Last night when I saw Norm Coleman’s newest TV ad the first thing that struck me is how odd Laurie Coleman’s placement in the ad looks. So, I posed a question: Does anyone else think this looks off? Well, the answer’s in, and it seems to be an overwhelming yes.
First up is the Big E over at MN Blue :
Check out the screen captures from the ad, the lighting is completely wrong. It sure looks like she wasn’t even in the room!
Then we have Joe Bodell at MN Campaign Report :
Lighting and reflections are one issue, but they were issues when we landed on the moon too. However, check out the angle in that shot — it looks like Mrs. Coleman is either embedded into the counter, or wasn’t actually in this shot, especially when you consider that the height difference between the two isn’t that big
Then there’s the Blue Man :
My only question, asked by colleagues at MnPublius and MnBlue as well, where was Laurie Coleman during this shoot? Was it taken in two places and edited together? What about the wedding ring shot 10 secs in?
And someone over at the GOP HQ or the Coleman campaign must be pretty upset about all this talk because their attack dog got sicced on MN blue this morning.
But the comments on the post are the best:
- Noah Kunin: The poor quality of the YouTube encoding makes it almost impossible to come to a full conclusion. I would say we should be able to see Laurie’s reflection (at least a bit of it) in the kitchen talble. Regardless the cut at :16 does seem screened by any reasonable analysis. Unless Laurie Coleman is now 9ft tall and/or Norm is 4 ft tall and/or their house is on an extreme slope. The perspective/angle is wrong at that point.
- Tim: It’s definitely a greenscreen , or "chroma key" as we say in the biz. At :16 the angle that she was shot at is too high and wide and she appears too small…unless she’s really about 3 feet tall and sitting on the kitchen island.
- MovieFan: I’ve checked with a couple people who work with film and video, including one who has done a lot of greenscreen work. Both felt the same thing: Laurie has been greenscreened in on this ad.
- Skyblue: oh, it’s definitely a composite. They missed the lighting and the camera angles. Oh, and yes, I’m a video guy with 30 years in the game .
Now, look, I have to agree with Noah on this one overall: there’s just no way to be sure given the quality of the YouTube clip . The Coleman campaign could clear this all up, and I’ll gladly post it , by publishing the full quality clip or some evidence of Laurie’s location. 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.
Loading ...
My wife and I saw this ad last nite. Our first reaction was that Laurie was not in the room.
This is no surprise is it? I’m not on ‘the inside’ so al I hear is rumors of rumors, but my understanding is that they have a show marriage, and she lives in LA.
Could/Would someone please explain why it matters? She’s clearly in front of a green screen. Maybe she was in LA or Saint Paul or Duluth or Russia for filming.
But again, why does that matter? I would be more concerned with the fact that there’s snow on the ground in the last few shots. Is that really the image of late June in Minnesota we want?
I thought it was funny when Norm went outside there was snow on the ground. Did they film parts of ads months ago and cookie cutter some parts together?
Ads like this in many campaigns are often created weeks or months before their release. And I ask again, and reflecting Arm, why does this matter?
It’s definitely a fake. I don’t think they were even trying to make it look real. It may be too much to ask for Laurie to head back to MN for a commercial shoot. But Norm and his campaign have done well fooling Minnesotans for the last few years, why would they give up their signature style.
If you want an honest answer, it matters because the Coleman campaign clearly thinks that family values are important and/or Laurie Coleman may be some sort of liability. I can only guess, but being that this is their second ad and they’re bringing her in, it seems like those guesses are reasonable. So, that being the circumstance, it would be very odd that they couldn’t get the two in the room to shoot an ad.
But, again, we need to establish what’s going on here before we jump to conclusions.
A campaign doesn’t make an ad months before the race starts, reassuringly showing the candidate with spouse, unless they know that the candidate and spouse have effectively if not legally been divorced for years… And the public is wondering who all else the candidate has been sleeping with.
This ad is horrible because it pretends that they have a close relationship yet seemingly they were unable to even spend a day together to actually do the ad. That is downright weird. It would have been preferable to rewrite the spot so talking to each other didn’t matter, rather than this faked conversation. To avoid the greenscreen just have the conversation take place in two different rooms. I think I might have used a better actress than his actual wife if I was going that fake anyway. She can’t deliver the line with enough warmth and conviction.
If Norm Coleman can’t be truthful and without trickery about something as simple as his wife asking him to take out the garbage, what can we expect for complex government issues?
There are other issues from that hangdog expression to the odd “yes, dear” submission sounding response to the request. All in all, a good shot in the foot almost equal to the Kennedy spots that caused Klobuchar’s positives to go up every-time they were run.
Apparently it’s a big year for green screens in the GOP. Maybe the only problem with McCain’s big speech on the night Obama clinched was that they forgot to put in the B-roll of mavericky things … or Norm taking out the garbage. One of those.
“This ad is horrible because it pretends that they have a close relationship yet seemingly they were unable to even spend a day together to actually do the ad. That is downright weird.”
I think Amuseinc (with whom I rarely agree) has the best explanation here. How hard would it have been to just shoot the ad with the two of them in the same room? The fact that they had to resort to video tricks to create a video of something as simple as a husband and wife talking in the kitchen is just pathetic.
Maybe someone should edit in Jar Jar Binks having morning coffee with the Colemans.
“…there’s just no way to be sure given the quality of the YouTube clip.”
You’re being too generous here. The video quality of the clip doesn’t deter from the fact that the angle and framing on Laurie is way off. That is obvious be it a grainy YouTuber or hi-def.
Where are all the Republicans??? Don’t you want to defend yourselves ie Norm on this post? Why aren’t you defending Bachmann on the posts below? No opinions? Just a little too selective in your posts I think.
Is that the same Dumpster (T) that Norm allegedly banged his head on while diving for a lamp Laurie threw out? Well, that was the “official” story anyway.
If it’s not green screen, I’d fire the crew for lighting the scene so poorly and opening it up for scrutiny.
Plus, the cut away of the ring is really strange. What the hell was the point if not to try to scream, “We’re married! Really we are!”