Cell phone cinematography

By Iain MacMillan June 16th, 2006
In Brand innovation · New technologies · Product launch · Stories

Nokia N90
Originally uploaded by Imacca.

There’s been a plethora of stories recently about brands ’supporting’ and providing a home for the talents of amateur movie-makers, be it with camcorders or mobiles. I’m always slightly suspicious. Brands usually insist the content gets uploaded to special microsites on their own destination sites - and often that they will ensure they own any of the content for subsequent marketing purposes. There are always better, more open sites with stronger communities that this stuff should go on.

Finding a way for such brands to effectively partner with the Googles, YouTubes and MySpaces of the world is the way forward - without ruining the openness of the service, but while creating additional value for the consumer.

Meanwhile, a bunch of Italian film directors have embraced the world of mobile movie making without, it seems, big brand backing.

They’ve created a 93-minute feature film entirely on their N90. Entitled Nuovi Comizi D’Amore (”New Love Meetings”), the directors’ idea was to do a modern version of the 1965 documentary Comizi D’Amore by Pier Paolo Pasolini. I’m sure Nokia aren’t complaining about a little more exposure for their new line of handsets.

1 response so far ↓

  • 1 Mat // Jun 16, 2006 at 4:44 pm

    Interestingly, there’s a kind of corollary to this at Read/Write Web: Netscape (who knew they were still around, eh? Let alone pulling in 0.8bn page views…) is taking on Digg with its own community news service.

    Digg’s CEO responds:

    I think introducing paid editors into a community site may end up being as problematic as the ‘hive mind’ that it aims to prevent - because it introduces potential bias and favoritism.

    This is doubly, triply true for brand-led communities. Non-media companies find it very hard indeed to allow people to say what they like - issues of compliance and reponsibility are too important.

    Definitions of communities (see: Jake McKee, or Carol Anne Ogdin) focus on concepts like “relationships”, “self-determination”, and “object” or “purpose.” Brands find it hard to

    In these terms, all brands can do is offer tools or support; we probably can’t even set the initial conditions. As such, involvement must - ipso facto be more akin to sponsorship, and less like seine-netting.

    What do you think?