One-third of the budget for the next James Bond film is to come from brands that will appear on screen, making it the biggest product-placement bonanza in cinema history, reports <a href="
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/more-than-a-word-from-007s-sponsors/story-e6frg6so-1226047962752" target="_blank">The Australian</a>.
Under a deal struck between the MGM studio and the film's distributor, Sony, $45 million will be raised from companies wanting their brands displayed on screen, says a New York marketing executive.
The figure is twice the previous record, held by Steven Spielberg's Minority Report, released in 2002. Lexus, Bulgari and American Express together paid about $20m to appear in the film.
Although the new production, codenamed Bond 23, is not due to reach cinemas before November next year, when the world's most successful film franchise will be celebrating its 50th anniversary, Sony is already establishing brand "ambassadors" to liaise with potential sponsors including, for the first time, Chinese technology entrepreneurs.
Spending on product placement in US films, television shows and video games tripled between 2004 and 2009, reaching about $3 billion, according to PQ Media, a research company.
Until the recession, Volkswagen and its linked company, Porsche, were spending $210m a year to ensure their cars were driven by screen heroes.
The Bond series has long profited from product placement. The most prominent include the three-film deal signed with BMW in 1995, starting with GoldenEye, for the fictional spy to use its cars.
Fans fear Bond scripts are being distorted by the needs of advertisers to plug products.
Their worries are shared by Morgan Spurlock, director of the documentary Super Size Me, in which he ate only McDonald's food for a month.
In his latest film, The Greatest Movie Ever Sold, exploring product placement, he derides lingering close-up shots of Ericsson phones in the last two Bond films. But he has a "special place in hell" for a scene on a train in Casino Royale in which 007 talked about his Omega watch to Vesper Lynd, his love interest, played by Eva Green. "The fact you are having a conversation about a watch is ridiculous," said Spurlock.
Comments
It's great to have the Bond 23 news flowing in once again.
Nice to see a smaller budget once again.
We may dislike product placement but it's an integral part of the financial process needed to ensure that Bond films remain the very best quality action films, and generally now it's too blatant in the films, certinally compared to say Moonraker's '7up' and 'British Airways' billboard's in the ambulance scene.
I admit the Bond/Vesper Omega exchange was maybe a little obvious but then again if I had a Omega Seamaster I'd be bragging about it in every conversation!
My favorite shots of Casino Royale:
http://screenmusings.org/CasinoRoyale/pages/CR_0275.htm
and
http://screenmusings.org/CasinoRoyale/pages/CR_0323.htm (Seriously, this one looks right out of a Ford Ad)
and
http://screenmusings.org/CasinoRoyale/pages/CR_0327.htm
and
http://screenmusings.org/CasinoRoyale/pages/CR_0343.htm
and
http://screenmusings.org/CasinoRoyale/pages/CR_0551.htm
and
http://screenmusings.org/CasinoRoyale/pages/CR_0840.htm
and
http://screenmusings.org/CasinoRoyale/pages/CR_1355.htm
not to mention
http://screenmusings.org/CasinoRoyale/pages/CR_1367.htm
and
http://screenmusings.org/CasinoRoyale/pages/CR_1425.htm
and
http://screenmusings.org/CasinoRoyale/pages/CR_1542.htm
and finally
http://screenmusings.org/CasinoRoyale/pages/CR_1425.htm
Phew.
Casino Royale is my favorite Bond film, by the way. No, really, it is.
Of course product placement works to a certain extent for Bond. Although it was not "product placement", Fleming always talked about real world products in his books and Bond's tastes for certain things.
Where they have to draw the line is for multiple mentions or views of the same object/logo, and having Bond user/wear those placed products that simply don't fit his style, like driving a Ford, that was a big fail. If you want to place some Ford, make it a background car Bond falls on during a fight, or passes during a chase.
And does product placement work? I am not up to speed on the data but it does not work on me. Did I eat Reese’s Pieces only after seeing ET? No. I also did not get into my car after first viewing CR to drive to the store and pick up a Sony Ericsson phone; nor did I hit the gas station after viewing MR to grab a 7-Up. http://screenmusings.org/Moonraker/pages/Mnrkr_528.htm So yeah, let companies fiance the next Bond film through the off-chance that someone will buy their products - it's their dime.
But ultimately, product placement is a part of the Bond legacy - Fleming is constantly brand-dropping cars, wines, guns, etc. - so, like it or not, product placement in the Bond films follows suit with the novels.
But seriously, I agree with what Luds said above, the product placement should enhance the style of the film: for example, Bond's Playboy membership card in DAF or his bottle of Peppar Absolut in NSNA (though I would think Bond would drink something more like Kettle One or Belvedere) or the Aston Martin of course or a fancy suit.
I do however like watching the old 60's films now and seeing the old billboards from the times like the Kenucky Fried Chicken in GF. It gives the story a time and place.
Baad Guy: No Mister Bond, I'm Wearing my __________ Bullet proof vest
No Please,No
I wouldn't be surprised if I probably agreed with many things Morgan Spurlock says, but the fact Bond talked about his watch in CR with Vesper was not ridiculous; it was product placement for sure, but nicely worked into the scene. And they were talking about an Omega, after all... ;)
Please.
Oh, Moonraker.
The problem with Campbell is that he doesn't seem to know how to be subtle in terms of product placement. I watched Edge of Darkness the other night and he had Mel Gibson's character remove two cans of Red Bull from his deceased daughter's bag. He could have just had an opened can of the stuff sitting on the beside cabinet in the background. Forster knows how to keep it more subtle.