Quintessentials: Terry Tate Office Linebacker

Terry Tate Office Linebacker

Dir. Rawson Marshall Thurber

United States, 2003, 3 Minutes

Throughout the course of the semester, our class has continually attempted to try and define what is and isn’t and short film. And although it can generally be stated that MOST youtube videos are not shorts, and MOST TV shows are not shorts, and MOST music videos are not necessarily short films (although this one is a little tougher), commercials like Terry Tate Office Linebacker are what make these sweeping generalizations a very subjective and partially inaccurate statements.

Directed by Rawson Marshall Thurber, the Reebok commercial documents in mockumentary style the hiring of an office ‘enforcer’ named Terry Tate (an enormous ex-NFL linebacker played by Lester Speight) to increase productivity and eliminate minor problems. Throughout the short, Tate roams the office, solving stereotypical office problems, including drinking the last coffee from the coffee pot, taking too long on breaks, not recycling, etc. He acclimates to the office environment, making office friends, and giving presentations during meetings. Although the commercial doesn’t necessarily provide anything but a snapshot of this strange office reality (the classic short film ‘slice of life formula’), the short is not only a fantastic advertisement, but it served as a precursor for the rise of the hilarious digital short.

The commercials greatest strength lies in the hilarious juxtaposition between football culture and office life, and what happens when those two worlds collide. Terry Tate’s stereotypical football machismo takes the oblivious office (for lack of a better term) douche bags to task, tackling pen-stealers, intimidating wrong-doers, and hurtling obscenities and his victims. Thurber, who also directed the 2004 comedy Dodgeball, expertly inserts the Reebok logo onto the powerful Tate, but leaves out any other unnecessary pandering and advertising that would distract/detract from the short. And like any successful film, Terry Tate is a brilliant and well rounded character who grows to become a part of the office lifestyle. An actual wide range of his emotions are explored in a little more than three minutes, which draws the audience in and helps us easily root for him.

A brilliant commercial, and ultimately one of the reasons why the lines between mediums can be blended and extremely subjective.

The Quintessentials: Brokeback to the Future

After reading Huw Roberts’ review of Brokeback to the Future, strange thoughts of the film’s purpose and appeal lingered in my mind. Being that the short trailer itself represented an extension of the preverbal “life of “ the films beyond their theatrical release I became fascinated by the possibilities such experimental spoofs have to offer. It comes as no surprise that one of the briefs in response to Huw’s review admits that an imagined feature-length version of Brokeback to the Future would be an interesting watch.

The trailer toys with genre expectations and form. It is perfectly reasonable to consider that if the trailer were designed as such when Back to the Future originally came out that the appeal of the film would not be half as broad. It might even still be the same film. But expectations are all about getting what you want out of a film.

In an industry where pilots and the filming of individual scenes determine whether or not a production continues, it seems necessary to consider the trailer (even as spoof) a legitimate means for attracting theatrical consumers. Today’s marketing is highly targeted to consumers in a particular niche. With tangible (i.e. theater, DVD) and intangible (i.e. YouTube) venues for showcasing films it is increasingly possible and affordable for successful projects to spawn newer projects which are in some way related. Supporting this notion buys into the methodology of successful television series which stem new seasons, characters, and even more challenging situations for the show’s protagonist.

In the film Tropic Thunder it seems there is this kind of curious experimentation with spoof trailers. Without explicitly mentioning that the preview trailers at the beginning of the film are indeed a part of the film itself, viewers are at first blindly fascinated with the prospect of seeing some of these preposterous trailers on the big screen as features. The titles include anything ranging from Scorcher VI: Global Meltdown to The Fatties: Fart 2. What’s most noteworthy is that some of these so-called "faux-trailers" are alluded to in the movie itself as the film portrays the lives of its characters who happen to be actors in these movies.

Don’t be surprised if this kind of ahead-of-time, conglomerate style of marketing for future projects becomes more common. It seems that it is increasingly impossible to sell an individual product without selling manifestations of the film’s inside jokes for future projects.

"Parents"

“Parents”
Darren Aronofsky
Montana Meth Project

I agree with Jeremy’s blog about Darren Aronofsky’s anti-drug commericial “Parents.” The films made for the Montana Meth Project are anything but cute. They hit you hard with the truth about meth and how it can destroy your life.

The Montana Meth Project features commercials by three directors including Tony Kaye, Darren Aronofsky and Alejandro González Iñárritu. Kaye directed seven commercials between 2005 and 2006. Aronofsky directed four in 2007 and Iñárritu directed the most recent three in 2008. For a drug campaign of this importance I think these three directors are well suited for the job. Aronofsky is one of my favorite directors and after watching “Parents” I was not surprised to see his name as the director.

“Parents” as Jeremy wrote starts us off feeling sympathy for the teenager. Quickly this changes as we realize that he is violently threatening his parents to allow him back in the home.

I think an important part of this campaign is not only the violence of Meth shown through the teenager kicking the door but the actions of the parents. Their grief is very heart wrenching as any parent does not want to see their child suffer. This commercial makes a strong statement to parents showing them that as much as it hurts to shut off your lights and close your door to a child in suffering, in the end it is what they must do to help this child. Allowing a meth addicted family member to live in your home is dangerous to yourself and the parents of these addicted people need to be reassured that their actions are for their own well-being. I think that message comes across very strong in this film when we see the child kicking the door and then the lights are turned off. There’s nothing more poignant than having the lights turned off and thinking of the heartache this child has caused his parents.

Each director’s films focused on a certain aspect of meth addiction. Aronosfky’s four films focused on the destruction of relationships as seen in “Parents.” Along with showing parents that closing their doors is the best thing, this film speaks to the potential drug users and showing them that their strongest relationships will be broken down by their addiction. This is seen through the visuals but confirmed by the narration as the teenager talks about his relationship with his parents and how they have always been close. The contrast between what we hear and what we see is what makes this commercial successful.

An Insult with a Lesson in Diplomacy

Por que no te callas (Why don't you shut up!)
Source: youtube.com


I've decided to talk about Raissa's post way back at the beginning of the semester about a commercial for Suncom Wireless. Since it is in Spanish, I will repost Raissa's translation of the commercial before I say anything more.

President Hugo Chavez of Venezuela would not back down during the speaking time of the Spanish delegation. He kept insulting the Spanish Prime Minister, Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, with regards to his predecessor Jose Maria Aznar. In a response to Chavez's behavior, the King of Spain, Juan Carlos I, YELLED at Chavez, "why don't you just shut up!" The video continues by saying "Wanna keep talking? Don't worry, Suncom wireless has all types of plans for you including call waiting." The exchange of words between King Carlos and President Hugo Chavez took place ON November 10, 2007 at the Ibero- American Summit in Santiago, Chile.

I picked this particular short film because I think that it gets at the essence of the difference between short films and film as a document and shows how our (or at least my) definition of a short film has expanded during the semester. Short film is something I thought of as a generally artsy and exclusive club, but it is no such thing. Music videos clearly belong to the short film club as do commercials. However, what starts to muddle the short film category is when we introduce Youtube and home videos in general into the mix and whether they should be determined as something different than the traditional short film. Youtube videos may be a bit coarser in various ways, but film is a title that suits them well.

This commercial illustrates the line between documentation and film well. The recording of the various diplomats was captured to show people, either in the news or in a live broadcast, what was going on at the meeting and to generally provide information for reporting. However, that documentation was then manipulated by Suncom to create a commercial and, consequently, a short film.

While the commercial turns out relatively fancy, the line between documents and short films is one easily broached without a large budget. The Youtube short, Charlie bit my finger - again!, illustrates my point. That moment of film was presumably caught as part of a larger recording documenting the two brothers. When the filmer saw that moment and decided to share it with the world, he changed that documentation into a film by editing which parts were to be shown. Even if the filmer only caught that particular moment, the mere act of putting it on Youtube transforms it by allowing it to be subject to the public gaze. The idea of the public gaze is one way to transforms a document by making the filmer self-conscious of his or her film as something that now stands on its own independent of the filmmaker. Previous to posting the document on Youtube (or any other film-sharing website), people who would have seen the document from a similar perspective of the filmer since they would be close to the situation. This shows film as a transformation from the private view of the cameraman to the public view of an audience which is free to inteprete the film in many different ways. This is perhaps one way to show how Youtube movies (and home videos) can move beyond documentation into film and documentaries even without the idea of editing.

Thanksgiving

Grindhouse--Fake trailer
Directed by Eli Roth



Thanksgiving is one of the five fake trailers featured during Tarantino's /Rodriguez's feature exclusively called Grindhouse. The double feature consists of Rodriguez's Planet Terror followed by Tarantino's Death Proof. I have a pretty good feeling most, if not of all of this blog's viewer's have at least heard of this gruesome duo, so I'll restrain from getting into the gory details of either film.

The great part of this nearly 3 hour double feature wasn't the crazy, disgusting, almost vomit inducing special effects, but instead, the advertisements for fake trailers that are featured before each segment. According to Rodriguez, the original plan was to make both films fake trailers reflecting those of the early 1970's, but clearly that didn't happen.

The trailers were all shot in two days, but the short time spent on these films doesn't reflect their quality, whatsoever. (wink)

The trailer I chose was for the fake slasher movie called Thanksgiving, directed by Eli Roth. The trailer was produced in the style of holiday type slasher movies like the well known Halloween.The trailer stars jeff rendell as a killer who stalks and kills people as if he is carving a thanksgiving turkey. Jordan Ladd, Jay Hernandez and Roth himself play Rendell's intended victims.

Not only is the voiceover ( Roth, himself) extremely creepy, but the mere sound that the killer's weapon makes as he kills each of his victims makes me close my eyes in disgust every time. The worst scene, by far is the last scene of the actual thanksgiving meal where all the family is gathered around the table and..well.. you'll see when you watch the trailer yourself.

Tropic Thunder Fake Trailers

Tropic Thunder Fake Trailers
Ben Stiller
2008

Tropic Thunder is a movie about making a movie, similar to Singin’ In the Rain. Tropic Thunder is the story of actors on location making a movie about the Vietnam War. When the director is unhappy with his leading actors, he takes the advice of the film’s consultant, a Vietnam veteran, and rigs up a number of cameras in the jungle. The actors are flown via helicopter into the jungle, with no creature comforts, and are left to act out the movie. However, a local drug lord becomes convinced they are not actors but Drug Enforcement Agents. A series of comedic misadventures ensues. Dramatic irony plays a large role in the film; the audience knows a great deal more about what is happening than the characters in Tropic Thunder.

While the film is a feature, it begins with four short films. The short films are designed as a form of exposition, to alert the viewer as to the diverse cinematic backgrounds of the leading characters in the film. The short films are in the form of trailers for each of the actors most recent film. Based on the trailers, the audience of Tropic Thunder knows instantly what type of celebrity each of the main characters in the film is.

Alpa Chino is a rap star, with his own line of energy drinks. His commercial resembles a hip-hop music video, complete with female dancers in skimpy outfits. The next is a trailer for Tugg Speedman’s new film "SCORCHER 6: Global Meltdown," an action movie. The trailer mentions the previous movies in the Scorcher series, which implies that it is a long-running franchise. This trailer is followed by Jeff Portnoy’s "The Fatties: Fart 2." Based on the number of fart jokes in the trailer, it is quite apparent that it is a gross-out teen comedy.

The final trailer is for “Satan’s Alley,” which stars Kirk Lazarus, an actor who was won multiple Academy Awards. It features many medium close-ups of Kirk Lazarus and Toby McGuire. The music is highly dramatic, setting the movie apart from the others advertised in tone. The plot concerns a homosexual relationship between monks. There is a two shot which shows one of the actors playing with the others rosary beads, which acts as a form of flirting. This film has the distinction of winning the Beijing Film Festival’s Crying Monkey. This fictitious film festival and award sets up the idea that Kirk Lazarus is a serious actor, unlike the other cast members in the film within a film.

What these trailers demonstrate is that only are the types of film they advertise instantly recognizable genres, but also that the trailers themselves have a high degree of familiarity. A parody only works if the audience is familiar with the material being gently mocked. This series of short films points to the idea that trailers are their own genre, and that trailers could be considered short films

Hip-Hop: Beyond Beats and Rhythms

Byron Hurt

Hip-Hop: Beyond Beats and Rhymns (4:52)

Why can't America leave Hip-Hop alone? Byron Hurt, an African-American film-maker, produced a film which "weighs in on manhood in hip-hop culture." In this film, violence, misogeny, homophobia, and how each relates to the culture are used to explore Hip-Hops degenerate appearance. Interviews with music artists, music video clips, and documentary-styled narrative reveal the producers displeasure with the image of the culture as it evolved from an innocent beginning to absolute sin.

At one point in my life, my desire was to become a Hip-Hop artist, but, perhaps, I just wasn't "gutta" (slang for extreme mischief) enough. Hurt's film, however, included statements from Dr. Michael E. Dyson, a cultural critic who claims "violent masculinity is at the heart of American identity," and Jackson Katz who says the culture itself is to blame for black-male aggressiveness. Though, seemingly, neither of these men are connected to the hip-hop culture, their statements are valued because black men are Americans and Hip-Hop has become their way of expressing the sins of a nation. The film also discloses just how "gutta" the culture has become. In the segment on misogeny, rapper Nellie from the Saint Lunatics, is seen swiping a credit card down the backside of a young woman. I only hope he called the credit card company and reported his card lost or stolen. But, the courage it took to expose such offenses is truly impressive mainly because, as from my experience, Hip-Hop, rather, frowns upon anything that divulges its filth.

This film, I think, is significant to all who understands and sympathizes with the culture and in many respects its inspires us to pray and never give up on humanity. In saying so, I reflect on the sister in Nellie's video. Then, my mind reflects on Tupak Shakur and Christopher "Biggie" Smalls - both victims of a culture which refuses to see the light.
--
posted for Michael D. Cole

Brokeback to the Future: Spoof Trailers

Broke Back to the Future
chocolatecakecity.com
Director: Unknown
Running Time 2:11

The true definition of an internet sensation is one that is forwarded through emails, linked on facebook pages, sent through AOL instant messenger, but never see the likes of the big screen. What great about this short is it's been in both realms. These trailers remade are an internet sensation amongst themselves not only just this one (but Brokeback Mountain is a popular choice). I chose this particular trailer out of thousands of remakes because of the use of two films that were once very popular films on the big screen and now have faded into TBS and our DVD players.

This trailer spoof takes the Back to the Future trilogy and splices them in a way that shows the two main characters in the film in a homosexual relationship. All of the clips that are used have slight sexual connotation to them, whether it's the Fox and Lloyd hugging or gazing into each other eyes. Needless to say all of the clips that are used are taken completely out of context. But put hem all together and throw the in the song The Wings by Gustavo Santoalla from Brokeback Mountain and the typical trailer music and you got yourself a completely different film.

I watched a few dozen of these trailers, from the very creative Good Will Hunted to the lesser Fight Club. But this short stood out the most for me because it's resemblance to an actual trailer, I think it even had some of the viewers who commented on it excited to see the feature length version of the film. What I noticed watching all of these spoof trailers is that they all seem to revolve around one central theme, which is Brokeback Mountain. Sure, there are plenty of other trailers that used different ideas to run with. But I think why so many of these trailers use homosexuality as their focus point is because it's so easy to run with. Take any film with two main characters that are men and run a some clips where they are looking at each other, play those in slow motion and have the song playing in background and there you have it a brokeback spoof.

There's Only One Sun

There's Only One Sun | Wong Kar-Wai
by YforYerom
There's Only One Sun

Directed by Wong Kar-Wai, Hong Kong, 2007

Approx. 10 minutes

Source: Dailymotion.com

The most interesting thing about this short is its intent and means of distribution. Last year, the Philips electronics corporation planned to unveil an exciting new product for the home theater market. Called the Aurora, the product was a new high-definition television set with an interesting new feature. Philips' groundbreaking "ambilight" technology would read the colors at the frame's edge of whatever media is currently being played on the screen, and then project a light of matching color from behind the television set onto the walls and room surrounding it. The idea was to create a more immersive viewing experience, by expanding the presence of the material on screen into the greater space of the home. It's pretty cool stuff, and Philips was burdened with the task of adequately translating the appeal of this new feature through marketing.

This is where Hong Kong auteur Wong Kar-Wai steps into the picture. At the time, Wong's last film was a dark and beautiful romantic sequel to his critically acclaimed 60s period piece, In The Mood For Love (2001). The new film, entitled 2046, was also predominantly set in 1960s Hong Kong, but a large subplot of the film concerned itself with a strange futuristic fantasy story illustrating the writings of the film's main character.  For those unfamiliar, Wong Kar-Wai (WKW from now on) has a propensity for creating intoxicatingly rich, dreamlike, sensual moving images in his films that compliment his improvisational production techniques as well as his usual themes of unfulfilled love, memory, and chance. So, having just released 2046 to critical acclaim and an admirable commercial success, Philips approached WKW to make an original short film in the style of his last feature to demonstrate the qualities of their new product.

The result is the film you can view above, a fantastically colorful and sexy piece, that virtually oozes WKW's signature dream-like atmosphere. Unfortunately, you can no longer view the film in the entirely unique manner in which Philips originally devised. The picture was released exclusively on the net, on a site devoted specifically to the launch of the new product. What made the project a unique success was a virtual simulation of the Aurora television itself, complete with simulated ambilight technology to demonstrate the practical functionality of the device. There's Only One Sun streamed on the website within its virtual television set, and as the extravagantly colorful scenes unfolded viewers could see the lighting render in real time. How better to demonstrate a new screening feature than to show it to the people? And how better to show it to as many people as possible than through the internet?

What's also fascinating is the lengthy pre-marketing-marketing that gradually build interest and hype for the reveal of the product and WKW's short film itself. Various stages of the website came online in the months leading up to the unveiling, featuring cryptic clues and savvy advertising lingo to get people excited. I believe at one point there was a sort of newsletter/fan-club section where members could access exclusive images from the film and other behind-the-scenes things like that (I can't say for sure what the exact sequence of pre-advertising consisted of since most of the website have long since closed down). On some date closer to the launch of the film, they even released a teaser trailer for the short featuring about 30 seconds of footage. The whole affair played out like a legitimate Hollywood pre-release strategy, though the entire thing unleashed online and for a short film.

lt's worth looking at the film itself a bit more closely as well, considering how it ties directly into the marketing theory of the whole ordeal. WKW has pretty openly embraced advertising within his feature films (His second film, Days of Being Wild, opens with Leslie Cheung buying a Coke, Fallen Angels sets a pivotal scene inside a McDonalds, and WKW even made one of those fun BMW "The Hire" shorts also made for the net) as well as worldly pop music and an ideology fully supportive of a capitalist Hong Kong. As such, it's not surprising that the Aurora television set itself plays a key role in the film it's advertising. The protagonist, having infiltrated the trust of a criminal mastermind in order to kill him, arrives at a strange organic-looking hallway bathed in light, the source of which being the Aurora. She muses on the power of the screen to sustain the life of memories indefinitely while they fade and die outside. WKW imbues the medium and technology itself with a sort of mystical appeal and value, the Philips product being a relevant and associatively forward-thinking construct of that power. The female spy missing "Light", her target and (this being a WKW film after all) love, presses her body up against the screen associating its warmth with that of her lost lover. If that doesn't sell a TV, I don't know what will.

Ultimately, I can't help but admire this short (being a devoted WKW fanatic) and its ingenious marketing plot (being... a savvy consumer?). There's one point where I realize I'm looking at a television set in a film... that's being shown within a virtual simulation of that same television set... that I'm then viewing on my computer monitor... that I sure as hell wish were a Philips Aurora television set, because those things are frickin' sexy!

THE SHOCK DOCTRINE

The Shock Doctrine
Dir. Jonas Cuaron, USA, 2007, approx. 7 min
Source: www.theshockdoctrine.com

On the surface The Shock Doctrine seems to be a nice short documentary that uses archival footage and Banksy style of graphics to tell us how shock has been used to push through a free market agenda. But, in the deepness of its subject it turns around to be an advertisement for the book of the same name… or is it? At plain sight the answer might be yes, but let’s say the movie was stopped at min 6:03 right before “The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism by Naomi Klein www.shockdoctrine.com” slate appears. Before it, the short holds on its own.

Archival footage from the 40s and instruction manuals from the CIA are cited as the source. Such footage and graphics explain how shock was used by the CIA to breakdown prisoners. The short then goes unto how natural disasters, wars, and terrorist attacks work in the same way but their effects distress entire societies and how Milton Friedman has promoted passing free market policies during such times. But, the major issue with the movie is not of content and whether or not you agree with it, after all people will be just as pro or con on the subject as they would with any feature length documentary. The Shock Doctrine seems to be trying to go beyond its economy smart target audience, it wants to go beyond the few young (liberal) readers of the Financial Times, Wall Street Journal, The Economist, etc. and grab the attention of those who fail to pay much attention to economic theories but have bought into the free market ideas of our generation, high consumer and most importantly internet junkies.

The short is clearly trying to indoctrinate or at least trying to get a generation wake up, to change. It sounds like a grandiose attempt to inscribe to a 6min short, but the attempt is there. Also there, is the fact that in criticizing the shock doctrine it uses the same technique to promote a book. But, considering the target audience it is not a far stretch. The most viewed online shorts are the most shocking ones, or otherwise it would be just another short that only the friends of its creator pay attention to. With a bunch of slightly ADD twenty-something they have got to deliver quickly, and use as many “relatable” info as possible. And while there is no comment from Foreign Policy the UK company responsible for the graphics, they do resemble Banksy’s style which will resonate with any rebel-leftist type and the modern art lovers. Its pace then propels the criticism that the short gives a bunch of facts without foundation, but the intent is to make the internet junkie generation go looking for more. And we are back at the beginning with the question of advertisement; yes Klein’s book will provide the missing content for the facts and yes it will make the viewers at least visit the website. But that does not necessarily makes the film an ad; it is more a book to film case. The difference here is that we aren’t given a one hour documentary it’s a short. It is our own tendency to see shorts as commercial snippets and calling cards that make us have an adverse reaction to it.

“Information is shock resistance. Arm yourself”

"How Disrespectful"

McCain Ad "How Disrespectful"
30 seconds
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fL_PYj7zZAs&NR=1

An often understated quality of political advertisements is that depending on who is watching them, they can stand on their own as powerful stories. For many people the perception of both Presidential candidates is limited to the framing device approved by the rival candidates themselves. With political ads the assumption on behalf of the party releasing the ad for television is that viewers will remember which politician is the good guy (or girl for that matter) and which is the bad guy.

This deliberately crafted antagonist v. protagonist story is often successful at motivating people to vote for their favorite story. In this particular ad, the villain is Obama. He is painted as "the world's biggest celebrity" whose "star is fading." Obama appears a cardboard cutout in the opening introduction. Each time he is framed negatively a one-frame image of him frowning, appearing disoriented, or villainously smiling is shown. These motionlesss, inanimate representations of Obama aim to establish a disconnect between viewers and Obama. The only time McCain and Palin are represented is when they are smiling and in motion.

The story's arc is logical and believable in that it frames fact (or partial fact) into story. The ad wants us to accept that since Obama's lead in national polls was being trimmed once Palin was announced as the VP candidate, that he had a kneejerk reaction of criticizing McCain's choice. The ad associates the change in polls with Obama's subsequent rhetoric. The ad frames the idea that Obama's "fading star" made Obama and Biden upset and "...so they lashed out at Sarah Palin." There is then a natural progression in the severity of Obama's rhetorical tactics which goes from dismissing Palin as good-looking (which "backfired"), said she was doing what she was told, and then "desperately called Sarah Palin a liar." These criticisms of Obama are summed up with "how disrespectful" as if the filmmakers didactically want to reinforce the ideal of human respect and dignity.

The desired effect of the McCain/Palin logo with the bright shiny star in the middle at the end of the ad can be likened to that of the G.I. Joe public service announcements which warn kids from anything to not petting stray dogs to not judging people.

It was estimated that no more than 5% of campaign financing was spent for both campaigns combined. This statistic is quite telling. It says something about the generational differences between those who rely on television for their news and those who spend most of their time on the internet. It could mean that the younger generation has a more elusive relationship with media advertisements and thus use the internet as a tool to be more selective in what they're exposed to. Television to the elder generation is almost an absolute medium. Campaigns do not discriminate between which channels you watch, but rather the fact that you are watching television. To many, television is the only voice for their candidate. The question is whether or not this voice is being heard.

America Coming Together - Bush Promo

America Coming together - Bush Promo
Directed by Adam Mckay, United States, 2004, 4:03
Source: America Coming Together

Most political shorts(almost always advertisements) serve as propaganda, and are more concerned with framing the "other" as the wrong choice than explaining why they are the right choice. This short was produced by America Coming Together (ACT), a liberal leaning political group that was dedicated to the "get out and vote" movement. Although not officially affiliated with a party, it is clear they supported democratic candidates. This short still functions as a bit of propaganda (anti-bush) but functions largely as a call to vote. Instead of being malicious they use accessible and popular humor to get a wider message across. VOTE!

This video is mock viewing of all the footage taken of the president at his ranch while attempting to make a political ad. The jumping around in time and showing the take numbers on the slate give the director complete freedom to have a ton of unrelated jokes and one liners. Adam Mckay is the director of Anchorman and was an original member of the upright citizens brigade, an improv comedy group. The unrelated one liners and how unqualified he makes Bush look is simply hilarious. Asking "Hollywood" what looks better "the giant shovel and little tiny thing (a hoe)". The irrational fear of horses that runs through the short keeps coming back to make us laugh.

The piece plays on the perceived stupidity and lack of qualification of the President. They frame him as a common idiot that has led the country in the wrong direction while in office. The incompetence conveyed is supposed to serve as the reason that everyone should vote, we shouldn't let this happen again. They start off funny, simply doing SNL type jokes about the president, which is why people will watch it, remember it, and watch it again. They do a great job of making the piece entertaining and slipping in an important message.

Montana Meth Project - "Parents"

"Parents"
Director: Darren Aronofsky
Source: Montana Meth Project

Montana Meth Project is the best anti-drug campaign in the United States. If you spend time in Montana, you cannot escape the graphic depictions of methamphetamine use on young people.

Was that idea so hard to come up with? Showing kids the effects of drugs is a much more visual and effective way to keep them clean than the accusatory "Sticking Leeches on Myself" anti-drug ad that wasted everybody's time a couple of years ago. You can't tell teenagers to find the fault in themselves because they are shallow, short-sighted, and immature. The leech ad accuses their friends of being bad people. The end result is that the kids try to put the blame for drug use on anyone but themselves.

Montana Meth Project dispenses with all of that and associates an incredibly vivid, negative image with drug use. That's it. That's all you need to do. I guess I lied in my comment on the previous post. This is about building a negative brand around drugs and getting kids to feel sick about using them.

"Parents" is a 30-second spot that shows a teenager running around his house. The lights go on and we look through the window. A woman, extremely upset, plops down on the couch. The man is making it clear that he is finished with something. The teen calmly narrates the scene. These are obviously his parents, and he gets along with them pretty well. Or so he says.

At this point, we're halfway through the ad and we feel sorry for the teen, who is shouting his deepest apologies and pounding at the door.

And then he turns and we see his face. Anger. Hatred. Disgust. He is a complete terror. His voice changes. It gets deeper and more aggressive. He starts kicking the door like a child. Soon, he's hissing, "Let me in! I'm gonna kill you!"

Animate. "Meth. Not even once."

"Parents" is a phenomenal example of how well these quick pivots and twists work in short films. No frills. No complicated setups. Just setting up a simple situation and then pulling the rug out from under you. In five seconds, we go from feeling sorry about whatever this kid has done to absolute shock at his change in tone. The message: Meth addiction will cut you off from your family and will turn you unhinged.

In the absence of the traditional three-act structure - I think I've included those words in two or three papers already this semester - the exceptionally quick twist becomes not only an acceptable storytelling device, but an easy one to pull off. Once you have a premise - any premise - in mind, it doesn't take long to come up with some way to upset the balance. For a 30-second commercial? Maybe an hour of fine-tuning at most. It's a shortcut, but there's nothing wrong with using this shortcut, whether it makes the film funnier, more surprising, more shocking, or just saves you a ton of money.

Guinness Dot

One of the most effective tactics used in beer commercials is to mislead the viewer for the about 90% of the ad. Often times advertisers like to mimic the tone of a certain kind of commercial and build it up with a different sort of integrity, then in the final seconds drop the beer label as a punchline. The concept of misdirection before that final punchline helps show a level of creativity and wit that works to ingrain the product in the viewer’s mind. 

In the Guinness Dot advertisement, Psyop Animations and Advertising lead the commercial on a path that would work perfectly for company like General Electric but the creation of the dot into a Guinness pint makes for a more amusing ending. This also works as a unique take on most beer commercials, especially previous Guinness ads. The “be whatever you want to be” angle brings a much more playful and innocent side to the beer. Previously, Guinness ads have a darker, more serious tone, specifically from “Good things come to those who wait” campaign.

Despite its different attitude toward the dark beer, the Dot commercial does tie into the overall quality of Guinness ads as well as other higher priced beers. The creative and filmmaking tactics used for more expensive beers like Guinness and Stella Artois helped add to the integrity of the products themselves. Beer commercials on a whole have always been the most satisfying commercials because of the many creative outlets possible. Each beer knows its market and the fact that there is alcohol seems to give most advertisers a little more leeway for what they are allowed to do. The Guinness Dot ad works is so much more effective because it does not try to push those boundaries but remains innocent and hopeful.

American Express - Tina Fey & Martin Scorsese

American Express has been using celebrity endorsements in their advertising for a while. Along with their magazine ads, they have a series of tv spots featuring celebrities like Ellen DeGeneres, Wes Anderson, M. Night Shyamalan, Robert Deniro and Diane von Furstenberg. The commercials all match their subjects pretty well – Ellen’s is funny, Diane’s is ethereal and pretty, and M. Night Shyamalan’s makes no sense.

But my personal favorite is a fairly recent one featuring Tina Fey and Martin Scorsese. This is primarily because I love Tina Fey and will watch anything she’s in, but even aside from that, I think the commercial is legitimately funny, especially if you watch the extended scene. Basically, Fey runs into Scorsese at the airport, and he invites her for a chat in the first-class lounge. Alas, she’s flying coach, and has to plead with the airline attendant to let her into the lounge, finally succeeding when she flashes her American Express card. Unfortunately when she finally sits down with the director it turns out he isn’t offering her a script but a time-share in Boca Raton.

The best thing about this commercial is actually Scorsese, who turns out to be funny and natural in front of the camera. The time-share gets worse and worse the longer he describes it, and he sells the self-mockery perfectly. American Express has done a great job with this one; when thousands of people are actively seeking out the “extended cut” of a television advertisement, the company must be doing something right. You can even almost forget that they’re trying to sell you something – until the end title pops up saying, “Need better travel advice?”, followed by their website address. The commercial doesn’t make me want my own American Express, but it certainly makes me have positive associations with the brand.

Montgomery Flea Market

This commercial is a music video about the greatness of the Montgomery Flea Market in Montgomery, Alabama. The commercial stars owner Sammy Stephens as he sings about his flea market, which he frequently compares to a "mini-mall" in the commercial. He tells the camera about his selection of living rooms, bedrooms, and dinettes. He also creates a dance that involves stepping to the left and then stepping to the right. The commercial became an internet phenomenon and has landed Stephens on Ellen DeGeneres's show multiple times. He's even been impersonated on Saturday Night Live (by Kenan Thompson, of course).

What impressed me about this commercial is Stephens' devotion to the concept. He really puts his heart into this commercial. He took a risk in creating this silly video, and it paid off. However, the question at hand is: does Stephens even know how silly it is? The dedication he puts into the performance seems to show that Stephens is taking the commercial quite seriously. However, the production values are cheap, and Stephens dancing and facial expressions, along with the poor song writing, all make for an unintentionally funny commercial that caused it to become a Youtube hit (one upload of the video has over 3 million views).

The popularity of this video isn't based on how great it is: it's based on how bad it is. Such is the way with many popular YouTube videos. People put themselves on camera, they make a fool of themselves, others get a copy and throw it online, and a YouTube star is born. YouTube has created a new fascination with unintentionally funny videos (you could say this climaxed with Weezer's Pork and Beans music video, which features many YouTube stars who've been laughed at). Stephens embraces the mainstream crossover appeal of the commercial. You can find videos of fans dancing with Stephens in person (such as this one or that one ). Sammy Stephens now has an official website and has starred in several other commercials (here's one). However, does he know if we are laughing with him or at him? Based on the popularity, he might get confused and genuinely think people think its a great piece. While we all laugh at him, it's a friendly laughter. People have embraced him. Youtube comments don't really make fun of him; instead, they ironically praise him. You will read comments like "MC Hammer has nothing on this guy. American Idol go to Montgomery, Alabama! Love it!!!!" or "my new ringtone!" The crowd goes nuts when he performs it live.

SAMMY STEPHENS RULES!

Hands

Duration 1:01

Uncredited 

This commercial starts out with a hand doing what many people do when they anxiously await something - tapping fingers. The hand gestures grows exponentially from there - and why shouldn't it? When you are waiting for such an amazing beer like Guinness, this short film shows the tricks a pair of smart hands would do.

I like the way this commercial is put together. The premise, stated above, is interesting in itself. Even when the viewer doesn't know what the advertisement is for, they continue to watch to find the point. From what I can tell, the hands are placed in the same spot throughout each "trick sequence," each finger extended for its trick and the film is sped up to make the transitions seamless.  This stop frame animation is a smart type of commercial filming because it aspires for the Guinness ending.  

The music is fitting as well - it is exciting. It's as though the music is waiting just as much as the hand is for their "treat" at the end.  With no words needed, the music and visual queues such as the letters on the fingertips, indicate the direction and overall message.  The "typed" message from those fingertips says, "Good things come to those who wait."  As the final product indicates, this notion is all too true...

The Itchy and Scratchy Show: 500 Easy Pieces

"500 Easy Pieces"
15 Seconds
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zd1e2avYidM

This advertisement for Butterfinger successfully combines the shock humor of The Itchy and Scratchy Show from The Simpsons with a clever and unique selling point for the candy bar itself: the loud crunch. Using the brand’s poster child, Bart Simpson to help sell the product Butterfinger makes the effort to tie in a relevant storyline from The Simpsons to give Bart’s laugh at the end more meaning. Thus, this “one-joke” short works on several comedic and particularly ironic levels once The Itchy and Scratchy Show is analyzed and understood.

The origins and inspiration of Itchy and Scratchy can be traced back to the ever popular cartoon, Tom and Jerry. Both shows involve a cat-and-mouse interplay (literally) in which the mice always seem to triumph and outsmart the former, often predatorial character. But the means of which this “outsmarting” occurs is often at the expense of excessive (and creative) violence. This violence is so preposterous and unjust in nature that it is hard for many Americans including The Simpsons Creator Matt Groening to contemplate how children were allowed to and even encouraged to watch such violence on their television sets. It’s no wonder that with short attention spans and an easy to follow plot that kids would fall victims to the older cartoons that made it okay to be violent.

Groening used these 30-second snippets of satire in his show consistently because he knew that the themes which the show attempted to stand for would ironically contrast with Itchy and Scratchy. The mere concept of Bart Simpson constantly watching this whimsical violence and being amused by it while left by his parents unsupervised at the television is often taken for granted when we watch the show.

The animation style and story structure of Itchy and Scratchy are also deliberately stylized the same as Tom and Jerry. The animation is simple with the characters having simplified bodily and facial features and the settings generally kept lackluster in detail. Most effort in its animation is concentrated on the punch line which unfortunately is always when Itchy is killed. The only slight variation in story structure is that Jerry and Tom always seems to be provoking each other in Tom and Jerry while the mouse in Itchy and Scratchy seems to completely dominate the cat without the cat ever bothering him and blindly falling into his traps. And while both animations’ stories follow story causality, Itchy and Scratchy condenses the suspense by eliminating the cause and just having the reaction! Therefore, Scratchy’s obsession with ultra violence is never justified in the show and seems darkly random. And that’s what makes it work.

The film’s title, “500 Easy Pieces,” is of course a play on words with the film title “Five Easy Pieces.” Each of the Itchy and Scratchy shows are titled in the same form perhaps to signal older audiences that kids would never “get it.” The fun and catchy jingles that bookend the Itchy and Scratchy shorts also work to play up on this irony by sounding kid-friendly. And that’s what gives the show its loveable charm. We watch the show to experience the dramatic irony that Itchy is going to experience a horrible death. What better contrast to a domesticated but flawed all-American Simpsons family? Only in an episode of Itchy and Scratchy can characters be cremated and killed by the sound of a Butterfinger.

BMW: The Ultimate Campaign Machine

BMW Series: Star
Directed by Guy Richie, USA , 2002, 9 minutes

Star is one of the eight short films that composed the ad campaign called The Hire by BMW (USA) in 2002 (more about this later). The film tells the story of a manager who has decided to get revenge on his employer, the Superstar (played by Madonna), for treating him badly. The manager has hired a driver (played by Clive Owen) for the Superstar to be driven to the venue that she has scheduled for that particular day. Star does fall for the trap that the manager has placed; Madonna (thinking that Clive Owen is one of her many drivers) asks the driver to lose the car carrying her manager and body guards. To this order, Clive Owen shows off all the features and capabilities of the M5 (the BMW model used in this particular film) The result of his driving skills allows for them to not only loose the car carrying the body guards, to get to the venue on time, but also to carry out the manager’s revenge plan due to the fact that Star has pissed herself during Clive Owen’s driving. In the end the paparazzi have a field day.
Star appears in the first season of BMW short film series called the Hire. The collection of eight shorts was distributed via internet only (on the BMW website) starting with John Frankenheimer's Ambush and continued with the rest of the series including Star in 2001-2002. These “commercial vignettes” were so highly praised by Times Magazine, Vanity Fair, the New York Times and especially the viewers, that the films ended up in a DVD distributed at only certain dealerships. Unfortunately, BWM had to pull the plug on the DVD since the actor Forrest Whitaker disputed that the films had been made for internet view only as stated in his contract. However, the demand for the films was so great that BMW decided to release another DVD which gave viewers the links to go see the films online and even released a second season. (If you would like to read more about this campaign please visit these websites http://www.bmwusa.com/Standard/Content/Uniquely/TVAndNewMedia/BMWFilms.aspx
& http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMW_films)
The Hire is a campaign with a groundbreaking style of advertising: the creation of short films that does not mention the brand name. In the case of Star, the car stands out by itself in the parking, and the car becomes the catalyst for the plot, but bold letters indicating BMW: the Ultimate Driving Machine never show up on the screen. The same can be said of Madonna. The film doesn’t introduce her in the credits in the same way that Clive Owen is introduced. The point that I’m getting at is that this particular campaign (and especially this short) plays around with the idea of star driven power. What makes a star a star? Is it performance? Is it quality? All these questions can be answered for both the car and Madonna. And as a result of this play on perceptions/ meaning of words such as star, I believe that this short fits this category of short with stars very well.
The ironic factor of the film being directed by Madonna’s husband Guy Ritchie is one of the reasons why I like this short a lot. The other reasons are Clive Owen and the punchy story line. The main punch is delivered at the end when the audience’s curiosity is answered as to how the manager got his revenge. However, there are other miny punches throughout the whole film that make it highly entertaining; the music adds to the viewer enjoying the ride, Owen’s changes in tone of voice and facial expression allow for the flow of the narrative to continue and finally the way that Madonna ends up being a pinball in the car enhance this simple story of revenge.
Finally, the film allows through its punchy story to not only have the manager get his revenge but it also brings a reality check for the star. It is as if she crash landed (literally) back into being a human. This is because the technique, in which star is portrayed, of having the narrator saying something like “her million dollar voice” and having the star cough, would not have been as effective in a short story for example. The film in this way makes what the narrator is saying of the star having blue eyes and strong hands and not being able to see them makes star as if she were something that humans (as the viewers) are not able to see. That is, not until she lands abruptly at the venue. Once she has been put in a position where star shows that she is human, then the ride is over.
I have seen most of the short films in the BMW series and personally believe that I enjoy this one the most because as a viewer you can take the ride over and over and it will always be really good. It’s like a Pixar short film but just with a really nice car and a really hot driver.

THE FOLLOW

THE FOLLOW
D: Wong Kar-wai, USA, 2001, approx. 9 minutes
Source: BMW Films, no longer available

A driver is hired by a movie star's assistant to follow the star's girlfriend (wife? lover?), who he suspects of infidelity. He tracks her, and narrates the nature of such tailing as he chases her around Los Angeles. He tracks her to LAX, where she tries to catch a plane to Rio de Janeiro, which is delayed. In a visually poetic moment, the driver breaks his own rule ("don't get too close") for a moment, only to discover something about the nature of this woman's relationship.

The Follow is a gorgeous film, typical of Wong Kar-wai's moving work in features such as In the Mood for Love and 2046. Upon its web-only release in 2001, however, it was also part of a larger series of works: The Hire featured five short films produced by David Fincher and directed by different directions with only two common elements, the unnamed Driver (played by Clive Owen) and the cars, all BMWs. Indeed all five films were part of an interesting commercial campaign called BMW films where the "films" themselves used the cars in fascinating ways, often involving car chases (like in this one) and sometimes even causing the cars to crash. The clear, cool nature of both Owen and the car exuded from these films, and vice-versa. More than the other four in the series, Wong's film also directly related these shorts to the concept of the art film, which can allow us to consider the nature of the audience that these films -- and likewise the cars -- are marketed to. Do those of us who watch these kind of films want to buy BMWs? Can we afford them?

The Follow therefore walks a fascinatingly fine line between "film" and "commercial." The series as a whole could be accessed under the very name "film" and played at the Cannes Film Festival; all the players involved (actors, directors, etc.) are related to film as well, and the budgets for these pieces certainly was along similar lines with commercials. And yet, these "films" won CLIO awards for best commercial pieces which naturally showcase the ubiquitous cars which handle rather nicely. This invites us to consider the nature of the commercial at all: where does the concept of the "film" begin and end?