We are inundated with advertising; these days, you can't avoid it.
That's the exact reason why we don't like it, doh.
Google, I'm sure, paid a ton of money to be featured in this film; they didn't get "free advertising" every time the commercials were shown, they paid for them.
That's another reason, actually. If it was a group of independant filmmakers that happened to choose Google for their plot, it would be free advertisement. But at least they could do whatever they want. In this case, as you said, Google dumped money into it. And that means they also bought some creative control about the movie plot, the characters and the way Google is represented. You probably heard of may thing Google is being accused of, like pushing or suppressing certain key words in search. But when Google is involved in the process, no critique of Google will be allowed.
Regular product placement in movies is one thing. I don't mind much if the main character drinks coke or pepsi. But this here is different, it's propaganda on many levels. And let's not forget that this comes from a company that is dealing with information on a very important level. You may not recognize it (which is part of the problem) but Google is shaping out opinions and world views as much as it is able to hide truths or propagate lies.
reply
share
i-hate-to-be
12 years ago
Agree with this completely, but I want to add that product placement is worse than other forms of advertising. When you see a billboard, you know its advertisment, you know they paid for it, you'll think about the message in the ad with (relatively) critical eyes. For product placement, the hero just happened to have that car/drink/wristwatch/computer/etc and you'll unconciously associate the brands with being cool.
Let's never forget that modern marketing does NOT aim to make us think "oh, that looks like a nice drink, I'll go and buy one right now!" - it's to make us get a warm fuzzy feeling once we do.
reply
share
onegilliamfan
12 years ago
I like how casual audiences will complain about the filmmakers whoring themselves to Google and then turn that Lego movie into a home video hit.
reply
share
puschit-1
12 years ago
I tend to disagree because of two reasons:
1) What about the other way round: As I director I might want to pick a specific car/drink/watch in order to make a statement about this character. For example, if the character is a wealthy, douchy, bragging type, I might want him to wear a Rolex, if he is a hipster, I might select an older Swatch for him etc. You know, sometimes you DO want play with images that these brands have.
And if I am going to choose Rolex anyway, I might as well ask Rolex to fork over some grands and in exchange focus on the watch one second longer.
2) Imagine a movie without any product placement, a movie where I am not allowed to use any props, clothes, vehicles, drinks or whatever from any known brand. I'd have to come up with made-up brands. For hundreds of items. Financial issues aside, if you watched that movie, you'd feel like being thrown into a fake world or a parallel universe. Does is never bother you when characters in movies watch internet video clips on some made up website instead of YouTube?
reply
share