JUST BREATHE is used in Katherine Heigl love comedy

myra

Citizen Zack wrote:

TunnelThroughDenial wrote:

Since when is a movie a commercial? Isn't film considered art?

Apparently only on a selective basis.

Don't get me wrong, to each his own when it comes to enjoying a movie or not.

Yet IMO, some films are innovative, when others simply apply old recipes to bring the larger audiences in theaters.

That's where I'd draw the line.

But then again, I admit to being very selective when it comes to films (and music ) and I don't mean to start controversy here.

Parksy

No disrespect meant... this is just my opinion but...

WHO GIVES A CRAP?!?!

It's their music! They should be able to do whatever they want with it.

My goodness. People are way too obsessed with "selling out" nowadays.

I can understand it if PJ were a bunch of dooshbags but they're still a band that care deeply about their fans and they're still a band who contribute, donate, and unlike most bands and celebrities actually spend their own time to raise awareness for SO MANY causes and charities.

Let's give them a break.

People thought Pearl Jam sold out in 1998 when Last Kiss came out... not realizing that they didn't make a cent off the song.. it all went to Kosovo relief.

Citizen Zack

myra wrote:

Citizen Zack wrote:

TunnelThroughDenial wrote:

Since when is a movie a commercial? Isn't film considered art?

Apparently only on a selective basis.

Don't get me wrong, to each his own when it comes to enjoying a movie or not.

Yet IMO, some films are innovative, when others simply apply old recipes to bring the larger audiences in theaters.

That's where I'd draw the line.

But then again, I admit to being very selective when it comes to films (and music ) and I don't mean to start controversy here.

No controversy at all. Just friendly discussion.

I hear what you and the OP are saying - this is just my take on it: The argument seems to be 'it's not cool if PJ uses their song in certain films. They should be selective in where they allow their music to be used.' The issue I'm taking with that stance is that it typically derives from the timeless argument that using their music in any format that is 'corporate' is 'selling out'. So I think that the original issue is that they shouldn't use their songs in and make money off of corporate/evil Hollywood productions . But then it becomes selective to just romantic comedies in order to sustain an argument. People don't seem to mind Singles. Or Ed's Into The Wild soundtrack AND tours supporting that music which probably netted him a bit of cash. Did people care when Ledbetter was used in a Friends episode? But then as this thread progressed, it appeared to me that the problem seemed to be that it was Just Breathe and a romantic comedy in particular. Are people railing against Eat, Pray, Love because it includes not only Better Days, but Long Road as well? Seems like it's a personal beef with the song and genre. But my point is this - it's all the same. It's their music, it's being used Hollywood to support all kinds of films. When approached by someone who wants to use a song in their film, are they supposed to get a rundown of the genre, plot, and cast - then decide that it's okay for this movie, but not for that movie? What's the difference. It's flattering that someone thinks their music fits a movie (visual art - whether you like the film or not). It's all corporate. And that does not mean they've sold out.

People treated the Target deal like it was the worst betrayal of all time. They were with SONY before! They've got to distribute music somehow. Give them a break. And being a corporation doesn't make you evil by default. I'm sure there are some decent ones. People seem to like ESPN - a major company. Do a search for posts that talk about PJ songs/references found on ESPN. There's dozens and every post is delighted that they heard a PJ song on SportsCenter. So they're okay with that, but not with a song in a tv show or movie. I don't get it?

cippociappo

MJ91 wrote:

. i dont mind if the song is used in a great film like "Into the Wild" but not this film. is this too much to ask?

Personal taste!
Into the Wild is a great movie according to YOU... I didn't like it.
But I didn't bash Eddie for having written the soundtrack :P

nicksmith33

There's a good article in the most recent Rolling Stone written by U2's manager about this type of stuff...not relating to PJ but just how the piracy thing has basically changed the industry so much that everybody has to do things a little differently than they would have thought of in the past in order to make a living at it. As for the overall idea of art, sure, I see a lot of meaning in the music personally and love it dearly, but at the same time the band still has a goal of making money and a living at this, so you got to do what you got to do.
We all do the same thing.

LikeAnOcean

MJ91 wrote:

TunnelThroughDenial wrote:

Since when is a movie a commercial? Isn't film considered art?

since when is katherine heigl romantic comedy art? i dont think anyone who involved in this film thought they were making a art film.

its like saying both goo goo dolls and pearl jam are making art. sorry if there are goo goo dolls fan here. and ive never heard goo goo dolls seriously so i can be totally wrong. but to me, pearl jam music has meanings. i just hope they choose meaningful films.

Art is all subjective. Sure the movie may be a redundant, predictable, romantic comedy, but it's still an art form. It is designed to invoke feeling and emotion in the audience. Whether it has a meaning for you or not doesn't matter. It will for many.

It's not like Just Breathe was used to sell us air freshener or something.

justam

Just Breathe is a good love song.
I'd rather hear a good love song with a beautiful voice in a movie than a bad one.
Wouldn't you?! :?

youngster

Here's a list of movies PJ songs or Ed Vedder songs have been in. Sorry if I miss a few.

Singles
Judgement Night
Big Fish
Into the WIld
Eat Pray Love
Reign Over Me
I Am Sam
Dead Man Walking

And now this movie

Why would anyone be surprised to hear a PJ song in a movie?

mookeywrench

youngster wrote:

Here's a list of movies PJ songs or Ed Vedder songs have been in. Sorry if I miss a few.

Singles
Judgement Night
Big Fish
Into the WIld
Eat Pray Love
Reign Over Me
I Am Sam
Dead Man Walking

And now this movie

Why would anyone be surprised to hear a PJ song in a movie?

Not to mention songs in
Friends (the most watched Friends at that)
The Castle
and an entire Law and Order episode dedicated to their music

myra

Citizen Zack wrote:

No controversy at all. Just friendly discussion.

I hear what you and the OP are saying - this is just my take on it: The argument seems to be 'it's not cool if PJ uses their song in certain films. They should be selective in where they allow their music to be used.' The issue I'm taking with that stance is that it typically derives from the timeless argument that using their music in any format that is 'corporate' is 'selling out'. So I think that the original issue is that they shouldn't use their songs in and make money off of corporate/evil Hollywood productions . But then it becomes selective to just romantic comedies in order to sustain an argument. People don't seem to mind Singles. Or Ed's Into The Wild soundtrack AND tours supporting that music which probably netted him a bit of cash. Did people care when Ledbetter was used in a Friends episode? But then as this thread progressed, it appeared to me that the problem seemed to be that it was Just Breathe and a romantic comedy in particular. Are people railing against Eat, Pray, Love because it includes not only Better Days, but Long Road as well? Seems like it's a personal beef with the song and genre. But my point is this - it's all the same. It's their music, it's being used Hollywood to support all kinds of films. When approached by someone who wants to use a song in their film, are they supposed to get a rundown of the genre, plot, and cast - then decide that it's okay for this movie, but not for that movie? What's the difference. It's flattering that someone thinks their music fits a movie (visual art - whether you like the film or not). It's all corporate. And that does not mean they've sold out.

People treated the Target deal like it was the worst betrayal of all time. They were with SONY before! They've got to distribute music somehow. Give them a break. And being a corporation doesn't make you evil by default. I'm sure there are some decent ones. People seem to like ESPN - a major company. Do a search for posts that talk about PJ songs/references found on ESPN. There's dozens and every post is delighted that they heard a PJ song on SportsCenter. So they're okay with that, but not with a song in a tv show or movie. I don't get it?

To me, the argument was on a much lower level actually. I'm not talking selling out or anything. I'm surely not talking betrayal as well... God ! I'm not questionning their policy about their music appearing on movies. As I understood it, the OP's original intent there was to say they were disappointed in hearing a PJ song in that movie. That's very personal. But I can understand that. Because we relate to their songs in very personal ways. And I would probably be disappointed to hear a PJ song in a romantic comedy as well, if I thought the movie didn't live up to their standards.
Mind you, if they hadn't been with Sony, it might have taken me longer to 'meet' their music or it might have been more difficult for me to find their releases, who knows ? Thus it's not a matter of being with such or such major company. It's just a matter of a fan relationship with their music. That's very irrational. Yet that's a feeling I can understand.

keyser_soze

MJ91 wrote:

Just went to a screening of Katherine Heigl and Josh Duhamel romantic comedy, "LIFE as We Know It". and there is nothing wrong with this film. it is as you would expect... however, in the middle of the film, JUST BREATHE was used....i dont know how everyone feels but i m not able to stand this. suddenly eddie vedder songs or pearl jam songs are used in hollywood films which i dont see why they said yes to??? they dont care anymore? or they need money????? how u think? u dont mind either???

Well you went to this movie. Is it okay for you to support the movie and then unsuitable for pearl jam to be involved? Double standards methinks. I'm not ragging on you but I do think this is a pertinent point.

igotid88

mookeywrench wrote:

youngster wrote:

Here's a list of movies PJ songs or Ed Vedder songs have been in. Sorry if I miss a few.

Singles
Judgement Night
Big Fish
Into the WIld
Eat Pray Love
Reign Over Me
I Am Sam
Dead Man Walking

And now this movie

Why would anyone be surprised to hear a PJ song in a movie?

Not to mention songs in
Friends (the most watched Friends at that)
The Castle
and an entire Law and Order episode dedicated to their music

you mean Cold Case. And it's just Castle

MJ91

i still dont understand why everyone talks like all the movies and tvs are the same.
they are not the same. just like you like pearl jam but not the other meaningless bands.....
but like someone pointed out, its very subjective. and you might love the meaningless other bands as much as you love pearl jam.

it was very interesting to know that not so many PJ fans do not care about it.
so, thank you everyone!

Newch91

igotid88 wrote:

mookeywrench wrote:

youngster wrote:

Here's a list of movies PJ songs or Ed Vedder songs have been in. Sorry if I miss a few.

Singles
Judgement Night
Big Fish
Into the WIld
Eat Pray Love
Reign Over Me
I Am Sam
Dead Man Walking

And now this movie

Why would anyone be surprised to hear a PJ song in a movie?

Not to mention songs in
Friends (the most watched Friends at that)
The Castle
and an entire Law and Order episode dedicated to their music

you mean Cold Case. And it's just Castle

And FlashFoward.

Newch91

I wonder how people felt when they heard Yellow Ledbetter on the Friends finale?

Indifference71

Honestly, who gives a fuck??

Cradles Broken Glass

I completely understand. The same thing happened with Beatles' songs. They never wanted any of their music to be used for stuff like commercials, but Michael Jackson got a hold of them and they have been used in more commercials than I can count off the top of my head right now. I know it's not the exact same thing because PJ is allowing theirs to be used, I'm not sure of their reasoning for this,who knows? I see it two ways, one being a "sell-out" like they fought many years to avoid the other being smart business sense and it exposes people to great music in the sea of crap that usually infest most soundtracks to popular movies.

Newch91

Cradles Broken Glass wrote:

I completely understand. The same thing happened with Beatles' songs. They never wanted any of their music to be used for stuff like commercials, but Michael Jackson got a hold of them and they have been used in more commercials than I can count off the top of my head right now. I know it's not the exact same thing because PJ is allowing theirs to be used, I'm not sure of their reasoning for this,who knows? I see it two ways, one being a "sell-out" like they fought many years to avoid the other being smart business sense and it exposes people to great music in the sea of crap that usually infest most soundtracks to popular movies.

I hope someone gets a hold of The Beatles' songs. I'm happy they're not on iTunes.

ledvedderman

We're missing what is important here. That is that I would plow Kathering Heigl to pieces.

hopethatuchoke

Do you remember when the 10 Club would actually tell us when their music would appear somewhere? I'm wondering why that stopped.