But, then again, Superman II featured Superman getting thrown into a Budweiser truck made out of mylar.
I don't have a problem with "flash" product placement with the product logo onscreen only for 5 second or something. But if Zod and his crew had been hiding in the Budweiser truck for 15 minutes planning on how they were going to take over Earth, that would have been too much. Product placement would be taking over the movie at that point.
Eh, I dunno, product placement is a fact of life and it's always going to be there and it's always BEEN there. That Budweiser truck being focused on for a moment is just as much of product placement as part of a battle taking place in an IHOP for a couple of minutes.
One one hand I sort of see where people come from on the product placement in this movie, on the other hand product placement has always been there in one form or another. There's a scene in "Superman The Movie" where we see a behind-shot of Martha Kent looking out the window and there's a prominently placed Cheerios box on the table. We then switch to a shot in from of Martha looking out the window and the box has re-oriented itself to, again, have "Cheerios" readable. (Rather than now seeing the back of the box.) Continuity error or product placement?
People complained how in "Book of Eli" we get a look-out over a burned-out highway with product logos on trucks. Product placements? Sure. But it also makes sense for them to be there.
Again, maybe to some degree 7-11, IHOP and Sears were a *bit* front and center as far as where the action took place but it's no big deal, really. It's not like the movie stopped for a moment and had Superman turn to the screen and express his love for the Rooty Tooty Fresh and Fruity breakfast at IHOP. Mention my name and get $2 off! Like he was the host of a 1950s talk show.
And it occurs to me that it wasn't a Budweiser truck in S-II but a Marlboro cigarette truck.
Not going back to fix it, deal.