Product placements may soon be added to classic films

Discussed at the time:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26860643

(42 points/36 days ago/60 comments)

A possible and troubling outcome of this may be that "controversial" scenes are removed from classic films entirely, because advertisers don't want to be associated with them. We've already seen disclaimers added to movies that are "problematic" like Gone with the Wind or Breakfast at Tiffany's.

When push comes to shove, will Media Co. turn down millions from Coke just to keep a 30-second scene in a film? I'm not optimistic.

Do we need any more reason to completely abandon mass media movies, music, etc.? If nothing is sacred to them, why should it be to me?

I am well aware of the history of product placements, but this just brings the reality to the forefront: you and I are viewed as nothing more than marketing targets and advertisement receptacles. It's dystopian.

No issue with movie product placements in general, though they are sometimes a little bit absurd. Film makers should be a little bit more discerning. But i think to revise old movies is unacceptable. For one thing, the actors/ directors may not have agreed with the ethos of the products they are "advertising". And i think it would be plain vandalism almost revisionism. I don't particularly want to watch the great escape and be forced to see a great big "drink heineken" sign, or a billboard promoting Amazon Prime. It's a no from me.

Weaving a product into a film or television program may be just about acceptable - whether payed for or not (the Modern Family Apple episode or advertising in Blade Runner stand out).

But adding/replacing ads in “classic” well regarded movies really destroys any notion that these are works of art or classics in any way.

Remember when the internet was going to be this amazing thing ?

These days it seems to be a machine for making me think "FFS" an increasing amount of times a day.

Movie studios are conspiring to remove any last bit of guilt I had about pirating.

David Lynch on contemporary product placement, 14 years ago: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F4wh_mc8hRE

We'll always have <strike>Paris</strike>Cincinatti, the affordable tourist destination

I remember reading a satirical article about a remake of 2001: A Space Odyssey, redoing all the product placement (of which there was a lot more than I noticed: https://everything2.com/title/Product+placement+in+2001%253A... basically replacing defunct companies with newer/modern counterparts. Can't find it, but I don't think it was The Onion.

Anyway... good lord stuff like this might actually happen.

How far away are we from adding product placement to reprints of art like the Mona Lisa, Sistine Chapel, etc?

Or: why I hodl/keep buying every 20th century movie I care about on tape/disc and archiving DRM-less digital files.

What's Amazon going to do to the MGM back catalog?

And note the nascent free video exodus beginning with the upcoming removal of "Charlie Bit My Finger".

> Mr Beringer says that the next leap forward will be the ability to digitally add product banners to live sports or concert broadcasts "in real time, or milliseconds after".

Hasn't that been possible for quite some time now?

"Bullshit. That's how I feel. Total fucking bullshit."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F4wh_mc8hRE

I don't mind product placement where it's credibly part of the artistic vision of the director - the classic examples here from my point of view include the Atari placement in Blade Runner.

The things that stick out like a sore thumb are where there's an element that has clearly been scripted by the advertiser to inject into a script.

Like: we're in a police procedural TV show and the detective's interactions with the GPS/entertainment system on vehicle Brand X suddenly become a focal point of dialog or the scene.

That stuff's just obnoxious.

This has been proposed as a technical possibility for a long time -- and yes, it is a terrible possibility! And yes, you can find an example of it happening, like the Chinese TV example! -- but "may soon" is doing a lot of heavy lifting in the title. They talked to a couple of business people who said, more or less, "making money is good". They reaffirm the technology is good. There's no real evidence they're in discussions with any actual studios or there are any actual advertisers planning to do this. There's no discussion of how the logistics would work in terms of streaming services. The only western example given in the article is Modern Family, which I'm pretty sure is referring to contemporaneous product placement (e.g. an episode was shot without product placement, but the intent was always to key it in in editing)

I don't think this is impossible and if it happened I would be frustrated and angry. But let's hypothetically say that I'm right, and this is not going to happen. That would make this article almost definitionally clickbait: a remote possibility is brought up with an infuriating headline designed to share, and the comments section is filled with people who clicked and are riled up emotionally. I think both journalists and people sharing things should be as conscious as possible about this and not participate in the click-attention game.

(I recognize a certain irony in commenting to say that no one should react to this, when I'm reacting to the reactions.)

Although I'm a bit scared of the advertisement industry, I'm hopeful this can turn out to be good. Most product placement are very subtle and non-intrusive, so they don't bother me too much. It may eventually lower the price of streaming services because it is a new revenue stream and may possibly enable a service were costumers don't have to pay for, like old non-cable TV but without intervals.

Also, this creates incentives for preservation and re-launch of classic films.

Ideally this could trigger a flow where producers create content; post-producers gather resources from advertisers pay the producers, digitally place products and distribute to consumers. If every step is healthy, it can even get to the viewers without the need to pay for it.

This could be a boom for entertainment in poorer countries where a good deal of the population can't pay for streaming. Some people simply wouldn't mind watching a five year old blockbuster with product placements if they don't have to pay for it.

Of course, it is possible that I'm being optimistic here... we'll have to see how this turns out.

Open the pod bay doors, Alexa

We continue to develop our ability to turn inward from the world, to shut out or edit what we don't like about it and construct ever more convincing fantasies by tricking our brains. Advertisement wants to be there with you in your most private thoughts, manipulating your private fantasies.

Max Headroom (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Headroom) seemed like such a funny lark when I was 15. Now... I'm nearly living in that world. It's sad.

Given that they've all been pirated I expect this will just fuel trading of pirated classics.

We've already seen where this goes with Star Wars: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harmy's_Despecialized_Edition

So then the next piratebay will have the -original, the -coke and the -redbull version?

Is there really a lack of space for companies to advertise on? Seems like we’re opening up more and more room because the biggest companies take up the best 50% of advertising space. I’d support a cap on how much one company can advertise on one platform (e.g. only so many hours of ads on television so that everyone is able to participate). That way, we don’t see ridiculous attempts like the headline to open up more advertising space.

Not related this directly, but it brings to mind the whole saga around the (failed) attempt to remove the rat from the final scene of The Departed:

https://www.indiewire.com/2019/02/warner-bros-shuts-down-kic...

Just another variant of deepfakes. All movies are “fakes” by definition. They also retrofit ads into live sporting events covering other billboards for over a decade now. None of this is new in fact.

Some people might even prefer the tracking part:

“So if you like wine then the hero of a film could be drinking a particular bottle that you might be tempted to try. Or if you are teetotal the star might be sipping on a bottle of branded water.”

-

Wonder how they will redo the dystopian The Running Man with ads:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Running_Man_(1987_film)

-

And while at it we already edit text and whitewash news and books. How about adding product placements from finance companies to The Merchant of Venice:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Merchant_of_Venice

Why should we care about people defacing fiction when the inflation of fiction is responsible for drowning out non-fiction? Even things intended to be non-fictional, like documentaries, are loaded with fiction.

I just don't understand why an advertiser would risk doing this. Seems like it could very wrong if the inserted material rubs people the wrong way. It reads as a tacky thing to do to me.

This is some kind of race to shit. Adtech is a scourge of humanity.

Can’t wait to watch a classic noir just to see humprhey bogart whip out his iqos vape and follow it up with a 2019 name brand bourbon before getting in his tesla.

I wonder if / how this sort of thing might be implemented in video games (like classic micro console releases or video game remasters).

Go ahead, push more people into piracy and then cry how those evil people pirate stuff cuz they hate big media...

Horrible idea; this is not a positive thing from a cultural heritage point of view. I am not a fan.

Sorry for the low effort post but fuck this and fuck the people trying to make it happen.

This is what it looks like when a handful of giant corporations run the world.

Can’t wait for the Google recruiting billboards in On the Waterfront.

Can't wait for Rosebud to be the latest Ford EV Truck.

Feels a bit too 1984 to me…

Now do it with books.

Han shot first !

Another example of capitalism's relentless pursuit of value extraction from anything and everything with no consideration given to the side effects, because money is the only way to measure success and importance in our society. We should be building a society for the benefit of everyone, instead of building a society optimized for value extraction for the benefit of a small few.