response to: this article + Logorama(2009).
It was an interesting concept that the film used logos that are + have been seen everyday, everywhere for the whole piece. There was a lot of background that goes with each company, whether that be slogans, company motto, what they've tried to tell the public in the past and what we know about them. It adds a lot more to this piece because it brings in also our memories associated with that food, or other past memories in our life that were sparked upon seeing a logo. The overall set up of the whole film being set in Hollywood + LA really makes sense too, as that's where many people in the US want to be and where you go to be seen. Personally it brought back a lot of memories because I've been driven near LA and through "Hollywood" before...so the thought and memories of driving around and walking around there all popped in my head, which contrasted with the idea of the film, but it brought more of a connection for me to the film. So, I would say that graphic elements can really help the viewer get more involved in the piece, get a connection faster to the piece, which is really a helpful tool. If you can get a viewer emotionally involved in a piece, you can often get them to not look away; we're always looking for connections to people, places, things.
In the article it states that the video "is a carefully instigated scenario that took on challenging artistic as well as technical decisions." This is true, because they did bring in all of these different logos + companies, decisions had to be made that did not make the piece look as if it was thrown together. There is a nice fluid movement throughout the film that melds together easily recognizable logos, some that I've forgotten and some that I've never seen. The plot itself needed to have the small moments where there were confrontations or a notion made to competitive companies such as the various fast food restaurants. An interesting moment was when one of the Original Pringles man said to the other "They never want the original anymore." What an interesting moment; that could have been a direct reference to consumption in general. I mean look at technology, we are never happy with the first or old version, we always want the newer and supposedly better version. But in general, most companies change logos through the years; we're trying to find what is going to best strike someone's attention.
The one thing that the movie really had going for it that involved the graphics/logos was all of the connotation that we as consumers had with each company going into the movie. Even as I laughed along at moments with the film, or a bit horrifically looked on in some moments, the actions and gestures of the "characters" did not fully shock me. It was almost as if I had already associated those characteristics with the companies prior to seeing them be morphed into characters. Putting Ronald McDonald as the villain in the piece really makes sense; I'm not sure there is another company that has such a bright logo that is supposed to make you happy with it's bright colors, but has really taken over the whole world. I read an article a few weeks ago that McDonald's is opening a vegan fast food place in India and I think that someone recently told me that McDonald's is branching out into another fast food place. So it really made sense to me that Ronald McDonald was the villain It was a bit ironic that he got knocked off his bike by Weight Watchers and all of the interactions with other fast food restaurants, such as Big Boy who bites McDonald's arm to get away.
No comments:
Post a Comment