I'd say it was part of a print ad that had been done months in advance and now the Suntory people want him to come in for an actual commercial. And who's to say they flew him out there to shoot a couple of pictures? They could have just as easily hired a photographer back in America to take those pictures in a studio and then have them sent to Japan to be done up for print.
After all he's wearing only a shirt in that print ad but he's wearing a tux for the commercial.
Yes, that's been my take on it for all these years, and that may very well be what Coppola intended, but I think it could potentially be slightly confusing (albeit only when you stop and think about it) and that the film possibly would be better off without that one shot (cleaner storytelling basically).
After all, if that ad was shot in the US then why travel to Japan at all? Surely it would be better to shoot everything, both the commercial and the new print campaign in the US?
After all, he's not only shooting a commercial while he is in Japan, he's also shooting yet another print campaign (the one where he's told to look like Roger Moore), and that print campaign looks very similar to the one we see at the very beginning of the film. Maybe it would have worked better if the ad we see in the beginning had looked more different to the subsequent shoots?
From a storytelling point of view what does that initial shot at the very beginning of the film tell us? Originally I felt it was about telling the viwer that Bob was a celebrity and it immediately gives us an impression of why he's there. But is it really needed though? (given that we shortly afterwards are told much of the same information when he's recieved at the hotel?)
This is of course all nitpicking on my part, but I'm just curious to hear what people think about it. :)
reply
share
CapnKaos
8 years ago
After all, if that ad was shot in the US then why travel to Japan at all? Surely it would be better to shoot everything, both the commercial and the new print campaign in the US?
That's not how things work. I get it. You're thinking like a Westerner and I'm not saying that to put you down but Japan is in a way, working by it's own rules.
I'm sure you've seen Japanese commercials showing Western celebrities shilling for Japanese products? They're all over youtube. My personal favorites were Tommy Lee Jones selling Suntory Coffee Boss coffee inna can. He plays an alien come to Earth to study us and each one ends with him enjoying a delicious can of coffee. In truth Japanese coffee inna can is good for emergencies only or for those that really don't like coffee. But I'm getting away from the point.
Print ads can be done anywhere in the world, TV ads are
always done in Japan especially for big companies like Suntory. This way they can send the actors out on TV shows and interviews and do signings and whatever. Kinda like what Bill Murray did in the movie.
After all, he's not only shooting a commercial while he is in Japan, he's also shooting yet another print campaign (the one where he's told to look like Roger Moore), and that print campaign looks very similar to the one we see at the very beginning of the film. Maybe it would have worked better if the ad we see in the beginning had looked more different to the subsequent shoots?
It looks similar but he was wearing a tux. The other one he was just wearing a regular shirt, it wasn't even a tuxedo shirt.
From a storytelling point of view what does that initial shot at the very beginning of the film tell us? Originally I felt it was about telling the viwer that Bob was a celebrity and it immediately gives us an impression of why he's there. But is it really needed though? (given that we shortly afterwards are told much of the same information when he's received at the hotel?)
I think it had more to do with him waking up in the taxi and seeing his ad with all the Japanese lettering making for a rather surreal experience. Jet lag is a bitch and the ride in from Narita is long. I think it was there to show that he was in an alien land but there was still something familiar about it.
reply
share
michaeltrenton
8 years ago
Yes, you're probably right. Like I said earlier I've never really had a problem with that ad being there on previous viewings, which should be an indication there is nothing wrong really. But for some reason when watching the film again recently, I started thinking about it and whether including that one shot could be a potential mistake. But it was probably just me overthinking things.
reply
share