First Kiss Flip-Flop

Why is everyone so outraged that the First Kiss video turned out to be an ad and cast people in the industry rather than “real random people off the street”?

What is it about filmmakers and photographers that makes them unreal people? I assume people who are outraged about this imagine bankers and lawyers, and grocery store cashiers and call center people, looking haggard after a day of work, gloriously un-made-up and in shitty wrinkled clothes.

…. When is the last time there was public uproar about a filmmaker casting people who were too pretty and too styled in their film? What makes this project different?

What is it about something being an ad that suddenly negates it as art? Someone still had a good idea, still did a casting, and a shoot, and a pretty nice edit. Just because a brand is involved and someone is getting paid for it means it’s not a good creative idea? Should an artist always be starving? (Obviously this is a bigger topic very close to my own heart.)

Please, don’t throw up your hands in disgust and walk away when you hear the video you shared and aww-ed at “turned out to be an ad!” I want to know what made you have that response. Why is it heart-melting one second and disgusting the next?

Question the simplistic execution. Criticise the flat production. Or the edit. Or even the fact that it’s an ad — but please not blindly.

I’d love to hear your thoughts.

Advertisements

About Varia

Traveler, writer.
This entry was posted in Work and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to First Kiss Flip-Flop

  1. lapeddi says:

    I’m not sure everyone’s disappointment with the revelation it was an ad has to do with the whole art/money issue. I’m thinking people liked it because they imagined those kisses sparked some electricity, connections, feelings of some kind and therefore allow the idea that “love” (or at least the seeds of it) can be born super easily and that the strangers you walk the streets with can more likely bring you love than harm. some faith in humanity restored kind of thing. what drove everyone nuts is not strictly the fact that it was an ad, but the fact that the people where actors, which means there was no spark happening, it was just a “job”. therefore goodbye illusion that you can go out, make out with a stranger and bam, your soulmate’s on your side.

    this is just my idea, though, and i might very well be completely wrong about where the disappointment came from. the whole art and money thing is however another topic worth discussing and i think i would agree with you on most things.

    • Varia says:

      Yeah that definitely makes sense. I understand that people feel that the emotion of it is cheapened, but the thing is that a) they weren’t all actors and b) even if they had been, they’re still people kissing for the first time, and there’s still some interesting stuff going on in terms of chemistry and spark. This again comes back to the idea of actors etc not being “real people”.

      I think what people are forgetting here is that any time you get two people into a situation like this, it’s never going to be 100% “real”. And the flip side – just because there’s casting and staging involved doesn’t necessarily mean it’s completely fake.

      Also just my opinion 🙂

  2. Yavor says:

    Within procrastination…

    Hi,
    I’d agree with the first comment (lapeddi), and want to add something to it.
    Unfortunately, in may societies today intimacy is considered to be a sort of quasi-weakness. The new unique and all-achieving person has to be storng and self-sufficient, in order to be able to work and consume more. However, this sort of forcefully inculturated identity is..incomplete, and its disingenious nature is (at least implicitly) felt by most of us.
    So there comes a nice video, showing a radical intimacy act, which challenges such rather lonesome identity and at the same time adheres to our basic needs of satisfaction and belonging. And we love it. Naturally, showing how fake it was, sparked some resistance, but I think such resistance is more an expression of disappointment from the current state of our dominant social identity, than form the fact, that the video is staged.

    Cheers, all above can be also said in a not so wise-ass manner, but I didn’t bother.

  3. Bill says:

    I guess my question is to what extent it was scripted. It didn’t strike me as scripted, and much of the interaction struck me as honest: the fumbling, the shyness, the clumsiness, feeling tentative, the ‘oh my that wasn’t bad at all’ afterwards.

    What was the ad selling? Mouthwash?

Talk to me

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s