Product placement is often seen as the bane of modern films, particularly those created in a studio setting. There is simply nothing more distracting or irritating than trying to immerse yourself in a film and then suddenly having a company logo appear on screen; how can one maintain that level of immersion when this immediately makes the viewer realize they just paid to watch a commercial that some film production executives thought the audience would either ignore or simply not pay attention to. It makes the film feel cheap.

Unfortunately, films are expensive and oftentimes 20 seconds of product placement are necessary to give the viewer the two hours of an entertaining, emotionally and immersive journey. 

The Best Use of Product Placement

One of the most irritating aspects of product placement is when its blatantly in a film for no reason whatsoever. This only amplifies the irritation for the viewer as the brand is essentially imposing itself on the audience. However, sometimes, the branding is cleverly intertwined with the story in a subtle manner. "The Secret Life of Walter Mitty" attempts to integrate product placement into the narrative through the constant use of eHarmony, but this falls into the trap of being overly indulgent and annoying. However, Stephen Frears' "Philomena" manages a more delicate balance of using branding as a small plot device that moves the story along without distracting.

In the second half of the movie, Steve Coogan's Martin Sixsmith sits in a bar completely defeated. Philomena (Judi Dench) has already found out that her long-lost son has died and thinks that he never had any interest in ever meeting her. Sixsmith sits at a bar to drink some Guinness. Suddenly, he notes something and starts to stare intently at the glass of beer in front of him. No one knows what he is looking at, but something is particularly interesting on the beer bottle. The film cuts to a close-up of the logo, but Sixsmith says nothing and runs out of the bar. This not only creates a tremendous amount of curiosity, but keeps the Guinness logo at the forefront of the viewers' thoughts. What was so interesting about that logo? Is it another product placement ploy? The viewer quickly dispels the second question because the rest of the film up to that point has been so compelling and interesting. There is simply no way that Frears and company would have ruined their movie with some marketing scheme. And true to form, they don't. In the following scene, Sixsmith reveals that the Guinness logo has an Irish harp that Philomena's dead son was wearing in a widely published photograph.

In this instance, the product placement is perceptible, but the fact that it becomes a major twist in the story makes it memorable without being a nuisance.

The Worst Use of Product Placement

There were a number of major films that utilized product placement in the worst of ways. "Walter Mitty" makes excessive use of many different products, while "Man of Steel" is extremely blatant in how it showcases it logos (was that wide shot of the destroyed Sears really necessary?). However, no film did it worse than the god-awful "World War Z."

Imagine this. Our hero, Brad Pitt, has just found the ultimate weapon to take down the destructive zombies. It turns out that he needs to inject himself with a fatal disease in order to test his hypothesis. So he does exactly this and winds up finding out that he was right the whole time. So now he needs to escape because otherwise he is going to die. He has to get through a maze of zombies and back to the laboratory in order to have any hopes of saving himself.

I'm guessing that none of the scientists like any other brands of soft drinks? (Paramount Pictures)

So what does he do in this most tenuous of circumstances? He stops for a quick breather to drink a can of Pepsi. In the middle of the film's climax when the tension is supposed to be at its highest. Why? Because there just happens to be a vending machined filled with Pepsis in the middle of this high security lab. So I take it that the scientists ONLY drink Pepsi? But the biggest disgrace of all is what follows. Pitt slams the machine and knocks out all the cans. The zombies respond to this and run in the direction of the noise while Pitt runs away from them. What you end up with is a blatant commercial. If Pepsi Co. isolates this 45 second sequence, then they would get arguably their best Pepsi commercial to date. Just think about how Pepsi could spin it. Zombies, who normally eat humans, are all running past this person just to get to their coveted Pepsi cans. What does it suggest? That even zombies find Pepsi more appealing that their average meal.

Just thinking about this and the fact that it becomes a major moment in the climax of the movie is quite revolting and outrageous to say the least.

There you have it. One film which actually makes the viewer think twice about the company's logo without creating an irritating viewing experience and another which blatantly imposes a TV Spot in the middle of the film's climax.

What do you think were the best and worst uses of product placement in films in 2013?