John Lennon in new commercial

John Lennon in new commercial (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

came4U -> John Lennon in new commercial (12/27/2008 6:29:16 AM)
Yoko made him a puppet...creepy. news story:http://www.citynews.ca/news/news_30455.aspx view commercial: http://www.youtube.com/olpc

colouredin -> RE: John Lennon in new commercial (12/28/2008 6:54:18 AM)
Hmm I dont think its creepy and i dont think yoko has made him a puppet either, I think this is just the kind of thing that he would have been for had he not been murdered. Look at the rosta of charities that he supported and patroned. I dont think its weird or odd I actually think its clever, they are firstly showing what computers can do, using his image for something positive and supporting a good cause. Yep id say it was rather good actually.

SteelofUtah -> RE: John Lennon in new commercial (12/28/2008 7:27:14 AM)
Sorry I gotta go with Creepy. Support the Charity, that is fine, make him say something that he never said Creepy. Yoko, has been doing a LOT of this lately. I was a Fan, not a Beatle Mania Fan but I like the band and even I think this is in Bad Taste. Let Lennon Be. The Man did more than enough good while he was alive and through his foundation continues to do good. Yoko has allowed his image to be More Commercialized than the man EVER woud have been okay with and she has been called out on it numerous times. She refuses to do any interview with anyone on live television unless they agree to a 10 Million Dollar Misrepresentation Clause meaning that should she do a Live Interview and they ask a question that she has NOT agreed to answer they will pay her 10 Million. She is a Businesswoman. I can respect that, I just cannot respect the ammount of money that she has made off of John Lennon AFTER his Death. Steel

PlayfulOne -> RE: John Lennon in new commercial (12/28/2008 8:24:51 AM)
This is certainly something he would have supported if he were alive so I don't see any problems with it. When Nike used "Revolution" for a show commercial that was sickening. K

Raechard -> RE: John Lennon in new commercial (12/28/2008 8:55:17 AM)
This is kind of typical in terms of how the memory of dead people is exploited. I'm not sure the perfect gift is a laptop there are probably other causes he may support more. For all we know he may have evolved into a corporate type that hated charity and despised children. No one can say for sure what a dead person may or may not have thought about anything. When has someone held consistent opinions throughout their life or held back from being corrupted by this influence or that. When people die they are stuck in this unrealistic phase of consistency in people’s memories when in reality they would have changed for sure if still alive today.

LadyPact -> RE: John Lennon in new commercial (12/28/2008 9:05:27 AM)
I'm not saying that it's not a good cause, but I don't see the need to use Lennon's image to promote it. If Ono wanted to do so, she could have appeared in the ads herself. I think it's in very bad taste.

came4U -> RE: John Lennon in new commercial (12/28/2008 9:08:07 AM)
quote: This is certainly something he would have supported if he were alive so I don't see any problems with it. Who is she to decide that? Besides, technology bahhh, if he had been stuffed and put on a ventriloquist's lap, it would be in the same bad taste.

marie2 -> RE: John Lennon in new commercial (12/28/2008 9:09:20 AM)
It's a little bit creepy, yes, but I don't really think it's a bad thing. If he left Yoko in charge of his estate, in the event of his death, then he consented to the possibility that she would be making decisions like this. It looks like it's for a good cause. I seriously doubt that Yoko Ono needs to do anything like this in order to generate income for herself. Looks like a positive way for his legacy to live on, and she probably feels that he would have been ok with it. Seems like something he would have done if he was alive.

SteelofUtah -> RE: John Lennon in new commercial (12/28/2008 9:21:04 AM)
marie2, I have heard this before so I will ask you what I have asked them. Exactly what do you think she does that has allowed her to live the life she has now become accustomed to? Considering most of the Projects she works on she doesn't get paid for? Basically what are you under the impression that Yoko Ono actually does for Money? Steel

came4U -> RE: John Lennon in new commercial (12/28/2008 9:35:46 AM)
quote: Exactly what do you think she does that has allowed her to live the life she has now become accustomed to? She obviously sucked a mean cock.

PlayfulOne -> RE: John Lennon in new commercial (12/28/2008 10:26:09 AM)
Stell, This was not done for money. They were given permission to use it. Many of the things yoiu might find distasteful about how his image and recordings were used were no by Yoko. Case in piint, when revolution was used for the Nike commerical Michael Jackson is the one who made that choice. Teh Beetles were a prime example for artist abuot hanging on to their rights. K

SteelofUtah -> RE: John Lennon in new commercial (12/28/2008 10:36:44 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PlayfulOne Stell, This was not done for money. They were given permission to use it. Many of the things yoiu might find distasteful about how his image and recordings were used were no by Yoko. Case in piint, when revolution was used for the Nike commerical Michael Jackson is the one who made that choice. Teh Beetles were a prime example for artist abuot hanging on to their rights. K OH YOU ARE MISTAKEN. Yoko Ono was paid for John's Likness to be used and she is EVERY TIME! Don't fool yourself either, the company that the likness is benifiting is ALSO making a Profit. So that you know MOST foundations, NonProfit, and Not For Profits Make something usually for those who run it. I know this first hand. Opportunity Village in Las Vegas works for helping those with Mental Retardation, Little Miss Kitty Jeans to Jewels helps these individuals when the Parents are no longer able to care for them or Pass on when these people are in thier 40 or 50. The people who run this outfit live EXTREAMLY WELL. I have been to their HOMES So don't fool yourself, Lennon is a Profitable connection. As for the Revolution being used in the Nike Commercial I am not sure but you may want to talk to Michael Jackson about that as it was Him who owned the rights to the majority of thier songs and that is what paid for MUCH of NeverLand Ranch. John Lennon is a Trademark now and to use it you gotta Pay. Steel

LadyPact -> RE: John Lennon in new commercial (12/28/2008 10:44:49 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: marie2 It's a little bit creepy, yes, but I don't really think it's a bad thing. If he left Yoko in charge of his estate, in the event of his death, then he consented to the possibility that she would be making decisions like this. It looks like it's for a good cause. I seriously doubt that Yoko Ono needs to do anything like this in order to generate income for herself. Looks like a positive way for his legacy to live on, and she probably feels that he would have been ok with it. Seems like something he would have done if he was alive. I don't find the above to be correct. Lennon died in 1980. At that time, I highly doubt that Lennon thought of the possibility of his likeness being used in such a way, with computer generated words coming out of his mouth. Ono, I'm sure, has a good idea of how he would feel about helping children, and perhaps even a reasonable inkling on how he would feel about laptops. Creating words he never said or actions he never took, I'm a little sketchy on that one.

colouredin -> RE: John Lennon in new commercial (12/28/2008 10:58:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SteelofUtah Let Lennon Be. The Man did more than enough good while he was alive and through his foundation continues to do good. Yoko has allowed his image to be More Commercialized than the man EVER woud have been okay with and she has been called out on it numerous times. And who is to say he didnt want his image to be used for good causes? Wouldnt she be one of the best people to ask about what he wanted? He spent a large portion of his life supporting and working with charity. You know I actually love yoko ive seen some amazing pieces by her, interviews and the like she was very often misunderstood. I am sure that with this she has nothing but good intentions and sometimes isnt that enough? Is it hurting anyone? and who is to tell if he would have been doing this anyway? Isnt it better to use his image for this than to sell elton john records (sorry im thinking of another famous dead musicion)

marie2 -> RE: John Lennon in new commercial (12/28/2008 11:49:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SteelofUtah marie2, I have heard this before so I will ask you what I have asked them. Exactly what do you think she does that has allowed her to live the life she has now become accustomed to? Considering most of the Projects she works on she doesn't get paid for? Basically what are you under the impression that Yoko Ono actually does for Money? Steel I don't know if she was his sole beneficiary, and I'm not her accountant, Steel. I wouldn't know with any certainty of course, but I would imagine the millions upon millions he was worth when he died would have been enough for 10 kings to live high on the hog for the rest of their lives. LadyPact: I didn't mean he could have known or consented to any decisions specifically---ie...Yes Yoko if I ever die, you can make a computer animation of me to do blah blah blah. What I meant is when a person dies, and they have someone appointed in the case of their death, to do with their estate as they wish, it becomes that person's decision/s to go on to do whatever, as long as there's nothing illegal going on.

LookieNoNookie -> RE: John Lennon in new commercial (12/28/2008 3:40:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: came4U Yoko made him a puppet...creepy. news story:http://www.citynews.ca/news/news_30455.aspx view commercial: http://www.youtube.com/olpc It's not Lennon's voice.

came4U -> RE: John Lennon in new commercial (12/28/2008 4:22:27 PM)
quote: It's not Lennon's voice. lol of course it isn't his voice, thus he is the puppet and someone is the ventriliquist. Also, John was used similarly in the movie Forest Gump, don't tell me that was her being 'charitable' too. lol quote: when a person dies, and they have someone appointed in the case of their death, to do with their estate as they wish, it becomes that person's decision/s to go on to do whatever, as long as there's nothing illegal going on. It may be legal if she owns the rights to his old film shots but it is still creepy.

LookieNoNookie -> RE: John Lennon in new commercial (12/30/2008 5:08:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: came4U quote: It's not Lennon's voice. lol of course it isn't his voice, thus he is the puppet and someone is the ventriliquist. Also, John was used similarly in the movie Forest Gump, don't tell me that was her being 'charitable' too. lol quote: when a person dies, and they have someone appointed in the case of their death, to do with their estate as they wish, it becomes that person's decision/s to go on to do whatever, as long as there's nothing illegal going on. It may be legal if she owns the rights to his old film shots but it is still creepy. I guess I should have said....they could have done a vastly better job with his voice.

BlackPhx -> RE: John Lennon in new commercial (12/30/2008 6:26:43 AM)
The voice was an impersonator, synced to his lip movement. As for whether Lennon would have supported the message, that would remain an unknown, but he did support people working together, bringing knowledge to disadvantaged children and many other charities, dedicated to feeding, providing health care and education in poorer parts of the world. Far more likely this than a Nike commercial. As to the creep factor after watching Humphrey Bogart, audrey Hepburn and others in commercials long after their deaths, it doesn't bother me. At the rate CGI is advancing we may not need actual actors for very much longer. poenkitten

slaveboyforyou -> RE: John Lennon in new commercial (12/30/2008 6:59:24 AM)
I've seen used car lots use George Washinton's and Abe Lincoln's likeness on President's Day sales advertising. I don't see much of a difference using John Lennon. The guy was just a musician. I don't see where he did that much good for people. The SOB practically abandoned his first son; he didn't even put him in his will. Yoko can use his image to hock bubble gum for all I care. I don't think people would be as shocked if the wife of the guy that sung "Monster Mash" used his likeness in a commercial. What's the big deal?

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875