Anti X Bias

Every now and again there’s a news story about someone accusing someone else of an anti x bias. Where x could be pretty much anything but is usually something related to religion, politics, or other topics with strongly held opinions.

People with a strongly held view are very sensitive about it. It is often so strongly held that it is part of that person’s identity.

Being sensitive about a topic means a person accusing others of an anti x bias do so because x is their thing and they notice any slight against it. Other topics, say l, m, n, o, and p may also have been discussed in the same manner but the person is unable to see that. Or they see any criticism of x as an attack on x and can’t take it or accept it.

There are situations where the anti x bias is real and not imagined, though I find it is usually imagined.

Last month, Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice, was released to lots of bad reviews. For most movies that would be that. But BvS is a comic book movie, based on DC comics, with a huge fan base. Some of these fans accused the reviewers of being bought off, by rival comic book studio, Marvel, to give the movie a bad review. Very strongly held opinions. Very sensitive about those opinions.

No doubt any of us are capable of being sensitive about the opinions we hold. But if we find ourselves accusing others of a bias against something we hold dear, perhaps we should first determine if it is ourselves being sensitive. Not an easy task when we see something as part of who we are.

Untwisted Twist

This morning I came across a link, “15 Books to Read if You Love a Shocking Plot Twist”.

I didn’t click. I couldn’t. It’s a self defeating headline. If I read the list then those fifteen books are ruined for me. The twist becomes untwisted. It’s a non-spoiler-spoiler.

It’s the same problem when someone tells you a movie has a great twist. Well, thanks, you’ve ruined it. You didn’t tell me the secret but you told me enough that I’ll be watching or reading in such a way that I’m keeping an eye out for the twist. So I’m not immersed in the story. I’m viewing the story at a remove.

Knowing there’s a twist takes away the surprise and with it half the pleasure of the story.

Just recommend the book or movie to me. Say nothing about a twist. Tell me you think I’ll enjoy it. Do that I probably will. And after I’ve read or watched I’ll thank you for the recommendation. Not curse you.

Oscar Results

Last night I stayed up until 5am to watch the Oscars. A big part of it was that Christina wanted to watch them live. Another part of it was wanting to see how many Oscars I predicted correctly (on Friday I posted a  slideshow of my prediction).

I updated the presentation today with the results so if you’d like to see how I got on you can have a look below. My predictions got off to a good start. Not that means I did well!

2016 Oscar Predictions

Following on from yesterday’s post here are my predictions for this year’s Oscars…

Best Cinematography

The Revenant Emmanuel Lubezki

I’d prefer if Roger Deakins won for Sicario

Best Costume Design

Mad Max: Fury Road 
Jenny Beavan

Best Director

Alejandro G. Iñárritu The Revenant

Best Editing

Mad Max: Fury Road 
Margaret Sixel

Best Foreign Language Film

Son of Saul Hungary

Best Makeup

Mad Max: Fury Road 
Lesley Vanderwalt, Elka Wardega and Damian Martin

Best Production Design

Mad Max: Fury Road 
Production Design: Colin Gibson; Set Decoration: Lisa Thompson

Best Sound Editing

Mad Max: Fury Road 
Mark Mangini and David White

Best Sound Mixing

Mad Max: Fury Road 
Chris Jenkins, Gregg Rudloff and Ben Osmo

Best Visual Effects

Star Wars: The Force Awakens
Roger Guyett, Patrick Tubach, Neal Scanlan and Chris Corbould

Best Original Score

The Hateful Eight
Ennio Morricone

Best Original Screenplay

Spotlight
Written by Josh Singer & Tom McCarthy

Best Documentary Short

Body Team 12
David Darg and Bryn Mooser

I have no idea about documentary shorts as there just isn’t enough buzz about them. So I’ve just gone with the betting odds.

Best Documentary Feature

Amy
Asif Kapadia and James Gay-Rees

Best Animated Short

Sanjay’s Super Team
Sanjay Patel and Nicole Grindle

Best Live Action Short

Shok
Jamie Donoughue

Again this is a category that I’ve no real idea about.

Best Original Song

“Til It Happens To You” from The Hunting Ground; Music and Lyric by Diane Warren and Lady Gaga

Best Adapted Screenplay

The Big Short
Screenplay by Charles Randolph and Adam McKay

Best Supporting Actress

Alicia Vikander The Danish Girl

I’m going with Vikander as she could also have been nominated for Ex Machina.

Best Supporting Actor

Sylvester Stallone Creed

Best Actor

Leonardo DiCaprio The Revenant

Mostly I think he’ll win because he has missed out before and people think he’s ‘due’ the win. Also because The Revenant shoot was really tough according to all those involved. Not that that should impact who will win but it will.

If Leo gets overlooked I’d guess Eddie Redmayne to win his two in a row.

Best Actress

Brie Larson Room

Best Animated Film

Inside Out

Best Picture

The Revenant
Arnon Milchan, Steve Golin, Alejandro G. Iñárritu, Mary Parent and Keith Redmon, Producers

I don’t want it to win but think it will.

This Year’s Oscars

This Sunday is Oscar night. A night my wife wishes was a national holiday.

Every year during the show we try to guess who will win. We make our pick as the nominees are being called out and keep a running total of how many each of us got right. All that’s at stake is bragging rights.

Over the past few years we’ve found that we haven’t watched many of the nominees before Oscar night. Which means we don’t end up rooting for anyone in particular. This year we’re trying to watch as many of the best picture nominees as we can before Oscar night. So far we’ve watched five of the eight nominees and hope to bring it to at least seven before the awards.

Who do you think will win?

Product Placement and Artistic Integrity

I’ve got no problem with brands appearing in movies. So long as it’s done right. If it diminishes the artistic integrity of the film, causing it to become a commercial, it’s not done right.

Sometimes the integrity of a movie is upheld by making sure a brand is visible in a scene. Whatever is being filmed might mean that a brand should be included as it would naturally occur there in the wild (so to speak). For example a shot of a car driving along a road towards us. As we see the front of the car in the shot it would be normal to see the logo. The audience would probably find it stranger and more distracting not to have the brand in the scene. In this case if the logo was removed or taped off. Including an invented logo on the car would likely have a similar effect.

Product placements that evolve naturally from the script are usually more credible. Had the script not pointed towards a need for a particular placement then it is likely to stick out and compromise the integrity of the movie. For example, having a character drive a Volvo can help to underline or establish that character’s desire for safety. A Porsche would give a different impression. Matching a movie with the right brands is essential for credibility. Filmmakers do this in pre-production through brand line-ups called ‘show and tells’ to determine which brands best suit a film and its characters.

Picking the right brand isn’t enough. It has to appear naturally. If the appearance of the brand seems contrived or awkward it lessens the artistic integrity of the film. Giving a brand undue attention usually indicates a movie’s creative integrity has been violated. But not always, sometimes the circumstances of a movie demand a slow pan across a logo.

How often a brand shows up in a movie is another issue. As indeed is the total number of products placed. Again context is everything.

It doesn’t matter what the filmmaker does. Follow the rules. Break the rules. Just as long as it works for the movie.

Paying to Be In a Work of Art Isn’t New

For some allowing anything commercial to have any level of influence on a movie robs it of something. Worthiness or some such probably. Thus they see product placement as a corruption of the film art form.

I don’t agree. Not entirely. Product placement can be done badly and distract the audience. But it doesn’t have to be done badly. Being paid to include something in an artwork doesn’t have to diminish it.

Product placement can be seen as akin to the depiction of donors in paintings as transpired around the time of the Renaissance. In Masaccio’s Trinity (circa 1428) the donor and his wife are depicted praying. They are outside the arch, on a lower level, and at the same scale as the other figures in the painting. Titan’s Pesaro Madonna, painted between 1519 and 1526, includes donor portraits of five members of the commissioning Pesaro family.

The Renaissance isn’t the earliest period when donor portraits appeared. Anicia Juliana is depicted in a donor portrait in the Vienna Dioscurides, one of the earliest and most lavish illuminated manuscripts still in existence.

An artist’s costs were covered by donors. Product placement helps filmmakers with the cost of making their movie or its promotion.

Donors appearing in paintings was an extensive practice. We don’t look at these paintings and think that including the donor has somehow made them lessened them. No, we look at them and see art.

Product Placement Categories

There are three categories that product placement in movies fall into. Visual, audio, and plot placements. The terms themselves are pretty self explanatory.

Visual Placement

Visual placement is when a brand or recognisable product appears on screen. Not all visual placements are the same. How prominent a brand is in a visual placement is determined by factors like the style of the camera shot, and the number of on screen appearances. Visual placements include outdoor advertisements in urban scenes or food brands in kitchen scenes.

Audio Placement

Audio placement is when a brand appears on the audio track. Generally this means the brand is mentioned in the dialogue by a character. The prominence of an audio placement is determined by a number of factors. The context the brand is mentioned in. The frequency at which the brand is mentioned. The emphasis put on the brand name (tone of voice, place in dialogue, who the character speaking is, etc).

Plot Placement

Brands or products can only show up in movies in two ways. Seeing them or hearing about them – visual and audio placements. A plot placement can be visual or auditory or a combination of both. What makes it a plot placement is the level of connection the brand has with the story or a character. The more central to the plot, or identifiable with a character the brand is the higher the level of intensity the plot placement has.

What is Product Placement?

Product placement is when a brand or product is integrated into a movie through an agreement between the filmmakers and the brand owners. The filmmakers don’t do it out of a desire to be nice to the poor brand owners either. Nope, ‘pay me’ they say. It doesn’t have to be cash. It could also be through some form of promotional exposure.

This is different to brand clearance where the filmmakers want to, or need to, include a brand in a movie and need to get permission from the brand owner. The filmmaker wants to use a brand as a creative tool.

From the viewpoint of the brand owner product placement is a tool to promote their brand. That doesn’t stop the filmmaker from being able to use it as a creative tool. Nor should it.

Either way once a brand is in a movie the audience has no way of knowing if the filmmaker got paid to include it or not.