Cinematical

One of the paradoxes of Hollywood is that the more money you have, the more companies want to give you their expensive stuff - for free. Over the past several years, the concept of "gifting" celebs, both nominees and presenters, at awards shows, has grown to the point that it almost eclipses the show itself. The Grammy gift baskets were worth $54,000, the Golden Globes swag worth $62,000. Each.  During Sundance, Cinematical talked with Jono, Moviefone's "swag king", about the phenomena, and what differentiates good swag from bad.

What's in it for companies? In theory, the chance to get their product in the hands of trend-setting celebs, with the hope that when commoners (that would be us) see Gwyneth Paltrow taking a free cruise valued at $22,000, we'll somehow be inspired to do the same. I don't know about you, but hey, sure -- if a cruise is good enough for Gwynnie, heck, I'll dig that $22K out of my couch cushions and catch the next cruise out of the Port of Seatle. Or not.

The Hollywood Foreign Press Association, on the advice of their tax lawyer, decreed that no HFPA member could take the extra $62K swag bags they had left over. In an article in the New York Times, Lee Shepperd, contributing editor to the journal Tax Notes, points out that celebs may face tax implications from accepting "gift baskets", because the IRS views them not as "gifts", but as income.

The bigger moral question that begs consideration here, though, is this: do Hollywood stars, already paid in the millions for acting in films and living in mansions, really need free stuff? Some people might view the gifting of stars with swag in a negative light - both on the stars who gobble up the swag and the companies who feed them. Wouldn't a company get as much marketing weight - nay, perhaps even more - by , say, donating their stuff to people who actually need it? What if a skin care company, instead of filling gift baskets for pampered stars, donated their lotions and potions to a shelter for abused women, or went into shelters offering free facials and manicures?

What if a cruise line, instead of giving away cruises to celebs (who, reportedly, only even bother to redeem such gifts maybe 5% of the time anyhow), put those assets instead into a free cruise for families from a housing project? What if companies stopped treating Hollywood stars like a pantheon of gods, and instead treated them as no different than anyone else working for a living - or focused their swag on real heroes like police officers, firefighters, teachers, social workers. Would you think more of a company that donated its goods and services to people who actually need and would appreciate it? Or does Terrence Howard posing with his spandy new Le Vian watch make you want to rush out and buy one?