GM paid $2 million to have a Solstice blown up

[wildcat]

Did you see what Peter DeLorenzo wrote in his March 22nd AutoExtremist?

He gave a "negative arrow" to Pontiac and GM, stating "Word on the studio lots in Hollywood is that GM paid the producers of 'Mission Impossible III' $2 million for the 'privilege' of having a Pontiac Solstice blown to smithereens in a scene in the upcoming summer blockbuster - this after every other car maker turned them down cold. Now, that's what we call March Madness."

Please tell me GM didn't waste $2 million on this. (Especially when Toyota would gladly blow up a Pontiac for free - ha-ha!)

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

GM marketing at it's best!!!!

I liken it to those commercials where the ONE guy is having to share the office with a bunch of monkeys.

Same concept.

[VenSeattle]

Will that Solstice be counted as a fleet sale?

[Chazman]

Will that Solstice be counted as a fleet sale?

Good one.

[Guest Josh]

[Bimmer325]

Shouldn't Mission Impossible III be paying Pontiac $20,490 to blow up a Solstice?

[Guest Josh]

Shouldn't Mission Impossible III be paying Pontiac $20,490 to blow up a Solstice?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Don't forget dealer mark-up.

[Nick]

It is pretty sad that GM has to pay people to blow up their cars...

[SilvaChris1]

Blowing up a GM vehicle is no easy task though. Lol.

Maybe it'll just take 2 million dollars worth of TNT.

In reality, maybe the car will get some awesome publicity in the film, maybe the main car that gets driven around in a chase of some sort. I just hope it doesn't end up being some random, barely even in the movie, side of the road, exploding car.

Edited March 22, 2006 by SilvaChris1

[Guest Josh]

Blowing up a GM vehicle is no easy task though. Lol.

Maybe it'll just take 2 million dollars worth

In reality, maybe the car will get some awesome publicity in the film, maybe the main car that gets driven around in a chase of some sort. I just hope it doesn't end up being some random, barely even in the movie, side of the road, exploding car.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The car is already selling at a loss to the General. Why sink another $2,000,000 into it for the simple act of "publicity."

Speaking as an owner of the Solstice. The car has enough going for it that it does not need a spot in a "B" rated over featured Tom Cruise movie.

It's a waste of money. They should have spent the $2,000,000 on something more constructive.

How much did GM spend on the Matrix "placements?" I feel that investment (obviously) was far more important than a vehicle that is lucky to see 30,000 units produced annually.

Just stupid.

[Nick]

Yea, in the Matrix: Reloaded, wasn't nearly every single vehicle on the freeway chase scene (minus the CV's, semi's and Ducati's and a few scattered cars perhaps) a GM vehicle?

[Guest Josh]

It was the primary placement of the CTS and Escalade that I'm referring to.

I'm sorry but I help manage a store. When I see somebody come to me and say "can we sell this phone, and this case, at this price" I can't help but sit back and see what the benefits are.

People will say it's different from an auto company to a major telecomm business but I don't think it is.

You either know good business sense or you don't.

[Nick]

It was the primary placement of the CTS and Escalade that I'm referring to.

Oh yea, those were the obvious ones anyways (and can't forget the firebird either, of course, I guess that doesn't really count). But I just happened to notice, most of the cars you see on the freeway are primarily GM. I remember seeing GM vehicles (like an olds and a tahoe for example) getting creamed in the movie.

[pow]

Oh yea, those were the obvious ones anyways (and can't forget the firebird either, of course, I guess that doesn't really count). But I just happened to notice, most of the cars you see on the freeway are primarily GM. I remember seeing GM vehicles (like an olds and a tahoe for example) getting creamed in the movie.

I believe the entire freeway was built for the sole purpose of that chase. And, yes, every car on that freeway was a GM car, including the Aurora that ____ landed on. Off the freeway, there was a E32 7-series that split in half.

[Cadillacfan]

It's obvious that a lot of you don't know how the movie business works.

Guys, companies do this all the time. You just don't hear about it as much.

Whenever you see product placement or some sort of brand name item in a movie,television show, or a music video, it's not because the producers paid to have it shown in the movie, it's the other way around.

Companies like Motorola, Apple, GM, and Toyota (to name a few) pay movie studios to have their products showcased especially in huge blockbusters like the new Mission Impossible movie.

The reason: guaranteed viewership

Would you rather have GM waste billions of dollars on television commercials in a time when things like TiVO, DVDs, and internet file sharing are allowing people to completely skip the commercial break?

Or would you rather have GM spend a cool 2 million to showcase a hot vehicle that is guaranteed to be seen by hundreds of millions of people in a big summer movie?

Hmm... tough decision there.

Even though Tom Cruise is nut-job and everyone knows it, he still draws in a huge audience. Mission Impossible III will be one of the biggest movies of the year and you don't think GM should spend a little money (yes 2 million is a small amount for advertising) for some airtime?

Maybe that's why you guys aren't in the advertising biz.

[toesuf94]

when you consider that a years worth of car shows cost the general close to $50 Million just for the booth space, electricity and carpeting - not the cars folks - just the space for the privilidge of showing the cars! Then they have to sell the cars at a deep discount due to the damage attained by the discerning public ( anyone here ever see somebody pull a piece of plastic trim off of a car at a car show? ) So $2 Million to showcase a product in a movie - not at all that bad. Seems a shame to me to waste a good car on something as stupid as a Tom Cruise movie - let's just hope it was a preproduction car or a Captured Fleet car that was already ready to be disposed of.

[Newbiewar]

how much did GM pay to get the Cadillac Cien in Islands?

[zbad1]

It's obvious that a lot of you don't know how the movie business works.

Guys, companies do this all the time.  You just don't hear about it as much.

Whenever you see product placement or some sort of brand name item in a movie,television show, or a music video, it's not because the producers paid to have it shown in the movie, it's the other way around.

Companies like Motorola, Apple, GM, and Toyota (to name a few) pay movie studios to have their products showcased especially in huge blockbusters like the new Mission Impossible movie.

The reason: guaranteed viewership

Would you rather have GM waste billions of dollars on television commercials in a time when things like TiVO, DVDs, and internet file sharing are allowing people to completely skip the commercial break?

Or would you rather have GM spend a cool 2 million to showcase a hot vehicle that is guaranteed to be seen by hundreds of millions of people in a big summer movie?

Hmm... tough decision there.

Even though Tom Cruise is nut-job and everyone knows it, he still draws in a huge audience.  Mission Impossible III will be one of the biggest movies of the year and you don't think GM should spend a little money (yes 2 million is a small amount for advertising) for some airtime?

Maybe that's why you guys aren't in the advertising biz.

Thank you. Now I don't have to type this. Also, Chrysler paid nearly $20M for it's placements in The Island. (cool movie. too bad for chrysler, the "must-have" vehicle in the film was a Caddy, not a dodge....)

[azulSKY]

......fleet Solstice? Who rent's a Solstice?

And I agree with zbad1, this is a smart move actually. Think of it like BMW or Aston putting their vehicles in a Bond movie. And so what if it gets blown up? People are going to remember an explosion more than if we just saw a Solstice parked on the street in a movie, like an "extra," or a background prop.

Mazda used the RX-8 in X-Men 2, and I'm sure they paid for that, not the studio.

Chrysler HEAVILY promoted the 300C and the fact that appeared latest Harrison Ford movie Firewall. I saw more commericals for the car being in the movie than I did for Harrison Ford being it.

So let's not jump the gun on GM because they did this.

Now, if they decide to blow up a fleet of Solstices........then we'll talk. :AH-HA_wink:

Edited March 22, 2006 by azulSKY

[atomicrooster73]

the producers wanted a Saturn Sky but refused to pay a price premium like everyone else. LOL. Different kind of company my ass

[jbartley]

I believe the entire freeway was built for the sole purpose of that chase. And, yes, every car on that freeway was a GM car, including the Aurora that ____ landed on. Off the freeway, there was a E32 7-series that split in half.

Kind of a "watch out bmw, escalade will cut you in half" moment. haha

[sciguy_0504]

How long is the Solstice shown? 2 minutes? 2 seconds? If a "bad guy" drove it around the entire movie and it gets blown up at the end, I am fine with it. However, if it just gets blown up randomly, then no. The $2 million could have gone into investing in a better interior.

[El Scorcho]

I believe the entire freeway was built for the sole purpose of that chase. And, yes, every car on that freeway was a GM car, including the Aurora that ____ landed on. Off the freeway, there was a E32 7-series that split in half.

It was, and they weren't. If you look closely (I did because I noticed they were nearly all GMs), you'll find at least one early-90s Taurus, and of course the Bimmer. Maybe a couple more, too, but the point is there were a ton of GMs.

[the_yellow_dart]

Bad Boys II was also mostly GM... and also mostly crap. Coincidence?

[turbo200]

Bad Boys II was also mostly GM... and also mostly crap. Coincidence? 

MI:3 will be mostly crap too, what does that say about the Solstice? Edited March 22, 2006 by turbo200

[I hope GMRULES again]

It depends on how much the Solstice is seen before its blown up. $2 million divided by 20K each (at least) = 100 cars. The question is will this movie convince 101 people to buy a Solstice, if it does its worth it.

[wiserocz]

The fact that you are talking about that scene as rediculas as it sounds makes the money well spent. If only this were 1979 all over again and we had another smokey and Bandit.....and Pontiac had a firebird.

[Flybrian]

Bad Boys II was also mostly GM... and also mostly crap. Coincidence? 

That chase scene made the entire movie worth it. Tell me it wasn't awesome seeing a 3700 lbs LeSabre being dragged with a chain and a Park Avenue doing cartwheels?

[FAPTurbo]

All this talk of product placement makes me wonder just how much Ford payed the producers of the new Bond movie, "Casino Royale" to have the "Blonde Bond" drive... I'm not kidding here... a Ford Mondeo. (A Ford Contour to us in the colonies).

Yep, he'll still have it packed with plenty of gadgets and he will use it to pick up the girls, but he will be doing it in a family vehicle...

(Apparently the actor has already sustained a lot of injuries in the movie including the loss of two teeth... oh and he is willing to do full frontal nudity... Looks like this is the Bond movie we all ought to miss...)

[KillFort]

There has been an autoextremist update concerning the matter:

Publisher's Note: We have an updated confirmation (6:00PM EST) from General Motors that GM did not pay the producers of "MI-3" for placement of the Solstice. We stand corrected. - PMD

[the_yellow_dart]

That chase scene made the entire movie worth it. Tell me it wasn't awesome seeing a 3700 lbs LeSabre being dragged with a chain and a Park Avenue doing cartwheels?

Ya, that was cool, and they did make the CTS look pretty good later on.

[Angry Dad]

I've been all over the site and can't find anything remotely close to GM paying for Solstice placement.

Is this a false alarm?

[sciguy_0504]

There has been an autoextremist update concerning the matter:

Publisher's Note: We have an updated confirmation (6:00PM EST) from General Motors that GM did not pay the producers of "MI-3" for placement of the Solstice. We stand corrected. - PMD

What an idiot.

[Cadillacfan]

How long is the Solstice shown?  2 minutes?  2 seconds?  If a "bad guy" drove it around the entire movie and it gets blown up at the end, I am fine with it.  However, if it just gets blown up randomly, then no.  The $2 million could have gone into investing in a better interior.

$2 million is not a lot of money. There is no way 2 million dollars can make the interior of the solstice better. Hundreds of millions of dollars could. 2 million dollars is pocket change.

Come on people. How many times do I have to say that?

Edited March 23, 2006 by Cadillacfan

[wildcat]

Has the Pontiac Solstice / Mission Impossible III item been removed from the autoextremist website? But here's something which has been added:

"Editor's Note: What started out as a lighthearted conversation between two colleagues at lunch has escalated into a minor firestorm. Rumors were making the rounds last week that The Autoextremist himself was on the short list of candidates for a drastically revamped board of directors in a post-Rick Wagoner GM. When asked for clarification, The Autoextremist had this to say: 'It was a joke - at first. But now several people have come forward saying that I'm exactly what the GM board needs. I'll leave it at that.' As one high-profile individual put it (he must remain nameless for the time being): 'The guy has a deep knowledge of the business that's brimming with insight, perspective and experience. They could do much worse.' - JJP"

[Sixty8panther]

Message to those members who own Toyotas & Hondas: I will gladly blow up your car for free... depending on the car I might evern cover all my travel expenses and buy you a dinner afterwards so we can talk about your future GM car purchase. :wink:

[Guest Josh]

What an idiot.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

BURN HIM AT THE STAKE!!!!! HE LIED TO US ALL!!!!

/sarcasm!

[I hope GMRULES again]

More proof not to believe everything you read.

[ehaase]

"Editor's Note: What started out as a lighthearted conversation between two colleagues at lunch has escalated into a minor firestorm. Rumors were making the rounds last week that The Autoextremist himself was on the short list of candidates for a drastically revamped board of directors in a post-Rick Wagoner GM. When asked for clarification, The Autoextremist had this to say: 'It was a joke - at first. But now several people have come forward saying that I'm exactly what the GM board needs. I'll leave it at that.' As one high-profile individual put it (he must remain nameless for the time being): 'The guy has a deep knowledge of the business that's brimming with insight, perspective and experience. They could do much worse.' - JJP"

What an ego. Any of the teenagers that post at C&G would do a better job on the GM Board than Peter DeLorenzo.

[FAPTurbo]

What an ego. Any of the teenagers that post at C&G would do a better job on the GM Board than Peter DeLorenzo.

I appreciate your confidence in people my age.

[ehaase]

I appreciate your confidence in people my age. 

I don't have confidence in people your age. I just have less confidence in Peter DeLorenzo.

[FAPTurbo]

I don't have confidence in people your age. I just have less confidence in Peter DeLorenzo.

Yeah, I don't have much confidence in people my age anyway.

We're the generation that gave you all Paris Hilton.... (sorry)

[Newbiewar]

umm... i just watched the movie and i saw no solstice...

[thegriffon]

They did blow up a Lamborghini—that would have been expensive.

[Newbiewar]

They did blow up a Lamborghini—that would have been expensive.

and hopefully GM didnt pay for that...

[thegriffon]

and hopefully GM didnt pay for that... 

I wonder how many they had to blow up to get the right shot.

[Newbiewar]

I wonder how many they had to blow up to get the right shot.

i'm sure they had lots of cameras rolling... just to make sure it only took one...

[w00t_man]

I never saw the Solstice either.

[w00t_man]

All this talk of product placement makes me wonder just how much Ford payed the producers of the new Bond movie, "Casino Royale" to have the "Blonde Bond" drive... I'm not kidding here... a Ford Mondeo. (A Ford Contour to us in the colonies).

Yep, he'll still have it packed with plenty of gadgets and he will use it to pick up the girls, but he will be doing it in a family vehicle...

(Apparently the actor has already sustained a lot of injuries in the movie including the loss of two teeth... oh and he is willing to do full frontal nudity... Looks like this is the Bond movie we all ought to miss...)

A. He's driving an Aston Marton DBS (new one) and an old DB5 as well. I havent heard anything about a Mondeo.

B. Daniel Craig still has all his teeth, there will be no full frontal (he only said he would be willing if it were called fo), he CAN drive a stick shift (which is one better than Brosnan), and most of the rumors about him are BS. Stick with facts, dude.