It’s all about strategy.
Robert Zemeckis‘ runaway success “Cast Away” has drawn criticism for being nothing more than an advertisement for such corporations as FedEx and Wilson Sporting Goods, but is this criticism warranted? As Tinsletown execs wise up to public scrutiny, the days of shameless sponsorship have (somewhat) ended.
But capitalism lives on in Hollywood.
And lives stealthily.
Corporate “Cast Away“?
The second most visible presence in the hit “Cast Away” — after Tom Hanks — is the FedEx logo. Surprisingly, though, FedEx didn’t spend a cent on this exposure. The company became a prop.
“Our marketing people worked closely with the ‘Cast Away‘ crew after the screenwriter and director approached us in 1998,” says Carla Boyd, FedEx Senior Communications Specialist. According to Boyd, it wasn’t a case of buying screen time — it was a simple trade-off. “Air operations and ground operations were involved,” she explains. Providing hangars, jets and automobiles was FedEx’s sole responsibility. The exposure was free.
Wilson Sporting Goods is also benefiting from the success of “Cast Away.” One of their volleyballs is a character in the film — an inanimate sidekick named “Wilson.” With such ample product placement, was Wilson’s involvement more costly than that of FedEx?
“When we spoke with ‘Cast Away‘ producers over two years ago, we were asked to provide them with sporting goods. Little did we know how much actual exposure we would get,” says Molly Murphy-Wallace, Wilson’s Communications Manager. “Donating products to a movie or a similar production can be a hit-or-miss thing. Usually (the balls) are in the background of the scene. We are getting much more than we bargained for this time.”
Thus, a new form of product placement in films is born — one that forgoes cash: donation. Hopefully, this trend will continue.
[PAGEBREAK]
Recent Product Placement
Aside from “Cast Away,” several other recent productions feature some fairly shameless corporate presence.
“The Family Man”
How many times can Nicolas Cage mention his Ferrari?
Countless.
The 2000 fun-flick “The Family Man” is supposed to be about the shedding of vanity and the value of simplicity. Yet, mention of Cage‘s Ferrari — reflected by “angel” Don Cheadle — permeates the script and footage, and is even highlighted in the film’s trailer.
It’s an over-the-top reference that borders on insolence.
“The Thomas Crown Affair”
How long can the camera fixate on a corporate logo? As our video montage shows — forever.
Rene Russo, in the slick action pic “The Thomas Crown Affair,” does a veritable commercial for Pepsi in a startling scene from the film. The product-placement infiltration is blatant — but then again, watching a glamorous actress suck down a soda isn’t exactly disturbing, and that’s what Pepsi was banking on.
Nice.
“The World is Not Enough”
BMW has sunk their teeth into the Bond saga. Since the early ’90s, they’ve been the exclusive provider of automobiles for 007 fare , and that deal shows no signs of fading. Interesting — Bond drives a non-British import?
“ANTZ”
Okay, this was a cheesy animated feature, yet it contained one of the most jarring product-placement sequences in recent memory. In the video montage above, just try to count how many Pepsi products are featured on-screen. You’ll need two hands at least.
This was a smart move by Pepsi: no matter what they paid for this exposure, they became the first brand to be computer animated in a feature-length film.
“Jurassic Park”
Yes, the original. Though many viewers did not notice, the scene (above) displaying the theme park’s merchandise actually showed the products sold to the public. Spielberg got crafty. Suddenly, we were seeing the Christmas gifts we’d later purchase – a good seven months before they’d be marketed.
