A Few Words About A few words about...™ Casino Royale -- in BD (1 Viewer)

[Steve Tannehill]

I rather enjoyed seeing the row of Sony Blu-ray players, as I was playing the movie on one of my own.

Other than that, I was too involved with the fun movie to notice the trivial things like that.

- Steve

 

[MarekM]

me too
I already watched CR several times, alone, with girlfriend or with friends, and I (we) enjoyed every second of the movie.....

Marek

 

[Grant H]

There's a thread in AVS that mentions a couple pages worth of continuity errors. The fact I hadn't noticed any of them in 3 viewings says something to me about the quality of the film.

Actually, I noticed Bond had no marks on his face when he went back to the poker table, but for all I know every 00 agent has some kind of concealer to hide his battle damage...or there could be a cut scene with Vesper putting some make-up on him. I could see either of these being left on the cutting room floor, as Bond applying makeup wouldn't quite fit with the new anti-pretty-boy image.

Speaking of aging pretty boys, I forgot to mention perhaps the most absurd product placement in DAD: Bond's Norelco. The scene gives the impression Brosnan quickly got rid of his Robinson Cruso beard with it alone. Obviously, there had to have been some scissors involved too. Brosnan just stops short of looking at the camera and saying something like "the closeness of a blade, the comfort of a Norelco!"

 

[Reagan]

As far as product placement goes, Moonraker (1979) may be a more egregious example.

Not a Bond film, but Lethal Weapon 2 is also pretty bad.

-Reagan

 

[Robert Harris]

Point being that at least this viewer was taken out of the film. Grain structure around the Vaios and various Ericssons did look nice.

 

[BrettB]

PP has never really bothered me so not a problem in CR.

The Blu-ray presentation looks better than it did in the theater. Most notably the opening credits which are rock solid on the BD.

 

[ScottJH]

She was driving a T-Bird and not a Cougar.

 

[Grant H]

Ehh, I don't know why I kept thinking there had been a new Cougar since the T-bird too. I got tired of searching the Internet. Amazingly I couldn't find anything related to Jinx's car or cars from DAD besides the Aston Martin and Jaguar. I guess it shows how much everybody cared. Guess it should have been a new Mustang, but they weren't out yet I don't believe.

 

[Cees Alons]

Funny enough I didn't have many problems with the "Bond rebooting in the present time" aspect: "M" played by Judy Dench, references to 9/11, etc., but indeed the Sony Vaio logo (and a big one indeed) on the lid of one of the notebooks hindered.

Somehow those other aspects didn't distract as much as the big "Vaio". It looked rather ridiculous to me.


Cees

 

[Edwin-S]

The product placement in this film didn't really bother me, but I wish the practice would stop. The reason being is that the director and cinematographer start framing shots for clarity of logos instead of what is really important: the business taking place in the scene. The big Vaio logo seems like a good example of that very kind of thing. It is distracting because the camera shot is set up with highlighting the logo in mind, instead of the action. The advertising becomes more important than the artistry.

The other reason I would like to see PP stopped is due to the fact that I;m sick and tired of constantly being advertised to. I'm subjected to more than enough advertising in every conceivable media. I don't need to see more of it in the films I watch.

 

[KurtEP]

Considering I have one of those laptops, it didn't bother me at all. Of course, I wish mine had the capabilities of the one he was using. :frowning:

PP only really bothers me when it becomes noticeable or looks forced. The fact that almost all the cars in the movie were Ford products looked artificial to me, although I'd guess most people didn't notice (See the freeway scene in Matrix Reloaded for a similar situation). I'm not as tuned into Sony products as some here, so much of that went right by me. I still enjoyed the movie, though, a lot.

The worst PP I can remember was in the Thomas Crown Affair remake with the Pespi One shot. They may has well have stopped for a commercial break at that point. It looked totally forced.

 

[Grant H]

The Matrix Reloaded is a good example. Yeah, I noticed they were all GM cars. Quite a Cadillac ad, and more Oldsmobiles than I think I'd ever seen. Funny that after that and X-Files they dissolved the brand. Guess the ads didn't work.

Honestly, what bothers me most at the movies is sitting through the commercials before the show. I didn't pay to watch TV commercials. They tend to not be good ones either. I remember the good 'ol days when you just got coming attractions. Now you get commercials, commercials for TV shows, then the previews. By the time it's all done I tend to forget what I'm there to see or just want to take a nap.

I don't remember the Pepsi One from TCA. Must not have jumped out at me. Or I've just blocked it out.

 

[Rob Young]

I didn't even realize most of the PP. Didn't clue in the Ford thing (yes, I know at the time they owned both AM and LR) and all the Sony stuff even though I saw the laptop was a Sony. I missed the bluray logo stuff and the cell phone stuff. Guess I wasn't looking that close.

I am sure if I watch it again I'll notcie this stuff a lot more now that I have been made aware of it.

Anyway, PQ and AQ seemed excellent to me!

 

[Jefferson Morris]

F*ckin-A. Ninety-nine point nine percent of in-movie product placement slips right by me without my noticing. But commercials (other than trailers) shown before films (and that includes cell phone ads disguised as turn-off-your-cell-phone announcements) make my blood boil.

--Jefferson Morris

 

[Douglas Monce]

Interestingly if you watch the Ultimate Edition version of DAD they used the U.K. release print for the transfer. You can tell be cause the razor is a Phillips in that version. Norelco and Phillips are owned by the same company. Norelco is marketed in the U.S. and Phillips in the U.K.

The Bond films have had product placement going way back. They have had a deal with Ford at least going back to Goldfinger, and I believe Ford has been the car supplier on almost every film after.

Sony is all over the place in You Only Live Twice. Every time you see a TV screen it says Sony under it. Rolex supplied watches for most of the early films, then in the 90s they switched to Omega. Phillips was a name that showed up on electronics frequently in the 80s Bond films.

So its nothing new in Bond films, I think its just so obvious in Casino Royale because EVERYTHING is a Sony tie in.

Doug

 

[Beau222]

I have watched CR 5x's now and when I think back the PP that just stands out and which was probably the most subtle was the FedEx packages being delivered to the front desk.

 

[JulianK]

I wouldn't know a Buick from a Renaut, so product placement with cars is wasted on me! As long as they're different colours....

If you want to see some really outrageous product placement, check out Dracula 2000. The whole film seems like an advert for Virgin!

 

[David D H]

The worst example of product placement in the film (for me anyway) was the scene where Vesper used a Sony Cybershot camera to take take a picture of the Venetian canal. They showed her taking a photo with the camera right in centre-frame, cut away, and then cut back again.

Still, the funniest example of product placement in a Bond film (apart from all of Moonraker) is the car chase at the start of "Live and let Die" in New York. Almost every car (with exception of the colour) is exactly the same. It seems really unconvincing that they're not only the same brand, but also actually the same model.

 

[Bryan^H]

Yup,
That, and bad CGI. Luckily CR doesn't have both

 

[ErichH]

Enjoyed the film. Product placement never takes me out of a film. I think I've developed a mental block for many things like this. Advertising is on every parameter (and 4 inches above the OPs first line) so why let it ruin a good time.

That said, it does put the franchise in it's rightful place in one sense, so I can agree with Mr Harris. It's sleezy