BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Underground > Radio & Music >

Ownership of a music video

  
 
haus of fraser
12:47 / 13.10.04
The Robbie williams had an interesting point about music videos in it...
to quote fly...

I guess I did base my interpretation of 'Something Beautiful' on the video, and on that first line, and it seems I was mistaken. Nonetheless, I tend to assume that videos get artist approval and you can this hold a bad video against someone.

and thought it would be an interesting topic for debate in general?

I work in the industry and can say 100% unless you are a Robbie williams, U2 etc you have very little say in your video.
The process starts as a Marketing pitch - the record label has a commisioner who's job it is to over see the production of the video- choosing a director, delivery etc...

80% of treatments are largely an open book ie. here's the track- directors what do you want to do with it we have x thousand pounds/ dollars? The biggest specifications are normally- we do/ don't want performance/ or it has to be shot in x location- sometimes the band will have an idea- but unless the idea is great and the artist is pulling in the bucks you can be sure they are often just told- you will be at this studio at such and such a date to shoot your video....

5 - 10 directors then get invited to pitch, writing a treatment to show how they would make the video, then a director is chosen to shoot the video. An artist may have a degree of say in what happens- but I would assume that the Robbie/ Popstars video took place because Robbie wasn't available/ and it was a cany marketing ploy...

Don't forget these artists are seen as brand- whether Robbie Williams himself liked that video- his audience one would assume from the market research is made up of pop idol fans rather than the type of people that love Michel Gondry/ Chris Cunningham.

I guess the point I'm trying to get a debate started about is who has creative ownership of a pop video? Even directors that aren't your extreme innovators like Gondry have a style that is adopted by certain bands...
You want a bling R n B/ Hip hop video you go to Jake Nava or Little x or Paul Hunter, if you want head fuck cool how d'ya do that? you go to Michel Gondry, or Jonathan Glazer, you want pop video you go to Phil Griffin or Matthew Rolston, you want controversy you go to Jonas Akerlund...

Its not just the big names that take pride in their work its all directors what ever the band- its a creative job...

Now who owns the video 'credit'- for example White Stripes - Dead Leaves, and Fell in Love with a girl- both directed by Michel Gondry but add a dimension to the white stripes that was never there before- If you watch the Gondry DVD in the interview with The White stripes they thought they were getting a different director but they went with it cos its what the marketing people said to do...

so who's video is it?
 
 
All Acting Regiment
20:41 / 14.10.04
I think it depends on what the band bring to the video, and what the director brings to the band. In fact both. I really have to say there seems to be no definitive answer to this question.
 
 
Our Lady Has Left the Building
15:22 / 20.10.04
I think sometimes the band goes to a director and says "We want to do this" and sometimes it's more "what do you think we should do?". I mean, Chris Cunningham was no one compared to Madge when he did her 'Frozen' video, but it was his idea and she went for it, whereas I think the Pet Shop Boys have most of the time a vague idea for where they want their videos to go and the director develops it.
 
 
haus of fraser
19:37 / 27.10.04
The recent Pet shop boys 'Miracles' video was directed by Howard 'blackhole sun' Greenhalgh- a lot of his recent output has been using a new digital technique that involves capturing literally thousands of frames per second (FPS) then slowing it back to 25fps(standard film speed) giving an incredibly detailed slowmo effect - something that until very very recently was imposible- and has used Greenhalgh as a pioneer testing the new technology. I know this would have been in Greenhalgh's pitch for the job- rather than at the psb's request as the technology wasn't in use before the video was made- and unlikely that they would even know about it?

How are we to know whether greenhalgh had more control on the pet shop boys video (he has directed a number of others) than say Chris Cunningham had with Madonna (she is notoriously controlling over her output)- or do we put Chris cunningham, Michel Gondry etc on a pedestal because they have become more familiar names- and we assume that because of that they are more in control of their output than less familiar names.

Here's a link I found showing some directors treaments- non of whom are cunningham or gondry- and yes some of the videos may be poor in comparison but they are still the work of the director rather than the band- its their ideas and explanation to the band of what they would like to do...

I guess its weird but in many ways a band 'acts' in a directors video, although outside of a lucky few directors the creative vision is credited to the band- even on kids tv they credit a video alongside the strength of the song- but the director is often seen as secondary (if at all)- if a video wins an award at the brits/ mtv- its the band who collect not the director...

little buggers
 
  
Add Your Reply