|
Post by Riff Raff on Dec 28, 2008 18:50:53 GMT -5
Here's an article and a link:
"Imagine that-- John Lennon in TV ad 28 years after his death" December 28, 2008 Imagine, John Lennon makes a television commercial for charity -- 28 years after his death.
Through the use of digital technology, the former Beatle urges people across the United States to support a campaign by One Laptop per Child to deliver tough, solar-powered XO laptop computers to the world's poorest children.
"Imagine every child, no matter where in the world they were, could access a universe of knowledge. They would have a chance to learn, to dream, to achieve anything they want," a voice and video image of Lennon has been created to say.
"I tried to do it through my music, but now you can do it in a very different way. You can give a child a laptop and more than imagine, you can change the world," says the musician in a play on one of his best known songs -- 1971's Imagine.
Ono approved the One Laptop per Child commercial, which was launched Thursday and will be shown on donated broadcast and cable time.
The One Laptop per Child Foundation, created in 2005, is a spinoff from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and started producing the XO laptop late last year at a manufacturing cost per machine of less than $200.
© Copyright (c) The Journal
-------------------------
Here's a link to the commercial:
|
|
|
Post by mikev on Dec 28, 2008 20:32:18 GMT -5
Imagine if there wasn't some psycho bastard born and this could have been a real message.
|
|
|
Post by sayne on Dec 28, 2008 21:13:54 GMT -5
I know it's a good cause, but I think it's too much of a hokey "Forrest Gump" stunt. It didn't make me go "Golly, Wow!" I didn't think it was particularly poignant, either. But, that's just me.
|
|
|
Post by Steve Marinucci on Dec 28, 2008 21:25:38 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Dec 28, 2008 23:36:40 GMT -5
LOL! That voice sounds like the John character from tribute band Liverpool Legends which I saw last night in Merrillville, Indiana at the Star Theatre.
|
|
|
Post by mikev on Dec 29, 2008 10:30:42 GMT -5
My vote would have been to use the cartoon voice of John from the old Rankin Bass cartoons...
C'mon...it sounded just like him!
;D ;D ;D
|
|
|
Post by winstonoboogie on Dec 29, 2008 20:45:51 GMT -5
My vote would have been to use the cartoon voice of John from the old Rankin Bass cartoons... C'mon...it sounded just like him! ;D ;D ;D "Pip pip and cheerio, chaps!" ;D
|
|
|
Post by OldFred on Dec 29, 2008 23:25:24 GMT -5
My vote would have been to use the cartoon voice of John from the old Rankin Bass cartoons... C'mon...it sounded just like him! ;D ;D ;D While Paul Frees was the voice of John (and George) in the Beatles cartoons, the cartoons were actually produced by Al Brodax for King Features Productions, not Rankin Bass, though Paul Frees did do a lot of voice work for Rankin Bass as well, especially many of their Christmas specials. Love the story in Mitch Axelrod's Beatletoons book where Paul Frees went to dinner with the animators of the Beatles' cartoon in London, and because he was doing the voice of John and George in the cartoons, he started to talk in a fake British accent, which embarrased those around the table.
|
|
|
Post by mikev on Dec 30, 2008 7:54:44 GMT -5
my guess is some of the same animators though...see Frosty the Snowman.
As a huge fan of Popeye, I loved when Sweet Pea made a cameo on the cartoon show (King Features).
|
|
|
Post by OldFred on Dec 30, 2008 8:51:48 GMT -5
my guess is some of the same animators though...see Frosty the Snowman. As a huge fan of Popeye, I loved when Sweet Pea made a cameo on the cartoon show (King Features). Don't think so. Rankin Bass and King Features had totally different animation styles. Mitch Axelrod's Beatletoons book and the books on the making of the Yellow Submarine feature reveal that the artists for the Beatles cartoons were based in London. The Rankin Bass artists were pretty much American. Plus Rankin Bass did a lot of puppet animation alongside traditional animation. They used a lot of the same voice talent, and maybe some of the animation was farmed out to the same studios in Australia, but the styles are unique to both RB and KF. Swee' Pea's cameo in a Beatles cartoon stems from the fact that Popeye is a Kings Features character.
|
|
|
Post by mikev on Dec 30, 2008 11:06:43 GMT -5
I always thought all of that stiff cheapo cartooning of the sixties was all done in the same studios. Disney all but disappeared during the decade-okay there was Pooh and Jungle Book-but even that stuff was kind of stiff.
Post Paramount Popeye was by far the worst, and the beginning of the Bluto vs. Brutus debacle.
|
|
|
Post by OldFred on Dec 30, 2008 18:16:07 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by jimc on Dec 30, 2008 23:24:53 GMT -5
I know it's a good cause, but I think it's too much of a hokey "Forrest Gump" stunt. It didn't make me go "Golly, Wow!" I didn't think it was particularly poignant, either. But, that's just me. I know I'm in the minority (my students at the time made this clear!), but I do not like Forrest Gump. I thought it trivialized history. I think there might have been a solid movie in there somewhere, but the cinematic "name dropping" turned me off. But I know a lot of people love the film. That said, I haven't watched this Lennon commercial yet. Don't know that I will, actually.
|
|
|
Post by vectisfabber on Dec 31, 2008 4:25:46 GMT -5
I loathe Forrest Gump. As a Brit I found it cloying, sickly, and selling an overly naive message (that if you're good at heart then the American Dream means that you can overcome any obstacle) which is simply not borne out by any halfway realistic examination of reality. Tom Hanks' performance was kicked into the shadows by Ernie Hudson's performance as a similarly afflicted character in Hand That Rocks The Cradle (although I do have to give Hanks credit for the short sequence where, when he's first introduced to his son, he asks Annie if the boy is slow or normal - his recognition of his handicap, and his fear that he may have passed it on, is truly heartbreaking, and wonderfully well conveyed by Hanks).
|
|
|
Post by vectisfabber on Dec 31, 2008 4:29:03 GMT -5
Hanna Barbera were one of the main culprits in bringing limited animation (and endless movement repeat cycles) to TV, starting with Huckleberry Hound.
Those boxsets of the old Paramount Popeye cartoons are wonderful. It's good to see them remastered: they were fabulously original short films, and to have all 100-odd available is great.
|
|
|
Post by sexysadie on Dec 31, 2008 4:47:57 GMT -5
I don't see the point of putting words in a dead person's mouth. Any dead person's mouth. It's a curiosity that initially packs a big emotional wallop, but ultimately, it's just creepy. And who decides what is a "good cause?" Yoko okayed Ben and Jerry's putting out a "whirled peace" ice cream. So why not use John's image and "voice" to hawk that product?
The door has now been opened, and I wish it never had been. I don't trust Yoko to draw the line on "using" John for whatever purpose she deems worthy. It's reassuring that a lot of fans do find it objectionable, a bit surprising that many don't. It's a cop-out to say it "depends on the cause." You either like seeing John resurrected for promotional purposes, or you don't.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Dec 31, 2008 9:18:05 GMT -5
I've just watched it for the first time, and I basically agree with you. I don't know -- I always hate the typically imitated and exaggerated "John Lennon Nasal Voice", but it's such a fleeting little commercial, it didn't even have much time there to resonate with me one way or the other. I'm not a fan of playing around with film images and making it appear as if a person is actually saying this or that... But is it a big deal? Not really. Like you said, it could have been uglier, and this is done for all sorts of celebrities, not only John. I know the temptation to blast Yoko for this, but I really do think that Yoko considers what John himself might have felt under such circumstances. I really do believe she knew John well enough to take him into consideration and not do anything that he felt would shame him. I honestly believe that, in Yoko's mind, she feels she's doing something honorable to keep John's "spirit and message" alive for all time. And for what it's worth, I also loathed FORREST GUMP.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Dec 31, 2008 9:24:52 GMT -5
It's a cop-out to say it "depends on the cause." You either like seeing John resurrected for promotional purposes, or you don't. It's no cop-out as far as I'm concerned. I wouldn't mind John "speaking from beyond" on behalf of a good cause, say the likes of which his wife knows he very well would have done anyway had he been alive.. but I wouldn't want him selling tires, or anything.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Dec 31, 2008 12:21:46 GMT -5
I have come to strongly hate this commercial: (1) Never, ever put new words in dead people's mouths; (2) Who knows what causes John would espouse today; (3) Why is giving urchins free laptops necessarily a good thing: do we need more teens and pre-teens on smutty chatrooms talking sex and exchanging nude pictures of each other, disseminating Columbine-style threats or gang symbols, and/or downloading porn? (4) The fake voice is terrible and makes John sound like a weenie!
I hope this kind of thing stops. Let the legacy of the dead stand or fall based upon their own actual words and actions done in their lifetime.
|
|
|
Post by sayne on Dec 31, 2008 15:15:40 GMT -5
. . . And who decides what is a "good cause?" . . . I do and did. Peace - good; War - bad; healthy children - good; dying children - bad; dog fighting - bad; pet adoption - good; selfishness - bad; compassion - good. Can Yoko speak for John? All I can say is that my wife knows me well enough to know which causes I would support - even if we never discussed the particular organization. You, know . . . it's a love thing.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Jan 1, 2009 8:45:13 GMT -5
. . . And who decides what is a "good cause?" . . . I do and did. Peace - good; War - bad; healthy children - good; dying children - bad; dog fighting - bad; pet adoption - good; selfishness - bad; compassion - good. Tender veal - Good!
|
|
|
Post by winstonoboogie on Jan 1, 2009 10:45:35 GMT -5
I do and did. Peace - good; War - bad; healthy children - good; dying children - bad; dog fighting - bad; pet adoption - good; selfishness - bad; compassion - good. Tender veal - Good! ;D
|
|
|
Post by sayne on Jan 1, 2009 10:54:05 GMT -5
Oh, you kid. That was a good one. You are soooo cheeky! ;D
|
|
|
Post by sexysadie on Jan 3, 2009 6:19:02 GMT -5
So, sayne, what about an ice cream called "whirled peace?"
Peace is good; ice cream is good. VERY good, in fact. John selling ice cream from beyond the grave?
NOT so good.
C'mon--did I hoist you on your own petard?
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Jan 3, 2009 6:53:21 GMT -5
I used to eat Ben & Jerry's all the time (not anymore, due to trying to improve my health) and I never saw "Whirled Peace" among the choices like "Cherry Garcia" or "Marcia, Marcia, Marshmallow". Never even knew about it until being informed of it on this board. Is it really that prominent? Is there any mention of John or his image on the packaging, or just those words "Whirled Peace"?
|
|
|
Post by sayne on Jan 3, 2009 11:10:57 GMT -5
So, sayne, what about an ice cream called "whirled peace?" Peace is good; ice cream is good. VERY good, in fact. John selling ice cream from beyond the grave? NOT so good. C'mon--did I hoist you on your own petard? Good one. Actually, I got rid of my petard a long time ago. It was a blast, but I decided if I was going to bomb in the bedroom I should do it on my own. How do you feel about Liverpool John Lennon Airport and using the motto "Above us only sky"?
|
|
|
Post by OldFred on Jan 5, 2009 8:26:01 GMT -5
Finally saw the ad. While the intentions are good, I also don't think it's a good idea to put words in John's mouth. They might just as well as have Elvis doing it. If they're going to use a Beatle, Paul or Ringo would have been better spokespersons for the ad. And it might be a good idea for every child to have a laptop, but I think it's more beneficial for them to have food, shelter and proper healthcare. Laptops just aren't that nutritional.
|
|
|
Post by sexysadie on Jan 5, 2009 8:53:15 GMT -5
How do you know, Fred? Have you ever eaten one? Joe, it's even worse than I thought. Imagine a peaceful world full of peaceful ice cream. John's name is not only on the carton, there is a whole interactive site. John's self-portrait is everywhere //oo\\. "Upload your message of (whirled) peace." Read about the Bed-In for Peace. Read about "the project." I'm beginning to worry that there really is a method to Yoko's madness. www.benjerry.com/imagine/It's an honor to have infrastructure named for you. Highways, bridges, airports, schools and other buildings--limited opportunities, lots of possible honorees. Nothing wrong with John Lennon Airport, people don't pick what airport to use based on its name. They don't have a fake John doing commercials for the airport, do they? On the other hand, there would be plenty wrong with John Lennon Airlines--using John's name to attract customers and part them from their money. An interesting idea, though. All the music channels would feature Lennon CD's, the movie "Imagine" would play on a continuous loop, John's artwork would adorn the tray tables, Yoko's the barf bags. And all the stewards and stewardesses would look like they just stepped off the cover of Two Virgins. Good times. And please, give Ringo his wish and name a luggage carousel for him. Peace and love.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Jan 5, 2009 9:03:20 GMT -5
Joe, it's even worse than I thought. Imagine a peaceful world full of peaceful ice cream. John's name is not only on the carton, there is a whole interactive site. John's self-portrait is everywhere //oo\\. "Upload your message of (whirled) peace." Read about the Bed-In for Peace. Read about "the project." I'm beginning to worry that there really is a method to Yoko's madness. www.benjerry.com/imagine/Well, I can't say that John's image is everywhere, because I don't see it much even when I'm not looking for it (as I do with, say, Elvis). But I'd say it would be up to John to decide if it's an honor to him, or if there's nothing wrong with John Lennon Airport.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Jan 5, 2009 9:28:24 GMT -5
Here is the container to the ice cream, note John's cartoon image and signature.
|
|