Rian Johnson, the filmmaker best known for his work on Star Wars: The Last Jedi and Knives Out, recently discussed his work and some aspects of the filmmaking process with Vanity Fair. During the approximately 20-minute interview, Johnson revealed an interesting tidbit about Apple product placement: the company reportedly doesn't allow the iPhone to be used on-screen by villains.
As Johnson points out in the video, this fact can function as a spoiler — if you see a character in a movie who may be the villain but they are visibly using an iPhone, then it is safe to assume they are not, in fact, the villain. That's due to the product placement rules Apple has in place for filmmakers, which allows iPhones to be used, but only if they're associated with 'good' characters.
It's unclear whether the public awareness of this fact may influence future movies. Some filmmakers may choose to have their characters exclusively use Android phones to avoid ruining the surprise. If that happens, Apple may feel compelled to loosen this restriction in order to return its handset to the big screen. 'Every single filmmaker who has a bad guy in their movie that's supposed to be a secret wants to murder me right now,' Johnson quipped.
Unless Apple is sponsoring the movie or it is being developed as an exclusive for Apple TV, the actors can use whatever the director choose to. This post is ridiculous.
Apple is full-steam on being politically correct to the extreme, more so since Cook. Politically correct being an understatement. This do-not-offend-anyone BS is building a weak and pathetic society.
Quite depressing that Apple has such influence. But we can always take refuge in pure imagination. I would like to see a spoof on people using Apple products in the style of Luigi Serafini’s Codex.
Uhhh, once a product is purchased, the manufacturer has zero ability to control what the purchaser does with it. Apple "can't" prevent a movie maker from allowing a "villain" to use an iPhone. What kind of nonsense is this?
use a phone? no they can't prevent it. however, use their logo/design/IP as part of your motion picture? definitely they will sue. or anybody else for that matter. any brand. you have to clear them. seriously.
i get that people sometimes can be clueless with IP usage, and it's okay if people ask. but if you don't know, might as well not be loud and proud about it :p
Maybe because in movies the 'villains' are always tracked and information pulled from their phones, Apple doesn't want people to realize their iphone is nothing but an open book.
@maxz That's not true. One of the positives about their closed system is that is secure, at least compared other operating systems and social media channels.
Funny. A company that keeps its customer well-fenced in in their product universe to grab all cash that is possible, a company that has killed any spending for social activities, a company that uses Flextronics which had to add nets on the first floor to reduce fatal suicide attempts of their workers enforces their good image with such clauses. Sad truth is many consumers are dumb enough not to notice.
Who is talking here about Sony except yourself?? Sony used to be really bad with proprietary power supply connectors and the like. Nowadays I don't see that anymore. Ever tried adding a self-made ringtone on an iphone? Or sharing photos via bluetooth? Uploading photos from PC to iphone? But kindly explain to me the candles lit in front of Apple Stores after holy Steve Jobs demise - a man responsible for all the aforementioned? Jobs did nothing worth mentioning regarding human kindness, social welfare or support. I don't like Gates but he at least donates a LOT for such causes. In society there seems to be a moral vacuum, persons and companies are revered irrespective of their moral/amoral actions. Lastly: According to this logic, Mercedes should have prohibited the use of their cars in any movie - in US movies, the baddy always drives the Benz.
I guess there is some kind of misunderstanding or misinformation here. There is something called product placement. A company pays for having their products visible in a film. Quite common. Then maybe Apple says that we only pay if the phone is used by a good guy. Or do Rian Johnsson really mean that Apple will sue a company if a bad guy uses an iPhone?
Except that's not what's going on here. They're not talking about product placement. When you buy an iPhone, Apple inserts a clause about placing their product in a negative light.
Yes, the agreement says that if you, as an individual, present the product your purchased negatively, they can come after you.
it's not about product placement. film is an intellectual property. a result of processing ideas, and every frame in a film is intentional. thus if you put apple or even any brand in there, you are creating an intellectual property that has elements of another intellectual property. which in that case you have to get clearance to use those to create yours.
"Except that's not what's going on here. They're not talking about product placement. When you buy an iPhone, Apple inserts a clause about placing their product in a negative light. Yes, the agreement says that if you, as an individual, present the product your purchased negatively, they can come after you."
That probably explains why when I once complained & criticised my only ever apple phone on an apple help forum they deleted my comments. I reposted and they deleted again, after reposting a 3rd time they blocked my device from their website.
Notice all home security commercials feature white guys trying to rob a home. Blacks understand that being portrayed in a negative light in movies or even commercials is really bad. Still white guys are happy to portray evil or idiotic roles. I wish they understood the harm they are doing. Apple, with billions of dollars on the line, understands this.
Bull. They use whites because it is not PC to portray a black in a negative light. There is far too much PC in the world and this is drowning out reality!!!
Although it's mostly make believe, Apple seem to insist on fitting into the stereotype of a do-gooder. Those that make these items may tell us somewhat different story, eh ?
But, I'm not surprised. Certain transportation company would go over a script to make sure they look "positive" within the film/video....prior to utilizing their vehicle. Yes, some have a trademark to protect. But, if one look close-enough, the skeletons in the closet will appear.
It must have been a slow news day at NPR....I even heard it there about the Apple thing.
I have seen many photography related movies with photographers having a camera with the brand made invisible with tape. is this because the camera company didn’t want to pay for product placement? or is it to avoid some juridical problems. it often look silly. Even laptops they work on use dummy operating systems. what about cars in movies. Most older villains seem to drive a black mercedes and the younger ones Ferrari’s. Can Boeing and Airbus make objection on using visually one of their planes in a plane crash movie?
the thing about filmmaking is, everything inside the frame is intentional. so, if you have something to do with trademarks in there, a face, or depiction of private property, you do need release document signed by the owner of said asset.
That is actually the case! We had to remove certain furniture from a picture due to that fact that Cassina did not want to appear their Corbusier chair in connection with the product we shot for the advertising campaign. Same applies to art on walls in the background.
Rian Johnson is actually a good director. Knives out was a well handled movie with a nuanced and subtle message. Looper was also a good movie with a well handled plot twist at the end. However beloved and well established franchises should not be handed to him carte blanche.
He's a competent director from a technical perspective. The Last Jedi is a beautiful movie and the actors were well directed. Where he falls way short is on the writing and pacing side of filmmaking.
Knives Out is a well-made movie but it's a murder mystery so it plays to his strengths of subverting the audience's expectations.
In a way, I can see why Lucas Film/Disney hired him and paired him with Abrams. They are both the epitome of the modern commercial big-budget director. Competent filmmakers but forgo plot for the sake of gimmicks designed to create cheap emotions for the audience. They are the internet trolls of filmmaking.
Villains won’t use any smart phones because they usually end up dead or in prison and thus are not very smart. Perhaps if they use a dumb phone i.e. one that doesn’t transmit all your location data to google/amazon/facebook, they would fare better.
The really smart ones will either a) do it so that no one knows they were villianized, or b) do so in a way that people love them for it (i.e. political figures, etc).
@themountainphotographer hahahahahahahaha, whatever. Anyone buying overpriced fruit phones get what they deserve... Overpriced, fragile tech with a closed eco-system.
D7000ShooterUK please stop making stuff up. That's not how a trademark works. It gives you the right to stop someone from attempting to confuse their product with yours, not the right to control discussion of your product.
There's some other element at work. Either Apple is paying everyone and then threatening to withhold the money, or there is some legal jack-move they threaten in the film industry that doesn't work anywhere else, or the film industry is just cowardly beyond all reasonable imagination.
@carton ebay seem to disagree with you. There have been numerous cases where the trademark owner has demanded that eBay terminate a listing containing their product. When I contacted eBay about this I was told that it was because they objected to their product (containing visible trademark) being pictured in the listing. This was obviously an attempt to stop grey market selling but trademark violation was the excuse they used.
Product placements are big business. Many companies actually pay to get their stuff in films and TV. Not sure if this is an outright prohibition, or simply that Apple won't play the game.
Ahhh product placement (from Casino Royale)
"Rolex?” she asks. “Omega,” Bond replies. “Beautiful,” Lynd assesses.
D7000ShooterUK good to know and interesting, but a lot of false positives, negatives, and power imbalances are entangled in that situation, and our law is passed by congress and interpreted by courts, not dealt out as Confucian Justice by ebay's "trust and safety team," so you're generalising from nonsense, ie. making stuff up.
Please read the first link I posted. It's pretty clear to me and does address movies specifically, but the repetitive comments under it suggest many people read the post and don't understand it so ymmv.
You may think that it is but have no evidence of this imagined legal concept that depicting a device on screen is equivalent to manufacturing a copy of the device and selling it.
Obviously no, they don’t have control. What they do have control over is the money they would pay you for product placement. If they think your work shines a bad light on their products, they are unlikely to pay you.
Also, if you treat them in this matter, they are likely not to work with you on the content for their streaming platform.
@carton it's not even about equivalency. the design, the logo, the icons on the screen, those are intellectual properties. a result of design thinking process. you're using someone else's IP as an part of your own IP (film) without permission, that's breach.
The man is an expert at deconstructing narratives.
One almost cringes seeing him at the Golden Globes, performing to his external global audience at the expense of those alienated self-entitled privileged people in the room without them being able to do anything about that precious truth-telling moments in comedy format.
"You're in no position to lecture the public about anything. You know nothing about the real world."
Actually a villain would never use an iPhone because they tend to be smarter than the hero... Yes I do own iPhones but only because of ease of use with airdropping photos...
Must be fair use. Otherwise the manufacturers of all the clothing, accessories, vehicles, furniture, buildings and so on would have to approve the use of their products. Not possible.
"Fair use" - if it applies in this case - is something in the US. But movies are usually shown worlwide. In other countries other legal rules are valid.
How can Apple dictate...? Can you just imagine how much they donate in political donations and how big their litigation budget is? Oh, Apple can dictate anything they want.
Apple can dictate how you use their product when they're paying you to use it in your movie - that's what product placement *is*. A company makes a (sometimes substantial) contribution to the movie budget in return for their product being shown in a positive way, as a form of advertising. In that case, fair enough - those are their contract conditions.
But if the production budget will stand it, you can always just buy your own iPhone (or whatever) and give it to whichever character you damn well please. If the company doesn't like that, they'll just have to sue you. And knowing Apple, they, at least, probably will...
"....When you do see producers blurring out logos or brand names, it may be because they are trying to avoid an uncertain, lengthy, and expensive trademark litigation between competing parties that have unequal resources. ...."
Which is VERY TRUE !!!
If you are low-budget in the USA or Europe, you can get HAMMERED by expensive court cases and legal fees (especially in the USA!) which means even IF a judge gives a positive ruling on you using iPhones in a negative light in your film, you are facing a company with 260 BILLION DOLLARS IN CASH sitting around doing nothing but feed its lawyers. You WILL end up with $500,000 to $800,000 in court case fees for a shot takes up 3 seconds of screen time.
AND the number of cases found in the end-users favours, ESPECIALLY in the USA, are very, very small !!! On an ACTUAL and ABSOLUTE BASIS, a company like Apple wins more than 95% of it's Trademark use cases!
Unless you can commit 5 million to 10 million US dollars for the main case and all of the multiple appeals, your chances of winning such a legal challenge against a company the size of Apple are SLIM to NONE!
THAT, unfortunately IS REALITY !!! AND YES Apple absolutely DOES go after the small film maker. Apple has about 3000 lawsuits filed against it every year, mostly for minor things such as employee/employer relations but some of them include trademark issues in media. Apple TENDS to win a lot of those and those it DOES lose, ends up with the Plaintiff (i.e. YOU!) paying hundreds of thousands of dollars or even millions in legal fees which you don't get back!
This is all covered in the link I posted. Yes, SLAPP is not perfect, so you can sue people even when the law is not on your side and use the courts in a punitive manner.
You have not established that Apple actually does this or prevails by citing an example case.
The link I posted agrees you might be right about what's going on and cites the example case of Debbie Does Dallas, but if that explains the no-iphones-for-villains the movie studios would be excessively cowardly about defending their creatives' expression well beyond all reasonable legal advice. The other possibility is that Apple is paying for product placement.
So just because Foxconn manufacture other products, that exonerates Apple for being complicit in contracting them? Lol, yeah ok.
So if other Governments "allow" poor working conditions, that means Apple are less liable/responsible for suicides at their contracted manufacturing facilities? Lol, yeah ok, keep em coming, you're on a roll 😏 Den
If you want to get on a metaphorical high horse and beat a metaphorical drum then target gun manufacturers and retailers and take a snipe at them because they are responsible for all gun related deaths. Which incidentally make the alleged suicides to which you refer a metaphorical little drop in the ocean.
Look at suicide rates in Foxconn factories (the cities they are) and compare with suicide rates of similar sized cities. I suspect you will find they are similar.
@peterwr If any Android assembly by Foxconn, I will skip it. Lucky, there are many selection from multiple Android phone maker. Since consumer paid money to buy phone, should has right to choose better "social responsibility" company. No stick to 😈 company.
Do you realize that Foxconn city is probably the largest consumer manufacturer of commercial electronics in China? You would be hard pressed to find a popular consumer electronics product not made there.
Of course you’re a dope if you’re trying to pin this on one company!
The difference is that Apple are being hypocritical as reported in this article. They're happy to have Foxconn (and their suicidal work practices) part of their manufacturing, but are so morally hypocritical to not allow villains to use their IPhones in movies.
@FuzzyDice IMO sometimes 'good' objective is difficult to achieve. But, are we not practice it if difficult? Although live has lot of difficulty, but we still hardworking to survive.
Nobody is forced to work there last time I checked. But sure, single out one company from all the clients of Foxconn just because the name appears in this article.
@EricWN Apple paid little (I remember less than USD 30) to Foxconn for assembly iPhone. Foxconn want maximiy profit margin then use some inhumane strategy. Basic salary is low, but overtime allowance is big. High pressure QA check by drop defect material to assembly line to test worker. Can't stay with friends after work..
Right, in all of the vast country of China there is nothing but jobs at Foxconn. There is no choice whatsoever. And you guys probably never buy products made there. Got it.
That's not the point of the article is it? Apple are hypocrites because they manufacture their products in suicidal sweatshops, but are so moral about not allowing onscreen villains to be seen using their IPhones. What a joke.
Honestly, DPReview should have mandatory idiot exams before approving forum membership, maybe it would have saved us from reading your nonsense posts 😏
They definitely need that because had you not left the topic and dragged us to work conditions we wouldn’t have this discussion. Any company will have guidelines about what they will support from a marketing perspective. Acting as if that is an Apple only thing and then trying to sell that as some sort of double standard that is somehow surprising is the joke here. Suicide blood - please. It’s not a new thing that Apple wants to protect its brand nor that working at Foxconn is a choice. It’s not an Uighur retraining camp with a locked door.
Den. It’s still amazing to me that you fail to acknowledge suicide rate in the Foxconn city is lower than the suicide rate many major cities. And, for instance, lower than the suicide rate in the United States overall. And you fail to acknowledge suicide rates at other large manufacturers like Samsung too.
Sounds like you’re hating on Apple for completely unrelated reasons. Or you wouldn’t pass that intelligence test you suggest either.
A dictator always said other people complain him. Also said other people kill more people than him so him isn't dictator. Even sometimes said is army kill people, not him, with proof that dictator did not know how to use gun.
This isn’t about dictatorship. It’s about statistics. If you don’t see the relevance of suicide statistics to this discussion I can’t help you. And you also wouldn’t pass Den’s intelligence test.
If you know history/news, real dictator also always provide multiple 'real' statistics. Dictator always said other people complain is not fact because not statistics. But weird, dictator's statistics always change according his need.
Last time I checked the character in the show did not touch teenagers. The actor - different story and not part of the discussion. We are talking about the role.
He was only a tiny cog in the Star Wars machine. That movie was doomed before they shot a single frame of film. It fell victim the inviolable laws of entropy. Abbott and Costello, Merchant-Ivory, James Bond, Charlie Chan, Pirates of the Caribbean, Superman, Fast and Furious, Harry Potter, and that god awful Hobbit. Every movie franchise eventually collapses from creative exhaustion.
clint yes, but that already started in the force awakens, but its well known that rian completely scrapped the material which was handed over from jj, he completely rewrote everything! i can only recommend one video on youtube, search for Why Star Wars: The Last Jedi is a Complete Cinematic Failure by the youtuber vito, he is SO spot on with literally EVERYTHING
watched knives out the other day, which was actually OKish
Oh...the moment Luke throws his lightsaber over his shoulder. Even thinking about that moment makes me cringe. Although TFA was a lazy cheap rehash of the Originals, the last Jedi was way worse.
So where do you find cellhones not made in China? Better yet, how do you know they weren't manufactured in any sweatshop. Hold on, as if you care! you buy them as long as they are cheap!
Daniel L. ... the point is, Apple like to portray themselves as holier than thou; yet they’re the biggest hypocrites in the industry! Everything they do is done to squeeze the last $ out of their customers, hidden behind a veil of ‘whiteness’. I used to love Apple products; until Jobs died and quality and innovation stopped, Ive went on a form over function crusade of destruction and Timmy boy decided shareholders were more important than creating fantastic new products (choosing to rest on their laurels and let anything decent (like the iMac range) die because more money was to be had selling rainbow coloured watch straps at $80 a throw!)
With every other brand, I know exactly where I stand; with Apple, I have to delve through the corporate bs to get to the truth!
I bet good amount of Samsungs are made in Korea, HTC in Taiwan, what about Sony, any made in Japan? If Sigma can make all their products in Japan from Japan sourced materials, why not the quite expensive brand phone models?
Also, Samsung are a real evil company, too. I had no idea until I moved to Korea for two years. Man, they shovel golf bags full of cash to politicians, are behind a plant that paid off politicians and families that had leukaemia-inducing poisoning, and they own half of the country.
Like, we lived in a Samsung apartment, shopped groceries at a Samsung supermarket, had to use Samsung phones, and if we took a ride somewhere, it was in a building made by them or on a ship they made. They have so much power they can do ANYTHING they want.
Shigzeo ... I don’t doubt they are; but they don’t play the innocent holier than thou card that Apple do; or remove features just to rob you with dongles!
Actually they do. People choose them out of ignorance as a benign option. Their pretence of innocence is pernicious. And they remove jacks now just like Apple did. But they don’t make noise about it. In fact they remove jacks quietly after lambasting Apple for doing the same. Nasty hypocritical company.
Shigzeo Apples motif to remove headphone jacks was all about forcing you to buy their wireless headphones. Samsung’s decision to do the same came over a year later and was based upon how the market had changed, not about how they could make money from it!
Actually, I am. I really dislike the post Jobs Apple but I don’t think you can pardon Samsung, who essentially run a corporate gestapo against their own people in Korea, including espionage and surreptitious murders. Apple is an evil empire but it is evil as an accident of totalitarian wokeness. Samsung are evil just by being Samsung and plundering Korea.
How did I guess that ... could it be your blatant defence of Apple, despite it being the most hypocritical and user mocking company out there. It’s the sheep effect ... I heard you bleating a mile off ... sucked in and brainwashed by Apples shameless marketing.
Also, are you really making this personal? I don’t care about you or me; wasn’t the subject what sort of phone an evil person would use? We got onto Samsung and I think they are the more consciously evil of the two. Apple are evil as an accident of wokeness. To me that is far scarier but Samsung are actively evil. In Korea they are loved for what they do for the economy (1/4 to 1/3 of the Korean GDP) but they are well known to be a corporate gestapo.
I don’t know which one a really evil person would choose but a really evil person would want the evilest phone or company. That at least was the joke.
Now you are making it personal, and about me, and because I pointed out that Samsung are an evil company. That may also put evil into another context.
So. give Dr. Henry Jekyll an Iphone XI Pro. And a Galaxy10+ to Edward Hyde. Now could you please pass the popcorn? No...I'm not going to get into what would be the respective phones for Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders.
With a fast lens, GPS and useful tracking features, and Raw support, Olympus's flagship rugged compact continues to be the best waterproof camera on the market.
While improvements like HyperSmooth 2.0 stabilization are truly impressive, the latest GoPro generation really only offers incremental upgrades – and that's looking like a trend we can count on in the foreseeable future.
The Lume Cube 2.0 is much improved on its predecessor, but we do have concerns about its smartphone app. It's also pretty pricey among its competitors, but its feature set and quality of light may win you over. Find out more in our full review.
The X-T4 brings image stabilization and a larger battery to the X-T series, but dig a bit deeper and you'll find a host of improvements and tweaks. See what we've discovered in the X-T3's sister model.
Nikon's combined the best of its DSLR and mirrorless cameras into one tough-built body, equally well-suited for stills as it is for video. For effectively modernizing one of the brand's all-star camera lines, it receives our silver award.
Whether you've grown tired of what came with your DSLR, or want to start photographing different subjects, a new lens is probably in order. We've selected our favorite lenses for Nikon DSLRs in several categories to make your decisions easier.
Whether you've grown tired of what came with your DSLR, or want to start photographing different subjects, a new lens is probably in order. We've selected our favorite lenses for Canon DSLRs in several categories to make your decisions easier.
The fixed lens camera market may be a bit niche, but it's here that you'll find some of the best cameras you can buy. Sensors ranging from APS-C to full-frame are designed to match their lenses, which cover ranges from 28-75mm equivalent, so image quality is top-notch.
Although a lot of people only upload images to Instagram from their smartphones, the app is much more than just a mobile photography platform. In this guide we've chosen a selection of cameras that make it easy to shoot compelling lifestyle images, ideal for sharing on social media.
Whether you make a living out of taking professional portraits, or are the weekend warrior who knows their way around flashes and reflectors, you'll want a camera with high resolution, exceptional autofocus and a good selection of portrait prime lenses. Click through to see our picks.
ProRes RAW for Windows version 1.0 adds beta ProRes RAW and ProRes RAW HQ support to Adobe After Effects, Adobe Media Encoder, Adobe Premiere and Adobe Premiere Rush.
Last week we spoke to Kazuto Yamaki of Sigma to get his take on the ongoing situation worldwide, and on Sigma's strategy and prospects for the coming year.
Photographer James Maher has been using the X100 series for street photography since the original version, but he's found the updates in the latest X100V make it the best street photography camera yet.
We invited a professional audio engineer to test the microphone pre-amps in cameras from Canon, Nikon, Sony, Panasonic, Fujifilm and Olympus. Find out which ones deliver the best sound.
Over 7,000 wildlife, landscape, and macro photographers submitted images to the inaugural Nature TTL Photographer of the Year 2020 competition. Here are the winners and finalists.
Rogue Photographic Design has released a new and improved version of its popular FlashBender shapeable reflectors for speedlights and strobes. The FlashBender v3 has improved usability and can fit a wider range of flashes.
Think of the Panasonic 25mm F1.7 as the brand's nifty fifty. At about $150 this 50mm equiv. is fast to focus, lightweight, compact and fairly sharp across the frame. See for yourself in our sample gallery.
The P series usually showcases Huawei's latest camera technologies and the P40 models are no different, featuring a wide array of innovative imaging technologies.
The updates for the X-T3 and 16-80mm F/4 lens only address bug fixes, but the 1.20 update for the X-T30 adds improved autofocus, drone/gimbal support and more.
Sony has announced that on April 1, 2020 it will be spinning off its Electronics Products & Solutions (EP&S) segment into Sony Electronics Corporation, an intermediate holding company.
While we're home-bound at the moment, we were able to sneak outside long enough to put together an initial sample gallery from our production Fujifilm X-T200.
Stuck at home with not very much to do due to stay-at-home directives or quarantines? Here's how to use some old and odd lenses to turn your room into a camera.
Like many photographers stuck at home due to the coronavirus, Chris and Jordan need a creative outlet. Let's see what happens when they try to re-create bad product photography from a kids' toy.
In a recent episode of DPReview TV, new host Don Komarechka introduced us to the magical world of frozen soap bubbles. Take a look at some of the fantastical images he captured – and give the video a watch if you missed it the first time around.
The new all-weather portrait lens is to join the company's premium line for K-1 series cameras, and will be the first 85mm designed for the Pentax digital full frame system
Canon USA has announced that due to 'stay at home' directives by authorities in various states, it will be shutting down repair facilities in California, Illinois and New Jersey.
The world has suddenly become a little smaller for many of us, but there are still plenty of photographic things you can do, while waiting for things to get a little better. Here are some suggestions.
Stuck inside? Feast your eyes on some spectacular images from the great outdoors. Winning images feature subjects ranging from active volcanoes to dramatic views of manmade structures, all captured from the air.
Comments