Valentine’s Day, a perfect opportunity to see Macs in action in one of the worst “chick-flick” comedies of recent history.
How to Lose a Man in 10 Days featured more iMacs and PowerBooks than an Apple Store on steroids, and for me, was one of the most redeeming aspects of the “razzie”-worthy film. I’m wondering now, just how much Apple contributes to films like this one. The formulas seem the same for this one, What Women Want, Kate and Leopold, You’ve Got Mail, and Sleepless in Seattle: Guy/Girl/Mac/Predictable ending.
Granted, most of these movies do occur in some sort of advertising or publication agency of some sort, so Macs look natural. But really now, movies are expensive, and difficult to finance. It would be cheaper and easier to find a plain boxy beige monitor to throw into a set than a pretty iMac with OS X installed, wouldn’t you think?
Something’s coming out of Cupertino in the form of production funding for some very cliche movies. I’m not complaining, I just wonder how much Apple shells out, because if they want, I’ll produce any movie under the sun and let any Mac ever made be on set, as long as they’re paying for it. When I get suckered into these snoozefests I appreciate seeing the Macs.
It gives me something to admire while getting nauseous from ugly dogs and awful jokes concerning female tendencies that drive men up the wall. It seems like a lot more than product placement. Its almost as if Apple is investing in these soggy flicks. Anybody have any information on the subject?
