When you're Geico, you beat jokes into the ground. It's what you do.

Geico has always been somewhat unusual among advertisers in that they tend to run multiple campaigns at once. Even today, you can see Geico spots that still feature the gecko, the "everybody knows that" spots, the weirdly earnest animated ones that seem aimed at the Esurance crowd, and the "it's what you do" ads. Like this one:



Even by the standards of marketers whose idea of brilliance is "We thought of four things you can push, and Salt-N-Pepa are on line two," this is stupendously lazy. I don't really know who was the chicken and who was the egg here, but remember the Super Bowl? Remember how there were not one but TWO spots featuring beloved (?) Internet sensation (??) "goats that scream like humans?" Yeah. There were TWO. Sprint did one that might not even feature a goat (looks more like a sheep). And then Discover also did one. It's like every time two movie studios release nearly identical movies within six months of each other and you're like "Did we even need ONE movie about Steve Prefontaine?"

In some ways, Geico's ad is the best of these three, since the other two really have no jokes other than the screams themselves, which I hasten to add are not jokes. Geico, God bless 'em, actually kind of tried. But come on. All that setup, this complicated factory set, for a joke about how the word "scapegoat" has the word "goat" in it? Hey, what if a scapegoat were a REAL goat? I mean, there's literally no actual joke there, because that's where the word scapegoat FUCKING COMES FROM. I don't expect the Geico ad people to be Biblical scholars - or scholars of anything, really, up to and including ads - but Googling "scapegoat" and finding out that it's not a coincidence takes two seconds. The alternative is that they knew that "scapegoat" had something to do with actual goats in the first place and didn't care because it was such a "great" setup to get that goat scream in there. In which case, fuck them.

It doesn't help matters that this is at least the fourth ad in the "it's what you do" series. Geico is known for draining every last drop of life and humor from their campaigns, and this is no exception. I think the horror movie spot was the first in this series, and it wasn't terrible, as these things go. The Salt-N-Pepa one is okay, I guess. Then you got the camel one, which...



I mean, holy shit, right? It's bad enough that Geico can't stop reusing concepts - now they have to (a) reference their own old ads and (b) editorialize that everyone remembers and loves them? (I suppose I might buy that a few yahoos have screamed "Guess what day it is" at zoo camels in the years since that ad first aired, but literally everyone at the zoo? Also, no one is so intimately familiar with that ad that they're referencing throwaway lines like "Mike Mike Mike!") But then, when most of the purpose behind running five hundred different ads at one time is to see what sticks with people, and then reusing that over and over again, I guess I can't be surprised that anything that had any kind of legs was ridden to death. Like this:



I'm glad for Ickey Woods that he's getting a few paychecks after playing his last NFL game in 1991, but it's kind of amazing that Geico went with this reference at all. I guess when you run as many ads as Geico, you can afford to have one of your five simultaneous campaigns focus on a 25-year-old athletic footnote. And then make all your ads in that campaign about his legendary (???) love of cold cuts. (Woods' Wikipedia page claims that he has been a sales representative for a meat company during his post-NFL career, so maybe this is the weirdest kind of cross-promotion?) I mean, the initial Woods ad, like many initial Geico ads, was mildly amusing. But seriously, go on YouTube and look at all the shit they've got him in. There are literally four different "What's Cooking" videos like the one above, ALL OF WHICH ARE JUST COLD CUTS JOKES. For real. Or there are EIGHT "Ickey Reflections" videos. The main 30-second one, again, isn't awful. I would probably have chuckled to see it on TV:



That's a reasonable follow-up to the initial Ickey ad. This, however, is not:



ERROR 404: JOKE NOT FOUND

Geico has had some funny ads over the years. But given how many they put out, it tends to make them look more like a blind squirrel than a squad of hilarious jokesters. I'm sure we're all excited to see what quarter-century-old reference they can exhume next, though! Here are some suggestions:

"When you're Wilson Phillips, you tell people to hold on. It's what you do."

"When you're Dan Quayle, you add letters to the end of words. It's what you do."

"When you're Macaulay Culkin, you booby-trap your house against burglars. It's what you do."

"When you're the Berlin Wall, you get torn down. It's what you do."

I'm Insulting The Viewer Rob Lowe, and I have DirecTV

I expect that most of the issues with the Rob Lowe DirecTV campaign have been hashed out in various places over the last few months, but I don't think we could start posting here again and not talk about these ads.



That's the first in a series that has now extended to seven different spots, which is some Geico-level shit.

Rob Lowe: "Hi. I'm Rob Lowe, and I have DirecTV."
Super Creepy Rob Lowe: "And I'm Super Creepy Rob Lowe, and I have cable."

Right from the outset, this is kind of a weird pitch. Because... what is the pitch? People who have cable are creeps? Someone who is creepy definitely would have cable?

RL: "With DirecTV, you get 99% signal reliability."

The fine print here says "Based on a nationwide study of representative cities." Which seems kind of vague and evasive, but I don't know. Maybe it's true.

RL: "Now that's reliable."

Thanks for interpreting that figure for me. As the kind of creep who has cable, I'm far too busy taking upskirt photos to do math.

SCRL: "My cable's out, so I'm down at the rec center, watching folks swim."

Wow, I guess cable must be terrible. Oh, wait, this part of the ad is based on absolutely nothing. I mean, is there some figure you could be quoting about how cable is out way more of the time? As it stands, it could easily be the case that cable's signal reliability is actually 99.9%. I always get suspicious when advertisers hide figures like this. Why doesn't DirecTV want to talk numbers all of a sudden? Doesn't matter, right? The guy with cable is a creep! That's the important point. I guess.

RL: "I love that I can watch my shows and be worry-free."

Couldn't even squeeze in a second actual claim, huh?

SCRL: "And I love the smell of other people's hair!"

Well, I guess they had to set up that "I love" parallel somehow. Had to.

RL: "Don't be like this me. Get rid of cable and upgrade to DirecTV."

Of course, there are a lot of ways not to be like "Super Creepy Rob Lowe." Having cable would be about nine thousandth in terms of importance on the list of "Things that this fake person does that you should really not do." But implicitly insulting your potential customers for their current purchasing habits is always a really good way to move product. Like, if you were walking into a McDonald's, and some guy in a Burger King uniform started yelling at you from the sidewalk that you should eat at Burger King because only jerks and losers eat at McDonald's... is your next move to go to Burger King? I will answer that for you: it is not. (Side note: I would not have put it past Crispin Porter + Bogusky to try that when they were in charge of BK's marketing campaigns.)

So anyway, either this ad was somehow "popular" or DirecTV already had a bunch in the pipeline, because then they brought out several more. The second one was... problematic. Okay, more problematic.



It's funny, because he has terrible social anxiety! Oh wait, that's not really funny at all. That's a diagnosable psychiatric condition.

RL: "DirecTV is number one in customer satisfaction over all cable TV providers."

Okay, actual claim. Not bad so far?

PARL: "With cable, you wait forever for them to show up! I hope it's not a girl."

"And I'm Super-Lazy-Joke-Making Rob Lowe. I have cable."

PARL: "...or a guy."

Social Anxiety Disorder, per the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of the American Psychiatric Association: "A persistent fear of one or more social or performance situations in which the person is exposed to unfamiliar people or to possible scrutiny by others. ... The feared situations are avoided or else are endured with intense anxiety and distress." Sounds like a laff riot! Suck it up and get DirecTV, you pussy!

RL: "Fact: DirecTV has been ranked higher than cable for over ten years."
PARL: "Fact: I can't go with other people in the room."

Paruresis. A relatively common phobia. Also, a PHOBIA. Like, a legit psychological issue. Not just something that only happens to weird fey losers like Painfully Awkward and Probably Not Coincidentally Kind of Effeminate Rob Lowe.

Anyway, it goes on like this. The remaining list of Fake Alternate Rob Lowes not to be like: Crazy Hairy Rob Lowe, Scrawny Arms Rob Lowe, Meathead Rob Lowe (so apparently you suck if you have no muscle but also if you have too MUCH muscle?), Overly Paranoid Rob Lowe, and Peaked in High School Rob Lowe. Laugh-a-minute jokefests all.

So let's try and figure it out. What is the pitch? What is it? If we take it seriously, the pitch is, "These weirdos have cable. Which means everyone who has cable is a weirdo! Do you wanna be a weirdo? No? Then you'd better get DirecTV, weirdo!" If it's more of a joke, then all you really have is DirecTV going, "We're better than cable! Also, have a look at these at best mildly amusing alternate Rob Lowes we came up with to tell you that."

You know what these ads remind me of? Apple's "I'm a Mac" ads. There are quite a few similarities: you've got one company treating a bunch of different companies as a single monolithic entity ("cable" means different things depending on where you live, much like how there are various manufacturers who produce "PCs"); you have the company not just claiming to be better than its competition but also depicting that competition in the form of someone intended to be less appealing; you have usually pretty vague descriptions of what the differences actually are; and, of course, you have the advertising company with a substantially smaller percentage of the market share.

I understand that whoever's behind tends to feel the need to go on the attack. It's why Pepsi goes after Coke but not the other way around; it's why Taco Bell couldn't just say "Hey, we've got breakfast food now," but felt the need to go after McDonald's in the process; it's why the political races in which the most mud-slinging goes on are the close ones. It makes sense in principle - if most people are going with your competitor already, you feel like you can't just say "Here's what I've got." You have to say "Here's what I've got and HERE'S WHY IT'S BETTER. You should change what you're doing." Again, in principle, this works. In practice, however, it comes off as insulting far too often. Taco Bell's ad attempts to suggest that Egg McMuffins are old and tired. But if you're the sort of person who eats Egg McMuffins all the time, it's probably because you like Egg McMuffins. And hey, maybe you're not going to appreciate being called old and tired for your taste preferences!

DirecTV doesn't have that same kind of problem - no one uses cable because they just fucking love cable so much - but nevertheless, this campaign implies that people who use cable are somehow inferior. Which is just sort of weirdly insulting, and hardly the thing that's going to get people beating a path to your door, especially given how strong the pull of inertia is. DirecTV may indeed be more reliable than cable, but as long as your cable is pretty reliable, I can't imagine that being compared to Super Creepy Rob Lowe is doing much to convince you to switch. There may be a subset of people who are so unhappy with cable that literally any pitch will sway them, but I'm guessing it's not huge. Oh, and I hope everyone in that subset has a clear view of the southern sky.

America's heart valves are always closed

One of our Twitter followers, @Telos09, brought the following ad to my attention a couple weeks ago. It's been a while since we've taken a "request," for lack of a better term, so let's get into it.



Painful.

Woman: "Uh, what's the Loaded Baked Potato Skillet like?"

Let me stop right here. Are there really people who go into Denny's and start asking the waitstaff to give opinions on what the food is like? This is the kind of thing you do at a real restaurant, where maybe you're not sure if the preparation is going to be what you want. Is a dish too spicy? How's the meat prepared? That kind of thing. At Denny's this is not an issue. What's the Loaded Baked Potato Skillet like? Uh, it's like we threw some potatoes and other shit into a pan and then cooked it for five minutes.

Waitress: "It's like, uh..." [makes sizzle sounds]
Kid in nearby booth: "No, it's more like:" [makes sizzle sounds]
Douchebag at a nearby table: "If you have prime rib, it's like:" [makes sizzle sounds]

Okay, everyone just shut the fuck up. And I know Denny's is just trying to work all the skillets into this ad, but prime rib? Who the fuck asked you about prime rib, dude? We're talking about the Loaded Baked Potato Skillet at the moment. Fuck off.

Old lady: "The Western Skillet's like:" [makes sizzle sounds]

NO ONE CARES.

The ad then cuts between all the people doing their stupid sounds in a way that reminded me immediately of the original Budweiser "Wassup" commercial from, God, what, a decade ago? On the one hand, probably just a coincidence. On the other hand, my mind went there IMMEDIATELY. I don't know. Whatever.

Woman: "Oh, that sounds good, I'll have one of those, please!"

I get the joke. It's not funny.

Guy: "I'll get the:" [makes sizzle sounds]

Die.

We then see the actual skillets, and man do they just look gross. They don't quite reach Famous Bowl levels, but they really do just look like a bunch of shit tossed into a pan. Yeah, just throw all that shit in there, and then drizzle some other shit on top of it. I am not getting hungry.

This ad deserves the death sentence on twelve systems

While the "Darth Vader Kid" ad did not win our Least Shitty Ad award during the 2011 Super Bowl, it certainly was in no danger of winning one of the bad awards. Nor was this year's follow-up, which for most of its length is actually pretty good and might have contended for Least Shitty Ad. Then it takes a turn. Thus, we present:

The Ian Malcolm Memorial "Your Scientists Were So Preoccupied with Whether or Not They Could, They Didn't Stop to Think If They Should" Award

And your winner... that's right, it's Volkswagen!



This ad is a minute long. For the first, oh, 42 seconds, it is at least passably amusing and certifiably adorable. The fat dog is getting himself into shape! It's cute. Sure, it's barely an ad for the car, but we at least see the car, and VW is really counting on the fact that people are generally familiar with the Beetle anyway. Really, so far, so good.

Unfortunately, ads aren't 42 seconds long. It's at this point that we pull out to reveal that the first 42 seconds were actually being watched on a TV in the Mos Eisley cantina from Star Wars (I guess ads are 42 seconds long in galaxies far, far away). And then we get this nonsense:

Evazan: "That was great!"
Ponda Baba: [grunting noises]
Evazan: "No, the dog is funnier than the Vader kid." [begins to choke]
[Darth Vader, across the way, is Force-choking Evazan; finally he relents]
Evazan: "Sorry."
[Vader storms out]

And, scene.

Look, I like Star Wars. I only had to look up one of those character names, even. But what was the point of this? The ad with the dog has nothing to do with Star Wars, nor did it need to. And make no mistake about it, Volkswagen wants you to associate this ad with dogs AND Star Wars - just look at the teaser they put out a couple weeks before the Super Bowl:



Volkswagen is hardly the first advertiser to call back to a commercial of theirs that was popular in a previous year. Really, it happens all the time. But that doesn't make it funny when there's no legitimate tie-in anywhere to be found. All I get from this ad is that VW thought, "Hey, we've already got the rights to use the Star Wars characters in our ads... let's do it again!" But then they couldn't think of anything else to do with them, so they just had two super-fringe characters step in to editorialize on the unrelated ad they'd already created.

Hence why VW gets this additional, made-up award: for doing something that they COULD do without apparently ever stopping to ask whether they SHOULD do it. As much as I like Star Wars, it isn't inherently funny. Volkswagen would do well to remember that.

Full of the milk of human creepiness

If you think about it, if you only include national advertisements, how many brands do you really see ads for on even a yearly basis? I'm guessing it's less than two hundred. And whenever you see an ad for a brand you've never seen an ad for before - especially if it's a product you had heard of despite not seeing any ads - doesn't it always seem a little strange? Like, "Oh, I guess they're advertising now." That's how I felt about this Muscle Milk ad, right after I got done hating the shit out of it.



No.

Host: "So! All-Star left fielder. What's on your mind?"

We're just dropped into this, so there's really no explanation for why the host is such a complete freak show. But if you pretend for a second this is a real show, would Muscle Milk really want to sponsor it?

Ryan Braun: "A female doctor asked me to take my shirt off yesterday... for an eye exam!"

Ladies and gentlemen, the Friar's Club Roast of Ryan Braun's Pecs! Seriously though, is that a zippy one-liner or what? And delivered with such verve!

Host: "Ryan, a little lesson. Life is like a river. But for guys like us, life is like a river that's also a hot tub!"

At this point he pulls his shirt out and rubs his stomach. The guy is in average shape, I guess you'd say, but I think clearly the idea is that he's supposed to be unappealing. Or is it?

Host: "Now! It's clear to me that you drink Muscle Milk after you work out. And you are just going to have to deal with women trying to get into your hot tub river!"

Cut to the guy in a hot tub with two women. Cut back to the guy on the set making a creepy noise. Fin.

I mean, what the fuck was that? Look, Ryan Braun is clearly not an actor, but if that's all you're going to do with him it seems pointless to even have him in the ad. At least he seems like a likable guy, unlike the actual pitchman, although who wouldn't seem like a cool dude next to this lunatic? (By the way: bargain-basement Ed Helms. Tell me I'm wrong.)

This ad is obviously aimed at men, so they don't really care if their attitude towards women is a little questionable. But who is watching this and thinking, "I want to be like that guy! I bet he's a big success with the ladies." No one. And I don't think this guy is supposed to be cool or attractive. Look how confused Braun looks when the guy starts pulling his shirt out. But with that being the case, WHY IS HE YOUR PRIMARY PITCHMAN???? For a product that is trying to associate itself with being hot and in great shape????

The last couple years have seen a lot of products using really unappealing spokespeople. I didn't get it when Toyota did it, I didn't get it when McDonald's did it, and I don't get it now. I mean, obviously this is just supposed to be funny, but (a) it isn't, (b) it's trying way too hard, and (c) the goal, ultimately, should be to sell product, not just be funny. Aside from making you aware of the product's existence, I don't see how this ad moves product. At least in that McDonald's ad, you could imagine people recognizing the main character as an exaggerated version of how they feel in the morning when they haven't had their coffee. Who is going to identify with this shithead? "Muscle Milk: preferred protein shake of creepy guys with hairy stomachs who make gross throaty sounds to indicate they're happy with something!" Yeah, uh, pass.

Tacos are for closers

During last year's baseball playoffs, Taco Bell managed to come up with an ad that actually was not completely stupid.



Sorry about the video, but I couldn't dig up a better example on YouTube. Anyway, that's not too bad, right? You could argue that Joe Girardi and Mariano Rivera aren't famous enough to lead a commercial like this, but it did play mostly during baseball games, and obviously that audience is going to recognize two well-known Yankees figures. Rivera's acting is pretty bad, but hey, he's not an actor, nor is English his first language, so I think we can cut him some slack. The concept of the ad is moderately clever, it's not overwritten, and there's some amusing little touches like Rivera taking a last sip of his drink before running over. It's not some masterpiece, but given how bad most ads are, I can live with one like this.

Unfortunately, this year Taco Bell did this instead:



The weird thing is, I'm quite sure I saw an ad with Brian Wilson in it this year where he was basically doing a similar thing to what Rivera did last year - "hey, I'm the closer, I'm here to finish your overly large chalupa." That's the whole joke, after all, since Wilson only gained fame as the closer for the Giants during last year's World Series. But I can't find that one on YouTube, and it seems like it didn't run very much, almost like Taco Bell felt like they needed a pretense to get to this one but liked this one so much more that they abandoned the pretense as soon as possible.

Why is this ad so bad? Well, perhaps the biggest problem is that it seems like Wilson wrote it himself. For God's sake, Mariano Rivera, the best closer in history and certainly one of the most famous, gets two lines in his ad. Yet here's Wilson, unaccountably given nearly every line in the ad in spite of the fact that he's less famous than Rivera, is also not much of an actor and comes off like a total maniac. (That was likely the point, but that doesn't mean it was a good idea to do it.)

The whole "let's go meta on our own ads" thing is pretty trite, too. And since the only point of having Wilson there is to continue the "you need a closer to finish this huge chalupa" theme, and since Wilson, no matter how much of a character he is by baseball standards, is not a professional comedian and therefore incapable of selling a pretty dire script, it makes no sense to change the entire concept and yet STILL KEEP BRIAN WILSON IN THE AD.

I mean, "black ops?" "Inner deliciousness?" Really? What's with the props? This is like the world's most sedate Robin Williams routine, only performed by a baseball player and even less funny. Nothing Wilson "comes up with" ties into the idea of the chalupa being especially large - which, again, is pretty much the only reason these ads exist in the first place. I guess there's the "these monsters are stacked" line, but compared to everything else he says that's basically a non sequitur, so I'm not even going to count it.

Really, I imagine it would have cost Taco Bell a lot less to cast any old commercial actor in this spot, cut out the "Brian Wilson just decided to change the concept" framing device and shoot it as some wacky doofus vamping around while his friend attempts to eat the XXL Chalupa. Would that have been fucking retarded? Of course it would have. But so is this, and if you're going to insist on making a stupid ad, I'm guessing not paying whatever Wilson's endorsement fee is would at least have been cheaper.

Yogurt, lies and videotape

I know this ad is a few years old. Is it ever too late to write about a total piece of shit? (Answer: no.)



First things first. Is there some compelling reason why this woman would be lying to her friend on the phone about her diet? I mean, once you've stated you're, you know, on a diet, it's kind of already out there. Why then go on to pretend that you're some sort of magical person who can eat a million desserts and lose weight?

The counterargument, I guess, is that she's not lying - the friend knows she's naming Yoplait flavors and it's just the dumb, sweets-craving husband who's confused. But if that's the case, why does she describe apple turnovers as "sort of my weakness?" Really, one random flavor of this 100-calorie cup of yogurt is your weakness? Come on.

Woman: "My diet? Well, yesterday I had an apple turnover. Mm-hmm. I know, it's sort of my weakness."

I mean, if the friend knows she's talking about yogurt, what could POSSIBLY fill the gaps in that conversation?

Woman: "My diet? Well, yesterday I had an apple turnover."
Friend: "You mean a cup of Yoplait yogurt flavored like an apple turnover, whatever that means beyond just 'tastes like an apple, more or less?'"
Woman: "Mm-hmm."
Friend: "Good for you, I guess?"
Woman: "I know, it's sort of my weakness."
Friend: "Am I even part of this conversation? God, shut up."

Woman: "I always keep it in the house."

The use of "it" here is, I suppose, evidence that the friend knows she's talking about yogurt, because it's a weird pronoun choice to refer to apple turnovers, in my opinion. But it's more likely that it's evidence that this ad was sloppily written, as if we needed much more of that.

Woman: "Well, that, and Boston cream pie, white chocolate strawberries - yeah, yeah! - and, mmm, key lime pie."

I honestly have no idea what to make of the "yeah, yeah!" part, which really could go either way as far as proof of what she is supposed to be talking about. But I've also lost interest because there isn't enough evidence to discount my original theory, and based on my original theory, fuck this woman.

By the way, check the bottom of the screen at this point in the ad for some truly awesome fine print.

Woman: "Yeah! Mm-hmm, I've already lost some weight!"

Fine print: "As part of a reduced calorie diet and regular exercise."

So basically what you're telling me is that the yogurt has effectively nothing to do with it. Good to know!

This series only gets worse, by the way, and the people in it only get more obviously full of lies. Check out this piece of shit:



Am I supposed to like the main character of this ad?

Woman: "Could you take all of these in for me, please?"
Seamstress: "All of them?"
Woman: "Well, it's the Boston cream pie, and the apple turnovers, and the white chocolate strawberries, and the key lime pie."

Didn't you say you have fourteen flavors? FUCK YOU for using the same four in every ad.

Seamstress: "So you need them let out."
Woman: "No, no, in."
Seamstress: "Out."
Woman: "Uh, in."

This goes on forever, while wacky French music plays in the background. Seriously, though: am I supposed to like this woman? She's a bitch. She goes into this shop, lies like she's been eating a lot of desserts, then treats the seamstress like a fucking moron for being "confused" about the issue. For good measure, this ad ends with a "joke" so bad I'm not even going to repeat it here. I can't believe someone got paid to write this and that it was filmed and aired. It's awful.

There are other ads in this series, like a follow-up to the first one where the husband is busy bragging to someone about all the desserts he's eating and yet staying thin, and the lying becomes more and more blatant. What's Yoplait's angle? "Our product is so bad you'll want to lie about eating it?" "See if these flavor compounds can distract you from the fact that you're eating a soul-crushing cup of diet yogurt?" Yoplait: It is so not worth telling anyone you ate it.

Women: can't live with 'em, totally can't live with 'em

Hey guys! You know what I, as a man, can't stand? Listening to women. Like, about anything, ever, particularly if some form of sporting event might be on in the immediate vicinity. And especially because women never have anything important to say. Why would they? They're women! If a woman is talking to me and I'm listening to her it's due to one of three reasons: (a) she's asking me what I want her to cook me for dinner; (b) she's telling me how her bra unhooks; or (c) I'm going to get a Klondike bar (manliest food on the planet!) as a reward.



Now who can't relate to that?

Announcer: "New Klondike Mint Chocolate Chip bars present: Five Seconds to Glory! Mark versus Actually Listening to His Wife!"

At least this isn't one of those ads where the guy with utter contempt for his wife's presence is also married to someone who is way too hot for him. Minor point in Klondike's favor.

Wife: "...beautiful, beautiful yellow squash. And I thought, we could potentially paint our foyer yellow. What do you think? I know, it's yellow, I know..."
[bell rings]
Mark: [jumps up] "YEAAAHHH!!!"
[confetti falls, models run in]
Jingle: "What would you do-o-o for a Klondike Bar?"

In addition to the obvious problems with the depiction of a relationship in this scene, isn't this just dumb? I mean, has anyone ever had to do less for a Klondike bar? Yet it's treated like Mark is having acupuncture on his penis or something. Oh man, listening to a woman for five seconds, you guys! That shit is hard! Because women, you know? They're like all boring and stuff. Unless they're models who bring you ice cream and don't talk.

I'm sure this post will yet again get me accused of having no sense of humor, as though "having a sense of humor" requires finding anything funny as long as it's trying to be. Sorry - this is a major failure. Let's ignore the ridiculously casual sexism for a minute - what exactly is "funny" about this commercial? The only possible "punchline" is Mark's wildly outsized celebration at accomplishing an incredibly easy task. But here's the thing - the commercial does not present the task as incredibly easy. It implies that it's difficult; Mark's facial expression suggests that it's difficult; and given that Mark is rewarded with the sponsoring product, this certainly suggests that Klondike is of the opinion that this is a difficult challenge. In other words, Mark is given a tough task, achieves it, and celebrates. That isn't humor. The only real "humor" is intended to come from the hilarity of Mark having to "actually listen to his wife" for five seconds - because if your wife is talking to you, it's boring and inconsequential, and thus paying attention to her is just all kinds of a chore. Haw! This brings us back around to the "sexism" part on the Möbius strip of shittiness that is this ad.

And if you still can't see the sexist subtext (though I hesitate to even call it subtext) in this spot, watch this other Klondike ad and tell me it doesn't have a homophobic subtext. Then tell me you'd put sexism past the troglodytes in charge of marketing at Klondike. The hilarious part is that, as a chocolate-and-ice-cream confection, doesn't it seem like Klondike should be advertising to women as much as men? It's not like they're advertising beef jerky or energy drinks or something that has a market of mostly 18-49 males. Instead, here's Klondike dumping all over at least half of its potential audience. Good work, guys.

Incompetence comes standard

Apparently 2011 is the year of car sex. At least if you go by the Super Bowl ads.



This is a 30-second ad that really has no purpose other than to tell jokes... and I count four of them. Four! That's it! Also, they all suck.

Red Car: "Hey guys, the reviews are in on Cars.com!"
Silver Car: "Really? What'd they say?"
Red Car: "Well, let's see. It says Sheila looks great... topless. Heh heh..."
Convertible: "What's so funny?"
Red Car and Silver Car: "Nothing."

Ha ha ha! It's funny because convertibles are topless, but then we also made the convertible a female car and if a woman was topless her breasts would be showing! Yeah! Oh man, what a joke! Also, there's no reason for cars to find toplessness erotic because they are cars, and not humans.

Red Car: "And it says here Hank's a real gas guzzler."
Silver Car: "You hear that, Hank?"
Blue Car: [belches] "Whatever."

Wow, a burp joke. I guess I should be happy they didn't have him fart, but we're still talking jokes that are sub-Mater. Although I'm almost inclined not to even count this one as a joke, because, are you fucking serious?

Silver Car: "Hey, what about me?"
Red Car: "It says your ride is very smooth."
Silver Car: "Aww yeah! Hear that, Sheila?"
Convertible: "Never gonna happen."

I can think of a lot of reasons why it's never going to happen, the first one being that you are cars and are incapable of having sex with each other, and the rest of them being that any attempt on my part to try to think of what it might look like for cars to be having sex with each other is going to end with me finding out who wrote this ad and beating them with a tire iron.

Announcer: "With consumer and expert reviews, confidence comes standard."

I know they only had 30 seconds. But those are not very confidence-inspiring examples of your great reviews that will help me make a car-buying decision. Whoa, a convertible looks good with the top down? Holy shit! Car X has a smooth ride? Surely not something you could say about any of a hundred different models. Expert reviews, everyone! A huge SUV/truck thing does not get good gas mileage. Thank God I visited Cars.com for that fascinating insider nugget!

Woman: "See? Just like the review said - big rear end."
I'm Sure Coincidentally Black Minivan: "Excuse me?"

And we end with probably the best joke of the ad, which should tell you how bad all the others were. Also, again, useless information from Cars.com. I mean, if you don't want a car with a big rear end I'm sure it's nice to know which ones do and don't before you head to the showroom. But they're at the showroom and walking past the car they don't like anyway, so total time saved = zero. Also, it's a fucking minivan. If you want a minivan, the back is probably going to be kind of large. If that's not what you want, you don't get a minivan. You're not going to walk up to a convertible and be like, "Just like the review said - the top goes down. That is not what I want at all!" You're just going to avoid that section.

I'm sure Cars.com has plenty of useful things that it does. Kind of a shame they couldn't show any of them in their three-million-dollar ad that was seen by a third of the country. But hey, I'm sure the belching SUV made a lot of four-year-olds giggle. Now we just need to make sure they also learned the name Cars.com and will remember it for the next twenty years! It's all about the long-term, people.

The P List

I don't think Wonderful Pistachios is going to run any ads during the Super Bowl, but if they did, they'd be a shoo-in for the "Most Egregious Use of B-List Celebrities" award. Frankly, they might deserve the lifetime achievement award in that category just for their most recent series of ads.



That's probably the one I find the stupidest, mostly because (a) Keyboard Cat isn't even a celebrity and (b) that's not even the real Keyboard Cat (who is dead, as we all know by now). Also, the way the guy says "purr-fectly" drives me up the fucking wall. But I mean, here's a list - not sure if it's fully complete - of other people appearing in this series of ads:

Lewis Black
Chad Ochocinco
Rod Blagojevich
R. Lee Ermey
Lucy (and Charlie Brown)
Wee Man
Snooki

If you have no idea what's happening at the end there, you are probably over 40, and I envy the hell out of you.

Look at that list. Granted, it's not completely terrible - Ermey appears in other ads, for instance (though it is worth noting that Ermey is not mentioned by name in his ad, implying that he is the least famous person on the list). But Rod Blagojevich? A guy who is only famous for beating corruption charges despite permanently looking like the cat who ate the canary? Wee Man, at best the third-most famous person from the inexplicably long-running Jackass franchise? And even though I will grudgingly admit that Jersey Shore's popularity means Snooki is famous enough to appear in these ads, is she really someone well-liked enough to constitute a positive endorsement?

I also don't really care for the construct of the ads. I'm sure they're cheap to make, and I suppose they're sufficiently original among what's out there as to be memorable... but we're talking about a gag ripped off of any one of a hundred bumper stickers that say shit like "Teachers do it with class." And then all they do is take that and cram pretty much whatever random quasi-famous person comes to mind - probably not even the first ones, just the ones they can most easily write puns for. It's like Mad Libs: "[person/thing of note] does it [adverb/simile]." That's it. Even if it's successful, I don't think such a lazy excuse for creativity deserves to be praised. Or to put it in terms they'd understand: Wonderful Pistachios ad writers do it... hackily.

A tradition more annoying than any other

How do you make a bad ad campaign worse? Try to get "edgy."



This ad is, obviously, online only. What kills me is that it's referred to as a "banned Super Bowl commercial" by KGB. I mean, I guess it was banned... in the same way that, say, the orgy scene from Caligula was banned from the Super Bowl. Most likely this ad wasn't submitted at all, since KGB cannot possibly have been under the impression it could air on television, or even if it was submitted, it was only so they could call it "banned!" and "too hot for TV!" after its entirely inevitable rejection. But wow, if it was banned from the Super Bowl... that means it must be totally hilarious in a risqué fashion. Right?

KGB Douche: "We got a call?"
Woman 1: "It's my husband."
KGB Woman: "What happened?"
Woman 1: "We were in the pro shop, he and Bob were discussing global warming, and..."

Cut to an hilarious shot of a guy bent all the way around...

KGB Douche: "He's got his head up his ass."

*spit take* Bahahaha! Hilarious! Not at all a joke that is decades old at best. Also, global warming? It would almost be worth 99 cents to see what answer KGB could possibly give to "Is global warming real?" Even actual scientists don't seem to be 100% in agreement on this point.

Woman 1: "Not the first time."
KGB Woman: "Sir, are you all right in there?"
Guy: "Who said that?"
KGB Douche: "Now who's Bob?"
Woman 2: "My husband. Over there."

Guess what? He's also got his head up his ass! ROFL!

KGB Douche: "Next time your husbands don't have a clue, make sure they text KGB first."

So... neither of them had a clue? How exactly had this debate been going?

Unnamed Husband: "Global warming is real! It's harming the planet!"
Bob: "Oh yeah? Prove it, jerk!"
Unnamed Husband: "See, there's pollution, right? And the pollution goes in the water, polar bears eat it, they die, and their rotting corpses drive up the planet's temperature!"
Bob: "You idiot! Nuclear waste gets stored in cooling towers! It makes everything colder!"

If neither person has a clue in a debate, it no longer matters.

KGB Douche: "Always know what you're talking about. Text your questions to 542542."

"Don't bother doing any significant research on the major scientific topics that you'd like to discuss. Just text KGB and get an answer that fits into 120 characters on your cell phone." I don't know, KGB. Couldn't you dumb things down a little more? I want an answer about global warming that would fit inside a fortune cookie!

Guy [putting]: "It's in the hole!"

And one last cheap ass joke, just for good measure. I would have added a sarcastic *rimshot* there, but KGB would have assumed I was playing along with the theme.

Possibly the worst commercial ever made

It's hard to define the "worst commercial ever made." But I think I would suggest that some good qualifications for the title would be (a) being incredibly unfunny; (b) featuring things that no human would ever say; and (c) being really creepy. Congratulations, AT&T: the only way this ad could have been worse is if it were also racist.



Black guy's thumbs: "Funny is knocking at the door, and he wants to partay!"

This is not funny. It is not something anyone would ever say to indicate that they found something funny. And good God, those thumbs with the faces on them are creepy as fuck.

Nerdy white guy's thumbs: "That's insanium in the cranium, dawg!"

Kill me.

Goth girl's thumbs: "I'm laughing on the dark, abysmal inside. Heh heh."

Ugh. Hey, goths like dark things! You knew that, right? Please let this end.

Guy with a hat's thumbs: "Shake your funny-maker. Shake it. Shake it hard."

I would like to shake the person who wrote this ad hard. And slap them across the face a few times.

Blonde woman's thumbs: "If they bottled that kind of funny, I'd buy it! Hilarity, by Daryl."

The bottled version of this ad: "Crippling Head Pain, by AT&T."

Announcer: "How would you say LOL?"

Not any of those ways, not in a million years. And neither would anyone else. Ever.

Announcer: "With a full keyboard, it's easier to text it how you say it."

Oh God. That's the point of this ad? That is all you were using this ridiculous bullshit to sell? Guess what - even with a full keyboard on a computer, when I indicate that something is funny, I might type the onomatopoeia of a laugh. I would not, in a jillion fucking years, write that something funny my friend said was "insanium in the cranium," and anyone who would should immediately be euthanized for the good of humanity.

More importantly, why did they have to use the horrible, creepy talking thumbs? God, they're awful. This ad was written, produced, looked at by probably dozens of people, and apparently not one of them said "This is really awful" or "This isn't funny at all" or "Those thumbs look like garbage and they're terrifying" or anything. Or, which would be worse, these things were said and AT&T just figured that the public at large will laugh at anything. Based on the YouTube comments, it seems like that might be true. Gag.

It's a crazy world -- with stupid commercials

Some companies subscribe to the idea that if you create a commercial that's weird enough, then people will remember it and, by association, your product. The data to support this theory is inconclusive at best, and oftentimes what you see is people remembering a particular commercial but not the product. We've even seen examples of people reaching this site by searching for a particular ad with the wrong company (i.e. a description of a Toyota ad with "Honda" in the search string.)

That "memorability factor" is the only reason I can think of for the creation of this Sierra Mist ad:





(A man walks into a bar where everyone is drinking Sierra Mist. The bartender slides a plastic bottle of pop down the bar.)

Must be one of those wild cowboy saloons in Salt Lake City.

Man: It's a crazy world.

Apropos of absolutely nothing.

Man: I knew this girl who would do anything to get married.

Everyone else in the bar is paying rapt attention. And, why, exactly? Is this such an audacious statement?

Man: I call her, "the Wedding Girl."

Oh man, okay. Now I'm interested. Now that you've given her a self-evident identifier? I am putty in your able storytelling hands! Go on....

Scenes of the Wedding Girl at a reception where the narrator was apparently a bassist. She's beating up the other girls in the bridal party to be able to catch the bouquet -- doing anything to get married.

I guess if you find this particularly hilarious -- if you're a big Three Stooges fan, say -- then maybe you're going to remember this ad. But is there anything that make beating up girls at a wedding unique to Sierra Mist-brand lemon-lime soda pop? Anything?

Man: It's a crazy world. Drink Sierra Mist. It helps to refresh your mind.

Not until the end of the commercial does any of this ad make sense. Apparently Sierra Mist will help you cope with the craziness of phenomena like the Wedding Girl.

The big question is -- will Sierra Mist refresh my mind after seeing its own horseshit commercials?

I'll take "Tortured Premises" for $200, Alex

This ad doesn't seriously offend me or anything, but it just strikes me as yet one more example of how little most ad writers think about what they're writing.



You can see the basic idea of the ad there - "Guy who works at sub shop prefers Domino's oven-baked subs to his own employer's product" - and you can also see where it totally went off the rails. There's humor, and then there's this, where in taking the easiest possible path to the "joke" the writer(s) conveniently ignored that the path makes no sense.

Why did this guy order the sandwich to be sent to the sub shop at which he works? Why did he order it during business hours? Why did he give his real name? Why did he talk so loudly about it in front of his co-workers, making it thoroughly clear that he did in fact order it? "Why would I order a DOMINO'S OVEN-BAKED SANDWICH?" He even looks back into the shop as he says it! This makes no sense at all. No one would ever do this. The only reason to do something so incredibly nonsensical in your ad is if it's hilariously awesome. This is not hilariously awesome. This is what happens when your script for the ad is so lame that the director of the spot doesn't know to tell his lead actor that his delivery is totally off-base. Either that or Domino's wants you to think that only complete morons who are incapable of even the most basic subterfuge like their product.

Here is a better premise, which it took me ten seconds to think of: the Submart guy gets caught at Domino's by his manager and claims to be "scoping out the competition." Or, you know, anything else that might come close to happening in real life. I guess maybe that's not as side-splittingly hilarious a punchline as "Poor guy was lost!", though. Right? I mean, that's such a hilarious joke that we had to absolutely torture our basic premise just to get to it, right?

Unrelated note: Why are "Mike & Mike" doing the voice-over at the end? What the hell is the point of that?

Pepto Abysmal

Even in the world of advertising, where maybe one joke in a thousand is actually funny, sometimes you run across a truly epic failure of comedy.



Could there possibly be a more strained, obnoxiously contrived setup for this "joke"? Misdirection is one thing. This is outright "forced to use words no human would ever speak in this context" idiocy, and in service of what?

Pepto Operator: "Pepto-Bismol! Nausea, heartburn, indigestion, upset stomach, diar-rhea!"

Pepto really relishes the last part of that, don't they? Also, this makes it appear that these are all products they sell. "Yeah, can you guys track that package of diarrhea I ordered? It was supposed to be here on Wednesday."

Woman: "Yes, I want to know if we're covered."

Pepto-Bismol: not insurance. As far as I can tell, it hasn't been trying to position itself as insurance in its ads (feel free to correct me if I've missed one). Therefore, this? Stupid.

Woman: "Last night, Rex got into everything."

At this point, the camera pans down to the dog in her lap. She looks at the dog as she says it. Rex is the dog.

Pepto Operator: "What did Rex ingest, Ma'am?"

And here's where things really start to make no sense. So, I think it's pretty clear from his tone of voice that the guy thinks Rex is a dog, right? And he should. Because the phrase "got into everything" is not one that any human being would ever use to describe another, and because he probably hears the dog whines on the other end of the line.

Woman: "Chips, tapioca, ice cream, leftover moo shu and, of course, dog treats."

Of course! Because Rex is a dog.

Pepto Operator: "I'm sorry, Miss, we don't cover dogs."

Ooh, the old "Ma'am-to-Miss" slap-down! That's what you get for calling about a dog, lady! Even though it was obvious that this guy thought Rex was a dog. Why did you even let her keep talking after she said Rex? Anyway, this is classic bad-joke setup - like a guy walking into a bar with his supposed talking dog, and the bartender wants to kick them out unless the guy can prove that the dog talks. But wait! This is no ordinary dog! Get ready for the biggest shocker ending since Seven's head in the box:

Woman: "Oh... no, Charlie is my dog. Rex is my husband."

"I just talk about him like he's a dog! And seem to think nothing of the fact that he eats dog treats, apparently with some regularity!" Come on, what? Could that setup possibly have been any more forced? This is like the joke I mentioned above, only if it went like this:

"A man walks into a bar with his dog. 'Hey, two beers, one for me and one for my furry friend here.'
'We don't allow dogs in this bar,' says the bartender.
'What? This isn't a dog, it's just my friend Jeff,' says the man.
'Hi,' says Jeff."

My sides!

Voice-Over: "Whatever your stomach problem, Pepto keeps you covered. Pepto-Bismol: Yup, you're covered!"

Thanks for saying functionally the same thing twice in four seconds.

Here's how this ad goes if the people in it talk like humans:

Woman: Last night my husband ate everything in sight. He even ate dog treats!
Operator: Sorry to hear that, Ma'am. Some Pepto should clear him right up.
Woman: Say, why the fuck am I calling the Pepto hotline when everyone knows what symptoms your product works on?

When the punchline to your joke is so lame that you have to mask it in a layer of subterfuge just to get to a point where it could even conceivably seem like a form of humor, you have failed. Still, I'm sure we can all be thankful that the guy just ate dog treats, and not brownies laced with horse laxative.

An ad campaign about nothing: Microsoft spends $300 million on "jokes"

So Microsoft wants to be cool. Call it "Apple envy." We've seen it before -- companies trying to make hip commericals that look like they were produced by Apple's longtime agency, Chiat/Day. But where does a giant like Microsoft find their creative inspiration? They open up their pocketbooks, grab a $300 million wad, and go begging to the advertising agency most responsible for the existence of this site, Crispin Porter + Bo-fucking-gusky. Ahh, Crispin. Creator of the BK "King," panderer of lazy humor, mover of offices from Miami to Boulder (I guess -- needed to spend all that money?)

But wow, $300 million dollar account.... access to the world's second richest man.... seemingly limitless marketing opportunities. What would Crispin Porter do with all that? Oh, of course! Take ten of that three hundred million and hire a comedian a decade past his prime! Then put him in ads next to laugh-a-minute comedy master Bill Gates! So, hey, how'd that turn out?



Seinfeld: "Shoe Circus. Quality shoes at discount prices. Why pay more?" Bill Gates?

My thoughts exactly. If you're thinking "what the hell am I watching," like I am, you're probably hoping there's a big, tidy pay-off at the end that makes some sense of this situation. Spoiler alert!! There isn't.

Gates: Jerry Seinfeld?

Seinfeld: Churro?

Hmm. Almost a joke. So close here, Jerry. What is it about Jerry Seinfeld in commercials that just drains the humor out of him?

With $10 million spent on Seinfeld alone, I wonder what the cost of this campaign is per joke. Let's keep a tally. This is joke #1.

Seinfeld (helping Gates try on shoes): Is that your toe?

Gates: No.

Seinfeld: What is it?

Gates: Leather.

Joke Count: 2. Granted, Jerry plays straight man here, but we'll give it to him. Also, this is probably the funniest part of the commercial right here.

Seinfeld: You know what I do? I wear (the Conquistador shoes) in the shower. You ever wear clothes in the shower, Bill?

Gates: No.

Seinfeld: You're dressed, and you're clean. Open the door, go about your business.

Joke Count: 4. I'm counting the word "Conquistador" as a kind of throwback "Seinfeld" word joke. I guess kind of like "Festivus" or something. I dunno. Also I'm counting the showering in your clothes bit as a joke. Although, isn't that really odd? Did Seinfeld write this, or a crack-addled Crispin Porter copywriter?

Seinfeld: Guess what Bill, you're a ten (referring to his shoe size).

And we're up to 5 now, with a pun. Yay. If the commercial stopped now (if only!), it'd be just $2 million per joke. And sure, that may seem excessive, but think about this: Don Rickles used to charge $50,000 per insult at the old Friar's Club Roasts. And if it got a big laugh? That was extra. And that's before inflation, folks. (Note: I'm almost certain this is true.) Comedy ain't cheap.

Seinfeld: What do you get with that card (the Clown Club membership card)?

Gates: Big Top points.

Seinfeld sets the pick, and Gates drains the three! We're at 6. Six funny, funny jokes. Oh, and we've learned a lot about Microsoft. Like about the brand, what their products do, Vista. All that important selling stuff -- it's all covered.

Also, I'm not counting the fact that Bill Gates, a bazillionaire, is shopping at a discount shoe shop as a joke. You have to try harder than that to be funny.

Seinfeld: You know, I imagine over the years you've mind-melded your magnum Jupiter brain to those other Saturn-ringed brains at Microsoft.

That's negative one. That is so forced and awkward that, if there's a joke somewhere in there (Jerry's a zombie and wants to eat Bill's delicious brain?), I can't find it in that turgid, tortured sentence. Just abominable. We're back to 5.

Seinfeld: Just wondering, are they ever gonna come out with something that will make our computers moist and chewy like cake so we can just eat 'em while we're working.

"Jerry Seinfeld on Salvia," ladies and gentlemen! Listen as he riffs on tasting colors in airplane food... identify with him as he discusses the annoying coworker who always flies inside the refrigerator just as you were going to hear it bleed purple! This Thursday through Saturday at the Orpheum. Tickets going fast!

Joke Count: 6. Just because I kind of pity him now.

Seinfeld: If it's yes, give me a signal -- adjust your shorts.

Gates: (moves ass uncomfortably)

Joke Count: 100,000,000,000,000. I take it all back -- that bit alone is like a hundred trillion jokes. Jerry Seinfeld was worth every penny! I actually just came to after passing out from over-laughing. I'm typing this from an ambulance where I'm being treated for a fractured rib cage -- from laughing way too hard at the inherent comedy in blending observational Jewish humor with PC-based operating system marketing! Wooooooo!

The Future. Delicious. (Windows logo)

So, to recap, here's what I take away from this ad:

1. Microsoft is a shoe company.
2. Even rich people like discounts.
3. Jerry Seinfeld stopped being funny, somehow.
4. Hey, those Mac vs. PC ads are pretty funny, huh?
5. Oh, guess I was wrong on point #1 - Microsoft has something to do with computers, not shoes.
6. The future is delicious.
7. Okay, figured it out -- Microsoft sells churros.
8. I am going to buy a Mac immediately.

One would have to think that Crispin Porter + Bogusky's reign atop the advertising world is coming to an end very soon.

Money well spent

Oh, Hyundai. Why didn't you just hire Maria Sharapova, tennis champion?



(Skip ahead to 0:17, since the first part of the video is just some bumper that precedes the ad.)

Salesman: [yammers about features on the car, then says] "Plus, right now you can get $2000 cash back!"
Customer: [sounding utterly unimpressed] "Pretty impressive."

This should have been followed by a massive, cartoonish yawn take. Am I right?

Larry Winget, Best-Selling Author of You're Broke Because You Want to Be, Who Is Creepily Hiding in the Back Seat: "Pretty impressive?"
Customer: "Larry Winget? Best-selling author of You're Broke Because You Want to Be?"

First of all, bullshit. No one outside of the Winget family knows Larry Winget on sight. Second of all, if Larry Winget were famous enough to justify an appearance in this ad, you wouldn't need to mention both his name and the book he's "known" for having written. I also love how the customer still sounds totally underwhelmed. Did they spend too much money getting Larry Winget, Best-Selling Author of You're Broke Because You Want to Be for the ad and not have enough left over to hire an actor who could modulate his voice?

LW, B-SAOYBBYWTB, WICHITBS: "Take the money you'll save and pay down your credit card debt."

I love that this is what passes for sage financial advice. It's not Larry Winget's fault that the American public is so stupid with credit, I guess, but really? "Hey, maybe pay off some of your credit card debt?" Good call, financial guru. Also, if you're that serious about needing to pay off your debt, maybe don't buy a new car, much less a gas-guzzling SUV (17 mpg city, 24 mpg highway). Larry? Maybe? I bet if you asked him when Hyundai wasn't paying him, he'd tell you the same thing.

Customer: "Probably should."
LW, B-SAOYBBYWTB, WICHITBS: "Did he just say probably?"
Customer: "Definitely. [sotto voce] Probably." [flatlines]

God, you are so boring. This is what passes for a joke in this clunker of an ad, by the way.

I kind of feel like if Larry Winget gave financial advice to large corporations, he would take Hyundai to task for wasting their money on a pitchman who is so not famous that he has to be addressed by his full name and what he's (not actually) famous for doing. "Hell, what are you guys thinking? Is my appearance in this ad really any more convincing than any random actor saying the same lines? You could have taken the money you saved by not hiring me and bought a pool table for the company break room to boost morale!"

Vaguely healthy fast food alternatives? Surely you jest!

As you may have noticed, Burger King has really been getting on my nerves in the months I've been doing this blog. It took this next ad a while to show up online in a format even remotely suitable for viewing, but here it is. "Enjoy."



I'm on the record as supporting ad wars when they're done right, but this is just stupid. It's confusing, for one thing; doesn't Burger King lead Wendy's in sales? This is like Pepsi doing an ad that makes fun of RC Cola while giving Coke a free pass. It's not that ads where #2 takes on #1 seem to work very well, but why even go the other direction? And why does Burger King insist on representing one of its menu items as an obnoxious teenager in a hamburger costume?

Whopper Jr.: "Let's go take 'em out, yeah?"
Chicken Crisp: "Yeah."
Whopper Jr.: "We've got business to handle!"

Take 'em out? For serious? And what's with this now-hackneyed "documentary" style? I must have missed the memo where Burger King is now exclusively targeting 16-year-old white suburban kids who find Borat to be the height of comedy.

Whopper Jr.: "Hey, can I - can I get a Whopper Jr., please?"
Wendy's Speaker: "This is - this is not Burger King. That's at Burger King. Sorry."

Oh. Man. Motherfucking owned, Wendy's! PWN3D, even! I can't believe you don't have Burger King products on your menu! Up is down, black is white... what is happening???

This tactic of making fun of other restaurants for not selling their products - which would probably get them sued anyway - is an interesting one on Burger King's part. I would suggest that they didn't go nearly far enough with it, though. Why not have Whopper Jr. go into a pet shop and ask for a Whopper, only to be told that all they sell there are adorable puppies? In your fucking face, pet shop! And imagine the pwnage that will ensue when Chicken Crisp discovers that the local hardware store will sell him nails and screwdrivers, but nothing even resembling the Enormous Omelet Sandwich!

Whopper Jr.: "Can I get some flame-broiled beef, please? Got any of that?"
Wendy's Speaker: "Uh, we don't do that here."

I suppose this is intended as a counterargument to Wendy's "fresh, never frozen" pitch. The question thus becomes - is frozen and flame-broiled beef better-tasting than fresh but grilled beef? I really have no idea, but I will say that I've eaten one Burger King burger in my life and I wouldn't exactly call the flame-broiling noticeable.

Wendy's Speaker: "Do you want a sour cream and chive potato?"
Whopper Jr.: "A baked potat- a baked pota- are we in Russia?"

That joke was much funnier the first time, when I heard it in Caddyshack. Also, that was 1980 and Russia was still a Communist state, so it kind of made sense then. I suppose Russians probably eat a lot of potatoes. The potato is a pretty major vegetable on the world scale, so a lot of people eat potatoes. What's more, a baked potato is a relatively healthy option on a fast-food level; Wendy's sour cream and chive potato has 320 calories and four grams of fat, as well as being fairly rich in vitamin C and potassium. A Whopper Jr. has 370 calories and 21 grams of fat, and that's with no cheese. The Whopper Jr. also weighs a full 150 grams less than a sour cream and chive potato from Wendy's, giving it a fat weight percentage of 14%. The potato? 1.3%. But I guess you're right - this being America, the idea of an even remotely healthy option on a fast food menu is kind of anathema, especially to the type of person who would find this ad funny in the first place.

Burger King hits a home run!

You guys, I loved this ad. I loved it so much I just had to post about it.



Is that not about the funniest thing you've ever seen? Oh my God. It's so sneaky. Like, they're pretending it's just about his tongue, but it's totally referencing morning wood! Ha ha ha! That is so awesome! So awesome that I'm going to ignore how disgusting "Cheesy Tots" sound, or how that really doesn't strike me as a breakfast food, or how utterly fucking terrible this ad is aaaaah I couldn't go through with it.

Well, happy April Fool's Day, anyway.

Shock and Vomit

What audience, exactly, is Cars.com targeting with their latest spot?



Wife: And I didn't have to resort to Plan B.

We are only at 10 seconds (1/3 of the way through the spot), and you are already done telling me anything about your product. Not one more second of this commercial is useful to consumers or relevant to marketing Cars.com.

Salesman: Oh, what's Plan B?

Wife: In order to get you to agree to my terms quickly, I was going to have you eat these brownies which I mixed with horse laxative.

Um, what? Weren't we just talking about comparing car prices? Then I see skeevy looking food and hear the word "laxative" preceded by the word "horse." First of all, why did they go to extreme gross-out measures with a cheap laxative joke? Secondly, why does it have to be horse laxative? Regular human laxative wouldn't do the trick?

Let me just point something out: How old is this couple? They look to be around mid to late 30's, possibly early 40's. That's about the target age range for Cars.com, I'd guess. Now, remind me, who laughs at jokes about laxatives? Oh yeah, not 40 year-olds. I bet this commercial went over great with the pre-Driver's license audience.

Husband: (stomach grumbles, brownie crumbs reveal themselves on chin) Excuse me.

Sweet! Bonus diarrhea jokes! Thank you to the Farrelly brothers for writing this ad.

Wife: My husband kinda has a sweet tooth.

The comedic double whammy! Not only did you dump horse laxative in there, but you let your husband eat it! Woohoo! This is the payoff line to which all future payoff lines will be compared..... if it were funny at all.

If you just took the first 10 seconds of this commercial, here's what you'd have: A straightforward selling message of the benefits of Cars.com without the stomach-churning shit jokes and lowest-common-denominator humor. But you would also have a boring ad. I guess the question for companies that can't come up with a good, original commercial is: Is it better to possibly bore your customers, or to make them want to throw up? Unfortunately, Cars.com seems to know where they want to go.