat. Bond is not high art and therefore it's not a sell-out to have a three-second shot of Bond quaffing a bottle of beer in a less than salubrious joint (it would be more ridiculous if he was sipping a martini in a setting like that) as it would be if the Louvre tattooed Microsoft onto the Mona Lisa's cheek.
As long as product placement isn't 'in my face' or completely untrue to the storyline/character, then long live product placement!
www.justgiving.com/inMemoryOfLewisCollins
www.helpforheroes.org.uk
Well that first picture's actually in Birmingham taken near Moor Street station. Either way it looks really good on the side of the tatty Travel West Midlands buses.
The prdouct placement in SFwas fine not as in ur face as in Brosnan movies. Although I did think the shot of the omega in the PTS did linger a second or 2 longer than required.
The FULL article.
The car, the watch, the make-up, the beer advert: James Bond - licence to print money
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/features/the-car-the-watch-the-makeup-the-beer-advert-james-bond--licence-to-print-money-8228760.html
However...what did ..i think..no do the movie any good at all were..the use of about 4 Bond adverts BEFORE the movie. It really was a joke...I mean..when you get JB aftershave promoted, the watch, the mobile...an advert..then a ( usually ) computer game ad then another Bond advert...I mean...it really cheapens the movie.
Never a fan of advertising in the cinema..you pay enough, for the overpriced sweets too, let alone then have to sit though a ton of adverts before the film trailers etc..and all the while you have kids behind and in front yappying away, their phone going/lighting up etc...But to get back to the thread, No..Skyfall ( although not a fan of the movie ) did not suffer in the slightest from an inavertising in my view.
I do recall however Kodak...in the opening credits of Licence to Kill..on the camera...never forget that one...
The FULL article.
The name's Brand, James Brand! 007 fans forced to sit through THIRTY minutes of adverts before movie even starts
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2224574/The-s-Brand-James-Brand-Film-fans-forced-sit-30-minutes-adverts-movie-starts.html
Heineken... I thought it was token, unsubtle and utterly pointless. Although I quite liked the fact that as his character refined and became more the Bond we know (in other words as he became better!) he moved from beer to the proper -{ with the satisfied expression of "perfect" as the waitress shook the cocktail for him!
I haven't read the article, but I think people are confusing ads with product placement. They're not the same. Ads, adverts, commercials are just that...advertisments. Be they posters, on TV or in the newspaper. Anyone can advertise wherever they like as long as it's not offensive and there's space/time available.
Product Placement is the appearance of a product in a non-advertising situation...ie Bond using a clearly-identifiable Sony Vaio laptop, a close-up of him checking his clearly-identifiable Omega, or drinking a beer with the label aimed squarely at the camera. That's product placement.
I hate ads before a film (except for previews of other films). I've paid way too much money to sit and watch that film and I resent being subjected to adverts when I can't change the channel or get up and leave. However, this is not unique to Skyfall and I believe that those ads in the cinema are sold by the cinema and not by the prdouction company.
I half ecpected him to open the Boot of the car to sell a few Leather Jackets
and some " Four lighters for a quid "
Only Joking,
Sadly All films have to use Product placement these days. I had worries
over the amount Skyfall had But have to admitt. I thought they did a great
job at keeping them unobtrusive.
Only we are in the know after months of leaks over which Brands etc would
be in it, On screen you'd blink and miss them.
NO discussing watch brands in Skyfall.
That article does not seem to separate 'adverts' and 'product placement' and personally I've seen no one complaining about the product placement on Twitter.
I did sit through over 30 minutes of adverts which felt ridiculous, especially for such a long movie, and I ended up missing my last bus home.
I found the product placement perfectly fine and agree with some of the things that have already been said; I really only noticed it because I was on the lookout for them and was expecting them. The only exception to this was the PTS lingering on the watch, which did feel a bit too long a shot.
Thirty minutes of ads and trailers is rather ridiculous. Luckily, I knew about it beforehand. I could have wandered around outside for a bit but decided to close my eyes and relax through most of the ads. I was distinctly unimpressed by the trailers, so much that I can only remember one of them and that was for The Hobbit.
On first viewing I also found the product placement perfectly fine. I wasn't bothered by the lingering shot on the watch, the only thing that was remotely intrusive was Eve's mention of V W Beetles in the PTS. One or two people have mentioned a scene in MI6 where Tanner drinks Heineken, I didn't notice that.
There's far more product placement in the books than in the films - it's one of the things that helped them to grab the readers' imagination in the austere, post WW2 years.
Even in at M's briefing it's in clear view.
Yes it does, doesn't it?
he was sluming it
with Tanner was not as subtle.
and date, even take in some of the Bezel details.