text:
|UFDC Home
|myUFDC Home | Help
This item has the following downloads:
|Full Text
2007 Karen Fenton
To Mom, Dad, Christina, Concetta, James and Duncan.
I thank my committee chairperson, Dr. Cynthia Morton, and my committee members,
Dr. Marilyn Roberts, Dr. James Babanikos, and Professor Elaine Wagner. Dr. Morton's interest
and knowledge of product placement encouraged my own interest in the topic, an interest that
grew exponentially as my research unfolded. I am grateful to Professor Wagner, who encouraged
my interest in creativity and art and to Dr. Babanikos for his knowledge of the world of
independent film, and for his relationships with independent filmmakers, some of whom served
as my respondents. I also thank Dr. Roberts for stepping onto my committee when another
member was away for sabbatical, and for her constant encouragement, support and practical
advice. I thank Jody Hedge, Program Assistant to the Division of Graduate Studies and
Research, who answered countless questions and provided ongoing encouragement. I thank
Esther Biggs, a co-worker without whom I would not have had the array of filmmaker
respondents which I did. I am also eternally grateful to each filmmaker who lent their time,
expertise, and often humor to my interviews and for their candor and openness during the
interview process. These filmmakers are: Deanna Russo, Chris Zara, Fred Zara, Paul Sirmons,
Ralph Clemente, James T. Henri, Shamrock McShane, Mike McShane, Darren McDaniel, and
D.A. Jackson. And finally, I am appreciative of my boyfriend, James, who supported me
throughout my research and writing and shared my joy when my results were complete.
P ro du ct P lacem ent ........................................................... ................ .. 9
Independent Film s ....................................................... ............... ............... .11
Exploratory Question.......... ...... .... ..................................13
O organization of this T hesis ........................................................................... .......... .......... 13
W hat Is P product P lacem ent? .................................................................... .........................14
Product Placem ent versus Sponsorship ................................... ..................................... 16
The H history of Product Placem ent ............................................................................ ...16
Product Placement in M ovies vs. Television ...................................... ............... 19
The Relationships of Product Placement..................................................................... 20
The A ppeal of Product Placem ent............................................................................. ...22
P lacem ent w without a P rice ....................................................................... ..................23
The B business of Product Placem ent .................................................................... ...... 24
Identification of Product Placem ent ...................................................... ..... .......... 25
Product Placem ent W orldw ide .............................................. ............................. 26
The Future of Product Placem ent ........................................................................ .. .... 27
W hat is an Independent F ilm ? ...................................................................... ....................28
Funding an Independent Film ............................................................................ ... .... 30
M making an Independent Film .......................................................... ............... 30
The Future of Independent Film ...................................................................................31
Interview Procedure .................. ................................................... ...... ....... 33
R e se arch V ariab le s ........................................................................................................... 3 4
S a m p le .............. ...... .............................................................3 5
Them es That Em erged from Interview s ........................................ ........................... 40
Response Them e M oney/Cost ..........................................................................41
R response T hem e C ontrol............................................................................. ............... 44
Response Theme Experience Level .......................................... ............................... 46
Response Theme Filmmaker Interest in Product Placement .................... ....... ............49
Response Theme Artistic Integrity/Art versus Business ............................................. 50
Implications for Product Placement in Independent Film............................................... 54
L im itatio n s ..........................................................................................5 6
Suggestions for Future R research .................................................. .............................. 57
C o n clu sio n ................... ...................5...................8..........
Interview T transcription # 1 .......................................................................... .....................67
Interview T transcription #2 .......................................................................... .....................74
Interview T transcription #3 .......................................................................... .....................82
Interview T transcription #4 .......................................................................... .....................89
Interview T transcription #5 ......................................................................... ....................10 1
Interview T transcription #6 .................................................................. ......... ..................110
Interview T transcription #7 .................................................................. ....... ....................117
Interview T transcription #8 ......................................................................... ....................127
Interview T transcription #9 ......................................................................... ....................136
Interview T transcription # 10 ........................................................................ ...................144
Table page
3-1 D im tensions of attitude defined ....................................................................... ..................35
4-1 Filmmaker respondent characteristics .............................................................................39
Abstract of Thesis Presented to the Graduate School
of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree of Master of Advertising
Karen Fenton
May 2007
Chair: Cynthia Morton
Major: Advertising
Product placement is the placement of brands in a film or other media in order to gain
exposure for the brand. This practice is often done for a fee or trade arrangement. Previous
research on the topic of product placement in film focused on audience perceptions of the
practice. My study sought to learn how independent filmmakers felt about product placement. I
questioned aspiring and existing independent filmmakers about their attitudes toward product
placement in film. My study was a qualitative study consisting often in-depth interviews of
eleven aspiring and existing independent filmmaker respondents. I explored the attitudes toward
the practice, the interest in the practice of product placement in general, and the filmmakers'
opinions on topics including audience distraction by product placement, artistic integrity and
product placement, and cost of film production and product placement.
A major finding of my study was that product placement arrangements in the independent
film world differ greatly from those in the world of Hollywood feature films. Another important
finding was that though initially resistant to the idea of product placement, most independent
filmmakers reported that they would be open to the practice if it helped the bottom line of their
film, as long as they could maintain a certain level of control and artistic integrity. Implications
for product placement practitioners and suggestions for future research are discussed.
A consumer's day is flooded with commercial messages from start to finish. From
morning radio and billboards during the commute to work, to sit-coms jammed with commercial
breaks at night, it is seemingly impossible to find a single moment of solace from the constant
onslaught of advertising messages. To a consumer, it may seem that advertising has reached its
maximum potential in touching nearly every part of his life, but to an advertiser this is far from
the truth. Consumers are constantly evolving and growing weary of traditional advertising
techniques, but as fast as consumers are learning ways to avoid commercial messages,
advertisers are seeking to place messages into untapped regions of the consumer's life.
Product Placement
Product placement, and specifically product placement in film, is one solution that
advertisers have utilized to place brand images in front of consumers without taking the hard-sell
approach toward which consumers have grown so jaded. Product placement, sometimes referred
to as brand placement, is the practice of placing brands within an entertainment medium, such as
a television show, video game, or movie, in exchange for some fee, be it money or actual traded
product. Product placement has been defined as, "a paid product message aimed at influencing
movie or television audiences via the planned and unobtrusive entry of a branded product into a
movie or TV program" (Balasubramanian, 1994), or as "paid commercial insertions within a
particular media program intended to heighten the visibility of brand, type of product or service"
(LaPastina, 2001).
Product placement in film has existed in some form since the start of cinema, but this
technique really broke through as a significant method of mass communication in the 1982
Steven Spielberg classic E. T.: The Extra-Terrestrial. This film featured the star character leaving
a trail of Reese's Pieces candy to lure his alien friend. At the time of the film's release Reese's
Pieces was a new candy to the market and its feature role in the film increased sales of the
product a reported 70 % (Segrave, 2004).
With the true start of product placement in film in the early 1980s, the academic study of
this advertising technique wasn't far behind. The study of product placement in television, video
games, and particularly film, has been a widely growing area of study in advertising research.
The mid-1990s and through the following decade gave way to a variety of studies about product
placement in film. Researchers analyzed how consumers felt about product placement (Gupta,
Balasubramanian & Klassen, 2000), how they are influenced to buy by product placements
(Morton & Friedman, 2002), and what products are best fits for movie and television placements
(Freeman, 2000). During the year 2000 and beyond interest in the practice of product placement
grew rapidly and studies of this technique increased significantly.
Though several studies analyze the consumers' attitudes and perceptions toward product
placement, there is a lack of knowledge regarding the attitudes and perceptions of product
placement from those assembling the product message: the filmmakers. In researching this
specific product placement topic I found only a handful of articles exploring anything
specifically related to the attitudes or opinions of this group of people, and none directly related
to the study of product placement in independent film (Nitins, 2005; Turcotte, 1995). My
exploration is particularly timely in its contribution to product placement research for reasons to
be discussed in more detail below.
Research reveals the persuasive nature of product placement. Product placement has
grown in number and obviousness since its inception nearly 30 years ago. What started as a
single brand placement in 1982 has exploded into seven instances of real brand placements in 22
minutes of sit-com television in a mid-1990s episode of the NBC hit Seinfeld (Karrh, 1998) and
15 featured placed brands in Steven Spielberg's 2002 Minority Report (Segrave, 2004). What
may be even more striking than the number of brand placements in Seinfeld (where brand
placements were referenced an average of one every three minutes), is that the writers of Seinfeld
even altered the dialogue in some places in order to emphasize the brand references (Darlin,
1995). It is this alteration of the vehicle which delivers a placement, or the even more intense
practice of altering a vehicle around products, that sparked my interest in what filmmakers
thought of product placement.
Independent Films
In the world of independent film there are a variety of genres. Most generally these can
be divided into documentary and narrative films. Documentary implies a non-fiction telling of
events, though not necessarily an unbiased one, while the narrative genre tells of a story, based
on real or fictitious events (Evans, 2002).
An independent (or "indie") film is a film produced without the financial or distribution
backing of a major film studio (What is "independent film", 2006). Independent films began in
the early 1900s as a result of filmmakers' want for independence from the constraints of the
Motion Pictures Patents Company an organization of patent holders in the early 1900s who
were highly restrictive in their control of patents related to raw film which ultimately drove
filmmakers away from the MPPC's watchful eye on the east coast to a west coast home base
(Motion Picture Patents Company, 2007). Independent films are not distributed in the manner as
large studio films, their usual venue is through a film festival or through a distribution
arrangement that the filmmaker has located personally. In 1996 it was estimated that the business
of independent filmmaking totaled around $300 million and with the growing popularity of indie
films, it can be assumed that currently this amount is significantly more (Marks, 1996). The
mid-1990s gave rise to a new wave of popularity for the indie world and in the early to mid-
2000s this popularity has continued to grow. Independent filmmaking has moved away from its
rebellious roots to the forefront of applauded cinema. In 2003 independent films like Frida, My
Big Fat Greek Wedding, and Bowlingfor Columbine dominated the awards season (Holmlund,
2005). The 2007 Oscars also boded well for independent films with nominations for Half Nelson,
and a Best Picture nomination for Little Miss Sunshine.
The rise in Internet DVD rentals, satellite TV, and specialized cable film channels has
also increased audience exposure to independent films. As indie films find more and more
vehicles for distribution their popularity moves upward. While the popularity of independent
film and the use of product placement in film are on the rise, there is little research on how these
two practices interact.
The purpose of my study was to explore aspiring and existing independent filmmakers'
attitudes toward the practice of product placement, particularly as it influences their decisions
about production budgets, artistic integrity, and audience receptivity to their films. My thesis will
not only shed light on the opinions of the crafters of the product placement message for
researchers, but also give advertisers some insight about how product placement is currently
being employed within the indie world so that they might discover possible avenues for further
exploration. The contribution of my study is in offering practical insights into how product
placement is used, and how this practice can be further improved, to create a more meaningful
brand-viewing experience for the consumer, and maintain a meaningful and artistic filmmaking
experience for the filmmaker.
Exploratory Question
Though research on the practice of product placement in general has grown in recent
years, research specific to this practice as related to independent film still presents a void. My
study seeks to explore the link between product placement and independent film. The research
question is: What are the attitudes of aspiring and existing independent filmmakers toward the
practice of product placement?
Organization of this Thesis
Chapter 2 presents a review of the literature and provides a general overview of the current
knowledge on the practice of product placement, with specific focus on the practice of product
placement in film. Chapter 3 details the methodology, including the research design and
procedure used for recruiting and interviewing research respondents. Chapter 4 reports my
study's findings and Chapter 5 presents the conclusions, limitations, and recommendations for
future research.
The literature review is broken into two sections: the first on the topic of product
placement in film, and the second, a brief introduction to the topic of independent filmmaking.
The review addresses the history, trends, cultural implications, media comparisons, and business
relationships involved with product placement in film. Though the focus of this research will be
on product placement in films, in order to fully understand the background of this practice and to
more thoroughly gauge the implications of product placement in film, product placement in other
forms such as in television and video games will also be addressed.
What Is Product Placement?
Product placement has been defined as "a paid product message aimed at influencing
movie or television audiences via the planned and unobtrusive entry of a branded product into a
movie or TV program" (Balasubramanian, 1994). Product placements are also defined as "paid
commercial insertions within a particular media program intended to heighten the visibility of
brand, type of product or service" (LaPastina, 2001).
This 'hybrid' advertising technique, as coined by Balasubramanian, is called 'hybrid'
because it represents a marriage of paid advertising and non-paid publicity. It has come into use
recently as consumers have become more product-savvy and more jaded about the thousands of
product messages aimed at them each day (Balasubramanian, 1994). Because product placement
involves the merging of advertising and entertainment, this technique has also been coined
'advertainment' (Deery, 2004).
Product placement is often considered a more under-the-radar way to put a brand
message in front of consumers. "When a brand is integrated into a show [or movie], it's not
perceived as a commercial, and it's very powerful" (Tucker, 2004). Product placement has
emerged as the solution to 'zipping' (the process of skipping past commercials by fast
forwarding) and 'zapping' (the process of skipping past commercials by changing the channel)
(Hoyer & MacInnis, 2001). Product placement has also gained popularity in response to the
clutter of other advertising avenues, such as the increased number of commercials per 30 minute
television slot, and the decreased length of commercials, from 60 seconds to 30 and now 15
second spots (Russell & Belch, 2005). As product sponsors realize that consumers are making
an active effort to avoid their messages, they are forced to come up with new and creative ways
to keep their brands and messages in front of the consumer. Product placement is one solution to
this advertising dilemma.
To further expand on the definition, Tiwsakul, Hackley, & Szmigin (2005) suggest that
there are three distinct categories of product placement: 1) implicit product placement (the
placement of a product without any formal recognition of the product such as when a Coca-
Cola sits on a table where two characters are seated), 2) integrated explicit product placement
(involves a formal expression of the product and the product plays an active role in the script -
when the same Coca-Cola is picked up by one of the characters and commented on), and 3) non-
integrated explicit product placement (a product is explicitly recognized in connection to a
show/movie, but not featured in it such as if a Coca-Cola were mentioned throughout a story,
but the product itself was never actually shown).
Turcotte (1995) recognizes three different types of product placement, though parts of his
organization overlap with Tiwsakal et al. definitions. Turcotte suggests that product placement
may be visually placed on a set but never specifically referred to, that it may be spoken about in
dialogue but not necessarily shown, or it may be featured visually and in the action or dialogue.
Product Placement versus Sponsorship
There is some overlap in the definitions of product placement and sponsorship. While
researchers have still not settled on where to draw a clear line between the two, it is nonetheless
important to define each.
Product placement has been defined to be "unobtrusive" and inserted into "paid media"
(Balasubramanian, 1994; LaPastina, 2001). Sponsorship may not be initially placed in a medium,
but may be broadcast through one anyway, such as with a banner at a sports event that is
televised. Sponsorship has been defined as "the provision of assistance either financial or in kind
to an activity by a commercial organization for the purpose of achieving organizational
objectives" (Meenaghan, 1983).
Schneider and Cornwell (2005) draw the distinction between product placement and
sponsorship in that product placement involves the placement of a brand name within a scripted
media, while sponsorship approaches event inclusion under the guise of philanthropy, and views
media exposure as a secondary benefit to this.
The History of Product Placement
The history of product placement finds its roots in early cinema and dates back to the
start of cinema in the 1920s. At its inception product placement did not involve meetings with
studios, brand managers, and the like as it does today: rather, it was a naive, casual, and person-
to-person arrangement. Products were handed off to celebrities, often for a small gratis fee paid
to the celebrity personally (Segrave, 2004). It is reported that these barter-style agreements were
the norm for product placements until around 1970 (Mckechnie & Thou, 2003).
Product placement began in radio in the 1930s, when products would often be central to a
radio show's narrative. The term 'soap opera' refers to the on-air dramas of early radio that were
fully and unabashedly sponsored by one specific brand of soap, and later, other household
products (Russell & Belch, 2005). Product placement began in television in the 1940s, when
advertisers would purchase entire time slots for branded shows such as The Texaco Star Theater
(George, 2005).
During the 1930s and 1940s product placement made occasional appearances in film.
For example, in the 1948 film Mildred Pierce Joan Crawford drank branded Jack Daniels liquor
(Nebenzahl & Secunda, 1993). However, the practice of product placement from the 1920s until
1970s was not consistent, nor was it considered profitable. Film was not a totally ignored
medium, but advertising occurred through this period first as ad reels shown before films, then as
ad trailers in the 1960s and 1970s. In the mid-1970s it was stated that, "for 40 years ads in
theaters have been standard practice nearly everywhere except the U.S. and Canada" (Segrave,
2004). Advertising in theaters just hadn't caught on in the United States. as advertisers failed to
acknowledge its potential for bringing a brand to a mass audience and filmmakers failed to
realize the financial gain that could come from this practice.
Nineteen seventy-seven was the year that this opinion and practice changed, and the year
that really set advertisers and filmmakers up for the marriage of film and advertising that was to
occur in the 1980s. In 1977 a Frenchman named Roger Hatchuel ran an experiment to disarm
the fears that many advertisers had about the placement of advertising messages in the theater
atmosphere. Hatchuel ran three minutes of advertising for nationally distributed products like
Chrysler and Seiko and surveyed the audiences after viewing the commercials to determine
whether or not the presentation of advertising in the film atmosphere elicited any negative
reactions. The audience had no strong negative reaction, as many had expected they might, so
Hatchuel moved forward with the placement of regular advertising trailers before films (Segrave,
2004). Shortly after, the rest of America followed this practice, and advertising accompanying
films is a practice that continues in similar manner today.
Product placement started in the form that it is most commonly recognized in 1982,
when Steven Spielberg, the director ofE. T. the Extra-Terrestrial approached Mars, the makers
of M&Ms, with an idea to include this candy in his film. Mars, unfamiliar with the exact idea
and implications of involving its already-successful product in a Hollywood film, declined the
offer, so Spielberg next approached Hershey, the makers of Reese's Pieces candy. Hershey
wisely agreed and the placement of the candy reportedly caused sales to skyrocket 70 percent
(Segrave, 2004). The mass success of the Reese's Pieces placement spawned a new way for
communicators to get their messages in front of audiences: placing their products in the films
that consumers were already willing to pay to go see.
Jump forward 20 years in Spielberg's career from his initial product placement success,
and this director may be found again reaping the benefits of this growing communication tool.
Spielberg's 2002 Minority Report featured 15 maj or placed brands, including the likes of Gap,
American Express, USA Today, and Pepsi (Segrave, 2004). These placed brands were not in the
least subtle to the paying viewer. At a price tag of a combined 25 million dollars, these
corporations made sure that their names were seen and hopefully remembered.
The popularity of product placement has extended to modern television as well, and
although that success is not the focus of this literature review, it is certainly noteworthy. Today
consumers are now quite used to seeing well-known brands incorporated throughout television
storylines and backdrops in order to give the show a more realistic appeal (George, 2005). As
marketers and advertisers look for what's next in innovative advertising, more and more are
turning their attention to product placement as a unique way to keep their brands in front of
consumers and work around consumer avoidance of advertising messages (Cardona, Chura, Fine
& Sanders, 2002).
Product Placement in Movies vs. Television
It is reported that a larger audience views television than movies, and it is estimated that
the average American household's TV set is on for 7.2 hours a day (Avery & Ferraro, 2000). In
terms of selective exposure opportunity, a consumer specifically chooses to go see a movie, and
which movie to see, so he presumably has more power over viewing or avoiding product
placements in movies. Yet, in opposition to this claim, it could also be argued that a consumer
has control over which channels he views (Avery & Ferraro, 2000). Moreover, since a viewer
typically views the same television shows over a longer period of time, versus visiting the
characters once in a movie theater, he is more apt to become involved with the program and its
characters, and by extension of that, more influenced by the placed products that character uses
(Avery & Ferraro, 2000).
Avery and Ferraro (2000) also examine the amount of placement content in television
versus movies and found that commercial movies re-run on television contained more product
placement than regular scripted television shows. These researchers also found that these movies
also contained more persuasive product placements that is, placements that were visually
prominent and positively portrayed than those in television shows. Another study by PQ Media
found that in 2005 television actually accounted for over half of all product placements relative
to movies and a category of 'other' placements (J. E., 2005).
Though larger audiences are exposed to television shows nationally, it is important to
note that many Hollywood movies are released worldwide, and therefore movies can also reach
as wide an audience as television, if not wider (Mckechnie & Thou, 2003). Worldwide movie
distribution can also dictate which brands are placed in film, whereas a brand featured in
television may be more geographically localized and therefore inappropriate for worldwide
distribution. An example of this is the 1993 film Demolition Man which made reference to Taco
Bell foods, and was edited to refer to Pizza Hut foods for release in Australia and other countries
as Pizza Hut was more geographically relevant to these other areas ("Demolition Man", 2006).
Nonetheless both media film and television can experience a long shelf life via syndication or
video/DVD release (Morton & Friedman, 2002).
The Relationships of Product Placement
Product placement is said to have a symbiotic relationship between a filmmaker who can
choose which products to feature and a product sponsor who is constantly attempting to place his
products in front of consumers (Balasubramanian, 1994). Balasubramanian expands on this
relationship stating:
To efficiently locate product placement opportunities, the product sponsor usually hires a
specialist firm to act as a liaison with movie studios and secure story scripts far in
advance of movie production. These scripts are carefully reviewed to locate desirable
story contexts for placing a specific product (Salmans 1981); when these contexts (and
the consideration terms accompanying them) are acceptable to both the moviemaker and
the product sponsor, a product placement results (Newsweek 1989). For example, Alaska
Airlines, Apple computers, Bounty paper towels, and Ore-Ida Frozen French fries were
an integral part of the movie Short Circuit (Tucker 1989). Similarly, Gerber products
(e.g., baby food, strollers, and high chairs) were successfully placed in several television
series, including thil i)yv\inluriig and Our House (Cain 1988). (1994).
The relationship between television producers and product sponsors is evident in the
editing of The Real World, a reality show on MTV, which claims to simply document the real
lives of seven young strangers, yet is so emphatic about product placement relationships that
"they systematically blur out logos for companies that aren't under contract, a practice that one
could argue reduces the environment's realism by creating a more artificially selective display of
brands than is generally found in real life" (Deery, 2004).
Product placement also involves a relationship between the brand and the viewer.
Product placement, in its very essence is a way to reach potential consumers in a smarter, subtler,
and at times more credible way than the typical 30-second commercial. However, this is often
compromised as product placements move from the natural backgrounds and TV settings; for
example, Jerry Seinfeld's favorite cereal strategically placed on his counter, to the foreground of
storylines and reality television; for example, brand names as central to the storyline of shows
like Survivor and The Apprentice (Deery, 2004).
Product placement not only involves managing the relationship between movie studios
and product sponsors, but also managing commercial media buys that occur after a product has
been placed. Product placement, though obviously a force in its own right, is often buttressed by
other strategic media buys, such as commercials at the start of the commercial block immediately
following the scene the product was featured in, or other sponsorship arrangements. This was
the case recently for Subway restaurants which "worked with its media-buying firm, WPP
Group's MediaCom, and General Electric's NBC on an ad package (centered around the sit-com
Will & Grace) that involved both the product placement and a 30-second commercial to run
during the episode" ("Subway", 2005). This strategic media planning, which can involve
commercials, sponsorships, and product placements, all centered around a single television
episode provides an example of product placement taken to the next level. In these cases product
placement is the nucleus of a media buy, the product is not only advertised during a show, but
also featured within the show itself to ensure a much greater audience reach.
Another example of how product placement can be built into lucrative media packages
and acting as the catalyst for other traditional advertising is in the package deal for Heineken and
the film Be Cool, starring John Travolta. In this arrangement, Travolta, as the film's main
character, was featured drinking Heineken in the film. The movie took Travolta's character's tie
to the brand a step further by featuring him in the Heineken television commercials as well. This
campaign was further buttressed with Heineken/Be Cool point of purchase displays, movie ticket
giveaways, radio promotions, and even a "Live the Cool Life" Heineken promotional
sweepstakes which offered V.I.P. treatment to popular nightclubs as another way to tie the movie
and the beer together (Hargrave-Silk, 2005).
The Appeal of Product Placement
Product placement has a unique appeal as a marketing and advertising tool for brand
managers and producers. According to Ted Wirth, creative-services manager for Subway
restaurants, "Product placement helps us connect with our consumer and it puts our products in a
more tangible scenario. That can't often be done in commercials" ("Subway", 2005).
Research has found that positive portrayals of a product in movies can result in a positive
intent to purchase the product featured in film, while negative portrayals can be a reason for
discontinuing use of a product (Morton & Friedman, 2002). Findings like these are what
motivate product sponsors to continue to grow this area of communication.
Product placement involves the creative pursuit of brand placement in a variety of media.
The main point of placement is to get the brand in front of the consumer, hopefully in a context
within which the placement seems unobtrusive and natural. The placement seeks to enhance the
media that it is placed in, rather than dominate it. One creative product placement deal involved
Timex watches and the author Tom Clancy, in which Timex was approached with a $1.3 million
proposition to be highly incorporated into a Clancy novel, CD-ROM, movie, and Internet game
(Nelson, 2002).
Product placement is developing in other media as it gains popularity. Two such media
are computer games and video games, both of which are estimated to be equally if not more
popular with younger audiences than the television medium. One difference between gaming
and watching television is that consumers are actively involved with the game and are compelled
to pay much closer attention to the screen. Time spent in front of a computer or video game
screen is quality time, while time spent in front of the television or at the movies usually do not
involve comparable levels of media engagement. For this reason, such outlets hold extreme
appeal and are important areas for growth in product placement as time goes on (Lindstrom,
Placement without a Price
Product placement, though often viewed as a lucrative business opportunity, can also
occur without an explicit exchange of money. The start of this review touched on the roots of
product placement and noted that in its very early days placement usually occurred as a barter
Today, products are sometimes chosen simply because they are the best fit for a
television or movie scene, or because the television or movie studio wish to use a product's
established brand character to represent some characteristic of the show/film's characters. This
was the case on Seinfeld, which placed Drakes Cakes coffee cakes as central to a particular
storyline because the product added to the show's East Coast flavor (Jensen, 1997). "The snack
cakes, which have been a staple in Northeastern grocery stores for decades, have become the
prop of choice for Hollywood studios seeking to create a hip East Coast look for their TV
shows" (Jensen, 1997). "Drake's says it didn't solicit -- or pay for -- any of the product
placements, but the company couldn't have gotten the attention at a better time. It had already
decided to expand beyond the Northeast and Florida when TV viewers started phoning to ask
where they could find the snacks" (Jensen, 1997).
The Business of Product Placement
Though a product may be fortunate enough to be placed in television or movie for free
based on some characteristic or meaning the product holds, more often than not product
placement comes at a price. As mentioned previously, in the 20 years since he started placing
products in E. T., product placement has blossomed into a lucrative business opportunity for
Steven Spielberg, who grossed 25 million in product placement deals alone for Minority Report
(Segrave, 2004).
Research indicates that product placement can enter a film in four ways: 1) a brand can
solicit a film and offer to pay a fee for placement in a film it believes reaches its target audience;
2) studios can approach brands for placement and a fee when they believe they have a fit; 3)
studios can simply place a brand in a film at no cost and without the explicit permission of a
brand; or 4) placement deals can be specified and arranged by independent product placement
firms (Gupta, Balasubramanian & Klassen, 2000; Entertainment Resources and Marketing
Association, 2006).
Product placement is viewed as both a means to keep up the momentum of an already
successful product, as well as a solution for businesses and brands that are facing declining sales.
Such was the case for Sears department store that turned to Norm Marshall & Associates, the
same product placement specialists that placed USA Today newspaper in Spielberg's Minority
Report (Tucker, 2004). Sears was "looking at nontraditional means of promoting the brand and,
in part, responding to the changing landscape and the media mix" (Tucker, 2004).
Marketers that use product placement are becoming more proactive in the dealings of
product placement in order to have a more hands-on control of when and how their products are
featured in film and television. Coca-Cola, Ford, and BMW have even taken on the role of
program producer in certain cases in order to exert their influence and control (Karrh, McKee &
Pardun, 2003).
Identification of Product Placement
While product placement is enjoying massive popularity in modem television and film,
there is growing concern that the very idea of product placement is a violation of the laws for the
separation of editorial content and advertising (Baerns, 2003). Though there are laws in place
that product sponsors must be clearly identified, and advertising pitches clearly distinguished
from editorial content, it seems that the loophole that advertisers are aggressively pursuing in
order to reach savvy consumers in a more subtle way is the same loophole that many academics
and researchers fear is being exploited. This discrepancy results in a confusing gray area
regarding where the entertainment ends and advertising begins is developing (Baems, 2003).
Product placement is also garnering increasing attention from consumer advocates who
have suggested that brands be identified in the opening credits of a film in order to clarify which
part of the film is story and which is advertising (Gupta, Balasubramanian & Klassen, 2000).
Gupta et al (2000) also note that consumer advocates have suggested allowing for ticket price
reductions based on the number of placements in a film, requiring refunds to consumers upset by
product placements, and an overall limit to the amount of product placements in a film in order
to preserve the creative integrity of the movie-going experience. A more recent comment on this
issue came in May 2005 when a member of the Federal Communications Commission called for
stricter regulation of product placement, stating that there is nothing wrong with product
placement as long as it was properly disclosed as required by law. There is no specific law
regarding product placement at this time, but as product placement grows in frequency and
popularity there is no doubt that this issue will at some point be brought up in the court law in
order for these legal boundaries to be clarified (Shields, 2005). The Commissioner, Jonathan
Adelstein, noted that product placement was particularly worrisome when it appeared in "news"
broadcasts, and urged lawmakers to make "clear and prominent" disclosures for all commercial
messages ("Tell the FCC", 2006).
The issues surrounding product placement become even harder to define when one
considers non-traditional media taken in context with the fact that there are no specific credits
typically attached to the message in which product placement is being conveyed. A recent
example of this is with online blogging. Blogging (i.e., web logging) or keeping a web diary,
started and is widely represented as the author's personal thoughts and opinions posted on the
Internet for the world to read. However, in December 2004 the line between editorial and
advertising content became blurred when a software company announced that it would pay select
key bloggers to endorse its products in their online blogs for a fee (Roush, 2005).
Product Placement Worldwide
Though extremely popular in the United States, product placement is a technique that is
also reaching audiences worldwide. For example, in Brazil where the practice called
'merchandising', product placements are often central to the narrative of prime time telenovelas
(soap operas). Furthermore branded placements are growing even more relevant to the themes
and narratives of the dramas as time goes on (LaPastina, 2001). The United Kingdom also has
its share of product placement, specifically in British soap operas and mini-series (Tiwsakul,
Hackley & Szmigin, 2005). Though recent articles point to the use of product placement in U.K.
television, there had been a 50-year ban on product placement in this region (Hall, 2005). The
U.K. has previously been strict about product placement in order to protect the integrity of its
programming and prevent any detrimental effects that it may have on its audiences, but is now
leaning toward the liberalization of product placement restrictions as this form of advertising
gains steam.
Studies of China in relation to product placement have revealed that when compared to
the United States, Chinese audiences were generally less accepting of product placement in
movies as a form of reaching consumers (Mckechnie & Thou, 2003).
Another topic of study regarding product placement around the world is one that
considers the placement within movies that are released worldwide. Gould, Gupta & Grabner-
Krauter (2000) note that not all products will be regarded with the same acceptance across
different nationalities and that product sponsors, when negotiating to place a product in a film,
should be aware of this potential issue and not overpay to place their product. As mentioned
previously, while the localization of product placement can be very effective via television (i.e.
Brazil), movie product placement is a different matter as products and product recognition can
vary across nations.
The Future of Product Placement
The future of product placement is not certain, and as the media landscape continuously
changes product placement may gain or lose favor. In the three year period from 1990 to 1993
that Advertising Age commissioned a study of the number of incidences of product placement on
major network television stations (studies conducted by Hume, 1990 and Fawcett, 1993) product
placement increased by almost 11 percent (Avery & Ferraro, 2000). Product placement is
currently booming and is featured in television sit-coms, reality shows, competitions, and movies
alike. Recent product placements have appeared on everything from The Apprentice and Queer
Eye for the Straight Guy to AllMy Children and Scrubs (George, 2005). Ford even had the hit
show 24 create entire storylines incorporating their Ford vehicles (George, 2005). Statistics
published in Broadcast & Cable suggest that television product placement may be the wave of
the future, noting that while traditional advertising avenues grew by only 7% from 2004 to 2005
television product placement grew by 30.5% during this same time period (J. E., 2005). Les
Moonves, the chairman of CBS, predicts that within three or four TV seasons (from 2005), up to
75 percent of all scripted, prime-time network shows will feature products or services paid for by
advertisers (George, 2005).
As discussed throughout this literature review, product placement has extended beyond
film and television to various outlets such as computer games, video games, and even books
(Nelson, 2002). The beauty of product placement, and a key reason for its momentous growth, is
the mutually beneficial relationship it instills between advertiser and producer, consumer and
media. A brand placed in a film or game gains brand exposure, the film or game producer gains
financial resources to produce their film or game, and consumers gain a more realistic
atmosphere to their media consumption experiences. Today, product placement is a $3.4 billion
industry (J. E., 2005). With this kind of money and the increasingly creative forms it is taking, it
seems that product placement may be here to stay
What is an Independent Film?
In order to fully understand the context of this study a reader must be equipped not only
with knowledge of the practice of product placement, but also a general understanding of the
world of independent film. An independent or "indie" film is a film produced without the
backing, either financial or in the process of distribution, of a major film studio (What is
"independent film?", 2006). Independent films began in the early 1900s as a result of
filmmakers' desire for independence from the constraints of the Motion Pictures Patents
Company. Despite the birth of independent film in the 1900s films remained largely produced by
major studios until the late 1950s and early 1960s when advancements in the technology of film
were made. In the 1980s the accessibility of low cost computing equipment reduced the cost of
producing a film considerably, serving as another step forward in the history of independent film
(Rusco & Walls, 2003).
Within the world of independent film there are a variety of genres and most generally these
can be divided into documentary and narrative films. A documentary implies a non-fiction telling
of events, though not necessarily an unbiased one, and a narrative is most often defined as the
telling of a story, be it based on real events or not (Evans, 2002). Since independent films are not
largely distributed in the manner that large studio films are, the venue in which an independent
film usually gains an audience and popularity is the film festival or through distribution which
the filmmaker arranged personally.
Though it seems that advertisers' interest in placing products and filmmakers' need for
financing independent films may be a natural fit, there is a limited body of knowledge on this
relationship. Though product placement is not a specific area of research in connection with
independent film, advertisers are attempting to align their products with the world of independent
filmmaking in other ways, such as sponsoring traveling indie film festivals, like the one
sponsored by Levi's Dockers brand in 1997 (Ebenkamp, 1997). Similarly, the automaker Audi
and Turning Leaf wine sponsored the 17th annual IFP/West Independent Spirit Awards film
festival and awards show (Greenberg, 2002). Other brands attempt to reach the indie film
audience by creating indie films themselves, as was the case for BMW and Aeropostle, who each
produced shorts featuring their products (Cuneo, 2002).
It seems advertisers may be utilizing these methods of association with independent films
because the very nature of indie films is a spirit of rebellion and resistance to commercial
influence and control. "True independent film production is about financing films from sources
that have no control over your story, your vision, your creative ideas. You are free to make the
film you want to make ..." (Funding, 2006).
While product placement may alleviate costs of making a film for the filmmaker,
advertisers are showing increasing interest in indie films as a forum for placing their brand
messages. One website even offers financing for filmmakers and product placement for the
sponsors who pitch into the pool of money from which films are made (Filmventure, 2006).
Funding an Independent Film
In 1996 it was estimated that the business of independent filmmaking totaled around
$300 million (Marks, 1996). Today, it can be assumed that this amount is significantly more.
However, it is important to put these costs into perspective because as the popularity of indie
filmmaking rises, in many cases, the cost of producing an independent film has fallen, making
this world even more enticing and accessible than it once was.
Many would-be filmmakers are lured into the world of indie filmmaking based on the
myths of indie successes that have become legends (Marks, 1996). For example, the 1999 film
The Blair Witch Project was produced for $22,000 and went on to $240.5 million ("The Blair
Witch Project", 2007). These legends are few and far between due in part to the fact that a film
produced for a few thousand dollars (or even less if shot digitally) very rarely gets any kind of
distribution. Frequently, by the time the film is transferred to the proper quality film for
distribution, the sound is remixed and all the deferments paid ('deferments' are when an actor or
crew member works on "credit" and will be paid only if the film itself is successful), and the film
promoted, the filmmaker rarely takes home a profit (Marks, 1996). Further, many indie films are
funded not only by outside investors, but on the filmmaker's own credit, a move that can follow
him for years to come (Marks, 1996).
Making an Independent Film
The process of making an independent film often relies heavily on the equipment and
software available to the public. Since independent film by its very nature is free of the guidance,
regulations, and the pocketbook of a large film studio, independent filmmaking is often a second
job for the filmmakers done with home video cameras, digital cameras, and personal computers
using programs such as Adobe After Effects, Adobe Photoshop, Adobe Premiere (now
discontinued), and Apple's Final Cut Pro (Moltenbrey, 2004).
Of course there is much more to making a film than just the equipment used to make it.
There is the matter of actors, writers, directors, producers, lighting, script supervisors, prop
masters, costume designers, and so on. The cast and crew of an indie production depends on the
size budget of the production, and can be on a very small (one or two) people to very large
(100+) scale.
Once a film is shot, it must be edited, and then a way to reach audiences must be
identified. While in the past the actual filmmaking was the biggest challenge, with an indie
"boom" in the mid-to-late 1990s, combined with the evolving trends in film equipment, the
challenge has moved from the actual making of the film to getting the completed film distributed
(Goald & Munson, 2002).
The Future of Independent Film
The creation of an independent film, no matter how ambitious the filmmaker, is often a
struggle due to budgetary constraints. However, today the landscape of the world of independent
filmmaking is changing quickly. Whereas a filmmaker in the past would have to raise a
significant amount of capital in order to even shoot his first scene, digital filmmaking makes the
world of filmmaking entirely more accessible and affordable to the novice filmmaker (Kennedy,
2005). According to Kennedy (2005), in the very near future film will no longer actually be part
of"filmmaking"; this process will go completely digital. While this concept has a significant
impact on the actual process of filmmaking, it will also have an impact on the preservation of
films once they are complete. A film will no longer be a physical entity that eventually succumbs
to corrosion and disintegration, rather it will be stored and preserved digitally.
The mid-1990s showed a dramatic increase in popularity for the indie films. During early
to mid-2000s the popularity and critical acclaim of independents films continued to grow.
Independent films also became more common during this time period due to a rise in Internet
DVD rentals, satellite TV, and specialized cable film channels.
The popularity of independent film and the use of product placement in film are both on
the rise today, and there is little research connecting the two. This study seeks to explore the
attitudes of independent filmmakers toward the practice of product placement and the next
chapter presents a detailed discussion of the research design used to further investigate the
research question.
The purpose of this study is to explore aspiring and existing independent filmmakers'
attitudes toward the practice of product placement in order to shed light on this unexplored area
of advertising research. The current body of knowledge on product placement presents a primary
focus on the study of consumers' attitudes and reactions to the method of product placement.
However, there is a lack of research specific to filmmakers' opinions about product placement.
Based on this void the nature of this study will be qualitative and highly exploratory and will be
conducted as an in-depth qualitative analysis of filmmakers' attitudes toward the practice of
product placement. Though exploratory research can be conducted through other methods, such
as focus groups, the specific qualifications and scarcity of qualified respondents (local aspiring
and existing independent filmmakers) made the sample pool small enough that in-depth
interviews could be conducted personally with each filmmaker respondent.
The in-depth interview has been likened to "a conversation with a purpose" (Legard,
Keegan & Ward, 2003). According to Legard, Keegan, & Ward (2003), a good in-depth
interview should feel natural to the respondent, but should adhere to the purposes of the
interviewer. The in-depth interview is used to answer questions of value, definition, and policy.
According to Stacks (2002), advantages of the in-depth interview include the rich detail that can
be drawn from a one-on-one session with a respondent, and the fact that the interviewer can
gather detail about the topic at hand as well as about the respondent himself in order to best
qualify the information gathered.
Interview Procedure
The interviews were semi-structured, in-depth and held at the convenience of the
interviewee. The interviews ranged from 25 60 minutes in length depending on how much
feedback the participant had. An interview guide consisting of nine questions that examined four
specific dimensions of filmmakers' attitudes toward product placement was used as the basis of
the interview. This outline was followed to keep the interview on track and avoid straying from
the topic at hand, as well as to thoroughly explore the identified dimensions of attitudes. A
sample of the protocol can be found in Appendix C. Nine classifying questions were also
included as part of the interview guide. The purpose of the questions related to dimension of
attitude was to gauge filmmakers' reactions by bringing up topics related to the identified
dimensions. For example, "Do you think product placement has an effect on the finished film's
quality?" was asked to address the dimension of "artistic integrity of the film". "Does product
placement affect the cost of making the film?" was asked to address the dimension of "cost of
producing the film". The purpose of the classifying questions was to put the filmmaker
responses into context of age, gender, years of experience, education and so on. The interviews
were audio taped and afterwards transcribed verbatim. These steps were completed for every
participant before the qualitative analysis took place.
Research Variables
Four variables were examined in this study to explore aspiring and existing independent
filmmakers' attitudes toward product placement. These four dimensions included: "artistic
integrity of the film", "cost of producing the film", "audience distraction by placed products",
and "filmmaker interest in general topic of product placement". "Artistic integrity of the film"
was used to explore the filmmakers' perception of how closely the completed film adhered to the
filmmakers' original vision for the film. "Cost of producing the film" was used to investigate the
filmmakers' perception of budget and how the use of product placement affected the bottom line.
The dimension "audience distraction by placed products" was used to explore the filmmakers'
perception of how placed products influenced that audience's focus on the film's storyline, and
"filmmaker interest in the general topic of product placement" was used to discover the
filmmakers' personal interest in product placement. These variables were measured by the
author's interpretation of the responses to each question that was assigned to one of the four
noted dimensions. The author measured dimensions abstractly by identifying themes in the
filmmaker responses. Table 3-1 presents these dimensions and their corresponding definitions.
Table 3-1. Dimensions of attitude defined
Dimension of attitude Study definition
Artistic integrity of the film The filmmaker's perception of how closely the film
adheres to his original vision and refers to the intactness,
intention and purity of the end result film.
Cost of producing the film The filmmaker's perception of the budget and how the use
of product placement affects the film's budget.
Audience distraction by The filmmaker's perception of how placed products affect
placed products the audience's focus on the film itself, meaning the main
plot, characters, scenery, and all placements that do not
carry an intended brand message.
Filmmaker interest in The filmmaker's level of personal and professional
general topic of product interest in the topic of product placement.
Independent filmmakers served as the respondents to this study, and thus a basic
understanding of who these people are is necessary to understand the context from which the
study's results are derived. The respondents to this study all considered themselves professional
independent filmmakers because their filmmaking was not a hobby, rather it was done for profit.
In this study most of the filmmakers interviewed had other "day jobs", and many had daytime
careers that tied directly into their independent filmmaking ventures, such as teaching film,
writing and editing, visual designing, or engaging in entrepreneurial ventures. This holding of a
day job while being an independent filmmaker seemed to be the norm for at least the most basic
level of independent filmmakers.
Though an absolute snapshot of the "average" independent filmmaker is impossible to
compile, it seems that most independent filmmakers share at least a few common qualities,
including; a creative desire to make a film that adheres to his or her vision as a filmmaker, an
entrepreneurial spirit to be able to raise money to shoot an independent film, and a desire to share
his or her creative vision with an audience. According to Lindenmuth (1998), independent
filmmakers make the films that they want to see and that aren't being made by large studios.
The type of sample used to recruit participants was a snowball sample. Aspiring and
existing independent filmmakers were located through the author's academic and professional
contacts and a snowball referral technique was employed to increase the sample. The sample
frame required that all respondents be independent filmmakers who make films for profit not
leisure and therefore who consider themselves professional filmmakers. The filmmakers were
also chosen based on the type of film they make, which was independent ("indie") and non-
documentary. Documentary filmmakers were not conducive to the purposes in this study in that
products that appear in their films are not 'placed' per se. In addition these filmmakers do not
have specific scripts and dialogue which may be affected by product placement.
The interviews took place over the period of November 2006 February 2007. All the
participants received written and oral information about the study previous to their participation
in it. A participant's willingness to participant was first secured via personal conversation,
telephone or email. The author personally conducted each interview, which were held
separately, with the exception of one father-son duo, who preferred to be interviewed in a joint
session. The interviews were conducted in person when the filmmaker was local, or over the
phone for filmmakers from out of town.
The next chapter will detail the research findings of this study and relate specific
filmmaker quotes from the one-on-one interviews to the researched dimensions of attitude.
The aspiring and existing filmmakers ranged in age from early 20s to mid 60s and ranged
in years of filmmaking experience from one year to over 40 years. It is this vast range of years
of filmmaking experience within the respondent pool that leads to the classification as "aspiring
and existing filmmakers." The respondent pool was composed of two female and nine male
aspiring and existing filmmakers. The filmmakers were of various racial and ethnic backgrounds,
including African American, Asian American and Caucasian. The filmmakers ranged in level of
education from the completion of some college to the completion of multiple Master's degrees.
Most of the filmmakers interviewed had other "day jobs" that were not filmmaking,
though all considered themselves professional filmmakers. Many had daytime jobs that tied
directly into their independent filmmaking ventures, such acting as Director of a film program at
a Florida community college or acting as the Film Commissioner of the State of Florida. Others
utilized filmmaking skills, such as screenwriting or designing to hold related jobs such as
English school teacher, magazine editor, graphic designer, or entrepreneur. Still others made
films for profit, but held day jobs unrelated to their filmmaking pursuits.
The respondent pool was composed of: two brothers and independent filmmakers for six
years, an office administrator and filmmaker for four years, a father and son duo and filmmakers
for two years, an Orlando filmmaker and entrepreneur, a Hollywood actress and independent
filmmaker for one year, an artist and filmmaker for nine years, a screenwriter for five years, the
Director of the film program at Valencia Community College in Orlando, Fl and the Film
Commissioner of the State of Florida and filmmaker for ten years. A more specific breakdown of
the characteristics of each respondent is illustrated in Table 4-1.
Geographically the filmmakers largely hailed from Florida, specifically from Gainesville
or Orlando, as this was the group most accessible to the author. The remaining filmmakers
resided in Venice Beach, California; Tallahassee, Florida; and New York, New York.
Table 4-1. Filmmaker respondent characteristics
Filmmaker Years Age Gender Location Occupation
Gainesville, FL
Gainesville, FL
Orlando, FL
Venice Beach, CA
Gainesville, FL
Gainesville, FL
Gainesville, FL
Orlando, FL
Tallahassee, FL
Orlando, FL
New York, NY
Office administrative
Entrepreneur/web site
Middle school English
Director of college film
State film commissioner
Filmmaker/graphic artist
The respondents were recruited by snowball sampling. Aspiring and existing independent
filmmakers were located through the author's academic and professional contacts and a snowball
referral technique was employed to increase the sample. The sample frame required that all
respondents be existing or aspiring independent filmmakers who make films for profit not leisure
and therefore who consider themselves professional filmmakers. In order to recruit participants
the author first spoke to a personal contact who was an aspiring filmmaker who suggested the
author could meet other aspiring and existing filmmakers by attending a small Gainesville film
festival. At this event the author made contact with a number of other filmmakers of various
levels of experience, most of whom were used in this study. Besides the aspiring and existing
<5 years
5-10 years
<5 years
<5 years
<5 years
<5 years
<5 years
20+ years
20+ years
5-10 years
5-10 years
filmmakers that the author met personally at the film festival, the remaining filmmakers were
referred either by the author's professors or through other filmmakers that were interviewed.
The respondent pool of filmmakers completed as few as one to as many as over 30 films
during their respective film careers and worked with budgets as low as zero (with some minor
out-of-pocket costs, but largely on a barter or "favor" system) to as large as $1.2 million.
Themes That Emerged from Interviews
Five prominent themes emerged from the interviews conducted, many of which were
interconnected with other themes, or served as umbrellas over more specific reactions. The major
themes that emerged from the interviews were "money", "control", "experience", "interest in
product placement" and "art versus business".
The first theme that will be discussed is that of money. When money was discussed it
was not in relation to a product placed in exchange for direct cash but rather a barter arrangement
for goods or services, which served to decrease the bottom line of the film. A second theme that
emerged is the idea of control. This theme was defined as the filmmaker's ability to control the
content and artistic vision of the resulting final film. A third theme that emerged was that of
experience. This deals with both the number of years that a respondent had been involved in
filmmaking and also his or her personal experience with product placement. Another theme was
that of the filmmaker's interest in the topic of product placement. This theme addresses the
respondents' reported personal and professional interest in the topic of product placement. The
final theme that emerged was the question of art versus business for the filmmaker. This theme
deals with the idea of balancing business and artistic vision and touches on the topic of artistic
integrity of the film. The following discussion explains the themes in greater detail and provides
illustration for each using respondent verbatims.
Response Theme Money/Cost
The theme of money or cost was a major aspect of the filmmaker responses related to
product placement. This theme is defined as the financial effect that product placement causes in
an independent film. This is discussed by respondents as a barter arrangement for goods or
service which lower the cost of filmmaking. This is the factor that was discussed most
consistently across interviews, and it has many aspects to it. Some filmmakers expressed a
willingness to be flexible to the brand's demands if it ultimately benefited the bottom line and, as
a result, the film as a whole. Others expressed a complete unwillingness to incorporate product
placement in any way and a resistance to the idea of money all together. This latter group of
filmmakers talked about their desire to stay true to what independent filmmaking is really about
and not to compromise their script, vision, or film in any way just to lower costs. One such
filmmaker commented on this stating:
You'll find that, um, well I find that a lot of independent filmmakers, they, they don't
want to place specific products in their, in their films because, it kind of goes against the
whole idea of independence. Because then you've got basically, like a corporate, if you
like see a corporate motto somewhere than it's almost like that person has sold out. It's
kind of like the image in a sense.
However, more often filmmakers talked about the positive effects product placement may
have on a film. One filmmaker who held this opinion stated:
Any time that you can get some kind of donation of goods, services, and in some
instances money, usually not on our level money. With that money that you're saving
from having to buy, pay for those goods, services and put it up on the screen, it has a
good effect on a film. And the other thing is, you know, not everyone is making "road
runner" pictures, not all the products can be named "Acme," I mean, we live in a world
full of products and brands, and, uh, people are branded very early in life and, you know,
hit with all this advertising stuff, so we all know that they have Fords and Chevys and
Dodges and all that.
Another filmmaker talked about his willingness to compromise with the studio that was
funding his film saying, "Like if we're working through a studio, and the studio is getting part of
the funds from a certain company and they just want, you know, a cereal box there or something,
I'll throw it in, no problem."
A different filmmaker discussed the benefit of product placement stating, "product
placement, at least from the independent filmmaker's point of view, can save you money because
it can provide you things that, that you don't have to buy, therefore you can use that money to
make your picture better." This same filmmaker later stated:
Especially in the low budget world where you're trying to save money, you want every
dollar you can on the screen, so if you can get something for less money or nothing
because you feature it and it doesn't hurt the story than it just makes good sense to use
that and then take that money and use it somewhere else to make a better movie.
Another filmmaker repeated this idea stating, "(Product placement) improves the quality
of the film because you get to throw some extra dough at it." This same filmmaker furthered her
view by placing emphasis on her willingness to approach the idea of incorporating products into
a film realistically stating that success in film is all about, "knowing your price tag....because
everybody has got their price tag."
On the other side of this issue were the filmmakers who expressed the negative effects
that money could have on an independent film. The same filmmaker who commented on the
benefit of throwing "extra dough" at a film also commented, "But at the same time it kind of
diminishes the quality because you have to slap a Yoo-Hoo sticker or something, you know,
right across a train set in the opening scene of The Sopranos, for example."
Other filmmakers talked about the implications of trading quality for money, "I mean,
what good is money if it's going to ruin the story?" And an inexperienced filmmaker talked
about the temptation to compromise for money stating:
It's difficult because, right now, I have, you know, I have spent a lot of time trying to
actually build a budget trying to get my own films made and I hadn't even found that
money, much less, advertiser money. So, I think being on this level seeing any kind of
money, you tend to want to jump at it.
In general, filmmakers seemed to have mixed opinions about the idea of money in
connection with product placement. Most overwhelmingly the filmmakers interviewed reported
that cash in exchange for a product placement was never really a possibility for them as their
films were too low budget or apt to be distributed too narrowly, if at all. The way money came
into play then was most often through a barter arrangement in which the brand provided goods or
services (most often goods) in exchange for an appearance in the film. The exact arrangements
for this were often very casual and did not usually require a written contract. Depending on the
film the appearance could come in the form of a spot in the background of a frame or as a
product worn or used by one of the film's characters.
One filmmaker commented on how he decreased his bottom line without featuring goods.
He stated, "We did a huge special thanks list... (for the) people (that) would provide meals for us
or locations. You know, our agreement with them was that, was that there would be a special
thanks credit."
Another filmmaker spoke on incorporating a bakery brand into a film in exchange for
baked goods for his cast and crew's meals. He said:
In one of the travel sequences we had the Entenmann's box sitting on the dashboard
semi-subtly. And so she (the person providing the goods) was elated. She must have
hooked us up with a hundred million calories. We don't make it look pretty. It's like half
torn, and, you know, it's people traveling across country. It wasn't sitting there perfectly
framed or anything. You know, it's just sort of hanging out.
This same filmmaker spoke about incorporating another brand into one of his films:
Something that we spend a lot of money on in making films is Polaroid film
because, you know, they can really give you the camera for free because they
get you with the film. It's basically a dollar a picture. Right, I mean. A
Polaroid, I've gotten twice photographic stuff. And a Polaroid, is we had the
girls that are crossing the Welcome to North Carolina, they're taking a picture
out of the convertible, and it happened to be a Polaroid picture. And so we got
free Polaroid film for the whole shoot and it probably saved us $10,000.
While filmmaker's specific experiences with product placement film seem to have a
strong connection with their feelings about money in relation to product placement, the spectrum
of attitudes was still impressive. The filmmakers interviewed varied from placing high value on
any money (in the form of goods or services) that could be devoted toward improving their film,
to resenting money and viewing it as corrupting their work.
Response Theme Control
The theme of control was closely tied into independent filmmakers' responses about their
attitudes toward product placement. This theme deals with filmmaker's ability to fully influence
the content and artistic vision of the final film. This theme ties closely into the idea of artistic
integrity, but was also brought up in conversations related to money, audience distraction, and a
variety of other topics. Thus, it is important to view the theme of "control" as a unique result.
When the filmmakers were asked if they believed that product placement enhanced or
hurt the quality of a finished film, often responses came in mixed forms, and centered around
how the placement was done and how much control the filmmaker had over the placement. One
filmmaker stated, "I think the ideal would be all in the contract, I guess, that we sign with the
company." This filmmaker went on to state, "to make sure that we had those freedoms the
freedom just to keep it (the product placement) tasteful in the movie. But I certainly wouldn't
rule it out." Another filmmaker echoed this opinion stating:
There would have to be some specifics for that, that if the product was used in a
particular scene, and they were paying some money towards it, there would have to be
some specifics in the contract that I use it to my, you know, to the best of my abilities, I
use it with my discretion. And if it needs to get cut out of the film because the scene
itself isn't working, I also have the discretion to do that.
This theme of control also ties into the idea that product placement can be done tastefully
or obnoxiously, a point that many of the respondents commented on. One respondent stated, "In
general, I don't really have a problem with it, if it's done, if it's done tastefully and it's not
overdone, and it's not, like, in your face." While another filmmaker stated:
I've seen films where it almost looks like you are watching a series of commercials, you
know, so it gets a little bizarre. You know, it's not every time you pick up a soda it's a
Coca-Cola facing perfectly towards the camera.
Yet another filmmaker commented:
It's weird trying to make the story about the product. Then it, it becomes more of an
advertisement. And so then it's no longer about the story, it's no longer about, um,
filmmaking or the art of filmmaking, it's just an advertisement, a commercial.
Some respondents commented that they chose to be independent filmmakers based on the
level of control it allowed them. One filmmaker reported, "It's, because in that sense I think that
this is, this is the level where you get most artistic freedom." This same filmmaker repeated this
idea stating, "I like the freedom of being able to just take shots and depending on, and not really
having to worry about like, 'How many times is this in here'?"
For the most part filmmakers expressed the amount of control the filmmaker retained as
directly proportional to how well the placement could potentially be done. The filmmakers
expressed a distaste for deals in which "too much" control is handed over to the brand, be it in
mandating how the brand should appear, the number of scenes in which the brand must appear,
or any alteration of the script. Largely filmmakers seemed to agree that the most natural product
placements were the most successful placements as far as not appearing obnoxious or over the
top and that an acceptable product placement is most likely one that is born out of the script, not
vice versa.
Response Theme Experience Level
Another key theme that emerged from the filmmaker interviews was that of experience
level of the filmmaker. This addresses both the number of years that a respondent had been
involved in filmmaking and also his or her personal experience with product placement. Though
filmmakers were not specifically questioned about their ideas on level of experience as related to
their attitudes toward product placement, it became apparent throughout the interviews that most
often those filmmakers who were most accepting and open to the practice of product placement
were the filmmakers who had the most filmmaking experience. While this was not an absolute
for every interview conducted it seemed that there was a direct relationship between those who
had made enough films to come into contact with some sort of product placement in their film
career and those who accepted the practice of product placement.
It seemed that the filmmakers with the lesser amount of filmmaking experience still held
fast to preconceived notions of the practice, but did not have personal experiences to discuss in
relation to these notions. It seemed that filmmakers with little experience had invested less
money into their films over time than those who had made multiple films. This lack of personal
investment seemed to keep these less experienced filmmakers resistant to the idea of product
placement. To them placing products represented another hand in their film. Because they had
not "been around the block" enough to recognize some of the financial benefits, so were not yet
at the stage of compromise in their filmmaking. Those filmmakers who had been in the business
for a number of years, however, were much more open to the idea of product placement in
exchange for goods or services because they had personally experienced a benefit from product
placement and had seen first hand how product placement could improve the bottom line of their
For instance, one filmmaker who had made films for approximately two years and had
not had direct contact with a product placement arrangement in his film career stated, "No, I
don't think we'd want to identify ourselves with a particular commodity." He further stated that
he looks at product placement in general as, "a universal as being it's a bad situation."
Another independent filmmaker who had completed one feature film was open to the idea
of creating his own brands to place, but not necessarily to placing the brands of others. He stated:
It was a way of in a business plan thinking, "Okay, well, if you just make a film you're
putting all your eggs in one basket" and if you merchandise things (within your film) then
any one of those little quirky things could take off on its own.
This same filmmaker also commented on how overwhelming the idea of product
placement can be to an inexperienced filmmaker, stating:
If you consider it as something you could do, then often, the mountain of paperwork and
dealing with larger companies, especially when you are a small fry, you know, you're
really not going to get any money for it, and certainly you're really going to run into a lot
of hassles. So I think a lot of independent filmmakers try to write that stuff, you know,
out of their scripts.
Another filmmaker with limited hands-on experience stated, "I think in a way it's sort of
a political thing....I'm personally resistant to do that." He later stated, "I don't like the idea of
product placement. I think it adds a lot of fake nature to movies".
On the other side, the filmmakers with the most experience (e.g. 10 to 30 years)
approached product placement from a more complacent angle. While filmmakers at this level
also expressed their desire for control over the placements and their resistance to compromising
an entire scene for a placement, they largely stated that product placement could have its
function in the world of an indie filmmaker in that it brought goods and services that could
improve the bottom line and improve the film overall.
One filmmaker of 30 years stated, "If a product is used correctly, I don't think it can hurt
the quality of a film. It's when they overdo it (that it hurts the quality)." A second experienced
filmmaker stated, "I mean, I've used product placement even in my small films, but you never let
it get in the way of telling the story or overriding the purpose of the scene or the dramatic impact
of the scene." He went on to say:
On The First of May we did a deal, and I believe it was with Old Navy for wardrobe for
the actors and that saved us. Not only saved us a good amount of money, but, which
allowed us to put in other areas to make the movie better, but it was a great look for the
character in the film, for the boy in the film to be wearing these products, that it was a
very simple wear, and that was his character.
A final quote that supports this theme came from a filmmaker who was new to indie
filmmaking, but had years of experience in the film industry as an actress. In this case, her
experience in the industry played out to yield an opinion similar to those filmmakers who had
years of filmmaking experience. She stated her opinion toward product placement use:
If that's the difference between an 800 theater release and, and, you know, a massive
release then, oh my god, I think those people would change their minds very quickly.
And maybe that's the difference between working in a city like L.A. as opposed to
This filmmaker pointed out a similar theme that was brought up by the indie filmmakers
themselves; that is, working at a lower budget level and in a city like Gainesville or Orlando
keeps filmmakers relatively separate from the practice of compromising their visions for
financial gain. Whether filmmakers keep their art pure because they choose to and avoiding
product placement is part of that choice, or because they have no choice not to because product
placement is not readily available at their level, remains a debate.
In general this theme emerged as one that was of mention, but was not as
overwhelmingly present as the other themes. Nonetheless, that the theme emerged as a trend
among a small pool of respondents brings up interesting ideas and may merit future study.
Response Theme Filmmaker Interest in Product Placement
A dimension of attitude that was set out to be studied initially was that of the level of
filmmaker interest in general topic of product placement. This theme addresses the respondents'
reported personal and professional interest in the topic of product placement. This dimension
emerged as a theme of the interviews, but did not seem to have a direct correlation with the
intensity of a filmmaker's attitude toward product placement, as even those filmmakers who
reported having little to no interest in the topic in general still expressed strong attitudes about it
during their interviews.
When asked if he considered product placement every time he made a film, one
filmmaker responded:
I don't think about it as much as I'm just traveling the planet and I know I'm surrounded
by stuff, you know. I don't put a lot of thought into it, it's really a prop master who puts
the thought into it.
Another filmmaker responded to the same question in a somewhat similar manner stating, "It
becomes pervasive that you have to be aware of it."
Another common response came from those who reported that product placement is in
the back of their heads, but not a top consideration when making a film. When asked if he
considered product placement each time he made a film, one filmmaker reported:
You have to be because you, because it comes into play when the sale of the movie
happens. So if you don't have clearance, again, it stifles the distribution process because
you have to go and get it, or you have to cut your movie again.
Another filmmaker echoed this response stating, "It's not, it's not on your top ten things you
think about. It is on your check list as, 'Okay, who can we involve to help us'."
Another response to the question of how much one considers product placement came in
the form of a "product displacement". Some filmmakers reported that the only reason they really
consider brands when shooting and editing their films is because they are aware that they cannot
show brands due to clearance issues. One filmmaker commented on this stating:
Usually, um, it's kind of drawn to my, it's brought to my attention like as we're filming,
like you start putting things, and then someone's like, "Hey, you can't see that name", so
we have to, like, turn it around, or like, tape something over it....I deal with a lot of that
more often than actual product placement.
A second filmmaker also discussed this point stating:
Our practical concern, and it was eye-opening for me when we were on the set and, um,
our script continuity man and our cinematographer went to great extremes to cover-up the
Aquafina machine that was dispensing soft drinks and anything that might be construed
as a product that could appear in the movie, because we hadn't of course been granted
any permission to use their products in the movie...so they went to great lengths to cover
everything up.
In general filmmakers reported noticing product placement, but only to the degree that
was necessary to get their films completed. That is, filmmakers noticed products in order to edit
them out of films to avoid future legal implications, or placed products in a scene most often for
realism and authenticity, and rarely for branding or money purposes.
Response Theme Artistic Integrity/Art versus Business
The final theme that was discussed across interviews was the idea of artistic integrity or
weighing the interest in one's business against the dedication to one's art. This theme deals with
the idea of balancing business and artistic vision and touches on the topic of artistic integrity of
the film. This topic was identified during the inception of the study as a point of interest and
therefore specific questions were derived to gauge the respondent's feelings about artistic
integrity in relation to the practice of product placement. Filmmaker responses to this dimension
of attitude were strong, and did not vary overwhelmingly. Instead, nearly every filmmaker
reported a loyalty to their story and considered vision as more important than any benefit that
could be gained from placing a product in their film. Yet, with that said, most were open to
evaluating the benefits on a case-by-case basis. What did vary was the intensity with which
respondents expressed this view.
Some filmmakers reported very strong feelings toward the idea of product placement.
One filmmaker reported, "It would be compromising your artistic integrity and certainly the
kinds of movies that we want to make are not designed simply to entertain or simply to make
money." This same filmmaker reported:
To look at the big picture, it hurts it as much as it possibly could. It corrupts it and turns
things into their opposites. For artists to function in a society they should lead, not follow.
And product placement puts the commodity ahead of human beings and it's contrary, it's
the opposite of art.
While other filmmakers mirrored this general opinion, most did not express their feelings
quite as strongly, and viewed product placement as more of a case-by-case decision. One
filmmaker reported, "It's an even balance of making the film that's in your head without
compromising any of the shots....and product placement is one big compromise." This
filmmaker also reported, "...everyone has to compromise along the way somehow." This
filmmaker further commented on the idea of compromising art for business by stating that
produce placement involved some questions to the filmmaker:
Like, what kind of future do you want to support? Do you have a family to support? Do
you have, do you want a steady job? Then it's easier to incorporate things like product
placement, as a filmmaker into your work because it depends. Do you want to provide
money for you and your family and sell out to the thing? Or would you rather forfeit
future jobs, and maybe have to sell your house, you know, because, you know, because
you won't put a product label in one shot.
This filmmaker furthered the idea of striking a balance between her vision as an artist and
her best interest financially by commenting, "It's a balance between being an artist and keeping
some type of integrity and also knowing your price tag." This filmmaker also commented on
how product placement as a marketing or business decision must be weighed against the integrity
of the film. She said:
I would have to consider as a filmmaker is how it would incorporate into it. Just like how
I would, I would compare product placement to sex scenes. Would a sex scene, you
know, increase the marketability of my film? Or, you know, is it really going to add to
the artistic integrity of my message as a filmmaker?
Another filmmaker commented on the incorporation of product placement into a film
stating, "It's all in the way, in the art, it's all in the way that you pursue your art." Another
filmmaker echoed this opinion by stating, "It's kind of, it really just comes down to the artistic
One filmmaker discussed her belief in the idea of making product placement work on a
case-by-case basis stating:
I can see a product placement sometimes working out that way, like if, if that product had
something to do with the storyline, and then all of the sudden it's like, "Oh, you know, it
adds, it adds to, like, the, um, it adds to the pacing, it adds to the motion of the film", then
it's not so bad. But more often than not I see that it's, it's a little intrusive.
The findings of these interviews centered around five major themes: "money", "control",
"experience", "interest in product placement" and "art versus business". In general filmmakers
reported that they would consider product placement depending on how it fit into their particular
script, but none reported that they would ever allow product placement to outweigh their original
vision or planned scripted scenes. Filmmakers seemed generally open to compromise to a
degree, but all were comfortable exercising their filmmaker control and ultimate product
placement veto.
A major finding of my study was that product placement arrangements in the independent
film world differ greatly from those in the world of Hollywood feature films. Another important
finding was that though initially resistant to the idea of product placement, most independent
filmmakers reported that they would be open to the practice if it helped the bottom line of their
film, as long as they could maintain a certain level of control and artistic integrity. Implications
for product placement practitioners and suggestions for future research are discussed.
The final chapter of this thesis will discuss the conclusions and limitations of my study.
This section will also make suggestions for future research and comment on the themes that
resulted from the study.
This study initially set out to study aspiring and existing filmmakers' attitudes toward the
practice of product placement in film. Though opinions about the practice of product placement
in general were revealed, an unexpected world of product placement was discovered through this
study that differed from the initial concepts of product placement recounted in the review of
literature the world of product placement in independent film.
Implications for Product Placement in Independent Film
I sought out filmmakers' opinions toward product placement. Product placement was
initially defined as, "a paid product message aimed at influencing movie or television audiences
via the planned and unobtrusive entry of a branded product into a movie or TV program"
(Balasubramanian, 1994). However, it soon became evident that for independent filmmakers
perhaps a more appropriate definition of this practice may be "a barter arrangement for goods or
services in order to decrease the bottom line of an independent film." It seems when defined this
way product placement is acceptable in the world of independent film. The results of this study
highlight a largely unexplored opportunity for product placement in independent films. Though
somewhat resistant to the idea of product placement, the independent filmmakers interviewed for
this study were for the most part open to placing products in exchange for goods or services if it
would decrease the bottom line of their film's production.
The practice of placing products in independent films has benefits and risks to both
parties involved in the placement. For the filmmakers benefits include the receipt of goods or
services that save the film money and ultimately decrease the cost of the film overall. Also,
depending on the good or service donated, the specific product may enhance the realism or
credibility of the film.
A disadvantage to the filmmaker is the potential loss of full control over his or her film.
The filmmaker may have to make some compromises including placing the product in at least
one scene and making sure that the product is visible and identifiable. Another potential
disadvantage may be that product placement adds artificiality to the film depending on how the
placement is executed.
For the product marketer this arrangement has the potential benefit of reaching an
untapped independent film-viewing audience. Products may gain credibility or be viewed as
cool, unique, or in support of the arts for appearing in indie versus commercial feature films.
Also, product placement at this level comes at a very small cost and is usually a casual barter
arrangement in which marketers donate some small amount of their goods to the film's cast and
crew for use throughout the making of the film.
A disadvantage to the marketer is the risk that the film may not be distributed widely, if
at all. Often independent films have limited release at film festivals and other events, and are
thus seen by a very limited audience. Additionally marketers run the risk of turning their product
placement over fully to the filmmaker to use at his discretion. Based on this arrangement the
placement may be either too overt and offend the viewing audience an audience which may
frown upon product placement at the start or be too subtle and not be noticed at all.
All in all it seems that the most overwhelming response from filmmakers and the most
notable guideline that emerged from this study is that product placement in independent film
should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. It was revealed that, in the opinion of filmmakers,
the placements that are born out of a script are the most natural, unobtrusive, non-offensive
placements. Those placements that are fitted into a script or scene often appear, awkward,
obnoxious, and unnecessary.
For advertisers, product placement in independent film is a viable, largely unexplored
option for reaching audiences that may be resistant to traditional advertising methods. The
investment to appear in an independent film is often minimal, and the rewards may be great.
Filmmakers, too, should continue to explore their options for placing products in their films in
order to enhance their film's budget. The filmmakers that were interviewed for this study who
experienced the most success and longevity were the ones who approached their filmmaking
both with artistic vision and business sense, a combination that served to increase their film
budgets and in turn increase the success of their films.
One-on-one interviews have a number of advantages including the rich detail that can be
drawn from a one-on-one session with a respondent and the fact that the interviewer can gather
detail about the topic at hand as well as about the respondent himself in order to best qualify the
information gathered (Stacks, 2002). Despite these advantages it is important to note the
limitations associated with the method of this study. First, qualitative in-depth interviewing can
be challenged by the presence of an audio recorder which may affect the openness of the
respondent (Yow, 2005). Also the qualitative in-depth interview method that was employed was
appropriate for this subject matter, but is not generalizable to a larger population (Stacks, 2002).
Therefore the results from this particular study must be viewed in the context of the respondents,
and each respondent's attitudes are drawn from his or her own unique set of experiences with
product placement. Additionally, the high cost in both time and money, as well as the difficulty
in gaining access to each individual interviewee created hurdles for this method of research
(Stacks, 2002). In-depth interviews require a large amount of research before the first interview
is conducted in order to identify the most appropriate respondents, set up interview times and
locations, and develop questions that properly explore the topic of study (Stacks, 2002). Time,
location, and scheduling presented challenges to this study. While many filmmakers were
agreeable to participate when initially contacted, actually pinning down a time and place to
conduct the interview was more challenging. Also, while filmmakers local to the author were
easily visited and interviewed in person, a large portion of the interviews (six out of the eleven
conducted) were held over the phone. Phone interviews presented issues in recording interviews
that were clear enough to transcribe, and conducting interviews at a speed that would keep the
respondent interested enough to stay on the phone and not lose interest. Lastly, at times it was a
challenge to keep the interviews on track. While most often filmmakers seemed to open up and
discussed their films and filmmaking experiences with candor, at times it was trying to strike a
balance between obtaining short, sparse answers and overly wordy, off-topic responses.
Suggestions for Future Research
This study set out to gain insight on how filmmakers actually feel about the practice of
product placement in film. While independent filmmakers were chosen as respondents based on
their accessibility to the author, the indie filmmaking world now presents a whole new angle
from which the practice of product placement may be researched.
Specifically, effectiveness of product placements in independent films is a suggested area
of future research. Though indie filmmakers are initially resistant to the idea of product
placement, this study revealed that when approached as a benefit to a film's bottom line, product
placement is actually quite accepted in the indie world. A study of how indie film viewers feel
about seeing products placed in indie films would be an appropriate follow up to this study.
Another suggested area of study is that of Hollywood filmmakers' attitudes toward
product placement in film. While some preliminary research exists on this topic (Turcotte, 1995),
a qualitative interview with feature filmmakers who have had repeated hands-on experience with
paid product placements in film would no doubt yield fascinating results.
Another suggested area for future research would be a quantitative survey on the topics
explored in this research. Now that specific themes have been identified, a quantitative study
which could provide generalizable results may be in order. Themes to be studied quantitatively
may include questions related to the aspects of"control", "money", "filmmaker experience",
"general interest in product placement" and "artistic integrity" which emerged from this study.
A final topic that may be addressed is that of audience created films for the Internet such
as those available on YouTube.com and whether or not brands are placed in these films. The rise
in online user-generated content in recent months has exposed a new area for academic study
that is largely unexplored. As the technology to create online videos becomes more accessible a
new venue for brand placements may be coming to light. Studies of this topic may include an
exploration into the number of instances in which a brand has paid or bartered to be included in
such a film or the effect of brands included in these films.
The knowledge gained from this research can be used by advertisers, researchers and
filmmakers alike to gain a snapshot of independent filmmakers' attitudes toward the practice of
product placement in film. Advertisers may utilize this data to uncover new opportunities for
relaying their brand message to the jaded potential consumer. Researchers may utilize these
results to base future studies on the effectiveness of brands placed within independent films and
filmmakers may utilize these results to learn about how product placement is currently being
employed within the indie world and to discover possible avenues for decreasing filmmaking
Informed Consent
Protocol Title: Thesis on Independent Filmmakers' Attitudes toward Product Placement in Film
My name is Karen Fenton and I am a student at the University of Florida writing my thesis on
filmmakers' opinions toward product placement. Please listen to/read this consent before you
decide to participate in this study. A copy of this consent has been emailed to you, so you do not
need to copy down the contact information that we will go over.
Purpose of the research study:
The purpose of this study is to learn the attitudes of independent filmmakers toward product
placement in film.
What you will be asked to do in the study:
You will be asked to answer open-ended questions related to product placement. This will take
place during a scheduled phone interview or during a scheduled face-to-face meeting at an
agreed upon location. The entire interview will be audio recorded for future transcription.
Additionally, you will be asked some general classification questions at the conclusion of the
Time required:
45 minutes (One phone conversation/face-to-face interview)
Risks and Benefits:
There are no risks or benefits associated with participation in this research.
There is no monetary compensation for participation in this study.
You have the right to confidentiality to the extent provided by the law. If you choose to
participate and would not like your name associated with your responses, this is acceptable. If
you choose to participate and would like to be named, this is appropriate as well. Personal
information such as your phone number and email address will not be included in the final
results, nor will it be given out to any third party. Only I, my professor, and the educational
parties necessary will see your full information.
The interview will be audio recorded. This recording will be used solely for the purpose of this
study and will not be listened to by or distributed to anyone outside of this study. For the
duration of the research and writing of this study the audio recordings will be stored in the
locked home office of the principal investigator. At the conclusion of this study, the audio
recording will be destroyed.
Voluntary participation:
Your participation in this study is completely voluntary. There is no penalty for not
Right to withdraw from study:
You have the right to withdraw from the study at anytime without consequence.
Whom to contact if you have questions about the study:
Principal Investigator: Karen Fenton, Advertising Graduate Student, Department of Advertising,
2084 Weimer Hall, (352) 870-0354
Supervisor: Cynthia Morton, Ph.D., Professor, Department of Advertising, 2084 Weimer Hall,
(352) 392-8841
Whom to contact about your rights as a research participant in the study:
UFIRB Office, Box 112250, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611-2250, ph. 352-392-
I have read/listened to the procedure described above. I voluntarily agree to participate in the
procedure and I have received a copy of this description.
Participant: Date:
Principal Investigator: Date:
Informed Consent Phone Script (Audio Recording Permission)
Protocol Title: Thesis on Independent Filmmakers' Attitudes toward Product Placement in Film
To be read over the phone before "Informed Consent" is read. This is to be clear that the
conversation will be audio recorded and that the respondent is in agreement i// this process.
My name is Karen Fenton and I am a student at the University of Florida writing my thesis on
filmmakers' opinions toward product placement. During this interview you will be asked to
answer some questions about your attitude toward product placement, as well as some general
information about yourself. With your permission, this interview will be audio recorded, so that
I can transcribe it after we talk, in order to capture everything you say to me to be used for my
study. If at any time you are uncomfortable with being recorded or interviewed, you may choose
to end the interview and I will dispose of the recording if this is your preference. If the interview
runs its full length (an anticipated 25-45 minutes) I will end the audio recording at the conclusion
of our interview. Once I am done transcribing the audio recording, this material will be disposed
of. May I have your permission to audio record this interview?
Ifyes, begin recording and read Informed Consent form to obtain consent.
If no, end interview.
Interview Questions
Dimensions ofAttitude Questions:
1. Do you think product placement has an effect on the finished film's quality?
2. Do you feel product placement enhances or hurts the quality of the film?
3. In your experience (or knowledge of other's experience) does product placement affect the
cost of making a film?
4. How do these cost affects (whether positive, negative or neutral) weigh in making the decision
to include product placement in a film?
5. Is there an instance in which no cost benefit would merit the inclusion of a product?
6. Do you think product placement distracts the film audience from the story at hand?
7. Do you consider product placement every time you make a film?
8. Do you seek out products to include in your films?
9. What kind of products have you/do you seek out for inclusion in your film?
Classification Questions:
1. Note gender:
2. What is your age?
3. What city do you reside in?
4. Is filmmaking a professional pursuit?
5. What is your occupation?
6. What is your average film's budget?
7. What is your level of education?
8. How many years have you been making films?
9. How many films have you made?
10. Would you like to be named in the study?
11. Can you refer me to another filmmaker who you think may be willing to participate in this
Interview Transcription #1
Chris Zara, New York Filmmaker, 36, Writer, Editor
Wednesday, Dec. 20, 2:30 p.m. Phone interview
I= Interviewer
First audio and informed consent are reviewed and agreed upon. Next, recording begins.
I: So you're a journalist, and I talked to your brother, and he is a director?
R: Yes, and I essentially write the screenplays and he does everything else.
I: Okay.
R: We're sort of a team. But my role is mainly through writing and story development. We
develop stories together and then I live in New York and I send the stories down here and he
does everything else down here, he films it, he hires the actors, he does all the auditioning and all
that stuff. He's most of the film. I'm really just kind of the writer and story guy.
I: Well I think writers are pretty key though as far as product placement because a lot of times
that's where, you know...
R: Yeah, and I can certainly give you some of, you know, in the past, especially in my early days
as a writer I would naively write specific products into the story because they exist in the real
world and you want to give the story a real feel.
I: Right.
R: But as I got older, you know, and more experienced I realized that that kind of stuff you end
up changing anyway.
I: Right
R: Because, like, for example you can't get Coca-Cola's approval, or whatever so you go with
something else or you just go with what you have.
I: Right.
R: But, um, you know in the beginning you kind of think it's cute to use real products, you
know, especially to make jokes about them, because, you know...
I: That will get you in trouble... (laughs)
R: People of our generation sort of appreciate pop culture references and products are a big part
of our pop culture, so, you know, it's something that I do try to write into a story when I can.
I: Right. I think, I mean, I'm studying advertising and product placement so I'm hyper-sensitive
to whenever I see a product placement, but I think that, you know, generally as a culture, we're
becoming, well Americans, so much more comfortable that it gets spoofed and made fun of a
lot more. You know, whereas before you could maybe slip it in, or a company could maybe
place a product, now I feel like people are almost, a lot of times audiences are on to them or
offended by it.
R: I think so. I think that you see a lot of that. And I think in that new movie with Will Ferrell,
Talladega Nights, where they have the Wonderbread all over the place...
I: Yeah, I didn't see it but...
R: No, I haven't seen it either, but the trailer, I mean you could see...they're kind of really being
a little blatant about it and I think they're trying to be funny. The fact that, like, Wonderbread
was like everywhere...
I: Right.
R: And it's kind of obnoxious, but it's supposed to be.
I: So they were tongue in cheek.
R: I think when it's done tastefully, I think it can be done okay and maybe the audience member
wouldn't even notice.
I: Uh huh. But then you get films like, um, with Tom Cruise Minority Report where there were
like fifty brands in a scene, and you know...
R: Right, right. Again, I think again they were trying to be a little spoofy because it was the
future, they were trying to show you how bad it's going to be in the future.
I: Right.
R: Like "if you think things are bad now, just wait until the future" and just imagine how you're
just bombarded with products.
I: Right.
R: You walk into a store and, um... Okay, and what else?
I: Okay, so you write the screenplays, is this your profession? Do you have a different
R: No, my profession is, uh, my day job is I am an editor for an entertainment newspaper.
I: Okay.
R: So filmmaking is not something that we actually make a living off of.
I: But you would classify yourself as a professional filmmaker? I mean, Fred told me that it's a
pursuit, you know, and you guys put it out there even though it's not your one hundred percent
full-time, it's a profession.
R: Well, yes. Ideally yeah. I mean, we certainly, I certainly would not consider myself an
I: Right, it's not a hobby, basically.
R: Yeah, it's not a hobby, and it's directly related to what I do. Because the paper that I work for
is an entertainment paper so I feel like the two are not mutually exclusive.
I: Mmmhm.
R: What I'm doing at the newspaper and then what I do with a films I write stories at the
newspaper and I write stories, um, with Fred. So, yeah, I guess basically you could call me a
professional storyteller.
I: Um, I guess I'll just go through some of the more basic questions first, such as and you
know, just answer these as best you can since Fred answered a lot these too but the, your film's
average budget? What would you say...?
R: Um, that's a good question. Definitely under five thousand.
I: Okay.
R: Um, typically in the two to three thousand dollar range. And they're short films, so keep in
mind that the average length of one of our movies is fifteen minutes, but still, you know, I think
even three grand for a fifteen minute film is exceedingly low budget. We do everything we can
- we get away with as much as we can without having to pay for... We don't pay the actors,
which I'm sure Fred has explained to you that we'd like to start paying the actors, that's actually
something that...
I: Right
R: We're kind of tired of, like, borrowing people's time and not really compensating them, uh...
I: Well, you said it kind of works as a trade off though because then they have something for
their resume or, you know, a reel to take.
R: Yeah. Certainly, but eventually you come to a point where you realize, "ok, this is hard work
and people really deserve to get paid".
I: Yeah.
R: And, uh, I think we've just come to that point in our lives...but, uh, but up until this point
we've cut corners wherever we can so our movies are exceedingly low budget. I don't know if
you've seen any of them...
I: I actually saw A Tale of Two Megans in Gainesville which is how I found out about you guys.
I copied your website down and found you on the Internet.
R: Ok, good. Ok, I think it yeah we played recently at the Florida ART Festival.
I: Yeah, and he (Fred Zara) told me the budget for that when you take out the equipment and
stuff like that which he owns was like five hundred dollars? Which just blew my mind, I
mean, I don't know a whole lot about independent filmmaking but that's amazing to do
something like that for five hundred dollars.
R: You know, I'm glad to hear that because that means we did our job.
I: Yeah, I mean -
R: If you believe we spend a lot more money on it...then...
I: That's what he said "that's the goal!".
R: But you can get away with a lot for very little...
I: Yeah, um, and you guys have been making films for how many years?
R: Um...we started in late 2000.
I: Okay.
R: In this venture. We actually, we grew up together we used to make home movies in the early
eighties too (laughs).
I: Okay.
R: So, uh, we've really been doing this for a long time, just on a fun level.
I: Uh huh.
R: But late 2000 is when we formed the company.
I: Okay. And with the company you've made? He said about six or seven films?
R: Uh, yeah, yeah, I'd say about that. A Tale of Two Megans was about number six, I think.
I: Okay. And that's your latest film, right, the one that I saw?
R: Right, we do have something in development now. I don't know if he told you but...
I: Oh really? You have to send it to Gainesville then.
R: What we have in development now is out of our hands. We've written a screenplay and we
sort of optioned it to this company.
I: Oh?
R: And they've basically taken over, so we really have no control over that.
I: That's cool, though. Um, can I ask you your level of education?
R: Yes. I am a college I guess you would call me a college drop-out. I got kicked out of high
school and never really finished college, but I've been taking, uh, you know, and I took some
college courses, on screenwriting and filmmaking, but I never finished, so...
I: Uh huh. Okay. So some college, and you're a professional now.
R: Yeah.
I: Um, and here's another weird one, can I ask your age? Or you can give me an age range if
you're not comfortable.
R: I'm 36.
I: Okay. Sorry, that's all for like setting up when I talk about the results, so I can say "my
candidates were..."
R: You, you actually, you're doing fine. When I interview people I always ask, "do you mind if
I ask you..." You know, because some people, they don't want to give you their age.
I: Well, that's what I thought.
R: But I find most people don't mind.
I: Yeah.
R: Um, I've never really had anyone say, "I'd prefer not to give my age".
I: Yeah, and I thought it'd be easier to just kind of ask outright instead of saying, "Is your age:
18-35, 36-..."
R: Yeah, well, you want to be real specific because I don't know if you're writing this like an
article, but you really want to, I mean, readers like specifics. So if you said, like, "a
thirtysomething filmmaker" the first thing a reader is going to think is "Well, thirty what?" 31
and 39 are two different things.
I: Yes.
R: So, uh, yeah, I'm 36.
I: Um, you're the older brother...
R: I am the older brother.
I: Um, okay. I'm just going to go through the questions. A lot of these you've pretty much
already covered so you can short-answer them, but, um. We talked about, "do you think that
product placement has an affect on the finished film's quality?" You said a little bit about it
might add realism. Do you think it ever detracts?
R: It really is a case-by-case basis. I think it can detract if it's obnoxious.
I: Uh huh.
R: And not in an intentional way. Like, I think the Talladega Nights situation might be
intentionally obnoxious because it's funny. Or the Wayne's World, well, I don't know if you've
seen Wayne's World where they're all talking about the different products that he says, "I'll
never sell out to them" but in the course of not selling out he is actually selling out. It's
supposed to be funny.
I: Right. I remember seeing that a long time ago. Do they do Burger King?
R: They do Pizza Hut -
I: Pizza Hut! That's it!
R: And they actually do like an aspirin commercial in the course of it and they actually do it just
like the commercial it's supposed to be funny and it is funny.
I: Yeah, yeah.
R: But, in a situation where it's not supposed to be funny and it's obnoxious like, for example
the label is intentionally turned toward the screen in a way that it wouldn't be in the real world,
um, I think it does detract a little bit from the quality, um, and pulls you out of the movie a little
I: Right.
R: I'm thinking of a situation, there's a new show on TBS called My Girls (author note: show
referred to is titled My Boys) and it's a sit-com. Uh, and I know that the show was sponsored by
I: Uh huh.
R: Match.com. And there's a scene where the girl says, "Well I'm going to go on Match.com
and find a new boyfriend". And you can just tell that they threw that in there.
I: And you can just feel it, yeah.
R: It's so, it's so artificial. And, uh, it pulls you out of it a little bit and it just makes you roll
your eyes a little bit.
I: Yeah.
R: Um..
I: That's really what I'm after. (laughs) You know, things like that. Who feels one way or
R: Well and there's so many examples and it really is hard to tell if it's going to work or not.
I: Mmmhm.
R: Um, I think like in Back to the Future the sequel where they're in the future -
I: Uh huh.
R: And there's like Pepsi everywhere. I think that's kind of funny, because, like, they're using
real products like Pepsi, but it's like a futuristic Pepsi or something. And like that's kind of
funny when they do it that way.
I: Don't they do Pizza Hut too? With like the tiny pizzas?
R: Yeah, he pulls out like a tiny pizza. Right, it's like products everywhere!
I: Yeah.
R: They're in the future and it's supposed to be funny. Um, but then other times I don't know,
there's times when it's not quite as tasteful or like...
I: Mmhmm.
R: Well, there's that other movie with Sylvester Stallone where they go in the future and all the
fast food restaurants are Taco Bell.
I: Demolition Man, (laughs) I yeah.
R: Demolition Man? And I think what's obnoxious and humorous works, but uh, I think there's
examples like the one I told you with Match.com where it's not supposed to be funny and it's
just kind of obnoxious.
I: Right. What about how product placement affects the cost? Fred told me that you guys
haven't necessarily dealt with necessarily being compensated by a brand to include it, but, just
your general opinion on it. Like if a brand comes up with money how would you feel about
putting it in your film?
R: As a filmmaker I guess we would do it but it would depend on the situation.
I: So as long as... a lot of what I've been hearing... I guess I would say the bottom line that I got
from your brother was that really, you know, 'movie first, and then maybe the brands of the
money second'. Like, as long as it, as long as he still had control and he didn't have to face
labels a certain way or write around it in the script or whatever. You know, then sure, money is
nice but as soon as it you know, somebody else had a hand in your project then, he said,
pretty much no amount of money is worth that to him.
R: I think the ideal would be, um, all in the contract, I guess, that we sign with the company.
I: Right.
R: Yeah, and to make sure that we had those freedoms the freedom just to keep it tasteful in the
movie. But I certainly wouldn't rule it out.
I: Right.
R: And if it's going to help us pay for our movie, um, you know, I would do it. As long as, yeah,
I think like Fred said, as long as we had control over, you know, of usage.
I: So, to answer the question "is there ever an instance in which no monetary benefit could, you
know, include a product placement" you would say the answer is "control". Is that, that's the
bottom line for you?
R: Um, yeah, if I felt like it really wasn't appropriate.
I: Uh huh, okay.
R: I mean, what good is the money if it's going to ruin the story?
I: Right.
R: I guess another question could be what if we couldn't make the movie otherwise, what if we
didn't have the money or that was the only way. But I can't imagine a situation where you're
relying entirely on one advertising entity to pay for your movie, so...
I: Uh huh. Well I would guess at that point -
R: In answer to your question, yeah there is a point where I just wouldn't do it. If it's
inappropriate for the story, you should turn it down I think.
I: Okay. Um, I have a question "do you consider product placement every time you make a
film"? And it sounds like you guys probably don't specifically think about it.
R: Um, no we don't. Um, the last few that we did it wasn't really an issue. We wrote a story
early on called Laugh Track with the lead character gets turned into a sit-com and there's a lot of
pop culture references that we really didn't have the rights to and that if we had shopped that
movies beyond film festivals we really would have had to get all the rights to the sit-com
characters. And in that case, yeah I did think about it, because we did think about it one time
maybe making this a feature length movie or something. And those are the situations where you
have to think about it because you may need Coca-cola to make the scene work for whatever
I: Uh huh.
R: Or you may need McDonald's or whatever else, you know, whatever else comes up in your
I: Um, when you do think about product placement do you does your mind automatically go to
certain things. Like as far as writing a screenplay is it always about soda or clothing or maybe
even a location? Just kind of what are your thoughts on what you think of when you're writing a
screenplay and brands.
R: It's almost always for the sake of, um, a pop culture reference that's somehow funny.
I: Okay.
R: I wrote a screenplay and (in it) a guy eats his friend's peppermint patty. And he says, "You
know that felt good. I felt the sensation of being in the Artic tundra". And he says it just like the
commercial and it's supposed to be, you know, he's kind of making fun of the commercial.
I: Uh huh.
R: In a situation like that if I had ever gotten that movie made, I'd want to go out and solicit
peppermint patties and ask them if we could really use the product because it makes the scene so
much more authentic.
I: Right.
R: Even though they're kind of making fun of it a little bit. Hopefully they'd be good sports
about it and let us do it and maybe even give us a little bit of money.
I: Well that's what I was saying. I mean it sounds like in that case you would go out to the
company and ask, "Can I use this candy?" but from what I'm reading, like, you could go out to
them and say "Hey, I'm making this film and if you want your candy in it give me a certain
amount of money".
R: It's good for you, it's good for me.
I: Yeah.
R: I think in E.T. they did that.
I: That's how it all started, yeah.
R: I think from the story they initially wanted to use M&M's and M&M's said, "No, we don't
want this stupid alien eating M&M's" not realizing that the movie was going to be a big hit of
I: Right.
R: And went with Reese's Pieces instead, and of course Reese's Pieces made probably a ton of
money using E.T.'s image all over the place after that movie came out.
I: Right. And something like that, I mean, even though that's such a legend as far as product
placement it's so hit or miss, you know?
R: The movie could have tanked.
I: It could have been horrible. It could have been like 'what is this thing??', but, I mean, it's
Steven Spielberg, it worked out, so...
R: Right.
I: Um, okay well you've pretty much answered all my questions about product placement. I just
want to know if I can use your name when I write up the results?
R: Yeah, you're absolutely free to use anything I told you. Yeah, my name, my age, whatever.
I: Ok, great.
End of Interview
End of Interview
Interview Transcription #2
Fred Zara, Orlando Filmmaker, 34, Graphic Artist
Wednesday, Dec. 20, 2 p.m. Phone interview
I= Interviewer
First audio and informed consent are reviewed and agreed upon. Next, recording begins.
I: So, Fred, where do you live, Orlando?
R: Yes, I live in Orlando.
I: And your brother lives somewhere else but he's visiting you, is that right?
R: Uh, yeah, he lives in New York City but he's here right now.
I: Ok, cool. As you know I am studying for my Master's of Advertising.
R: Okay.
I: And the topic that I'm studying is product placement in film, and pretty much everything that's
out there that I've found is about kind of more what the consumer or the audience, the receiving
end of product placement, how they feel about it and their attitudes towards it. I'm really just
interested in kind of what the filmmakers feel about it. If they feel, you know, positive, negative,
anything about the artistic integrity of their film and things like that. So I really just want to hear
about your experiences with product placement...
R: Uh, well I haven't had any personal experience with product placement, and I certainly can't
speak for filmmakers as a whole, but...
I: Right
R: In general, I don't really have a problem with it, if it's done, if it's done tastefully and it's not
overdone, and it's not, like, in your face.
I: Okay
R: Because, you know, particular products, I mean any kind of name product is part of real life,
and you're making a film to, you know, replicate real life, then some of those products are going
to show up from time to time...but, I mean, if it's a scene that, that warrants somebody drinking
a Coca-Cola, then fine, but,
I: Uh-huh.
R: But if it's a scene about two couples, like a couple having a conversation, and their
conversation starts turning towards how good the Coca-Cola is, I mean, that would be, that
would be, overdone and that would be annoying.
I: Mmmhm, right.
R: I mean, it can be, it can be done overdone, and it can be in your face and take you out of the
film, which I think is obnoxious, um, but in general it doesn't really bother me and it makes
people money on the side and there's nothing wrong with it.
I: Well, that was actually my next question, um, if you said you haven't dealt with it personally,
but any filmmakers you know of, or just your knowledge of the industry or filmmaking in
general how product placement effects cost? Do you have any comments about that?
R: Um, no, not anything in particular, I mean...
I: Okay.
R: It could probably, from what I understand, it can help offset some costs, because there's the,
uh, companies that are paying to have their product in certain productions. I mean, that can help
to go toward production costs and keep production costs down.
I: Mmhm.
R: And have that money go toward something else, and then that can, that, that's not always a
bad thing, especially on low budget productions, where....We actually, I was working on a
feature film, um, development on a feature film a couple of years ago, and that's one avenue we
were, we were experimenting with to try and get funding for the film. We were approaching
companies and seeing if they'd be interested in, you know, helping fund the product helping
fund the production if they had, like, a small spot, um, tastefully done in the film.
I: Right
R: We had, we had some, some alcohol companies that were somewhat interested, but it never
really, never really went anywhere. Um...
I: Okay. That kind of leads me into the next question, um, with your mention of possibly alcohol
companies being included. Uh, would you say that would be an instance in which, I mean
obviously, sometimes product placement can be pretty lucrative, especially in bigger budget
films, but do you think there would ever be an option of absolutely not including a product, you
know, perhaps if it distracted from the scene?
R: Basically um, for me personally yeah, I mean, that's why I -
I: Okay.
R: that's why I live in Orlando and I consider myself an independent.
I: Right.
R: Because I, I there's, there's a lot of things that I just, I won't do, for the integrity of the film.
And then, you know, if I'm um, not that I'm necessarily, like for instance against the porn
industry, but if I'm making a film that has nothing to do with the porn industry and they, they
want to throw a lot of money at me to plug, like, a porn website or something on somebody's t-
I: Uh huh.
R: I would probably tell them, that's not a good idea. It doesn't, it doesn't, say they want to put it
on one of my characters that wouldn't wear that t-shirt.
I: Right.
R: I would, I would just tell them no, I mean I'm fine with turning down money with, for,
something that's just not, you know, good for the product the product, the project. I mean, if I
was totally interested in just making money I would move out to L.A. and I would try and build
my ranks out there.
I: Right, and so in your example about the porn t-shirt, it wouldn't be the actual content of the
placement or the industry that it was coming from, it's just the fact that it didn't fit with that
scene or that script, correct?
R: That, for me personally, yeah, I mean.
I: Okay.
R: I would, I would only really allow it if it worked toward a particular scene or for the particular
film as a whole.
I: Mmmhm.
R: It really doesn't have anything to do with me wanting to boycott well, I might want to
boycott like a Wal-Mart, or something like that, but in, in general, I, I wouldn't really want to
boycott any particular company just because I don't like them.
I: Uh huh.
R: Um, and if it works for the scene then more power to them, let him wear, let him wear a porn
shirt if that's the kind of guy he is.
I: Right, right.
R: It's not that I'm worried about that kind of thing. It's just that, uh, if it was an obvious plug,
and they (the company placing the product) came on set and they asked me to make sure the
label was facing the camera at all times, I wouldn't want that, I wouldn't want that to be an issue.
And I would just, the money part wouldn't be, wouldn't be, wouldn't make my decisions for me.
I: So for you, it is a lot more and you typically are a director, correct?
R: Uh, yes, yeah.
I: Um, so for you, it's, it's more about, you wouldn't trade the control to set up the scene the way
you wanted to and for the money of having somebody there. Like, oftentimes, I understand
they'll send a brand manager to, like, turn all the labels one way like you said or things like that.
And, you're saying for you it's just not worth the trade off
R: That's not really worth the tradeoff, no.
I: Right.
R: It would, there would have to be some specifics. I mean, there's always going to be
exceptions made...
I: Right.
R: But there would have to some specifics that, that if the product was used in a particular scene,
um, and they were paying some money towards it, there would have to be some specifics in the
contract that I use it to my, you know, um, to the best of my abilities, I use it with my discretion.
And if it needs to get cut out of the film because the scene itself isn't working, I also have the
discretion to do that.
I: Mmmhm.
R: You know what I mean? Because, I mean sometimes you shoot a scene, and it just doesn't
work in the context of the movie as a whole, and I wouldn't want, you know, these money
people to come knocking on my door telling me I have to leave that scene in.
I: Uh huh
R: If they put money into the film and their product is in that scene. I mean, those kinds of
specifics would have to be in the contract, or, it just wouldn't be worth it because then the end
product that has my name on it, which is this film, is out there that's something that, that I'm
not happy with it's something that I didn't really put together.
I: Absolutely.
R: So...
I: Okay. Um, yeah, because I'm actually doing my research, I read about a couple different
cases, and one of them was like with Jerry Maguire, the feature film obviously, where they were
supposed to include a brand, Reebok or Nike, and they didn't and it turned into this whole thing.
And, I mean, so I'm very interested in understanding, as a filmmaker, because, to be honest with
you, I've talked to some people who are like, "Oh yeah absolutely it's worth the money I'll do
whatever they want" So...I really value the fact that I'm kind of hearing the other side of that
from you.
R: Well, that's good. Did you, you did talk to people for this piece that felt that way?
I: Mmhmm.
R: Well, I mean, there's certainly people out there and you bring up the Jerry Maguire thing. I
mean, that whole crew is that's on a whole different level.
I: Uh huh.
R: I mean, they almost don't even make movies (laughs)...
I: (laughs) It's pretty much a commercial, right?
R: A lot, yeah, a lot of times they don't even make movies for the content in the script, or the
story they, they make it on the commercial value of it.
I: Uh huh.
R: And if product placement is part of that commercial value, and they can cash in, well then,
they're going to go with that. But I mean, guys like us, I mean, we want to tell our stories the
way we want to tell our stories.
I: Uh huh.
R: And if their product doesn't mesh with our story, then, it just doesn't get in there.
I: Right.
R: Money's not really the issue.
I: Right.
R: Um, okay, well then I have a few...kind of classification questions related to that. And just
let me know if you don't want to ask um, answer any of these. Things that I'm asking are like,
what is your average film's budget? I understand you've worked on a lot of different films, so
this probably varies, correct?
R: Um, it, it varies, but they're all pretty low, I mean they're all within the, you know, the
thousand ($1,000) range to fifteen hundred ($1,500). Uh, you know, really in the thousand dollar
or so range.
I: Oh, okay.
R: Um...I mean, it can...I mean, I've worked on other films that have budgets.
I: Uh huh.
R: But in terms of the films that I've produced.
I: That you Like, what about, Tale of Two Megans, that I saw?
R: (laughs) Uh, A Tale of Two Megans, uh, it, it's interesting, A Tale of Two Megans, if you
want to put our fixed costs as far as, um, my computer software, and uh, the cameras that we use.
A lot of those things are called expenses but between me and my director of photography, um,
we own all that equipment.
I: Right.
R: So, I don't necessarily figure all that into the budget.
I: Right.
R: Um, so if I'm just talking about the budget for that particular piece, we're probably talking
about five hundred dollars.
I: Are you serious?
R: Yeah, I mean...
I: Wow...
R: It was a three day shoot, I had five actors. And I basically had to feed the actors for three
I: Uh huh.
R: Um, there was, there was minimal props, uh, we shot on set so there, you know we didn't
have to build any sets.
I: Uh huh.
R: Uh, and and like I said we owned all the equipment.
I: Wow...
R: There really wasn't a lot of cost that went into it. And, um, my, um, my music composer is a
good friend of mine. He's a professional composer in Seattle, Washington.
I: Uh huh.
R: Um, a guy by the name of Ron Leonardi, and he, um, he worked for me for free because
we've, we've, you know, helped each other out on so many different products or, uh, projects
in the past.
I: Right.
R: So I didn't have to, have to pay him. And he added, I mean, he added so much with the score
to make it seem that much more professional.
I: Right, I'm so impressed.
R: My lighting guys were as professional as they come, but, again, friends of mine that are
willing to just work for me because they like me and my ideas so -
I: And with the actors?
R: So, we keep it cheap. Um, with the actors, I didn't pay, other than, other than, uh, I, you
know, I paid for their food and I gave them, you know, nice copies and credits of the film.
I: Uh huh.
R: But I, I didn't actually give them day rates. John, John Hill who played the lead.
I: Right.
R: Um, I worked with him several times in the past and I do some stuff for him on the side I
edit some, like, demo reels for him.
I: Uh huh.
R: So I do some stuff for him, he does some stuff for me, we kind of- 'You scratch my back, I
scratch yours' And I when we wrote the script for A Tale of Two Megans I had him in mind
for it.
I: Uh huh.
R: But I asked him, I mean, he's a professional actor as well, and gets paid well to do it.
I: Uh huh.
R: You know, I I, one thing that I try to do for my actors if I'm not going to pay them, um, is
that I try to keep shooting schedule, as, as short as possible, because, they're, they're great actors
and they do a great job. Um, I can't really afford to pay them on some of these, some of these
films, so the least I can do is not take up too much of their time.
I: Right.
R: That they can be making money elsewhere.
I: Right.
R: Um, and I think that's a good tradeoff, that I'll try and deliver them a nice product from my
end if they work for me for basically no money.
I: Mmhm.
R: Um, and in return, it will only cost them about three or four days of their time.
I: Mmmhm.
R: And it's usually a pretty good tradeoff for people who are, who are trying to build a resume.
And as far as John, who already has a resume, well he's, he's just a friend of mine, we just get
along and so we do each other favors.
I: Wow, yeah, this is uh, you know largely my first, like, foray into independent films and I had
no idea that something, you know, I felt like the films that I saw here in Gainesville were very
professional looking, for the most part, and, I mean, especially that one, I can't believe you did
that for five hundred dollars. And all the tradeoffs and things like that, but that's just amazing to
R: Well, well thank you. I mean, we really appreciate that, because we try to um, if you've
actually chronicled our films from the past five years since we kind of got started,
I: Mmhm.
R: Uh, you'll definitely see, um, I hope you'll definitely see the progression in the production
value even though our budgets haven't really changed, you know, none of us really have any
I: Right.
R: You don't really make money in this kind of field until you get to another level.
I: Uh huh.
R: Um, though our production budgets haven't really changed, I spent less on A Tale of Two
Megans than I have on my two previous films.
I: Uh huh.
R: Um, we've just gotten better at disguising the fact that we're not really spending money.
We've gotten, between me and our director of photography and our writing and the way I can
direct some actors, um, we've gotten better at making it seem like there's more money behind it
than there really is.
I: Uh huh.
R: But I appreciate that you thought that it was done for a little bit more.
I: Oh yeah, absolutely. Um, so you went to film school, correct?
R: Uh, I didn't, I didn't graduate film school.
I: Oh, but you studied at...?
R: But I did go to, I did go to, but I don't know if you would even necessarily classify it as a film
school I went to Valencia Community College for a couple semesters.
I: Well, actually one of the people that I'm going to interview is Ralph Clemente, do you know
R: I do know Ralph, yeah.
I: Yeah, he's one of the people that I've talked to before, actually. I haven't done the official
interview, but I just kind of have been talking to a couple people to feel out what sorts of
questions I would want to ask, and things like that...and, uh...
R: Ralph Clemente, yeah.
I: Yeah, he had a lot to say actually. Like, I called to ask him one quick question and we were on
the phone for like an hour. I was just like, "Okay!"
R: He's an informative guy. I don't I guess he would remember me. We, uh, we were going to
produce a film program two years ago.
I: Mmhm.
R: Um, and our funding, we weren't coming through with our funding, so instead we, uh,
optioned our script to a production company.
I: Uh huh.
R: So, but I did have several meetings with Ralph, meetings that I thought would pretty much be
scheduled for fifteen, twenty minutes and we were there for two hours.
I: Yeah.
R: And I was just kind of rapping with him about all the different things that he's done and...
I: Yeah.
R: Uh, he's an informative guy, and he's a nice guy, and from what I understand the people that
have actually, have been on set with him, he's a good guy to have on set. He gets down to
business and he can get serious when need be.
I: Mmhmm.
R: Yeah, Ralph's a, Ralph's a good source to have for what you're doing.
I: Good, yeah, I'm supposed to call him, in a little bit here. Um, so, you are, your occupation is
professional filmmaker, this is your full time job?
R: No, that is not correct.
I: Oh really? Can I ask what your occupation is?
R: Certainly. Uh, I do some different things.
I: Okay.
R: But professionally I do, I guess consider myself professional for that fact that I have been paid
I: Mmhmm.
R: To write a script.
I: Okay.
R: Um, I have been paid on occasion to edit.
I: Uh huh.
R: So I guess that makes me a professional, but I also hold a job as a graphic artist.
I: Oh, okay.
R: I do headshots and re-touching for actors, and uh...
I: Okay.
R: It's all industry-related, but...
I: Right, well, just when I write up the results and talk about the pool of respondents, you know, I
have to say "males and females, eighteen to whatever, let's say fifty, primarily composed of',
you know, "professional filmmakers" which you would fall into and also graphic artists -
you know, so I can name out everything to kind of set up...
R: I I guess you could really just say 'industry professional' because everything I do is
industry-related, but
I: Okay.
R: But, like, in our town, here in Orlando, we kind of wear a lot of different hats.
I: Right, right. Um, do you mind telling me your age, or you can give me an age range?
R: I'm 34.
I: (laughs) It's kind of a weird question to ask. And you said you've been making films for five
R: Um, we've been seriously attempting to make films since around late 2000, 2001.
I: Okay.
R: So it's been about five or six years.
I: And, the number of films that you've made? I've been to your website and I see you have a
link for 'student films' also, so what...?
R: Yeah, I don't know that I would necessarily classify those as films.
I: Okay.
R: So whatever the other films are. I guess there's six or them, seven of them.
I: Okay, okay. Um, that's pretty much what I had to ask you. I think you, uh, I mean it was
really helpful to talk to you because I feel like you had a clear stance on the issue and you had a
lot to say.
R: Yes, I'm sure I'm giving you more than you're actually going to use or need.
I: But that's better, more is better than less. (laughs)
R: It's a good experience for me as well because I've done a couple of interviews here and there,
but I'm not necessarily somebody that talks to a lot of people. I mean, I've done some of these
film festivals and panels and stuff like that...
I: Right.
R: But I'm not generally all that comfortable with talking to a lot of people. But I need to be
more comfortable...
I: Well, I was going to say, I'm a good place to start then, because this is an academic study and
you know you can work your way up to being published in magazines and stuff, for now you'll
just be in the library (laughs).
R: Well, yeah...when Wired magazine calls next week I'll...
I: You'll be all set! Uh, I have one more question for you Fred, do you want me to use your name
in the study?
R: Certainly, yes.
I: Okay, and I can say the names of your films and everything?
R: You can say anything you want.
I: Okay, fabulous. Okay, thank you so much.
R: You're welcome. I'll talk to you later.
I: Okay, you too.
R: Bye.
End of Interview
End of Interview
Interview Transcription #3
Shamrock McShane, Gainesville Screenwriter/School Teacher, 55
Mike McShane, Gainesville Director/Student, 20
Saturday, Jan. 6, 2007 10 a.m. In person at Millhopper Library, Gainesville, Florida
I= Interviewer
S= Shamrock
M= Mike
First audio and informed consent are reviewed and agreed upon and signed. Next, recording
I: First, I guess I need to know a little bit about how you consider yourselves independent
filmmakers. What context you said director, writer. Um, if you can just give me a little insight
into what actual experience you've had, how many films you've worked on, things like that.
S: Okay, well, most recently we completed a feature length narrative film called The Votive Pit,
I: Okay.
S: 88 minutes in length.
I: Okay.
S: Uh, it took us a year of shooting.
I: Okay.
S: Um, Michael was the director.
I: Okay.
S: I was the screenwriter and the movie was based on a play I wrote.
I: Okay.
S: Um, so our, our involvement with film comes out of the theater. I've been in the theater since
the 1970's.
I: Okay.
S: Michael has made two feature length films. He, uh, previously made a documentary film.
How long was that movie?
M: It was, uh, 90 minutes.
S: 90 minutes, called It's All Good.
I: Okay.
S: And, uh, Michael has been more directly involved with the making of films. I've been
involved only as an actor and a screenwriter.
I: And a screenwriter.
S: But not just on our films, also on a feature length narrative film called Silent Warrior -
I: Okay.
S: Made by a local filmmaker Georg Koszulinski.
I: Oh, I'm going to talk to him also. Alright.
S: Mmhmm and Substream Films. Um, I worked on The Hawk is Dying with Paul Giomatti as a
professor, an extra in one of the party scenes.
I: Okay.
S: And, uh, a number of other local films here. And Mike's made a number of short films, if you
want to talk your credentials.
I: Absolutely and I was going to say at the end of this you have the option of me using your
names and the titles of your films so if you want to pepper the interview with the titles of your
films, I encourage you to do so.
S: Certainly, and we'll back it up with some email.
I: Okay, good. Okay great. Okay.
M: Yeah, I've been working over the past, I think it's now two years, with the Acrosstown
Repertory Theatre and the Gainesville Association for the Creative Arts with their teen programs
making short films based on their, what they've worked off of either Shakespeare or their own
life stories into short films. So I've been working on that.
I: Mmhmm. Okay. Um, would you consider filmmaking then your professional pursuit? Is this
S: It's certainly Michael's professional pursuit at this time. I'm a full time public school teacher.
I: Okay.
S: And chairperson of the Language Arts department at Westwood Middle School.
I: Okay.
S: But I've been a man of the theater, as I say, since the 1970s. I was previously the playwright
in residence at the Acrosstown and we have our own production company. So it's more than just
a hobby.
I: Does your production company have a website?
S: Yes, it does.
I: Can you provide that to me?
S: Yes.
I: Um, alright. You both live in Gainesville?
S: Yes.
I: Okay. And may I ask your ages?
S: I am 55.
M: I am 20.
I: Okay. And level of education?
S: I have my Master's degree in Creative Writing from the University of Florida.
I: Okay.
M: I am pursuing a B.A. in English and a minor in Technical Theater at UF.
I: Okay. And you say that you've been in theater since the 1970s but you've been making films
for how many years?
S: Um, gosh I guess the last five years.
I: Okay, and is that the same for you?
M: Yeah.
I: Five years. And do you mind if I name you in this study?
S: Oh, please do.
I: Okay. Well, um. I'm studying product placement. I'm trying to pursue my Master of
Advertising hopefully to finish up this spring. Um, so I'm interested... .more...pretty much
everything I've read on product placement so far is about how consumers or how audiences
perceive it and I'm interested in what filmmakers think about it if they feel that it possibly
compromises artistic integrity, if they feel that, I've talked to some people that say, you know,
it's great for a budget especially for an independent film and they'd be happy to work in a
product in whatever manner possible. So I have a couple questions related to that, just about
nine. Um, and certainly touch on your own experiences, experiences of others that you know of,
anything that you feel is relevant. Okay?
S: Okay.
I: Okay, um, do you think that product placement has an effect on a finished film's quality?
S: Well, our practical concern, and it was eye-opening for me when we were on the set and, um,
our script continuity man and our cinematographer went to great extremes to cover-up the
Aquafina machine that was dispensing soft drinks and anything that might be construed as a
product that could appear in the movie...
I: Okay.
S:...because we hadn't of course been granted any permission to use their products in the movie.
I: Uh huh.
S: And we live in a world of commodity. That's what our world is made out of. Um, so they
went to great lengths to cover everything up, and I can see the moral question that might be
presented to a filmmaker if you could finance your film in part by placing products within view
of the audience then it would become I guess the matter of the particular commodity and what its
intentions were, and what benefit, or how it's consumed.
I: Okay.
S: You know, if people are going to smoking cigarettes in your movie, if people are going to be
drinking drinks in your movie, can it be construed as if you are condoning those activities, or....
I: And do you think as a screenwriter would you ever change a script to fit in a brand? If perhaps
maybe the director or producer said, you know, this is a good opportunity for money to finance
the film? Or do you feel that that's a total distraction?
S: Um, I would like to think no, no I would not. Uh, and that it would be compromising your
artistic integrity and certainly the kinds of movies that we want to make are not designed simply
to entertain or simply to make money.
I: Uh huh.
S: So it doesn't operate on a bottom line like that. And no I don't think we'd want to identify
ourselves with a particular commodity.
I: Okay. And what about you?
M: With also on our last project that it was even to the point of in editing I handed it over to a
second editor and as much as possible they would cut out even the spoken words of any,
anything that came out like Mountain Dew or M&Ms, they tried to cut that out as much as
I: Mmhmm.
S: Particular references.
M: Right, particular references.
S: ...to specific commodities.
I: Now, is that because of your fear that perhaps this film would get bigger and then Mountain
Dew would...
S: That's exactly it. That's exactly it. And I had never even thought about that before. And the
logic behind it from the people that are warning us about those kinds of things was, "you don't
have to worry about anything.... UNLESS...you ever make a nickel".
I: Right, exactly. So it's not, just to clarify, it's not the specific reference, like, pop culture -
incorporating that, that's not your worry. It's will they come after you for money?
S: Mmhmm.
I: Okay, um, I'll pose this question. I feel like I've kind of gotten an answer but maybe you can
clarify. Do you feel that product placement enhances or hurts the quality of a film? Or maybe
it's situational.
S: Um, well, to look at the big picture, it hurts it as much as it possibly could. It corrupts it and
turns things into their opposites.
I: Okay.
S: Um, for artists to function in a society they should lead, not follow.
I: Uh huh.
S: And product placement puts the commodity ahead of human beings and it's contrary, it's the
opposite of art. So I think, and that's the only way you can look at it in the abstract, unless you
wanted to talk about Coca-Cola came to us and offered us X number of dollars to have the
people drink Coke instead of Pepsi.
I: Okay. Um, I think we'll get to that in the next questions....where we talk about money. Um,
do you share that opinion?
M: Yeah. From what I've dealt with at UF that there have been, you know, stories of even in
E.T. and stuff where they had to compromise. They couldn't get the rights to use M&Ms to
disperse for the alien so they had to use Skittles, and, you know, absurd little qualms over little
product placement things which I think should not affect a film. You just should do whatever
your initial goal was to make your film.
I: Uh huh. And that there shouldn't be this issue with rights and brands and that is what you're
S: Yes. Property. It becomes a matter of property.
I: Okay. Um, so how do you think these costs affect the decision whether or not to include
product placement? You would say even if there's a cost benefit to the filmmaker, it doesn't
justify inclusion?
S: No, no. It's a limitation. It's a it constricts.
I: Well, you have a consistent opinion and that's good.
M: Right. Even in the humor in State and Main of, you know, he hands over this ad that they're
supposed to put in the film for Bazoomercom in the middle of this 1890s film and the humor of
that, when you get to the end of the film you pan past the window and it's the shot of
I: Uh-huh. It's funny that you bring up E.T. also because from my end of it, from studying
advertising that's like heralded as the birth of product placement.
S: Oh yeah.
I: The fact that they couldn't get M&Ms to agree and that they had to go with Reese's Pieces,
and Reese's Pieces sales, like, quadrupled, it was something totally ridiculous.
S: Yes, yes.
I: And in advertising everybody was like "Yes! This is what we want!". You know, I think there
also might be some division in the world of independent filmmaking versus, I mean Steven
Spielberg and E.T., that was already a commercial venture to begin with, so perhaps he didn't
have the same... quandary. Um, so do you consider product placement every time you make a
film? So, maybe not in placing a product, but in editing it out. Is it always kind of in the back of
your mind?
S: Oh yeah. I think it becomes...
I: Okay.
S:...pervasive that you have to be aware of it.
I: Okay. And that's to avoid brands coming after you?
S: Yeah. Yeah. Legal complications.
I: And you would never seek out a product to include in your film? I mean, is there ever....?
S: I would. I would. The Mead corporation,
I: (laughs) Okay.
S: That produces the Mead composition book. If I could make an ad for the Mead corporation, I
would. (laughs)
I: (laughs) Um, so there's never...I guess the type of screenplays that you write you would never
want pop culture references in it? Or there's never a time when you think we need to say Coca-
S: Well, no. That-that, I think is the real crux of the argument here. Um, corporations who
produce these commodities, which are pervasive, they're all throughout the world. How can you
present an accurate picture of the world without depicting Coca-Cola?
I: Right.
S: A world in which no one says "Coca-Cola", they say "soda pop".
I: Uh huh.
S: It's not it becomes inaccurate. So, that, to me, is the crux of the argument. They produce
the commodity, do they then own that piece of reality in the world?
I: Uh huh.
S: Or does an artist have a right to use that?
I: So, I'm kind of getting from you that you think that the commodities and the brand names
should be fluid; there should not be rights to that -
S: Exactly.
I: And that just because -
S: When they sell their commodities they get a profit.
I: That's when they make their profit. Okay. Every, every brand? I mean, don't you think that -
I think Coca-Cola's probably a bad example because it is so pervasive -
S: For example -
I: But if I spent my life's work creating such-and-such a product, you know, Kleenex another
bad example, but I have then no rights to people can use it in any context that they want
because it's part of reality? Is that?
S: I would as, as an artist? Yeah.
I: Okay, okay.
S: Yeah. I mean if it turns out Mona Lisa is wearing Gucci shoes...and now they want...
I: Some rights to that. You say no. And do you agree with that?
M: Yeah ...(inaudible).
I: So do you think you would use brands if there weren't this rights issue? If you knew that
nobody could every come after you? If it was fluid?
S: Oh certainly. Yeah.
I: And would you incorporate them a lot into everything, you would just not worry about...?
S: Here's the particular example from the movie that we made. We made a movie about public
schools -
I: Mmhmm.
S: And the issues that affect public schools. For example, the vending machines that are in
I: Mmhmm. Mmhmm.
S: And the access that students have to junk food throughout the day.
I: Uh huh.
S: In fact one of the mottos that keeps being repeated throughout the movie is, "Don't go 'round
I: Uh huh.
S: Which is the motto that appears on the Tom's machine, the vending machine that circles
around and around and around.
I: Ooh... okay.
S: And we made particular references to the kinds of junk food that kids ate throughout the day.
I: Uh huh.
S: Doritos, M&Ms, Milky Way, umm....
M: Snickers.
S: Snickers.
I: Uh huh.
S: And that was definitely part of the statement that we were trying to make.
I: Uh huh.
S: Now, once the movie becomes popular, um, have we in any way, uh, damaged the reputation
or the profitability of these products? I hope so!
I: Uh huh.
S: (laughs)
I: That was your purpose.
S: Yeah.
I: So, I guess, this is really my first taste of independent filmmaking, but I'm thinking of that
Fast Food Nation movie?
S: Oh yeah.
I: So obviously McDonald's did not give them rights to do that. But is there a difference
between a documentary and a narrative? I mean, because this public school film that you made
was a documentary, correct?
S: No, it was not. It was not.
I: Okay.
S: And that was one of the reasons that we made it a feature, a narrative, a work of fiction, rather
than a documentary.
I: So but you still used the real Tom's brand and their motto, slogan?
S: Mmhmm.
I: So, in that case, if that film were to be released to larger audiences and become popular they
would absolutely have a right, Tom's, to come after you? Right?
S: Well that's what we're going to find out. (laughs)
I: (laughs) Okay. Because I don't know myself, you know, from an advertising standpoint, from
you know, as far as I know everyone wants their money of course. But I feel like if it were a
documentary wouldn't they have no right to it because you're only reporting... something...but
there's still an angle....
S: Yeah.
I: Okay, something for me to look into. Um, so I already talked a little about....the next question
is what kind of product have you, or do you seek out for inclusion in your films? We know that
you don't specifically seek out prod certain products, but if you, again if there were none of
this rights issue, would there be any certain thing that you'd love to be able to just show the
brand name? Or does it not really make a difference?
S: No, no. Just as it exists in the culture and to depict it.
I: Okay. So maybe, just the most common everyday things you would show.
S: Mmhmm.
M: Right, instead of having to specifically figure out, "oh, we can't film here because there's the
big sign of whatever item, or thing out there in the world that would cause any lawsuit or issue to
be shown".
I: Uh huh. Okay. What about locations? Is that also an issue that you think about if you're going
to shoot something outside of Harry's Seafood downtown, McDonalds?
S: Oh yeah, yeah.
I: Do you, I mean, what's the process for that, just out of curiosity?
S: Well, as, as I recall from when we're setting up the shot -
I: Uh huh.
S: that becomes what's going to be in the frame?
I: Uh huh.
S: And if you can avoid reference to any commodity.
I: So the first part of that is to avoid it?
S: Yeah.
I: And what if it's unavoidable? Do you then go into that establishment and ask permission, or
do you just go about your...?
S: Um, it depends on the case. Yeah.
I: Okay, okay. Um, that's pretty much of all my questions, unless you guys want to share any
specific, like, anecdotal experiences that you've had.
S: Just the ones that we've mentioned. And, uh, no, we haven't had occasion certainly no
one's offered us a ship load of money to to put their name on it.
I: Uh huh. And even if they did, you feel that it's not worth it, right? That's really what I'm
getting from you.
S: Yeah, yeah.
I: Okay, okay. Unless for some reason perhaps it fit seamlessly into your script without a lot...
S: Well, the only way that it would be possible would be for us to agree that, uh, they were
giving us money to actually sell their product down the river.
I: Uh huh. (laughs)
S: (laughs) And if they were cool with that then...
M: (laughs)
I: And I say good luck ever finding that situation. (laughs) Okay, you know it's just interesting
to me because I've talked to a couple of other filmmakers so far, and you have by far one of the
strongest opinions. A lot of people said "case by case", "situational", you know, "we'd think
about it", etc. So, I feel like both of you share this kind of one-sided artistic integrity opinion.
S: Oh, and, and of looking at as a universal as being it's a bad situation.
I: Right, right. Absolutely. Okay. Okay, um, let me just make sure I went over all the
classifications... and I, I think that's it. That was much shorter.
S: Well that's good! That's good, because you know I said I told some people we were going
to be interviewing with you and I said, "Well, I'm not sure what we think of product
placement!", so I guess we'll find out...
I: Through the questions.
S: When we talk about it.
M: It's good to know.
I: Okay.
End of Interview
End of Interview
Interview Transcription #4
Esther Biggs, 32, Sales Administration Supervisor at Naylor, LLC
Monday, Jan. 8, 2007 11:45 a.m. In person at Naylor, LLC
I= Interviewer
E= Esther
First audio and informed consent are reviewed and agreed upon and signed. Next, recording
I: Okay, um, first I have some classification questions for when I write this up and if you're
comfortable telling me your age?
E: I'm 32.
I: And you live in Gainesville?
E: Yes.
I: And you are, what's your title here at Naylor?
E: Um, Sales Administrator Supervisor.
I: Supervisor, okay. And you are also a professional filmmaker?
E: Mmhmm.
I: Um, and, I guess next I'd say, how many films have you made?
E: Um, to completion, um, I'd say, one of, one film that I worked on is actually completed.
I: Okay.
E: Um, two are in post.
I: Post-production?
E: Mmhmm. Um, actually there's a short film that I worked on that is completed, so I guess that
would be two completed.
I: Okay.
E: One feature and one short. Um, and then another feature that I worked on, just kind of, uh, it's
too long to still be in post, so I'm guessing that that one's never going to be done.
I: (laughs) Oh okay. Okay, fair enough. Um, and how many years have you been making films?
E: Um.... I don't know. (laughs) When did I start? Um, I would say, at least, at least four years.
I: Okay.
E: Um, because I started working in theater about six or seven years ago...and I started working
on films a couple years after. So I'd say probably four years ago.
I: Okay. So did you study film or theater?
E: No.
I: You just got into it....kind of as your interest?
E: No, I just kind of got into it. Um, I... just, uh, the basics I learned from television production
in high school.
I: Okay.
E: And then, um, from there's its just hands-on experience.
I: Okay. So how did that really start if you don't mind my asking?
E: Um...
I: Did you have friends that were doing it, or...?
E: No, well, somewhat, um, it's something that I'd wanted to get into when I was younger, but,
um, just, other, other factors kind of persuaded me to study something else when I was in school.
I: Uh huh.
E: And then, um, an ex-boyfriend of mine actually was studying, uh...
I: Film.
E: Film. In, in school, like film studies and stuff like that. He majored in, um, Journalism, like
something, Telecommunications.
I: Uh huh.
E: But, um, like he primarily studied that just so he could get some work done, like more in film.
I: Uh huh.
E: The film industry. So when, um, he started getting into it more, he finally found a job that I
could do, and like, just as a volunteer, and that's kind of how I got more and more involved in it.
I: Uh huh.
E: Um, but that was like after I started my theater company with the intention of trying to, um, to
get into film soon, soon after. I just wanted to get some experience with the actors and get some
experience with like production design...
I: Uh huh.
E:... and just the basics because there's a lot, a lot of shared, um, uh, requirements that you have
for both.
I: Okay.
E: Yeah, so...
I: And your theater company is called?
E: It's Thursday Afternoon Productions.
I: Okay, and they perform at the Acrosstown?
E: Mmhmm, yeah. It's primarily there, like, we started out perf, uh, performing all over the
I: Okay.
E: Like all over like different bars, and um, wherever we could find a place basically.
I: Okay, okay cool. Um... so out of these, you did one feature length and one short, um, I ask
what the average film's budget is for you, so if you can give me a range?
E: Um, I'd say, less than $10,000. Um, I'd say between $5,000 to $10,000.
I: Okay. Even for a short?
E: For a short, though, um, Ijust, no. For a feature probably $5,000 to $10,000. Um, for the
short though, I, I can't say because I've worked as the script supervisor, so I don't really know
the budget at all.
I: Okay.
E: Um, but there were a lot of people who were, who were around me that seemed like they did
it, and they did their job for a living.
I: Uh huh.
E: And I know that they -
I: So you assume that they were being paid?
E: Yeah, I assume that they it was all deferred, but, I'm assuming that they were being paid a
decent amount, so even that short could have been $5,000 to $10,000.
I: Okay. Um, from talking to the other, some of the other filmmakers I learned that sometimes,
like, actors don't get paid necessarily.
E: Mmhmm.
I: It's more like for their portfolio or their resume.
E: Yeah.
I: So when you say $5,000 to $10,000, that's including paying, who? Actors....?
E: Actors, yeah.
I: And production people, and lighting, and make-up, like everyone?
E: For everything, yeah.
I: And the food, it's all included in that?
E: Mmhmm.
I: Okay. Just to kind of clarify that because when I, you know, write this all up, I want
everything to kind of be relative so that we know what I'm talking about.
E: Okay.
I: Um, and I can name you in this study?
E: Sure, sure.
I: Okay. And any films that you name, I'm just going to make sure that I write them down
because I've found that so far in transcribing that's been one of my biggest issues is making sure
that I get the film names right.
E: Okay, yeah.
I: Um, we went through all... oh, could you tell me your level of education? You said you did
some college...?
E: Some college, yeah.
I: Okay, some college. Okay. So for my product placement questions; my first question is do
you think that product placement has an affect on a finished film's quality?
E: Um.... it depends. And, uh, yes and no. Because it depends on, like, how much of the product
has to be in the forefront.
I: Uh huh.
E: Like what the requirements are. Like if it's there just because it has to be there, like, if we
need a can of soda, doesn't matter what kind, but let's say we had, um, Coke actually sponsor us.
I: Okay.
E: Um, just as long as I don't have to put it in the front of the screen.
I: Uh huh.
E: Like if it's scripted that it's supposed to be there as just part of the background, no, it doesn't.
I: Uh huh.
E: But when they start putting in, like, requirements of "it has to be in a minimum of this many
shots" or, you know, "it has to have this kind of visibility", then, yes.
I: Okay. And so you're saying, uh, almost like lowering the filmmaker's level of control...
E: Yeah.
I: .. is negatively affecting the quality of the, of the finished film?
E: Um, more often than not, yes.
I: Okay.
E: It is, yeah, more often than not, yes.
I: That's what I've heard. I've gotten, you know, some mixed responses so far, but I feel like
"control" is kind of a key word.
E: It is. And the thing is, like, sometimes there's a happy it's like, when, um, we're working
on a scene and I've scripted a scene, I've storyboarded the scene, and then the actors improve
something that's... perfect.
I: Uh huh.
E: And, I can see a product placement sometimes working out that way, like if, if that product
had something to do with the storyline, and then all of the sudden it's like, "Oh, you know, it
adds, it adds to, like, the, um, it adds to the pacing, it adds to the motion of the film", then it's not
so bad. But more often than not I see that it's, it's a little intrusive.
I: Okay. That makes sense. So maybe, to clarify, if the product, if the placement is born out of
the script, and not vice versa, like...
E: Yeah.
I: Because one of the things I was kind of interested in, and the ideas that I'm really exploring,
which I've talked to you about, are like artistic integrity, and kind of the purity of what, you
know, the project you're working on, if the final result is really what you intended as a
E: Mmhmm.
I: ...or if it is intruded upon, like you said, by specific placements. So, um, what do you think
about when a placement kind of, a script has to work around a placement?
E: Um, that's, I feel like that's definitely a negative....
I: Uh huh.
E: ...against the final product, the film, because, um, to me it's, it's the story, and then, um, the
creation of the story itself and how it's all put together and how it's all just this collaborative
I: Uh huh.
E: But it's weird trying to make the story about the product.
I: Uh huh.
E: Then it, it becomes more of an advertisement.
I: Right.
E: And so then it's no longer about the story, it's no longer about, um, filmmaking or the art of
filmmaking, it's just an advertisement, a commercial.
I: Uh huh. Just out of curiosity and this isn't one of my official questions, but I think it helps get
us on the same page, can you think of a, a time when you've seen a placement in a film that has
been done well?
E: Um... hmmm...
I: Because I It's almost a tricky question I feel, because a lot of times if you see a placement
then maybe it's too obvious.
E: Yeah.
I: But...
E: That's because it, it works best when you don't even notice that it's there.
I: Uh huh.
E: Um..........I don't, no I can't think of anything specific where I thought it was done well.
I: Okay.
E: Where it wasn't....it just kind of complimented a scene rather than taking away from it.
I: Uh huh. So, I guess in that case it would probably be not something you walk out of the film
really remembering.
E: Yeah.
I: Because it was kind of seamless.
E: Yeah.
I: Um, okay. Um, in your experience, and maybe if you haven't dealt with this personally, but
knowledge of others' experiences, does product placement affect the cost of making a film?
E: Um, yeah, because, um, usually it helps reduce the cost of making the film.
I: Right, okay. Um, so do you know anybody's specific experiences?
E: No, I don't...
I: Do you know any filmmakers who have gotten compensated?
E: No, not yet, not yet.
I: Okay.
E: On this level though it's, it's rare that you ever see that.
I: Uh huh.
E: Um, although, in, uh, in a sense though where sometimes locations are a product, if you
consider a location a product, then, at this level it's pretty high.
I: Uh huh.
E: Because, um, even for, like, my film, like using specific locations to, um, to promote a
specific business.
I: Mmhmm.
E: And you use their location for free.
I: Uh huh. So you're saying instead of the business paying you, it's the fact that they're not
charging you?
E: Exactly.
I: That's the -
E: And that reduces the cost of production, yeah.
I: the compensation. So, normally in independent film, do you often pay location fees? Or do
people ask that of you and maybe you'll get...?
E: Um, it depends. It depends on, um, it depends on where you are, because if you're in a city
like, like Gainesville where there are not a lot of films made...
I: Uh huh.
E: .. more people are willing to, to open up their location because they don't it's not something
that they're required of a lot.
I: Uh huh.
E: It's probably like maybe once in a lifetime for some people.
I: Right. So they're almost excited.
E: So, yeah, so they're kind of excited to participate. But if you go to some place like Orlando,
or Miami, or out in L.A., or New York...
I: Or New York, yeah.
E: ... everyone expects to be paid.
I: Okay.
E: It's just, unless you actually know them, you have a, like, personal history with them.
I: Uh huh.
E: Um, and they're rare, from what I've heard it's rare that there's an actual location that just
kind of, you know, um, will just do it for free if you don't know them, if you don't know them
on a personal basis.
I: So locations, because that's something that I talked to you first before I developed my
questions or anything -
E: Mmhmm.
I: and it's kind of confusing because locations are almost, like, the opposite, financially, of a
product placement because, say you're shooting something, you know, in front of, like,
Universal Studios in Orlando. You know, you would a typical product placement, the way that
I've learned it, is "a paid product insertion".
E: Mmhmm.
I: So, in that case you would expect Universal to pay you to show their location almost like built-
in, free advertising, even though they're paying.
E: Yeah, yeah.
I: But locations really don't work that way, locations typically require a fee of the filmmaker.
E: Mmhmm.
I: It why do you think that is, just because you're using....?
E: Um, because, it's primarily because of, um, from what I gather, it's because you're using up
their space.
I: So it's more involved...
E: So it's more intrusive of them.
I: Uh huh.
E: Whereas if I have, like, a product, like, this tape recorder here.
I: Uh huh.
E: And I'm, you know, I'm going to give it to you for you to use, it does, it takes nothing from
I: Uh huh. Okay.
E: Whereas, like, if we're shooting out in front of Universal, you know, we're going to have to
block off a certain amount of space.
I: Uh huh.
E: That means that there's, since they're an entertainment, uh, business, where they require
people to come in and actually see them on a daily basis.
I: Uh huh.
E: If we're blocking off their entrance, that's, those are all, where clients come in...
I: So same with a restaurant or a bar.
E: Same with a restaurant, exactly, we're taking up space where it's part of their, their income,
its part of their revenue, and so that's why we're required to pay them.
I: That makes sense now. I just, I was giving a presentation on this a couple semesters ago and I
remember, I was talking about product placements and locations kind of in one unit...
E: Mmhmm.
I: ...and somebody kind of caught me and they were like, "Why, you know, doesn't Universal
pay the person because their brand is then in the film?" And, you know, and it was just a matter
of kind of thinking it through logically.
E: Yeah, and it's, and it's, and it sounds just the same but it's, it's not because of, um, yeah, just
I: Uh huh.
E: Because you're, you're taking, you're taking potential revenue for them.
I: Uh huh, it's interesting. So you've got to think of all those places in New York that are like
constantly, like, you know, like Tavern on the Green...
E: Yeah, like, if you're using any kind of public area you have to get, you either have to pay the
city or you have to get special permission from the city.
I: Uh huh.
E: You know, so it's....it's all the same.
I: Okay. Um, so we talked a little bit about cost, and the next question is, how do cost effects,
whether they're positive, which you kind of talked about costs being positive because they can
defer the cost of making the film, um, or negative, or neutral, how do those weigh in making the
decision to include a product in a film?
E: Um, it depends kind of on, it depends on the filmmaker and the producers.
I: Uh huh.
E: Um, it's depending, it depends on, like, how far they're willing to go on their own and how
far they feel like they need someone else's help.
I: Uh huh.
E: Um, with, uh, on this level you'll see much more, uh, because it's, it's actually feasible for
someone to make a film under, you know, with less than $10,000.
I: Uh huh.
E: Um, you'll find a lot more freedom...
I: Mmhmm.
E: ...for people to say no.
I: Okay.
E: And it's, because in that sense I think that this is, this is the level where you get most artistic
I: Uh huh. So it's almost like the lower the budget the more control is maintained?
E: Um, no, that's not true either.
I: Okay.
E: Because you're limited.
I: Uh huh.
E: Because your budget's low.
I: Uh huh. See, because that's what I kind of thought when I first started exploring this, I
thought, "Well, independent filmmakers are looking to reduce costs", because they usually don't
have a lot of financial backing to begin with.
E: Yeah.
I: So I would think they would be much more open to including products, but that's not always
E: Yeah, it's not always the case because you'll find that, um, well I find that a lot of
independent filmmakers, they, they don't want to place specific products in their, in their films
because, um, it kind of goes against the whole idea of independence.
I: Right.
E: Because then you've got basically, like a corporate, if you like see a corporate motto
somewhere than it's almost like that person has sold out. It's kind of like the image in a sense.
I: Uh huh, uh huh. No, that's what I'm after, absolutely.
E: Because it's not, it's not exactly true, because like, you kind of have to have a little give and
I: Uh huh.
E: But, um, it just depends on, you know, the person involved because you might have a staunch
independent filmmaker who's like, "Absolutely no corporate stuff' and they'll only take, you
know, um, like, uh, products from local businesses and, and promote those. And sometimes
they'll do that for free because they want to, they want to promote this specific local business, or
they want to, and that's kind of like the purpose of the film.
I: Uh huh.
E: So it's...there's so many different kinds of films that it's kind of hard to answer that kind of
I: Okay. Um, and then when you're talking about it depends on the producer, the director, could
you just clarify quickly what your role typically is in filmmaking?
E: Um...
I: Do you write at all?
E: I do, yeah, I do. I don't like to write because I don't feel like I'm a strong writer.
I: Uh huh.
E: Um, I wrote my last film because I, I needed to do something and, um, more out of, um,
impatience. (laughs)
I: Oh, okay. (laughs)
E: I kind of just wrote it. Because I had the idea, I didn't have anyone that I knew who would
write it for me.
I: Uh huh.
E: Um, and so I just wrote out, wrote out something that I could do. Um, I prefer to just create
the idea and have someone else write it for me, and like, kind of work on it together with them so
that I can kind of mold the story where, where someone is there to fill in all the dialogue.
I: Uh huh. So do you do producer, director more often?
E: Um, more often yeah. I actually kind of prefer not to produce either because I don't really
like the business aspect of it, like the whole, the whole thing like with product placement and
stuff like that.
I: Uh huh.
E: Um, I'd rather just be able to get in there, you know, put in there what I want to see, and then,
you know....
I: So that's directing.
E: Yeah.
I: So do you have a, like, a writer that you often work with?
E: No, actually I just recently found someone who's willing to write for me.
I: Okay.
E: So we haven't actually started a project.
I: Uh huh.
E: But, uh, our next project we're going to start writing probably in the next month or so.
I: So in that case, you have an idea already and then you get with that person and you say, "This
is kind of what I'm looking for" but then they flesh out all the dialogue.
E: Yeah, yeah.
I: Interesting. Um, okay, I think you kind of answered this. Um, is there an instance in which no
cost benefit would merit the inclusion of a product? So, you were talking about depending on
the specific filmmaker.
E: Mmhmm.
I: Sometimes people would say, you know, "You could give me a million dollars but I'm not
putting Coca-Cola, or Enron, or whatever, in my film".
E: Yeah.
I: Do you, is there some sort of line for you personally as a filmmaker?
E: Um, I have...uh...
I: It doesn't have to necessarily be like a moral or ethical question. If it's just like, you know,
like "I I don't like soda in my films" or whatever.
E: Probably, I....it would probably be about, anything, pretty much like if they ever, uh, require
that they, you know, that I need to place, that I need to have this much exposure with it.
I: Uh huh.
E: Or it needs to appear in this many scenes or....It's, um, having edited, like, I'm in post-
production for my movie right now and it's editing all the sequences and everything and, um, I
like the freedom of being able to just take shots and depending on, and not really having to worry
about like, "How many times is this in here?", or "How many times is this person in here?".
I: Right.
E: Or, like, "How many lines does this person have?". And so, um, even with, with actors, if I
ever get a contract for an actor where they're like, "This person has to have a minimum of 100
lines in this movie", like, I wouldn't do that.
I: I didn't even know a contract said that.
E: Yeah.
I: Oh wow.
E: Like, because, um, the more famous a person becomes, the more control that they have over,
like, projects that they're not even committed to yet.
I: Uh huh, wow.
E: Because they want to maintain a certain level of, um, stardom, I guess.
I: Visibility.
E: Yeah, visibility, so...
I: That's interesting.
E: Same thing with products, though, like, if it comes down to that I would definitely have to say
no because I don't, that's not something that I want to think of when I'm putting together a piece.
I: Okay, so again that kind of comes back to control.
E: Yeah, controlling the film, yeah.
I: Um, you've talked a little bit about this. Do you think product placement distracts the film
audience from the story at hand?
E: Um, it just depends on how it's done.
I: Mmhmm.
E: Again, like if it's always, like, in the forefront, like, you have a shot and it has to be like right
up there in the front of the screen. Um, then, then yeah.
I: Uh huh. So would you say if it's done well, then it's not distracting?
E: Yeah.
I: Okay.
E: It all, all depends on how it's done.
I: And as a filmmaker you believe that it can be done well?
E: Yeah.
I: Kind of case-by-case?
E: Yeah, it depends on, it depends on the filmmaker and how open they are to it.
I: Uh huh.
E: Like, I don't know that I would do it all that well, because I'm not very open to it, I'm not
very open to, like, having someone tell me, "You have to have this", and, you know, and, "You
have to do it this way".
I: Uh huh.
E: Um, but, I find that some other filmmakers are, they're more, uh, spontaneous, more creative
I: Uh huh.
E: So that if they're given something, like, it's kind of like a jigsaw puzzle.
I: Uh huh.
E: You're given a bunch of pieces to fit it all together well.
I: Uh huh.
E: So, it really just depends on who you've got on your team, too. Because sometimes even if
the director can't do it, then, if they have a strong team then they can do it.
I: Fit it in there somehow.
E: Mmhmm.
I: Um, so you said you don't know of anybody who has specifically been paid for product
E: Mmhmm.
I: Um, you've dealt with a little with locations. But do you know of anybody who's done more
of like the bartering thing? Because I've heard of, like, even getting food for the wrap party, or
beer, or whatever.
E: Um, there is this, I'm not really quite sure how much of it, um, but there's this, uh, movie,
The Essence of Irwin, you saw it.
I: Oh yeah.
E: I think that they did some bartering. I'm not sure to what extent. But I, for some reason I
remember, um, when I was on location someone was talking about that, about exchanging
services for something.
I: Okay. I'm going to talk to him too.
E: Okay.
I: And he said he has strong opinions about it, in that, he, um, kind of planned ahead so like if
that film were to take off or be shown to larger audiences, that he, almost like developed his own
built-in products. Like with the, um, water, the frozen ice thing.
E: Yeah.
I: So, I think, because my next question is, do you consider product placement every time you
make a film? And I hear from a lot of people, "No, it's not even something I think about", you
know, at this stage in the game. But I feel like somebody like him, is looking at it from a
business angle, the whole time.
E: Yeah, probably.
I: Um, but how about for you?
E: For me, no.
I: Okay.
E: Usually, um, it's kind of drawn to my, it's brought to my attention like as we're filming, like
you start putting things, and then someone's like, "Hey, you can't see that name", so we have to,
like, turn it around, or like, tape something over it. Umm...
I: And do you have to deal with that a lot?
E: Yeah.
I: Almost like product displacement... or...?
E: Yeah, yeah, yeah. That gets, I deal with a lot of that more often than actual product
I: And does that kind of trip things up ever?
E: Um, sometimes it does because, uh, the cover-up is really obvious.
I: Uh huh.
E: And so I kind of hope that it's small enough that it's really not noticeable.
I: Right.
E: Um, and then...
I: So I guess even when you do locations and things you have to think about that?
E: Mmhmm. Yeah, yeah. Um, I've had a, like what's kind of bothered me sometimes, and the
whole thing it kind of bugs me, is that it affects the composition of a shot.
I: Uh huh.
E: Sometimes. Because like if there's a sign on the wall that I can't see, suddenly I have to
change my shot, I can't have my scene come out the way I had scripted it.
I: Uh huh.
E: And, uh, or I had storyboarded the scene, so.
I: So, it's a lot like photography in that way, in that you, you see what the picture is supposed to
be and then a lot of times brands can interfere with that.
E: Yeah, yeah...
I: Because I know when I was talking over the weekend to, um, Shamrock and Mike, they were
telling me they shot something recently and it was like an Aquafina machine in the background
and they had to, either in editing, or maybe they put some paper over it or something, but they
said that they dealt with that machine, like over and over again.
E: Yeah, yeah. He probably, he probably did that in editing because you can kind of just change
things out. It just, it becomes a real problem trying to do it during editing, so we just try to
notice those things during the filming.
I: Uh huh.
E: The After Effects does a really good job, but it's still like, you always...when you look at the
scene it always looks a little awkward.
I: Right.
E: You don't quite, you may not quite catch that there's something wrong.
I: Uh huh.
E: But I always feel like there's an odd feel to it.
I: Right. It's almost like looking at a picture that's been "Photoshopped" and you can sense
E: Yeah.
I: ...it's not natural but you don't know why.
E: Yeah, exactly.
I: Okay, cool. Um.... we talked about that. You, so, you, since you don't consider product
placement every time you make a film, you don't seek out products to include in your film?
E: No.
I: Okay. Um, if you were to do that, like maybe you're working on a bigger budget film, or
something that would, for some reason the person in charge of it wanted to do some product
placement, what kind of products do you think you would ever look into? Or, I guess it's almost
like shopping around, like...
E: Yeah, um, just, um, mostly like generic goods....
I: Uh huh.
E: You know, um, probably something like Coke.
I: Right.
E: Because you know...
I: For like realism...
E: Yeah, because, um, it, oddly enough, it kind of like dates the generation, too. Just the look of
the actual can or the bottle itself.
I: Uh huh.
E: And, then, um, I mean, there's always different types of clothing.
I: Uh huh.
E: They like, you see like, mottos all over clothing now, so that...
I: Uh huh.
E: Um, I'd try to stay away from those because it does date and part of, um, part of what I like
about films is sometimes they're just timeless.
I: Right.
E: And the styles, you can kind of tell from the style of it, but then like, um, once you get
immersed in the story it's kind of timeless and so if you don't, if you don't see anything that's
specifically, like, just blows out at you, "1989!"...
I: Uh huh, yeah. (laughs)
E: You know, then you can kind of just get wrapped up in the story more.
I: Uh huh. So you almost feel like by not having specific brands and stuff it contributes to the
timelessness of the film.
E: Yeah, yeah.
I: I think that that's a good point that nobody's really brought up before. But it's true when you
look at a film like Minority Report...
E: Mmhmm.
I: That film was, like, chock-full of brands, all different brands.
E: Yeah.
I: And it seemed cool and futuristic, and they're like all in the future, at the time. But I'm sure
when we watch that in 10 or 15 years, you know, companies go under, or they become not as
cool, and things like that.
E: Yeah.
I: So, it will date that film.
E: Yeah.
I: Okay, um, I think we went through all these questions.
E: Okay.
End of Interview
End of Interview