Perfect. Earlier today I made a simple request to put an end to all these questions about Norm Coleman’s campaign:
Look, this is easy, let’s see some outtakes. I think it would be fun in general, maybe even endearing. A nice shot of Laurie and Norm laughing with each other when she flubs her line
And, to their immense credit, the Coleman campaign, or at least someone with access to their campaign materials, has made available outtakes from the commercial (available here; I’d post them directly, but they’re not YouTube).
As I said in my earlier post: “Odds are that this is all just some funky camera work, but it just looks too awkward not to take note and ask some questions.” And in another: “as I said yesterday, this is probably all the result of some odd camera angle and fancy lighting. Still, questions, I think, were to be expected.” Are people going to give us flak for asking questions about this ad, absolutely. But everyone I talked to who saw the ad, Republican and Democrat alike, thought at best the ad looked off. So, we asked our questions and the Coleman campaign responded. For that I give them the most sincere credit.
Loading ...
Of course the real questions are: Are those Minnesota grown apples on his kitchen island? Is that a low flow conservation friendly sink faucet? Is that granite countertop from a St. Cloud quarry or imported? Seriously, who drinks orange juice with coffee? And is that fair trade or caribou coffee? Let’s hope they play this alot, but cause with the economy in the crapper, the last thing most Minnesotans want to see is how wonderfully perfect their unused kitchen looks.
Why does this clarify anything. If you can green screen in a wife, why not a hair dresser?
The facts remain, Laurie is brightly lit from above, and yet unlike her slightly lit “husband” she casts no shadow or reflection on the granite counter top.
Show an outtake of the two chatting during the shoot, and I will call it simply an awkward ad. Until then, I still think it stinks.
Matt, no offense - but you sure rolled over on that one. Two cheesy pictures on a Karl Rove, Jr.’s website, and you’re accepting it as gospel??!?
While I didn’t and haven’t questioned the authenticity, I sure won’t accept those two pictures as proof.
But, hey - if you want to, good on ya. Just don’t criticise those that don’t.
(Cross posted at MDE)
First off, I’m a Dem operative. I’ve forgotten about more campaigns than I am willing to admit. After looking at the site visits of the various blogs (both D and R) and their comment counts, it seems like far more people MIGHT see this comment here than on other blogs. It is a counsel and warning to my fellow DFL’ers.
It’s very, very, very, very clear to me that none of these so called “video experts” have ever been on a real campaign commercial shoot with the full complement of grips, gaffes, craft services, etc.
Yeah, the lighting and angles make the final product look a little funky, but the point of the ad was to feature Mrs. Coleman talking about Norm. And in a very creative, fun way, Howell & Co., put together a fun little ad that grabs your eye better than the standard “spouse talks about elected spouse” ad.
The more important point is that Scott is doing Norm’s media (again.) This is not new news, and it was something that a number of DFL insiders and politicos were whispering about for months. Scott is about the meanest, nastiest, and BEST GOP ad man around. He comes from a long line of the most skilled GOP operatives, and his ads, regardless of your opinions on their veracity, appropriateness, tastefulness, WORK.
Any campaign operative who has ever put big dollars on television will tell you that you are going to put the spot on that will move the most numbers (of voters) either towards you or far, far away from your opponent. That’s Scott’s job, and he will do it with glee.
I’ve watched with some interest as other DFL blogs have immediately claimed that the new DraftCiresi folks “obviously are a Thune style GOP operation.” Whether they are or not (and my sources report they are legitimate DFLers), for the sake of Wellstone’s seat, please, please pull your heads out of the ground and realize what is about to go down here in Minnesota. At least save yourself some face by realizing what is about to hit not only Al but so many others.
Alas, this, like so many other warnings will be ignored, attacked, and I’ll be painted as “actually a GOPer”…voices crying in the wilderness and all…
MN DFL was warned. It looks like this race will run it’s course with the candidates they have (well, with the possible addition of Ventura).
For all of the so-called Wellstone accolytes, it’s a crying shame you’ve let this happen to Paul’s seat. Once you’re over your shock (not the general electorate, they have a lot more common sense than you give them credit for) of the results on the evening of November 4th, I hope you all do some soul searching and remember that you could have re-taken Paul’s seat with the right candidate.
I’ll give you two last things and be gone. The link below to an article from the HuffPo about Scott. Read it, and then think about who did this: Narrated his own books.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/max-blumenthal/a-chat-with-republican-ra_b_32734.html
(P.S. - Do you really think they’ve taken their hardest and best swings at Al this early or that they’re afraid of him? These guys are smoking cigars, sipping scotch, and smiling.)
Oh, but where’s the happy smiling picture of the husband and wife talking about this fabulous new ad? These pictures, like the Coleman statement, reflect the least possible proof. It’s just a weird ad. Weird.
Anybody know anybody in the commercial business in Dallas, for small sum of money I’m certain there is a grip or production assistant who could clear this up.
Note that with all the talented commercial people in the Twin Cities, they went to Dallas for the work. Sort of puts the lie to Norms interest in the local economy don’t you think? And for all his crying about being an independent check out who his commercial ad house did other ads for… Bush seems to be quite popular with them. Every one of the political commercials on the site are Republicans… so it is hard to decide if they are lying about the Colemans being in the same room. Especially because if they weren’t this ad shop is in deep trouble for the bad product.
huh? you bought it on those clips? Brother. I can pull better off a photoshop tutorial.
And I don’t know the DP, but they spiked the lighting, or the art director does drugs, heavily.
I tried to post a comment over on MDE (posted a couple earlier today) only to get this error messag:Sorry, but your comment has been flagged by the spam filter running on this blog: this might be an error, in which case all apologies. Your comment will be presented to the blog admin who will be able to restore it immediately.
“This is what I tried to post to MDE, and I don’t see it as out-of-line. Do you?
___________
“Still no evidence of interaction in the “outtake.” Nothing to indicate that the same editing technique on the commercial wasn’t used on the outtake.
“Is there another camera angle, or a different light set up that would make it appear that they are in the same shot? Any interaction between Norm and Laurie?
“Of course, if anyone believed they had a real marriage in the first place, no one would ever have asked the question in the first place.
“This doesn’t prove they were in the same room, which doesn’t matter anyway. It also doesn’t prove the marriage is real — in fact, we’ve seen no evidence it is.”
___________________________
MnPublius, gotta agree with TwoPutt here — the outtakes proved nothing, if they can even be called outtakes. No acknowledgement that the other person is in the room, same weird lighting/angle. This story shouldn’t be dead.
I don’t have an opinion on the veracity of the commercial.
It is still the second suckiest political ad I have seen (second only to the new Al green screen commercial) Yuk.
Wow. WHO CARES!?
This is one of the most idiotic “controversies” in recent memory. There are thousands of things Coleman can and should be called out on and this is what the blogs are busy with?
I expect this type of garbage from the right, but it’s disappointing to see it coming from the left as well.
Okay, so MDE has removed my other posts on this matter. One just questioning the commercial, the other asking whether the sensitivity of the Coleman campaign was due to the perception that Norm might have a Larry Craig problem or was it a Newt Gingrich problem (he cheated on his wife while calling for Clinton’s impeachment over the Lewinski scandal). Then I said neither of them would matter anyway, its just the perception of a coverup.
I see much, much worse written daily about Democrats, so not sure why my messages are deleted. Perhaps there is more to my suggestion above. I don’t think either of those two scenarios above disqualify someone from being a U.S. Senator, but MDE seems unusually sensitive about this type of suggestions.
MNPublius, I think you should ask video experts to look at the “outtakes” to see if they think, as I suspect, they are as easily faked as the commercial. Even the sliding coffee cup is such a lightning fast cut and doesn’t look natural. Other angles and lighting setups must exist UNLESS, they locked down the cameras to shoot at two different times and composite. I don’t necessarily think they were shot in two locations — just at two different times, possibly in the same location with a locked down camera. The lack of any hint of interaction between the two is strange. If they indeed are only together for his career, perhaps she wouldn’t be at the same place at the same time.
The fact that the campaign responded, calling bloggers names, tends to indicate you hit a weak spot. MDE’s deletion of e-mails (others are probably affected too) indicates there may be some collusion between the campaign and MDE.
Obama says, “They bring a knife, we bring a gun.” The left needs to get over its knee jerk reaction to admit they were in error. I don’t think the commercial controversy is ended with the few seconds of an “outtake” provided … in fact, it lends fuel to the fire that something is indeed rotten.
Björnkram, it goes to honesty. Had they said it was composited, no story. If they said they were together for the shoot and they were, no problem. If they were not, and said they were (especially with the bombastic language in the denial) it is a legitimate story.
I’m sick of losing over the Republicans pulling Democrats through the dirt. The public is not tuned in enough to see what’s happening. And every minute the Republicans spend on defense is a minute less they have to spend on offense.
Would be nice to live in a world where everyone would judge on interests more than character traits, but we are not there right now, and the Republicans keep trying to smear Franken. I don’t love Franken and don’t always appreciate his humor, but I think he would make a much better Senator and don’t want to see him beaten by the crap MDE spews.
DemAnon:
Sorry I can’t play along with your martyr game. I don’t care whether or not you are a Dem, but a campaign operative does represent their party on political blogs. Keep your comments limited to the actual discussion. It doesn’t matter which side you’re playing for; it just makes us all the more wary of you for needing to say that you play for one or the other.
Matt, exactly what is it in the outtakes that makes you think this is any more real than what originally thought. If anything, these “outakes” make it even more suspicious.