Only good characters use iPhones in movies | Hacker News Reader

Only good characters use iPhones in movies

twitter.com

23 pointshaddr18 comments

This article from last year [1] has more content. It says:

> “We used Coca-Cola bottles on the day of shooting, and we had to paint out the Coca-Cola label [later],” said Boyle in an interview.

What rule prevents them using a Coca-Cola bottle on-screen? Is it the copyright of the logo, perhaps?

(There are also some actual numbers. "Daniel Craig reportedly spurned a $50m deal that would have seen James Bond using a Samsung phone in 2015 outing Spectre because he did not consider it good enough for 007." – so we can see how much money is on the table for these deals.)

[1] https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2020/feb/26/apple-doe...

I think there is no rule, you ask Coca-Cola to pay and if they don't, you paint them out.

> Apple lets you use iPhones in movies

Can Apple prevent iPhones from being used in movies?

No, they pay the filmmakers to use them just like other manufacturers, but they also make certain demands.

Does this apply to non-AppleTV+ movies as well?

Rian Johnson confirmed that in some commentary/interview about Knives Out

Only if you want Apple product placement.

Meaning they'll pay the movie-makers? How much would be involved? Is there anything they would do if the filmmakers decided to eschew the payment and give a villain an iPhone anyway?

Why on Earth any producer would agree to this? Filmmaking is a business.

> Is there anything they would do if the filmmakers decided to eschew the payment and give a villain an iPhone anyway?

Then the product placement contract would be violated and the filmmakers wouldn't get any money from Apple for the placement of iPhones in their movie.

flagged, I can't read tweets as I have no account sorry.

You can read tweets without an account.

Not anymore. Twitter is rolling out changes that require an account to view tweets.

Do you flag every paywalled article posted as well?

https://archive.is/76qc7

yeah, what's the point of a link if it isn't accessible by the majority of readery.

I find good, paywalled content on the HN homepage regularly, if not daily. If you want to read it you can usually find a workaround.

What’s the point of flagging content you can not read, or do not want to put the effort into reading through workarounds? This only lowers discoverability for others.

workaround: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/privacy-redirect/p...

You can use a Twitter front end alternative, eg. nitter.net/lordbeef

There are also web browser extensions that will redirect URLs to more privacy-friendly alternatives such as https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/privacy-redir...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com