To me it is a whole other subject that I don’t feel I have the resources (or research skills) to explore… the relationship between Mad Men and its sponsors. Those little advertising tids offered both historical advertising leaps as embellishment to the show, and, clearly, were their own innovative advertisements.
(These were included as part of the commercial breaks during the premier run of the first season. AMC isn’t using them in the repeats, because they are stupidhead dumbasses.)
What I want to know more about is what is and isn’t factual (some I get, some I don’t. I wasn’t familiar with the apparently legendary It’s Toasted, for example). They are obviously intermingling real brands and real campaigns with fictional. How are those decisions being made? Are they attempting, with each mention, to get buy-in from a real name, with fiction always being their second-line? Did Wrigley’s refuse them the rights to write in their Doublemint Twins in Long Weekend (episode 10)?
Years ago you never saw a real brand onscreen, neither in film nor on tv. People would ask for “cola” and labels were obscured. Then product placement started rearing its ugly head. Only here’s the thing… it wasn’t ugly. We love our products. Love our brands. We love familiarity. One famous example of product placement was in Good Will Hunting when Ben Affleck would show up with two hot coffees from Dunkin Donuts. I remember finding that delightful, rather than feeling raped by advertising executives. What I learned later was that there were agencies (or at least teams within agencies) dedicated to finding places within movies for their products. So understand this… the scenario was not: Affleck was showing up with two nameless cups of coffee, and somehow that got sold to DD. Rather, someone pitched the whole thing… Hey, wouldn’t it be great if these two guys had a little coffee routine, sponsored by us, Dunkin Donuts? And the scenes were incorporated into the film.
So I’m interested in how this is all working, who is paying for what. Beyond just when are they being historically accurate and when they’re not. Which is always cool about any historical drama. You know, Titanic had Rose and Jack, and Molly Brown and the Astors.
January 6, 2008 at 10:31 pm
I hate when the product placement is really obvious. Like the Pop-Tarts in The Sixth Sense. Oh my GODS was that annoying. “Do you want a Pop-Tart?” Opens cabinet apparently filled with nothing but Pop-Tart, to lingering gaze of camera. “Eat your Pop-Tart.” “I’m going to miss my bus.” “Take your Pop-Tart with you.” FOR THE LOVE OF GOD!
But a sense of naturalism is better than fake products, which can be just as irritating, like 555 phone numbers. The Dunkin Donuts thing is natural.
Sometimes product placement in movies works the other way. On the director’s commentary to The Whole Nine Yards, they asked VW to sponsor them for use of the Beetle in the film, because they thought a Beetle was the perfect car for Rosanna Arquette’s character. VW refused because the car is perceived as a woman’s car, and they only wanted to pay for men driving it. They used it anyway because they liked it.
April 8, 2008 at 2:52 pm
[...] will participate in the Mad-vertising, which I think is the stuff that Roberta likes so much; the conversational/factual bits about products and product advertising that precedes the regular [...]
April 19, 2009 at 11:00 am
[...] will participate in the Mad-vertising, which I think is the stuff that Roberta likes so much; the conversational/factual bits about products and product advertising that precedes the regular [...]