I'm There Too

An interview with product placement expert Jennifer Bydwell

Matt Soar for Brand Hype

[This is the first in an occasional series of revealing interviews with industry figures on the contemporary practice of product placement. ]

Introduction

In August 2006 I was invited to join Jennifer Bydwell on the set of I'm Not There, a new movie about Bob Dylan being shot in Montréal (and the first one to receive Dylan's life and music rights). The movie stars Christian Bale, Cate Blanchett, Charlotte Gainsbourg, Richard Gere, Heath Ledger, and Julianne Moore. Dylan is played at various stages of his career by some of these actors.

Our interview concerned the practice of product placement: the deliberate positioning of name-brand products and services in the frame for the purposes of advertising and promotion. Bydwell (hereafter JB) arranges and coordinates clearances and product placement during the production of feature-length movies. Her credits include Georgia Rule, Deck the Halls, Freedom Writers, The Bone Collector, and The Fountain. Before starting a family she worked as a stylist on TV commercials. More recently she worked at Paramount as Director of Product Placement to cover for a maternity leave, but is now working independently.

As we arrived on set, the crew was in the middle of shooting a scene JB described as an homage to Fellini's 8 1/2. This required specific clearances with the project's attorneys regarding fair use of Fellini's material. Blanchett, in full Dylan 1960s garb (big hair, striped pants, pointy boots, dark glasses) converses with one of the Beatles (Ringo?) and with the character Mr. Jones (Bruce Greenwood) standing by a large, freestanding sculpture. Dylan is pursued by a pack of journalists. Various extras in period costume promenade in the background. We stood together quietly in the 'video village', watching the takes on the sound engineer's monitor. After several takes JB asked if I'd spotted the placement - which left me completely stumped. Blanchett-as-Dylan was wearing Ray-Bans, for which JB had sought permission - and obtained the glasses themselves, just in time, from Luxottica.

The contemporary dynamics of product placement

JB described in considerable detail the prevalent business practices relating to product placement on a feature-length, Hollywood movie: typical deals, rates, desirable kinds of placement, the tensions behind the scenes re the relative prominence of placements. Some current examples:

- Companies "get asked for free stuff all the time"; can be choosy as a result.

- Beer and soda companies have sliding scales of fees they are willing to pay, depending on whether their product is mentioned, seen or used, by whom, and whether in the foreground or background.

- Disney and Coke have a longstanding relationship in connection with their franchise deals re theme parks.

- Alcohol is sometimes difficult to secure since they "can't/won't ship across borders": if you're shooting in Canada you can't get alcohol from the US.

- Scotch, depending on the brand, might pay up to $20K for a placement.

- It is generally understood that alcohol brands must never be shown in association with drinking and driving; underage drinking; or, substance abuse. There is drug use in I'm Not There, which is why beer and champagne labels are 'greeked'. (JB wanted authentic, archival labels, but instead was obliged to invent names and then get clearances for these by running them through databases. JB notes that "clearances have become a priority for both studio produced and independent films". As a rule of thumb however, if a product is used in the manner intended then OK. However, if, say, the script calls for someone to be killed with a cell phone, then the answer is no. Must then invent a phone brand name and build it.

- FedEx is very difficult to deal with; Cast Away, a bonanza for FedEx, worked because the deal was made at a very high level.

- Cellphones: the logo is often digitally enhanced in post-production because they are generally very small on the phones themselves. This can be a source of tension if the director decides it's overdone.

- Watches: for a fee, these are sometimes added using a shot that is inserted after the fact

- Car companies are often asked for shells of cars that can be crashed; they are more likely to help out if the star of the movie is in car - but the crash must not to be seen as a result of the cars malfunctioning.

- Placements are sometimes acknowledged in the end credits (eg Mac Cosmetics in Pirates of the Caribbean)

- JB confirms that there are often more placements in later series of established TV shows (Sex and the City; Sopranos; Six Feet Under) because "they see they're getting away with it"; JB predicts that HBO and Showtime will become much more aggressive in their use of placements

- The New York Times never lets anyone change its covers; USA Today and the Financial Times will allow mock-ups; New York Post "allow you to do anything"

- Apple is easy to work with, although they often don't have as much gear in stock as other PC makers. Some scripts tend to be more likely to involve PCs rather than Macs, eg 'CSI'-style, or government environments. Dell is very generous with gear, if they see it as a good placement. As JB puts it, the "more wacky environments" tend to involve Apple. (Going further still, a computer company called Alienware "got great exposure" by providing the laptop for the "mid-eastern terrorists" in a recent season of the TV show 24.)

A history of placement

FILMS: JB notes that were really no brands in movies in the 1960s (except for James Bond) so clearances were not a cocnern. Then there was a sea-change forced by artists as their work appeared on screen without permission. It used to be the job of producers' assistants and art departments to clear copyright material, and obtain placements, but, combined, the tasks became too time-consuming. Studios now have their own departments to deal with these areas. Product placement contributes significantly to the budgeting of the movie. As an example, JB procured over $1.5 million worth of product for The Day After Tomorrow.

TV: Companies used to stay away from TV - a concern about conflicting sponsors (eg a Pepsi placement on a network that also runs a Coke ad) - but this is now different especially regarding reality TV.

Placement: Why and How

"Bang for buck": Producers are always looking for places to save money, and placement has served the business well. For example, on Home Alone, a placement deal with American Airlines and a hotel chain also meant sizeable deals for the cast and crew during production. Happy, friendly, family-oriented movies are considered ideal for placement. JB prefers what she calls "embedded placements" (eg the Ray-Bans in the Blanchett/Fellini scene in I'm Not There).

The business has changed significantly since the mid- to late-1990s. It's not so "loosey-goosey" any more; still lots of room for competition. The ERMA (Entertainment Resources and Marketing Association) was founded to clean up and standardize the practice of product placement. There are around 30 agencies right now. The agencies use TiVo to track placements: they send freeze frames to their clients to legitimize their activities, and to justify the retainer fees they charge. An illustrative fee is a beer company that pays $100K/year for 12 placements/year. (In only a few exceptional cases do production crews directly contact potential placement clients (Apple in New York; Dell in Texas). Current competitors of Apple and Dell are HP, Samsung and Sharp. NEC is currently not represented.)

Notable agencies and some of their current clients:

- Norm Marshall: GM and Chrysler

- Davie Brown: Pepsi; HP; Sony Playstation

- Premiere: Coke; McDonald's

- Rogers & Cowan: NHL (after strike); Ray-Bans

- Feature This

- Propaganda: Nokia, TAG; Casio, Lamborghini

- AIM Productions: unusual in that it has a relationship with Grey, an ad agency.

JB also sends "proof of placement" to her own clients in the form of still photographs; she reports that the protocol is to call the client straight away if a product doesn't make it into a scene and that while they will be disappointed, they understand that is the nature of the business. There are never any guarantees in product placement, unless there is a huge fee involved. (JB cites the multi-million dollar deal made between DHL and Mission Impossible 3 as an example.) JB's position is generally to be as candid as possible with her suppliers about what's actually ended up in the shot. Logos are not to be 'greeked out'; if that happens in the event of a product placement, production will be charged a rental fee.

Payment is not made until the movie is released. Placement generally benefits the distributor; generally it's not too popular with directors because he or she is likely to want to maintain some degree of creative independence. JB notes that placement is "often last minute"; it's currently "very arbitrary" as a process. Producers don't want to impose on directors; directors will often say at the beginning of preproduction whether they're "into it" or not.

JB explained that on I'm Not There she is working closely with Judy Becker, the production designer, whose credits include Brokeback Mountain. JB says: "Production designers do not want to be associated with placement but recognize its value with respect to production budgets." While directors and production designers are generally jaded about placement, the sheer value of placement to a production can be huge. For example, while Dell most often provides laptops, they also provided $60K worth of flat screens for six months for the shooting of Snakes on a Plane. Apart from fees, products provided for potential placement amount to props, set dressing, wardrobe and picture vehicles - which works to offset the hard cost of production.

JB secured equipment for The Day After Tomorrow. She wanted Canada Goose parkas, since this is what arctic scientists actually wear; ultimately, Canada Goose received prominent logo exposure in the film, and were happy with the placement. North Face was the parka of choice for Vertical Limit - some viewers found that the logo exposure was too prominent and took the viewer out of the movie.

The end result of attempts to put products in the frame is ultimately "all a roll of the dice": Transformers (a "big GM thing" plus Mattel/Hasbro); Chrysler appears in a new Danny DeVito film for which they provided a showroom, signage, etc.

An Illustrative Example: I'm Not There

When I asked JB about the mismatches or excesses of placement, she replied that a good placement is when its felt to be "right for the film". Specific examples in I'm Not There include:

- Perrier: used vintage bottles in return for 100 cases of Perrier for the cast and crew. (JB pointed out the significance of these kinds of deals: 20+ cases of soda a week for the duration of the shoot means a saving on catering of around $5K!)

- Coke: a Coke glass will appear in one scene; reasons cited include the fact that Judy Becker (production designer) liked the Coke ads from the 1960s and the crew preferred the taste. No fee. (JB had sent the script to Coke and Pepsi.)

- JB notes that ad agency brand managers "move slowly; generally conservative" - "hence there is room for placement agencies". (One exception is JWT and its client Ford, eg in the TV show American Idol.) Procter & Gamble are, historically, conservative. JB wanted a Clairol ad from the 1960s. Called P&G for releases for model, director, etc. Actually got permission to recreate the entire ad. The licensing agreement was two pages long. This is an example of dovetailing placement and clearances in which one supports the other.

- Life magazine: Blanchett, playing Dylan, is seen turning the pages of the magazine. Everything we see - covers, spreads - has to be cleared. Obtaining permission from Life can be a time consuming process as Life photographers sometimes retain rights. Quoted $500-700 to show one issue; 21 covers for $5K, plus seven internal spreads on LBJ, Vietnam, etc. JB called their publicity branch and "presented it as a product placement".

- Got clearance at last minute to include the Austin badge on a vintage car (it was a "lengthy process as a Chinese company now owns the Austin mark")

We followed up on a piece I wrote for Brand Hype where I noted the competing negative/positive appearances of Coke vs Pepsi in Missing, Brokeback Mountain and Munich. JB had asked Judy Becker about Brokeback, which she worked on as the production designer, and she laughed and said it was just a coincidence. The Coke vending machine was "just there"; and she "just liked the look" of the Pepsi sign.

With regard to the recent actions of SAG and WGA against placement, JB thinks they are right to be upset about it. When I noted that sometimes all I can see are the placements; JB replied "I'm there too."

Posted to Brand Hype (www.brandhype.org) May 24, 2007