Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Something happenedFollow

#77 Feb 08 2012 at 6:09 AM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,381 posts
I find it hard to beleive Clint Eastwood wasn't involved in the production of the commercial given he doesn't do a movie anymore unless he's part of the production team.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#78 Feb 08 2012 at 7:26 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,595 posts
gbaji wrote:

Tell him that they want him to do a commercial about a classic American industry getting back on its feet through hard work and effort, and he'll be all over it. Give him a script with a tie in to football (halftime in America) and keep the context as one of America fighting to improve itself, and he'll be ecstatic.

Toss in socialist images (you saw the union workers with their signs, right?) and the right music and cuts in the monologue, and you could have slapped a "Give Obama a second term" text box at the bottom and no one would have questioned whether this was a political ad. The did what the left always does: Twist words and ideas that have strong meaning to many Americans into something that most Americans don't support at all. Eastwood was a victim of that process IMO.


Wow gbaji, you've gone over the edge on this one. Your argument that the left twists words and arguments (and that they always do this) is based on one premise only - that Eastwood was duped.

Eastwood is a smarter guy than you. Maybe it's you that's been duped.







Edited, Feb 8th 2012 3:44pm by Elinda
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#79 Feb 08 2012 at 8:06 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Uglysasquatch wrote:
I find it hard to beleive Clint Eastwood wasn't involved in the production of the commercial given he doesn't do a movie anymore unless he's part of the production team.

The production team used their liberal roofies on him Smiley: frown
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#80 Feb 08 2012 at 8:17 AM Rating: Good
******
49,896 posts
The only way to even begin to believe that Eastwood had no knowledge or insight of the production is to insist that he is a no-name C-List actor desperate for work.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#81 Feb 08 2012 at 12:01 PM Rating: Good
Unforkgettable
*****
13,251 posts
gbaji wrote:
This is where you slyly wink while thinking "I know I can't convince gbaji, cause he's on to it, but maybe other folks will believe me if I just lie big enough". You can't possibly with a straight face make that claim.
You can't possibly with a straight face think that anybody here gives you that much credit.

Edited, Feb 8th 2012 1:01pm by Spoonless
____________________________
Banh
#82 Feb 08 2012 at 12:15 PM Rating: Good
****
6,471 posts
Sir Spoonless wrote:
gbaji wrote:
This is where you slyly wink while thinking "I know I can't convince gbaji, cause he's on to it, but maybe other folks will believe me if I just lie big enough". You can't possibly with a straight face make that claim.
You can't possibly with a straight face think that anybody here gives you that much credit.


He can't possibly with a straight face think that this is proper grammar.

Edited, Feb 8th 2012 1:15pm by Eske
#83 Feb 08 2012 at 12:19 PM Rating: Good
******
49,896 posts
He accidentally the whole thing.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#84 Feb 08 2012 at 7:31 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,010 posts
Nadenu wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Smasharoo wrote:
It was a car commercial. Honestly.


This is where you slyly wink while thinking "I know I can't convince gbaji, cause he's on to it, but maybe other folks will believe me if I just lie big enough". You can't possibly with a straight face make that claim. There were no cars in the commercial.

Really?



They show the factory where the cars are being built. In the middle, they show a Ram truck. Toward the end, there's a row of Chryslers coming off the assembly line.


I'm sorry. I should have learned by now that you guys love to ignore context. There were no cars being advertised in the commercial. Therefore, it wasn't a car commercial.

Quote:
You didn't see the commercial, did you?


Yes, I did. WTF? I did watch the **** game.

Quote:
No, it's not about selling the cars.


So you agree that it's not a car commercial. Cause to be a car commercial, it would have to actually be trying to sell you a car.

Quote:
It's a parallel of how Chrysler and the US are at halftime and making a comeback. That's all.


Isn't that exactly what I said it was? And if it's a parallel of Chrysler and the US recovering, and Chrysler's recovery occurred as a result of a big government bailout, then isn't the commercial basically saying that big government bailouts are the way for America to come back? Isn't that what the commercial is advocating we do in the "second half"? I mean, think one step further and you've got it.


What do you think political ads are about? They associate positive things with the candidate (or agenda) you want to promote or negative things with those you want to oppose. Think hard. It's not about selling cars, and it's not even about selling the company. It uses the company's recovery as an example of how America can recover. The ad is about American Recovery. Not cars. And not car companies. It's about how America can/should move forward with recovery.

And the proposed method, while not spelled out in words in the ad itself, is the method used in Detroit. Ergo, the ad is promoting the policies connected with the Democrats agenda for victory in the "second half". People seriously can't see this? Or do people just choose not to? I mean, it's not even that subtle. Imagine the exact same ad with a "Re-elect Obama" text at the end instead of a list of brands. Would anyone not think that it was an effective ad for Obama?


Quote:
Also, my husband loved the commercial. Not because he thought it carried a political message, but because he has a man crush on Clint, like a lot of hetero men in this country.


It was a good commercial. Honestly, if you left out the specific mention of Detroit, it would have been a great non-partisan pro-America piece. By tying the proposed path forward to recovery with the path taken in Detroit, it makes it partisan and political. Even if Eastwood thinks it wasn't, it was. And it's what the audience sees that matters in this case.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#85 Feb 08 2012 at 7:52 PM Rating: Excellent
******
49,896 posts
gbaji wrote:
I should have learned by now that you guys love to ignore context.
Said like a true conspiracy theorist.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#86 Feb 08 2012 at 7:58 PM Rating: Good
Lunatic
******
30,084 posts

By tying the proposed path forward to recovery with the path taken in Detroit, it makes it partisan and political. Even if Eastwood thinks it wasn't, it was. And it's what the audience sees that matters in this case.


Partisan? Let me do the math here. Bush in office, government hands Chrysler $4b. Obama in office government hands Chrysler $1.5b.

I guess you're right. The commercial was what, 120 seconds? Let's round the $1.5b to $2b, since I don't want to confuse you too much.

GOP - 80 seconds of ad time.
DEM - 40 seconds of ad time.

I am ******* outraged. Clint was clearly in on it, that fascist GOP *******. Can we move the **** on? Fiat paid for most of the bail out. They thought this would sell cars. The US government has on controlling interest in Chrysler. Every Budweiser ad in the history of the world can be seen in context as a GOP ad. Football, itself, as a paramilitary game of aggression, an be seen as a GOP ad.

If you're ******* insane.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? ***. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#87 Feb 08 2012 at 8:05 PM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,244 posts
Jophiel wrote:
If you think that's "interesting", I envy the sense of childlike wonder that must accompany your every waking moment.


Have I mentioned lately how I adore your snark?

____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#88 Feb 08 2012 at 8:16 PM Rating: Excellent
Quote:
I'm sorry. I should have learned by now that you guys love to ignore context. There were no cars being advertised in the commercial. Therefore, it wasn't a car commercial.
You don't really understand advertising do you.
____________________________
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
#89 Feb 08 2012 at 8:24 PM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,244 posts
Half the time Super Bowl commercials don't even mention what product they're advertising. Maybe not so much this year, but pre-recession it was like a Mad Ave potlatch.

____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#90 Feb 08 2012 at 8:24 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
35,010 posts
Smasharoo wrote:

By tying the proposed path forward to recovery with the path taken in Detroit, it makes it partisan and political. Even if Eastwood thinks it wasn't, it was. And it's what the audience sees that matters in this case.


Partisan? Let me do the math here. Bush in office, government hands Chrysler $4b. Obama in office government hands Chrysler $1.5b.


Let's do different math:

Dems in control of Congress, TARP gets bailouts for car companies inserted in by Dems, opposed by GOP.

Obama takes white house and Dems gain more control of congress, Stimulus bills toss more money at the car companies.


You get that this is about party agenda, right?


If I were to ask this forum which party they associated with helping the auto industry recover and which party they associated with opposing that recovery, is there any question what the answer would be? I mean, there isn't really any confusion on this, is there? Conservatives overwhelmingly were opposed to the auto company bail outs. Liberals were overwhelmingly for them. There really isn't any question then which "side" benefits by this ad then, is there?
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#91 Feb 08 2012 at 8:25 PM Rating: Excellent
Gurue
*****
16,299 posts
Sir Xsarus wrote:
Quote:
I'm sorry. I should have learned by now that you guys love to ignore context. There were no cars being advertised in the commercial. Therefore, it wasn't a car commercial.
You don't really understand advertising do you.

Why stop at advertising?
#92 Feb 08 2012 at 8:26 PM Rating: Excellent
******
49,896 posts
gbaji wrote:
You get that this is about party agenda, right?
We get that your ranting is party agenda, yes.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#93 Feb 08 2012 at 8:28 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,010 posts
Sir Xsarus wrote:
Quote:
I'm sorry. I should have learned by now that you guys love to ignore context. There were no cars being advertised in the commercial. Therefore, it wasn't a car commercial.
You don't really understand advertising do you.


I'm not the one(s) pretending that there was no political message in that commercial.


Seriously. Replace the list of brands at the end of the ad with text saying "Re-elect Obama", and does anyone here think this isn't an effective political ad? Be honest. So does not putting those words there make it less effective? I'd argue it's just as effective, but a lot less obvious.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#94 Feb 08 2012 at 8:30 PM Rating: Excellent
Gurue
*****
16,299 posts
Honestly no. I never thought it was a political ad. I thought it was a patriotic ad.

You'll tell me I'm wrong, because you know better than me what I'm thinking, so... whatever.
#95 Feb 08 2012 at 8:33 PM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,244 posts
Nadenu wrote:
Honestly no. I never thought it was a political ad. I thought it was a patriotic ad.

You'll tell me I'm wrong, because you know better than me what I'm thinking, so... whatever.



Patriotism is political. And when liberals pretend to care about their country, it's hypocrisy and probably ***.

Come on, Nad. You know this stuff. Smiley: oyvey

____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#96 Feb 08 2012 at 8:34 PM Rating: Excellent
******
49,896 posts
So who wants to be the one to point out that when it's against Democrats, how the audience interprets it is more important than what the actual message and the producers of said message say, but when it's against Republicans its the message and the producers of said message that is most important to focus on?

I mean, the two arguments were barely a day apart.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#97 Feb 08 2012 at 8:38 PM Rating: Excellent
Gurue
*****
16,299 posts
I'm not going back over this whole thread, but was it mentioned that Chrysler ran the same ad last year, only it was with Eminem?
#98 Feb 08 2012 at 9:32 PM Rating: Excellent
My new goal is to get Samira to an above 5 karma score average.

There are probably more elegant ways to phrase that.

@Nads, Eminem -> Rap -> Black -> Obama. Jeez. I'm not sure how kenya and islam fit in though.

Edited, Feb 8th 2012 9:34pm by Xsarus
____________________________
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
#99 Feb 08 2012 at 9:57 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
35,010 posts
Nadenu wrote:
I'm not going back over this whole thread, but was it mentioned that Chrysler ran the same ad last year, only it was with Eminem?


Well, except that they actually highlighted a specific car (the 200), didn't make a clear correlation between the Detroit auto industry and America as a whole, and this one magically came up with the whole "It's halftime in America" during the election year which will determine if Obama gets a second term.

So yeah, it was the same ad! Smiley: rolleyes

Edited, Feb 8th 2012 7:58pm by gbaji
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#100 Feb 08 2012 at 10:01 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
35,010 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
So who wants to be the one to point out that when it's against Democrats, how the audience interprets it is more important than what the actual message and the producers of said message say, but when it's against Republicans its the message and the producers of said message that is most important to focus on?

I mean, the two arguments were barely a day apart.


Huh? Care to elaborate? And I think you got something backwards there.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#101 Feb 08 2012 at 10:04 PM Rating: Excellent
******
49,896 posts
gbaji wrote:
Huh? Care to elaborate?
Yeah, it is the lack of elaboration that is the problem.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 47 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (47)