UKC

If the beautifully understated first installment is anything to go by, these should be well worth watching, and a nice antidote to some of the recent sponsored "athlete" nonsense on here recently from the other side of the Atlantic:

https://rab.equipment/basecamp/periodicals/commitment/overarching/?platform...

In reply to Robert Durran:

I'm sure the films will be well worth watching, but I'm not convinced quite enough has been done to stop the whole thing looking like a cheesy motivational office poster. Over this side of the Atlantic, we have our own po-faced way of doing cheesy...

In reply to Jon Stewart:

Have you watched the first one? I really felt it avoided slipping into cheesiness.

In reply to Robert Durran:

I agree, it's great and not cheesy. But the montage of the four titles does look massively like it's going to be used in the introductory session of an expensive motivational executive team-building event put on by a firm of smug-besuited management consultants.

In reply to Jon Stewart:


Afraid I don't see that.......... Ok, the bottom line is that it IS marketing, but I can live with it in this format.

In reply to Robert Durran:

You're lucky, and right, not to see it. I feel like my brain has been poisoned by all the marketing I've been exposed to and now I can't enjoy anything unless it's a 3h Michael Hanneke film about death, with no dialogue.

In reply to Jon Stewart:


It strikes me that these RAB films might be just what you're in need of then!

In reply to Robert Durran:

RAB should have worked out how to make the moving banner a seamless loop. missed opportunity!

In reply to Jon Stewart:


ha!

In reply to Robert Durran:

Enjoyed that, beautiful filming and thoughtful words

In reply to Jon Stewart:


Commercial crap

In reply to Robert Durran:

Didn't really see any difference between this and the other stuff really. The read out voice over got on my wires a bit, she sounded like somebody reading a passage in a church. The whole accoustic guitar, round the campfire songs are not good.
Only films I've enjoyed in a long time are the Dave Linnet ones, great film maker.

In reply to Robert Durran:

I made the mistake of watching the introductory video to the series instead and thought 'what's he on about, this is terrible!' but yes, this one is great.

It's pretty standard fare: a plate of cheese, nonse and guff with an extensive side salad of drone and sidetrack

In reply to duchessofmalfi:

Agree, no different from the standard, cod philosophical garbage. Nice pictures, but the words ruin it all.

CB

In reply to Robert Durran:



That would have been a fun film to make

In reply to Robert Durran:
I saw this before you posted the link and thought it was quite good but I did note that I was almost unaware that it was a RAB film. I watch quite a few climbing videos and usually the sponsors are very prominent - in this case I went straight into the film and missed the top right corner with the sponsors name. It was only when I read your post that I realised it was a marketing film. Is this failed promotion or subliminal?

In reply to keith-ratcliffe:


I first saw it in a link on facebook and didn't see the introductory film which came across as a bit sound bitey. I did notice the low key RAB connection and because I really liked the film and respect and appreciate the absence of any in your face "RAB sponsored athlete" bollocks, the company goes up in my estimation and so it is a successful promotion for me. Of course those who didn't like the film will see things otherwise......

Of course no company gets more respect from me than Berghaus do for this work of genius: youtube.com/watch?v=F7b96bQfnjE&

In reply to Robert Durran:
Personally, I feel very ambivalent about this kind of 'home diary' advertising. Once upon a time, in a galaxy far far away, being photographed pulling hard moves might be enough to get a climber sponsorship. Now, however, us punters being a little sick of this kind of schtick, you don't earn your sponsorship unless you're content to pour your heart out, talk about your difficult childhood, your broken heart, illness and aging, your fading hopes, your children - whilst repeating: 'I feel myself', 'a journey of self-discovery', 'a form of self expression', 'I feel truly privileged' and 'I feel truly alive' over and over again - as though trying to convince yourself. Over the top of it all, some awful awful North American indy folk band whining through their yak wool beanies. This kind of faux-authenticity seems both intrusive on the part of the climber (and their family) and emotionally manipulative with regard to the audience.

But, what you gonna do?

In reply to Robert Durran:

Not cheesy? " Climbing never stops does it?. Everything else in normal life which is hard work switches off... "

I'm not sure what it means, but i'm pretty sure it's bollox

In reply to Robert Durran:

It seems similar in idea to the Mountain Equipment "Making Time" video from last year?

In reply to Bjartur i Sumarhus:


You have a point, but that quote was from the introductory film rather than the first proper installment which my OP referred to (I hadn't watched the introductory one).

In reply to C Witter:



Absolutely share this cynical sentiment. If it is truly a "self discovery" you keep it to yourself and close family/friends, not instagram or facebook or a Rab commercial, otherwise be honest and say "I am trying to discover what others think of me and prove my worth to the world."

There is so much bs sensibility in the climbing community nowadays. Everyone is posing for instagrams and making videos to talk about how they are climbing for the simplicity of climbing and blah blah, but nobody says what's actually on their minds.

Lynn Hill in Valley Uprising commented very honestly what the Valley scene was about back in the days: "fingers of steel, zero body fat...lots of testosterone." That's just fantastic - superbly gifted climbing bums trying to out do one another! Simple as that! Now will the modern day Brits and Americans and everyone else please just cut the crap...?!

In reply to climbnplay:




Sorry, but all this is total shite.

We all know that, each in our own way, we get far more out of the climbing experience than simply cranking hard and doing harder routes than the next person. There is a long history of high quality mountain and climbing literature in which people have tried to communicate the personal experience of being in the mountains, the intensity of climbing, the friendships and the interaction of all this with the rest of their lives. If this is now done as much through the medium of film (as it has done for a very long time), then so be it and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. Of course it can be done very badly or very well. I happened to feel that the Libby Peter film did it rather well (though the commercial context does grate a bit). Others may disagree and that is fine; there can sometimes be a fine line in all forms of art between authentic emotion and nafness. But to dismiss everything other than "pulling hard and sending" type writing or filming as crap is to deny the reality of most of what, in the end, is actually important.

In reply to C Witter:

Is Libby Peters sponsored? I thought she was a guide/ instructor. All I could see in the film was her enthusiastically talking about climbing and going climbing with her daughters.

In reply to Michael Gordon:


Does it matter? Maybe the series is better seen as RAB sponsoring some nice little films rather than sponsoring individuals to promote their products.

In reply to Robert Durran:
It's Rab, as in the name, not RAB! By writing RAB you sound like one of the chavs who walks into gear shops asking: "'Ere mate? 'Ave you got one of 'em R A B jackets."

P.S. Presumably people refer to you as Rab Durran?!

In reply to Tom Ripley Mountain Guide:


Sorry. You're right.


I used to get called that a very long time ago but I think I managed to snuff it out.

In reply to Jon Stewart:

I watched it all twice and saw no references to cheese of any sort.

In reply to Robert Durran:

I think you misunderstood me (or rather, I made myself poorly understood). I don't think most "pulling hard and sending" films are well done - quite the opposite actually. I just find the absence of honesty and authenticity in modern-day climbing films appalling. The comment was not directed specifically at this Libby Peter film (I have never heard of her), but at most climbing films with a touch on "soul searching." "Soul searching" should not be filmed to please the sponsors, as by definition it is an introspection. One of my favorite books is "a hard day's summer" and the simplicity of a climber's mind - none of this BS we thirst for in the 21st century. (What the hell is wrong with us nowadays?!) If you must please your sponsors, just climb something and look adventurous in that Rab jacket.

In reply to climbnplay:


That is a fairly sweeping statement without qualification. There are some wonderfully authentic and honest films out there. Also some dreadful ones.


Given that the Libby Peter film was the subject of this thread, it would be interesting to know whether you consider it dishonest and lacking in authenticity.


I don't see the logic in this. Ultimately a company will film stuff that they think will help sales. It may sometimes backfire, but I don't see why you should place place such restrictions on them. I for one, if anything, am more likely to buy Rab stuff having watched this film; maybe I have just been cunningly manipulated, but if its tone represents the personal outlook of those running the company, I find myself wishing them well.

In reply to climbnplay:

How do you know what they are posting on Instagram or what is in their videos?

In reply to Robert Durran:


I have to admit, I watched 10 seconds "I often wonder how people who don't go into the mountains stay sane...". And from then on I reckon I could have sketched out pretty accurately how the rest of the video would go. Lots of slo mo, lots of drone, lots of sub-mumfords folk-pop and never actually showing enough of anything to get interested in the activity.

I'd definitely echo the sentiments above that this is just a different kind cheesy guff to the instagram spraying in the other thread recently.

In reply to Michael Gordon:
It's not about Libby Peter; actually, she seems a great person, she's an extremely experienced climber, her book and her articles are invaluable, and it's really good to see a woman on the edge of her 50s in a climbing film. It's also good that representations of climbing (e.g. films) are branching out. Dave Birkett said something along the lines of "climbing's not just about getting to the top, is it? It's a much bigger picture." It's good that climbing films and literature are trying to explore this bigger picture - not just focusing on cranking and just focusing on men.

My point was, this kind of sweet 'authentic' flavour is very intrusive and manipulative. Climbing has become so mediated by advertising and gear that we can no longer tell our adverts apart from our sincere attempts to explore the meaning of climbing through literature, film, social spaces (e.g. forums like this or film festivals). Our desires are being colonised by its narratives and channelled into whatever piece of gear we "need". In fact, even efforts to involve more women in the sport are being channelled into advertising opportunities (I can just hear someone somewhere shrilling: "new markets! new markets! harnesses in mauve and turquoise! low volume helmets!"). In that context, is a 'good' advert something to celebrate?

Of course, that's not nostalgia for the "good old days, when men were men and we just had an old hawser rope stolen from school and our only runners were a hemp sling each!" After all, I was born in the 1980s, not the 1920s, and most of my climbing partners are women...

p.s. The surest sign we're in the Neverland of an advert is the complete absence of work. I think it's past time for a video about someone who hardly ever climbs because they've no time, little money, have to look after the kids and can't afford to run a car! ("Yeh, I sometimes get out for a few hours to Warton to climb a couple of VDiffs") I'd certainly watch that one!

In reply to C Witter:

I'm really not sure why you say that or even what you mean by it. Intrusive on whom? Manipulating whom?


So are you simply saying that you somehow don't trust the authenticity of the Libby peter film because of its connection to Rab?

For me the best climbing film I've seen for a while is this: http://www.hotaches.com/transition/
I notice that there is a discrete Mountain Equipment logo, so presumably ME has helped fund the film and are hoping to benefit from the exposure the film gives them. Does this mean I shouldn't trust the film's authenticity? Or should I be grateful to ME for facilitating the production of such a great film?

Films cost money to make and I suspect that commercial involvement is inevitable if many good films are going to be made, but there is undoubtedly a spectrum of intrusiveness. At the unacceptable end is the sort of stuff shoving Red Bull in your face at every opportunity as if it's impossible to get off the ground without it, but I would suggest that the Rab film and Transition are very much towards the other, for me acceptable, end of the spectrum.

In reply to C Witter:
>


Very well said.

This is the rise of 'branded content' and is the subject of discussion amongst numerous editors in the climbing world. As you imply, it is beginning to take the space of non-advertising media, partly because it is one of the few forms of writing that can pay its writers. It's not evil, but it's certainly blurring barriers between things that used to be considered significant - i.e. ads and editorial.

Such branded content, which has been made exponentially easier to create due to technology (cheap DSLR video, editing software, drones and hi-speed net distribution) aims to cultivate an emotional attachment to brands, to influence purchasing, that may not bear much relevance to the quality or relevance of the product. Extreme examples of this can currently be seen in the US where outdoor-ish looking brands are using slick marketing to hipsters to part with their cash for eye-wateringly expensive gear most of us wouldn't use to carry our groceries home. It's about the image, and the feels.

Rab makes raincoats and trousers, mostly, and when spending my money on a raincoat I'm mostly concerned with whether the raincoat is any good and if it fits me well, and is affordable. Libby Peter seems very nice, and I admire her professionally, but I consider her family to be none of my business.

These videos will not influence my chances of buying Rab product, except maybe in a negative sense in that I don't like companies thinking they can manipulate my feelings about a product, particularly by using things like family and kids. They may want to invoke 'community' and 'the journey' but they're still mostly just selling raincoats.

I'd rather Rab spent that money on better raincoats and let me get my entertainment elsewhere.

In reply to Lemony:

Anyhow, someone posted the most "authentic" climbing video I've ever seen on UKB the other day... vimeo.com/184764724

In reply to Damo:


But that is true of all advertising.

In reply to Robert Durran:


You selectively omitted a relevant part of the sentence I typed, re: emotional attachment. Not all advertising does this.

Most advertising focusses on the product, its specs, uses, value etc. Branded content does not do this, and the roundabout fashion in which it seeks to influence purchase has other, wider, effects, as I wrote.

In reply to Lemony:


Would it have been any less authentic with a Rab logo in the corner? FWIW I found it a bit boring anyway.

In reply to Damo:


But an awful lot does, and not just "branded content".


I actually don't think that's true; it is usually included but the impact will usually come from pictures, humour...... emotional stuff in fact. Most people will go to reviews or companys' websites for specs etc.


I don't disagree that there is an issue here, but I actually think most people are intelligent and sensible enough to know what they are looking at.

Irrespective of its merits as a advertising medium, if I was Libby Peters I'd find it pretty insulting got suggest that the narrative wasn't 'authentic'. It seemed very heartfelt and honest to me, but goes to show it lands better for some folk than others.

In reply to Lemony:


Brilliant. Up there with "It's Not A Jug", another masterpiece of bouldering cinematography.

http://www.ukclimbing.com/articles/page.php?id=4568

In reply to C Witter:

I think you made some good points but chose the wrong film to make them about.

In reply to Max factor:


+1

I think folk are choosing to be cynical for the sake of it.

In reply to Max factor:


I'd hope it was authentic in that those were her words and feelings, even if she sounded as though she was reading a written script.

But it was all upside, no down. Where is the self-doubt of being 'committed' to something so dangerous and poorly paid? Where is the worry about risk, for her and her kids? Where is the worry about money, in a career so reliant on her physical prowess and a fickle industry? It was not a whole picture, it was a rosy picture. It was not a full story, it was part of a story, part of a life, the positive part. A life committed to climbing is so much more than all that nice talk, but here we see not a hint of a downside.

So in that sense it was not authentic. It was an ad.

In reply to Robert Durran:

Well, I thought it was lovely.

In reply to Damo:


I think that's unfair. Maybe she felt that climbing had given her a fulfilled life and just wanted to celebrate that. You seem to be going out of your way to be cynical

In reply to Robert Durran:

Damo is right, just the fact that Libby Peters seems to be a pleasant and "committed" person does not make the video less of an ad. It clearly is presenting a selected sample of what climbing can mean to a person with the obvious purpose of selling the products of one specific company rather than that of a competitor who could claim the same association with the lifestyle presented.

You cannot be cynical enough.

CB

In reply to Robert Durran:


I had missed that one! Super. Full marks for the guy who went legs either side of the snowshoe "rail slide", that's commitment to your art.

In reply to cb294:


You certainly can. Skepticism is laudable, cynicism is dreary and rather sad, like many of the negative comments on this thread.

In reply to ChrisBrooke:


I couldn't agree more. I am skeptical, but in the absence of evidence to the contrary am prepared to give the film's authenticity the benefit of the doubt. Yes, of course it's an ad, but that does not necessarily mean that it is not authentic.

In reply to Robert Durran:
Quite. Sure, Rab are ultimately trying to sell rain coats by creating a positive brand association based on, among other things, engaging advertising content. That in no way disqualifies them from presenting 'worthy' or interesting short films like the Libby Peters one.
I get very quickly bored of people who think the only 'true' artist is the emiserated destitute one, suffering silently in the enforced poverty brought about by the pursuit of their art with no commercial incentive. Good art can and usually does come with a cost attached. Someone has to pay the piper and there's no shame in that.
Obviously I'm making a wider point here having been rubbed the wrong way by some of the comments. Not necessarily comparing this film to Van Gogh

In reply to Robert Durran:


Since she often wonders how other people who don't go to the mountains can stay sane, I've come up with a short list (by no means exhaustive) that some people may find just as "therapeutic":
have a cup of tea in the garden while basking in the sun;
take a boat out to sea;
go for a swim in the sea;
go for a walk in the forest;
read;
write;
make a meal and share with your family or friends;
watch the sunrise;
a bit of fishing or a jog;
...

I love climbing, and I spend the majority of my free time climbing all year round everywhere I can get to, but I don't philosophize about climbing. My point being, why is it that every second climber feels the need to take climbing into such depth like no other activity? Siddhartha found Nirvana, and you found climbing?!

How do climbing films go? More or less like this:
"Oh that feeling of commitment high above gear..." *aerial shot of some climbing action*
"oh that feeling of airiness on a ridge traverse..." *aerial shot of some ridge traverse*

A non-climber hears this and says: "Oh you are such a hero! How do you do it?! I would be so terrified!" Is that what climbers thrive on? A bit of ego rub?! Tell me, if it's not what they are after, then why are they saying it time after time?

Do we hear paragliders or ski tourers talk about the glory of paragliding or making gentle turns in fresh pow and how they are such fearless heroes in the face of a bit of airiness, altitude or harsh environment? Oh the unknown....!

"Oh that feeling of commitment as we traverse across that snow slope..." or "Oh that feeling of commitment as we take off into the sky..." All these things would sound ridiculous, but yet we endorse climbers who mumble this mumbo jumbo time and time again. You choose the route, you choose the gear, you choose to carry on and not back down - now shut up and get over yourself. You are climbing a rock and it's not exactly saving the world.

In reply to climbnplay:

They are just trying to explain why they enjoy and get satisfaction from climbing! Definitely not to be looked up to by non-climbers - who would want that?!

In reply to climbnplay:

If that's all you get out of climbing then that's fine. Many of us get a lot more. I suppose I ought to feel slightly sorry for you but I really can't be arsed. I'll just repeat that you are talking total shite from an incredibly narrow perspective - clearly I did understand you perfectly well the first time round and it was nothing to do with you not making yourself clear.

In reply to Michael Gordon:


Absolutely. Very simple really. It's really odd how climbnplay has managed to get his knockers in such a twist about it.

In reply to cb294:


It can be both an ad and a good film, can't it? I know it's advertising by brand association, but even if it wasn't produced for Rab and no one wore a stitch of Rab gear, I'd still think it was a decent wee film.

In reply to Robert Durran:

How can it be anything but positive that a massive company like Rab wants to put money into creative and expressive enterprises? Both creatives and climbers are stereotypically skint, so a company enabling those of us with a desire to say something but no means to say it is a godsend. Sure, not everything will sit right with everyone, but we have to produce a lot of content to find common threads

In reply to Robert Durran:
Just as a matter of interest where is the red coloured sea cliff she is climbing in several parts of the film?

In reply to bensilvestre:

Absolutely, as long as the company doesn't just insist on the film being a vehicle for it's logos and so on, but allows the film maker to express themselves - and we have no reason to believe otherwise in the case of the Libby Peter film.

As I pointed out earlier in the thread, this wonderful film appears to have been part funded by ME ( http://www.hotaches.com/transition/ ) but I didn't hear a chorus of cynicism when it came out. People get to make great films, we get to watch them and ME gets some exposure in return - everyone is a winner.

In reply to keith-ratcliffe:


Is it Rhoscolyn? the Sun?

In reply to Robert Durran:

This was another ME one:

vimeo.com/146138403

In reply to Robert Durran:

I watched it and liked it but there was something that would just never relate to me. It reeks of privilege, oozes it, from it's wood burning fire to the buff neckacheif. The musing of how anyone stays sane without the mountains has no concept of the sheer distance (culturally) so many people are from mountains. It's not that it takes away from everything else, not in itself but the epic lack of awareness does, at least a bit - for me anyway.

But then it's Rab.

In reply to flopsicle:


What exactly reeks privilege about a wood burning stove (surely a feature of a lot of cottages in wales - practical house heating), a free buff and eeking out a living as a guide (not exactly easy money)?

(Not having a go, just interested)

In reply to flopsicle:


The fact that it doesn't relate to you should not, I hope, be a criticism; different films will relate to different people and that is fine.


I think some people are taking that far too literally. Obviously she doesn't really think it. I presume she is simply saying that climbing does a lot to keep her sane.

In reply to Robert Durran:

Thanks

In reply to bensilvestre:


Because people have finite time and finite eyeballs. If people are getting so much content like this 'for free'* then they'll be less likely to watch, and in some cases pay for, media content that has been made because of the information it contains, not the product it is selling.

Content made as a brand advertisement, as this Rab piece is, will be unlikely to take difficult positions, argue against a grain, strive for difficult balance, or present itself in any way that might be seen as 'negative' as this is market poison for almost all brands.

When media using this content relies on it for eyeballs, as UKC is doing with this piece, and comes to rely on it more and more for content, not just a basic sidebar ad, will that media still feel as free to host material that might be critical of the advertiser?

We have so much media competing for our eyes and minds, we need to leave survival space for that material whose aim is not to get money out of our pockets. Commercial branded-content like this always has one aim in mind, to sell product. That's OK, companies have a right to make money and most of the world is market of some kind. Ads can be art, and enjoyable, and valuable.

But there are consequences to these changes (ask a magazine editor) and in some cases, they may well be 'anything but positive' for some.




*which of course it isn't, it just adds to the price of your Rab product

In reply to Robert Durran:


I hope you remember that the next time you start a thread to complain about ' recent athlete sponsored nonsense from across the Atlantic'

In reply to wbo:


Fair point, but if you are referring to that recent Molly Mitchell film (though thread not started by me and I don't think I've ever started such a thread) I should point out that everyone who commented on here thought it was total bollocks - apparently no one could relate to it.

In reply to Robert Durran:

They might want to stop spending money on fancy marketing & divert some of it to customer service!
http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?n=650959

In reply to Damo:


Well, given that Rab are going to spend money on advertising anyway, at least this way I get a nice film to watch.

Good post though.

In reply to Robert Durran:


Mighty generous of you to feel sorry for me but altogether unnecessary... I may be talking total shite, or I may have hit a sore spot for certain people. Yikes!

In reply to climbnplay:


I don't. I said I couldn't be arsed. You do seem easily confused by stuff.


May?


What makes you think that? Seriously.

In reply to Robert Durran:


Not actually true. One individual stood up for it. They were shouted down. By you. Odd that you forgot that.

In reply to Damo:


I think that's rather harsh on the people, and they are people after all, who produce such content. Just because someone is paid does not make all other motivations null and void, just as those who produce things for free are not necessarily doing so for the benefit of all mankind.

In reply to Helen Bach:

Thanks. Yes, I stand corrected; there was one at the beginning of the thread who got shouted down by many others, myself included. The overwhelming consensus was that it was bollocks.

In reply to Robert Durran:

I thought it was nice.