Ad 73

Publication(s): 
Variety
Date of first publication: 
2010-12-21T00:00:00
Headline: 
"Was that an ad-libbed moment or did you have some brilliant product placement deal in place...?"
Parent companies in ad: 
Text: 
“Interviewer: Was that an ad-libbed moment or do you have some sort of brilliant product placement deal in place with the Famous Amos cookies people? Steven Antin: [Laughs] Gosh, we so didn’t! There are so many things in this movie that make me wonder if I’m going to benefit from any of it.”* Does that include the twenty other national brands mentioned or showcased in Burlesque? How about Stanley Tucci’s gruff-but-endearing character smoking in half his scenes, reinforcing tobacco industry campaigns targeting the LGBT community? Isn’t it enough that California taxpayers will shell out $7.2 million to subsidize this PG-13 movie’s production, according to the California Film Commission? Publicity around Burlesque makes clear that its writer-director and his team paid obsessive attention to detail, from the dancing to the brand-name dropping dialogue. Producers and distributors, in this instance De Line and Sony, also pay attention if someone else’s intellectual property shows up on screen. Did they make exceptions for a flashed Famous Amos or a quickie Camel logo? Other movies have displayed tobacco trademarks this year: The Sorcerer’s Apprentice (Newport: PG, Disney) and For Colored Girls (Marlboro: R, Lionsgate). And teasing tobacco brands is nothing new. The tobacco industry’s own documents show it has a history of spending millions to get its products and signage into hundreds of American films. The difference in 2010? State taxpayers across the country are now forced to foot the bill for films that recruit new young smokers — and even spotlight tobacco brands. This could put all film tax credits at risk. Encourage regulators to take a harder look at product placement. And lead national advertisers to question if they want to keep getting upstaged by smoking in kid-rated movies. Solutions are simple. Studios know it. Time for action. IMAGE: Production number from film The Bigger Tease? Brands in Burlesque Brand Reference Company Camel Outdoor ad British American Tobacco (UK) Chase Outdoor ad JP Morgan Chase (NY); Sony’s depository bank Cheerios Tess’s dialogue General Mills (Minnesota) Cocoa Puffs Sean’s dialogue General Mills (Minnesota) Coldwell Banker Outdoor ad Realogy Corp. (New Jersey) Dewar’s Markus orders Bacardi Limited (Bermuda) Dom Pérignon Ordered at bar MHLV SA (France) Dos Equis Jack holds bottle Heineken NV (Netherlands) Famous Amos Jack holds a box Kellogg Company (Michigan) over his genitals Alexis’ dialogue Mast-Jägermeister AG (Germany) KitchenAid Jack’s coffee mill (CU) Whirlpool Corp. (Michigan) L.A. Times Markus’s dialogue, Tribune Company (Chicago); permission listed in credits banner displayed  Louboutin Ali covets shoes Christian Louboutin LLC (NY) Michelob Neon sign in “Iowa” AB InBev (Belgium) Oreo Sean’s dialogue Kraft Foods (Chicago) Patrón Tequila Dialogue, bar, wedding Patrón Spirits Int’l AG (Swiss) Sony Jack’s camera Sony Corporation (Japan) Swarovski Crystal sparklers D. Swarovski & Co. (Austria); acknowledged in credits Triumph T100 Jack’s motorcycle Triumph Motorcycles Ltd (UK) Ultimat Vodka Case on bar Patrón Spirits Int’l AG (Swiss) Wild Turkey Jack carries case Gruppo Compari (Italy) * From “The Movieline Interview,” by Jen Yamato, Nov. 23, 2010. www.movieline.com/2010/11/steven-antin-talks-burlesque-cher-and-discovering-ian-somerhalder
No
Studios in ad: 
De Line
Main ad topic(s):