Oh, what the FUCK, you guys.
Honestly, how much sillier would this commercial have to be before you would just think it was a spoof? Maybe five percent?
[Action film stuff is happening. Big tough army guy is running through the jungle.]
Tough Guy: "Hey, ladies. Enjoying the film? Of course not!"
Of course not! Women don't like action movies, or so goes the stereotype. And this commercial does nothing if not ridiculously pander to stereotypes.
Tough Guy: "Because this is our movie!"
Here we go again.
In a time where ABC's fall comedy lineup includes not one but TWO sitcoms premised entirely around the idea that the "male identity" is under some kind of confusing external threat, I suppose I shouldn't be surprised by ads like this. And yet I am, every single time. Because in the world I live in - rather than the one depicted in TV commercials - you can be a man and have no interest in muscle cars. You can be a woman and enjoy watching action movies. And, for fuck's sake, you can be a man and pick up a can of soda that says "Diet" on it without recoiling like it was an erect penis. (Because no homo, you guys, seriously.)
Tough Guy: "And Dr. Pepper Ten is our soda!"
No, I guess you can't. "Hey, I know Diet Dr. Pepper tastes more like regular Dr. Pepper, but fuck THAT shit. Diets are for women."
Tough Guy: "It's only ten manly calories, but with all 23 flavors of Dr. Pepper."
Diet Dr. Pepper also has those flavors. It's a key part of your advertisements for that product. So the difference between men and women isn't taste - no, it's TEN CALORIES. High fructose corn syrup - which is the sugar component in Dr. Pepper Ten - is four calories a gram (as carbohydrates are). So the difference between the manliest soda alive and a diet drink that's just for GIRLS is a big two and a half grams of sugar.
Wait a second... two and a half grams... Two and a Half Men... are you guys thinking what I'm thinking here? Cross-promotion! The original manly men's sitcom (it's right in the theme song!) and the new manly men's soda.
Tough Guy: "It's what guys want!"
Yeah, aren't you always hanging out with your bros, and then one of them starts complaining that there's only Dr. Pepper and Diet Dr. Pepper in the cooler, and that as a MAN who is totally super MANLY but is ALSO concerned about his calorie intake, what he wants is the incredibly masculine taste of Dr. Pepper Ten? And then you pointed out that he was the one who brought the cooler full of nothing but Dr. Pepper in the first place, and that you all know that he's Dr. Pepper's brand manager and could he please just talk about something else for two goddamn minutes.
Tough Guy: "Like this!"
[throws can, springs trap on pursuing motorcyclists]
Tough Guy: "Catchphrase!"
By the way, Dr. Pepper, don't think it's not obvious how much of this ad was clearly ripped from those Old Spice commercials everyone liked.
Tough Guy: "So you can keep the romantic comedies and lady drinks. We're good."
Diet Dr. Pepper: lady drink. Do not ever purchase this product again, people with a Y chromosome, or Dr. Pepper executives will be waiting at the checkout to call you a fag.
Tough Guy: "Dr. Pepper Ten: It's not for women!"
Hear that, more than half of the US population? Don't even THINK about buying our product! We are marketing exclusively to tough guys who are worried about their weight and also totally insecure about their masculinity and who ALSO love Dr. Pepper and refuse to drink anything else. So to Steve Johnson of Seattle, Washington and Bill Smith of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: there's finally a soda for you! Get to the store right now and pick up some Dr. Pepper Ten, before this ridiculously clumsy sales pitch ensures it vanishes from shelves forever!
Monday, October 10, 2011
Thursday, September 22, 2011
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.
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.
Tuesday, September 20, 2011
The rapping bird gets the worm
The Aflac duck commercials must be one of the most prominent series we've never mentioned on this site, because while somewhat dopey and tedious, they've really just never been worth commenting on. Well, that streak is over.
If you're wondering why the pigeon is rapping, it's because this is a follow-up to this commercial... not that it made any fucking sense that time either.
Kid: "Why do we have Aflac-"
Duck: "Aflac!"
Kid: "And major medical?"
Pigeon: "Major medical, boyyyyy, yeah!"
[Frogs lay down a beat]
I sort of thought that commercials based around rapping clearly written by a forty-something white guy who has heard a grand total of one rap song in his life went out of style in the mid-nineties, but it looks like I was wrong.
Pigeon: "I help pay the doctor, ain't that enough for you?"
Dad: "There are things major medical doesn't do."
Also fun: when you decide to build your commercial around a rap song, then hire the whitest guy ever to stiffly speak half the lines in it.
Duck: "Aflac!"
Dad: "Pays cash so we don't have to fret."
Baby robins: "Something families should get!"
Worm: "Like a safety net!"
Then the mother robin CASUALLY TOSSES THE SINGING WORM TO HER HUNGRY OFFSPRING, WHERE HE IS INSTANTLY DEVOURED. This might be the most sadistic commercial I've ever seen. I hope that worm had some form of life insurance. Thoroughly unfazed, the mother robin goes on to the next line:
Robin: "Even helps pay deductibles to cover your back, with-"
Duck [using lily pads as turntables]: "A-a-a-a-a-aflac!"
This song was ghostwritten by Jay-Z, right? You can tell me. I'd recognize Hova's style anywhere.
Just for good measure, after the Aflac logo we get a scene of the worm doing the worm while the duck, frogs and robin beatbox. Here's the question: is this supposed to be the same worm? We just saw him become breakfast for those robins. There's no way he's not dead. Maybe the end scene is actually out of chronological order, Pulp Fiction-style (which would fit well with the embarrassingly 90s tone of the rest of the ad), and depicts the worm attempting to impress his various potential predators with some hot breakdancing moves. Sadly, as we know all too well by this point, it didn't work; the mother robin simply waited for an opportune moment to pounce. Perhaps the worm's line in the song was a last-ditch effort to prove to the other creatures that he was too talented to be eaten. Good try, pal, but those hungry chicks are a tough audience.
If you're wondering why the pigeon is rapping, it's because this is a follow-up to this commercial... not that it made any fucking sense that time either.
Kid: "Why do we have Aflac-"
Duck: "Aflac!"
Kid: "And major medical?"
Pigeon: "Major medical, boyyyyy, yeah!"
[Frogs lay down a beat]
I sort of thought that commercials based around rapping clearly written by a forty-something white guy who has heard a grand total of one rap song in his life went out of style in the mid-nineties, but it looks like I was wrong.
Pigeon: "I help pay the doctor, ain't that enough for you?"
Dad: "There are things major medical doesn't do."
Also fun: when you decide to build your commercial around a rap song, then hire the whitest guy ever to stiffly speak half the lines in it.
Duck: "Aflac!"
Dad: "Pays cash so we don't have to fret."
Baby robins: "Something families should get!"
Worm: "Like a safety net!"
Then the mother robin CASUALLY TOSSES THE SINGING WORM TO HER HUNGRY OFFSPRING, WHERE HE IS INSTANTLY DEVOURED. This might be the most sadistic commercial I've ever seen. I hope that worm had some form of life insurance. Thoroughly unfazed, the mother robin goes on to the next line:
Robin: "Even helps pay deductibles to cover your back, with-"
Duck [using lily pads as turntables]: "A-a-a-a-a-aflac!"
This song was ghostwritten by Jay-Z, right? You can tell me. I'd recognize Hova's style anywhere.
Just for good measure, after the Aflac logo we get a scene of the worm doing the worm while the duck, frogs and robin beatbox. Here's the question: is this supposed to be the same worm? We just saw him become breakfast for those robins. There's no way he's not dead. Maybe the end scene is actually out of chronological order, Pulp Fiction-style (which would fit well with the embarrassingly 90s tone of the rest of the ad), and depicts the worm attempting to impress his various potential predators with some hot breakdancing moves. Sadly, as we know all too well by this point, it didn't work; the mother robin simply waited for an opportune moment to pounce. Perhaps the worm's line in the song was a last-ditch effort to prove to the other creatures that he was too talented to be eaten. Good try, pal, but those hungry chicks are a tough audience.
Tuesday, September 13, 2011
There's always room for creepiness
I've talked before about how much I hate it when advertisers of products that are really geared toward children try desperately to pitch them to adults instead. Well, it probably shouldn't surprise anyone to see this, since Jell-O is a Kraft brand.
First of all, dude, you're an adult. Buy a big tub of whatever brand of chocolate pudding strikes your fancy and eat out of it to your heart's content. By no means are you confined to eating from tiny little two-ounce or whatever pudding cups.
Second of all, "pudding face" is goddamn horrifying and I can't believe Jell-O built an entire campaign around it in the hopes that this would move product. I first came into contact with this campaign via their series of horrible billboards which, I assure you, are like 500 times creepier than this ad is.
These things are fucking terrifying. This is apparently supposed to represent happiness? Unrestrained joy? Guess what, Crispin Porter + Bogusky (yeah, I know, who would have believed they'd be behind another terrible ad campaign) - that's not what I think of! The guy on the right looks like a serial killer. The kids on the left look like evil ventriloquist dummies from some creepy B-movie.
But hey, we're here to talk about this TV ad. So I guess we might as well.
Daughter: "Didn't we have some Jell-O pudding?"
I know this is just something commercials do, and I can't expect them not to, but: no one says the complete brand name of a product out loud like this. Ever.
Daughter: "Dad? Did you eat my Jell-O pudding?"
Did you buy it with your own money? When did this go from "hey, we had some of this product in the house, right?" to "IT IS MINE WHO TOUCHED IT?"
Dad [unconvincingly]: "No."
[Daughter walks over and pulls the paper away from his face.]
Daughter: "Pudding face!"
Dad: "No... I'm just... happy."
Mom: "Only pudding gives you pudding face."
Fuck you, Kraft, you editorializing pieces of shit. Your shitty products are not this good. Also, this guy? Does not look happy. He looks absolutely miserable, but with a grotesque forced smile wrought across his face. Jell-O pudding is apparently now a Batman villain.
Dad: "I'm sorry."
Son: "You don't look sorry."
Dad: "You're right, I'm not."
"Maybe because I paid for that fucking pudding. You hear me, grade schoolers? If I want your pudding I'm going to eat it and you're not gonna say shit." Honestly, what is Crispin Porter's obsession with trying to turn adults into the Trix rabbit? If, for some reason, adults want to eat the mediocre pudding you've been pitching to children since time immemorial, and if you're trying to sell it to them for that purpose, why is the pitch here seemingly intended to shame the adult for eating a kids' snack? Do you want me to buy it or not, assholes?
Announcer: "Get your pudding face on with oh-so-cool and irresistible Jell-O pudding."
Uh, Jell-O? You don't really get to take credit for the pudding being "cool." That's the refrigerator's job.
Obviously I don't expect Jell-O to under-pitch their product. But when you go way, way overboard, that's just annoying. Of course, that isn't nearly as big of a problem as is the fact that there is nothing even remotely appealing about "pudding face." It sounds awful. The way this spot treats it as a scarlet letter is bizarrely counterintuitive. And, most damningly, it looks awful. This is, seemingly, a condition to which I should aspire! I should want that horrible, contorted grin that looks more like the result of weeks of Clockwork Orange-style torture than the result of eating something delicious to be plastered across my face. I mean, what, was Crispin Porter so upset that Burger King phased out the King that they decided they were going to get something even creepier on the air? If so, I'm scared to think what kind of ads we're going to see when "pudding face" inevitably runs its course.
First of all, dude, you're an adult. Buy a big tub of whatever brand of chocolate pudding strikes your fancy and eat out of it to your heart's content. By no means are you confined to eating from tiny little two-ounce or whatever pudding cups.
Second of all, "pudding face" is goddamn horrifying and I can't believe Jell-O built an entire campaign around it in the hopes that this would move product. I first came into contact with this campaign via their series of horrible billboards which, I assure you, are like 500 times creepier than this ad is.
These things are fucking terrifying. This is apparently supposed to represent happiness? Unrestrained joy? Guess what, Crispin Porter + Bogusky (yeah, I know, who would have believed they'd be behind another terrible ad campaign) - that's not what I think of! The guy on the right looks like a serial killer. The kids on the left look like evil ventriloquist dummies from some creepy B-movie.
But hey, we're here to talk about this TV ad. So I guess we might as well.
Daughter: "Didn't we have some Jell-O pudding?"
I know this is just something commercials do, and I can't expect them not to, but: no one says the complete brand name of a product out loud like this. Ever.
Daughter: "Dad? Did you eat my Jell-O pudding?"
Did you buy it with your own money? When did this go from "hey, we had some of this product in the house, right?" to "IT IS MINE WHO TOUCHED IT?"
Dad [unconvincingly]: "No."
[Daughter walks over and pulls the paper away from his face.]
Daughter: "Pudding face!"
Dad: "No... I'm just... happy."
Mom: "Only pudding gives you pudding face."
Fuck you, Kraft, you editorializing pieces of shit. Your shitty products are not this good. Also, this guy? Does not look happy. He looks absolutely miserable, but with a grotesque forced smile wrought across his face. Jell-O pudding is apparently now a Batman villain.
Dad: "I'm sorry."
Son: "You don't look sorry."
Dad: "You're right, I'm not."
"Maybe because I paid for that fucking pudding. You hear me, grade schoolers? If I want your pudding I'm going to eat it and you're not gonna say shit." Honestly, what is Crispin Porter's obsession with trying to turn adults into the Trix rabbit? If, for some reason, adults want to eat the mediocre pudding you've been pitching to children since time immemorial, and if you're trying to sell it to them for that purpose, why is the pitch here seemingly intended to shame the adult for eating a kids' snack? Do you want me to buy it or not, assholes?
Announcer: "Get your pudding face on with oh-so-cool and irresistible Jell-O pudding."
Uh, Jell-O? You don't really get to take credit for the pudding being "cool." That's the refrigerator's job.
Obviously I don't expect Jell-O to under-pitch their product. But when you go way, way overboard, that's just annoying. Of course, that isn't nearly as big of a problem as is the fact that there is nothing even remotely appealing about "pudding face." It sounds awful. The way this spot treats it as a scarlet letter is bizarrely counterintuitive. And, most damningly, it looks awful. This is, seemingly, a condition to which I should aspire! I should want that horrible, contorted grin that looks more like the result of weeks of Clockwork Orange-style torture than the result of eating something delicious to be plastered across my face. I mean, what, was Crispin Porter so upset that Burger King phased out the King that they decided they were going to get something even creepier on the air? If so, I'm scared to think what kind of ads we're going to see when "pudding face" inevitably runs its course.
Friday, September 9, 2011
Worst threesome ever
Oh, the awkwardness of high school reunions. Being forced to make small talk with people you haven't seen in decades... getting hit on by old classmates who are like totally bald now... having old friends surreptitiously unzip your clothes... you know, all the normal stuff.
I think there's a reason we don't normally see Coldwater Creek ads on television.
Man: "Sooo... are you seeing anyone?"
Woman: "I'm married."
Boom! In your face, guy! Guy who has not at all been calculatedly paired to make this already quite-attractive-for-her-mid-40s woman look even better than she does by virtue of being balding and awkward!
Man: "Oh!"
Woman: "Yeah."
Man: "Lucky fella."
Woman: *chuckles patronizingly*
Why is either of them still standing there at this point? Really, why was this entire first exchange even necessary, other than to fill time?
Woman 2: "Oh, my - Jennifer?"
Woman: "Elizabeth?"
"We're wearing nametags that identify us, so I'm not sure why we sound so shocked."
Woman 2: "You look amazing! And this dress, wow! It is so good to see you!"
Then, while distracting Woman 1 with her uncomfortably long hug and thoroughly pat small talk, Woman 2 fucking unzips Woman 1's dress so she can look at the tag to see what brand it is.
I mean, this isn't a thing that happens, right? No one would ever do this. And why would they? You could, you know, ASK WHAT BRAND THE DRESS IS. The person who bought it is right in front of you. Or is that an etiquette faux pas? Even if it is, is it more of an etiquette faux pas than unzipping someone's clothes while they're wearing them? I say no!
And then Woman 2 just walks away without saying anything else, while the guy stands there with a look on his face suggesting he's totally going to be using that hug as the starting point for some furious masturbation in his lonely Holiday Inn Express room later that night.
I guess the ad does an okay job of getting the brand across by the way it just plops it on the screen at the end there, but really this whole thing is just forced and uncomfortable, to say nothing of the fact that it seems like it was pulled directly from an unaired sitcom pilot from the year 1997. The overall pitch - "Hey, 40-something ladies, prepare to wow everyone at your 25th high school reunion" - makes sense enough, but could it have been executed more questionably? I doubt it.
I think there's a reason we don't normally see Coldwater Creek ads on television.
Man: "Sooo... are you seeing anyone?"
Woman: "I'm married."
Boom! In your face, guy! Guy who has not at all been calculatedly paired to make this already quite-attractive-for-her-mid-40s woman look even better than she does by virtue of being balding and awkward!
Man: "Oh!"
Woman: "Yeah."
Man: "Lucky fella."
Woman: *chuckles patronizingly*
Why is either of them still standing there at this point? Really, why was this entire first exchange even necessary, other than to fill time?
Woman 2: "Oh, my - Jennifer?"
Woman: "Elizabeth?"
"We're wearing nametags that identify us, so I'm not sure why we sound so shocked."
Woman 2: "You look amazing! And this dress, wow! It is so good to see you!"
Then, while distracting Woman 1 with her uncomfortably long hug and thoroughly pat small talk, Woman 2 fucking unzips Woman 1's dress so she can look at the tag to see what brand it is.
I mean, this isn't a thing that happens, right? No one would ever do this. And why would they? You could, you know, ASK WHAT BRAND THE DRESS IS. The person who bought it is right in front of you. Or is that an etiquette faux pas? Even if it is, is it more of an etiquette faux pas than unzipping someone's clothes while they're wearing them? I say no!
And then Woman 2 just walks away without saying anything else, while the guy stands there with a look on his face suggesting he's totally going to be using that hug as the starting point for some furious masturbation in his lonely Holiday Inn Express room later that night.
I guess the ad does an okay job of getting the brand across by the way it just plops it on the screen at the end there, but really this whole thing is just forced and uncomfortable, to say nothing of the fact that it seems like it was pulled directly from an unaired sitcom pilot from the year 1997. The overall pitch - "Hey, 40-something ladies, prepare to wow everyone at your 25th high school reunion" - makes sense enough, but could it have been executed more questionably? I doubt it.
Tuesday, June 7, 2011
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.
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.
Monday, May 2, 2011
Every kiss begins with cats
I don't know what kind of TV loyal reader Tyler watches, but he sure finds some weird stuff to recommend to us. Case in point:
What the fucking shit is that?
There must be a trimmed-down version for actual broadcast, because at a minute long this is a waste of my fucking time. The first 25 seconds tells us nothing except that these two are dating and that she likes her family's cat. Yawn. Then there's the creepiness/utter insanity of the rest of it.
No one's house needs a goddamn cat room. Okay? It just doesn't. Especially if the cat is the size of a gerbil. (I know, I know, it's going to get larger. Still doesn't need its own room.) But that's nothing next to the idea of using a kitten to propose, creepy on a number of levels. First of all, he apparently thinks that just because she loves her family's cat, she'll love any cat. It's not clear to me this follows. Second, he's basically using cuteness to guilt her into this engagement. "Well, if you won't marry me, will you at least marry Mr. Snuggles and me?" Third, that poor kitten looks terrified while she's holding it. And fourth, the ad ends with what looks like "Our Wedding Album, Brought to You by Fancy Feast."
And Fancy Feast has FUCK ALL to do with any of this. What's even the pitch here? Feed your cat Fancy Feast or you don't love it? Feed your cat Fancy Feast or you don't love each other? Only Fancy Feast is good enough for your cat when the cat is the fulcrum on which your relationship balances? And, fuck, are there really people who feed their cats from fancy glass dishes? God, I hope not. Really, the idea of pretending that canned cat food is fancy when it looks like shit and smells like a wet pile of rotting fish just annoys me. But when you go out there and try to sell cat food with a treacly human story... that's just retarded.
What the fucking shit is that?
There must be a trimmed-down version for actual broadcast, because at a minute long this is a waste of my fucking time. The first 25 seconds tells us nothing except that these two are dating and that she likes her family's cat. Yawn. Then there's the creepiness/utter insanity of the rest of it.
No one's house needs a goddamn cat room. Okay? It just doesn't. Especially if the cat is the size of a gerbil. (I know, I know, it's going to get larger. Still doesn't need its own room.) But that's nothing next to the idea of using a kitten to propose, creepy on a number of levels. First of all, he apparently thinks that just because she loves her family's cat, she'll love any cat. It's not clear to me this follows. Second, he's basically using cuteness to guilt her into this engagement. "Well, if you won't marry me, will you at least marry Mr. Snuggles and me?" Third, that poor kitten looks terrified while she's holding it. And fourth, the ad ends with what looks like "Our Wedding Album, Brought to You by Fancy Feast."
And Fancy Feast has FUCK ALL to do with any of this. What's even the pitch here? Feed your cat Fancy Feast or you don't love it? Feed your cat Fancy Feast or you don't love each other? Only Fancy Feast is good enough for your cat when the cat is the fulcrum on which your relationship balances? And, fuck, are there really people who feed their cats from fancy glass dishes? God, I hope not. Really, the idea of pretending that canned cat food is fancy when it looks like shit and smells like a wet pile of rotting fish just annoys me. But when you go out there and try to sell cat food with a treacly human story... that's just retarded.
Sunday, May 1, 2011
Domu ads. Stupid. Annoying. Chicago.
This probably falls into the category of "stuff only I care about," since unless you take public transportation in Chicago you're never going to see these things. But they've just been blanketing the El and buses lately, which means I'm stuck learning two unlikely things about some total stranger I couldn't care less about.
Because there's no way I'm going to get a picture of these things from a moving train, I'm stuck with the ones inside cars or at stops I actually use. So trust me when I say there are way worse ones than the ones below. For instance, every male appearing in these ads seems to have come right out of "Look at This Fucking Hipster" right down to the clearly ironic ridiculous facial hair.
I mean, look at these fucking things. So, okay. Presumably the idea is that you're trying to sell the viewer on the product by showing a wide range of people who use the service (right down to the varying of the neighborhoods, which is probably the most important part anyway). But how does it help to go with weird, ridiculous, unrealistic and/or esoteric professions and interests? Take this one. Slam poets and urologists? Both of them? Did they meet at a urology convention and realize they both loved slam poetry, or did they meet at a slam poetry session and discover they both happened to be urologists? I mean, come on. It would be hacky enough to make some ad be all "Hey, wouldn't it be super funny if this person was a slam poet and a urologist?" But pretending that this describes two people living together makes me absolutely incapable of taking this bullshit seriously. Is this supposed to be lighthearted and I'm thinking too hard about it? Probably. I don't care. It's stupid and I have to see shit like this eight times every day. If they weren't so ubiquitous I'd have snorted and moved on.
"Muse?" Guess what - go fuck yourself. Is there a single noun you could use to describe a person that would make them sound more insufferable other than obvious pejoratives? I say no. And while this might be stereotyping, is there a universe in which this woman looks like, of all things, an air traffic controller? She looks more like a waitress at a vegan restaurant who goes to art school during the day.
Because there's no way I'm going to get a picture of these things from a moving train, I'm stuck with the ones inside cars or at stops I actually use. So trust me when I say there are way worse ones than the ones below. For instance, every male appearing in these ads seems to have come right out of "Look at This Fucking Hipster" right down to the clearly ironic ridiculous facial hair.
I mean, look at these fucking things. So, okay. Presumably the idea is that you're trying to sell the viewer on the product by showing a wide range of people who use the service (right down to the varying of the neighborhoods, which is probably the most important part anyway). But how does it help to go with weird, ridiculous, unrealistic and/or esoteric professions and interests? Take this one. Slam poets and urologists? Both of them? Did they meet at a urology convention and realize they both loved slam poetry, or did they meet at a slam poetry session and discover they both happened to be urologists? I mean, come on. It would be hacky enough to make some ad be all "Hey, wouldn't it be super funny if this person was a slam poet and a urologist?" But pretending that this describes two people living together makes me absolutely incapable of taking this bullshit seriously. Is this supposed to be lighthearted and I'm thinking too hard about it? Probably. I don't care. It's stupid and I have to see shit like this eight times every day. If they weren't so ubiquitous I'd have snorted and moved on.
"Muse?" Guess what - go fuck yourself. Is there a single noun you could use to describe a person that would make them sound more insufferable other than obvious pejoratives? I say no. And while this might be stereotyping, is there a universe in which this woman looks like, of all things, an air traffic controller? She looks more like a waitress at a vegan restaurant who goes to art school during the day.
Thanks (I guess) to what appears to be the website of the woman who took the photos, I was also able to get a hold of this one. Holy shit, LOOK AT THIS FUCKING HIPSTER. Worse yet, this appears to be part of maybe the most bizarre viral marketing attempt of all time - that Twitter account has been posting for several months, mostly about podiatry, but if you read the thing it's pretty clear (I think) that it's being ginned up by someone who isn't a real doctor, it links only to Domu.com and gives no actual links to or contact info for the supposed business, and Google doesn't give any indication that anyone named Sven O. Svenson is actually a podiatrist in the area. Also, if I walked into a doctor's office and they looked like this motherfucker, I'd be out of there faster than you can say "This is the weirdest fake shit I have ever seen in my life."
According to Liska + Associates, the agency responsible for this nonsense, "For the next evolution of marketing, Liska worked with Domu on a series of ads that feature the human side of Domu—the cool, interesting Chicagoans who use the site." Here's the problem: it's hard to feature the human side of something when you use humans who are so obviously fake, and when half of them have goofy, esoteric jobs or interests that virtually no one can relate to, and every picture is the most hipster-looking douchebag available. I can't recall seeing a single one that's just a normal looking dude in a business suit. They all have to have weirdly teased-up hair, or stupid ironic beards, or be dressed like they're on their way to a poetry reading in 1997. None of these people look "cool" or "interesting" unless you're already that kind of a schmuck, which means I'm forced to assume that Domu decided that their only real audience, I guess the only people currently renting apartments in Chicago, was hipsters. In which case, I guess, mission accomplished?
Dear advertisers: making the people in your ads into ridiculous extremes of human behavior does not make them seem more real (because how could I possibly come up with a person who was a slam poet and a urologist???). It makes them seem fake as shit. Even if these were all real people and were accurate recountings of their jobs and passions, I would have come up with some other people whose descriptions were closer to the peak of the bell curve, not several standard deviations toward the far end. Because these ads are stupid unbelievable bullshit and don't sell me on a fucking thing.
According to Liska + Associates, the agency responsible for this nonsense, "For the next evolution of marketing, Liska worked with Domu on a series of ads that feature the human side of Domu—the cool, interesting Chicagoans who use the site." Here's the problem: it's hard to feature the human side of something when you use humans who are so obviously fake, and when half of them have goofy, esoteric jobs or interests that virtually no one can relate to, and every picture is the most hipster-looking douchebag available. I can't recall seeing a single one that's just a normal looking dude in a business suit. They all have to have weirdly teased-up hair, or stupid ironic beards, or be dressed like they're on their way to a poetry reading in 1997. None of these people look "cool" or "interesting" unless you're already that kind of a schmuck, which means I'm forced to assume that Domu decided that their only real audience, I guess the only people currently renting apartments in Chicago, was hipsters. In which case, I guess, mission accomplished?
Dear advertisers: making the people in your ads into ridiculous extremes of human behavior does not make them seem more real (because how could I possibly come up with a person who was a slam poet and a urologist???). It makes them seem fake as shit. Even if these were all real people and were accurate recountings of their jobs and passions, I would have come up with some other people whose descriptions were closer to the peak of the bell curve, not several standard deviations toward the far end. Because these ads are stupid unbelievable bullshit and don't sell me on a fucking thing.
Friday, March 25, 2011
Forget smartphones, get a smarmphone
Leave it to Apple to concoct the smarmiest, most defensive ad campaign of the year.
Smug Douchebag Announcer: "If you don't have an iPhone, you don't have iBooks. So you don't have your favorite books in your pocket."
The emphasis on "your" there is weird, like if you buy an Android Phone it jams a hundred books you don't like down your pants. "Hey! Get out of there, the complete Dean Koontz oeuvre!"
SDA: "If you don't have an iPhone, you don't have an iPod in your phone."
Smug Douchebag Announcer: "If you don't have an iPhone, you don't have iBooks. So you don't have your favorite books in your pocket."
The emphasis on "your" there is weird, like if you buy an Android Phone it jams a hundred books you don't like down your pants. "Hey! Get out of there, the complete Dean Koontz oeuvre!"
SDA: "And you don't have the iBook store, an entire bookstore in your pocket."
Just in case you couldn't figure out what "the iBook store" could possibly be referring to, here's another whole clause!
SDA: "So whether you're looking for a certain author or a New York Times best-seller, a good book is just a tap away."
Certainly not true of any other product!
SDA: "Yup, if you don't have an iPhone, well, you don't have an iPhone."
Tautology moves a lot of product, let me tell you.
The whole series of these ads is so obnoxiously smug that, frankly, it completely turns me off from ever wanting an iPhone. And it's not just that they treat themselves like the hottest shit on the planet. Take this ad, for instance - the iPhone is trying to throw its body in front of e-readers like Amazon's Kindle, Barnes and Noble's Nook, and etc. And that's all well and good, I guess, except that the iPhone isn't really a competitor to those products. It's a phone. It's great how much other stuff it does, but if I want to read a book and don't want an actual book, I'm going to get an e-reader. The iPhone screen is like four inches! Yeah, can't wait to be hunched over Moby-Dick on a screen that size. It's like that T-Mobile commercial that brags about the phone that comes preloaded with Inception, as though anyone is excited to watch Inception, a film noteworthy for its visuals, on a tiny screen in the palm of their hand. I swear, sometimes I feel like the more things they make smartphones do, the less excited I am about it. I want a phone that makes calls and can surf the internet. I don't need to watch tiny, tiny movies or read tiny, tiny books. There are other devices that can do those things on the go in a way that isn't completely stupid, and if I need to do them that badly, I'll get one of those devices.
Are there 80 million variants on how much of a stupid jerk you are for not having an iPhone? Of course there are.
SDA: "If you don't have an iPhone, you don't have an iPod in your phone."
A necessary thing that everyone should have! Also, pretty much every smartphone plays music, asshole.
SDA: "With your music, and your playlists."
Again with the overemphasis on how this will be stuff you like, as though it's not true of anything else. Windows Phone finds out what music you like and then deliberately recommends completely unrelated tracks. Android phones come preloaded exclusively with fifteen remixes of "My Humps" by the Black Eyed Peas. I know the idea is how great it is that the iPhone can sync to iTunes, but really, BFD.
SDA: "And you don't have iTunes on your phone, the world's #1 music store."
Hey, have you heard of iTunes? No? Well, apparently it's some kind of music store. Good thing they told us that, or this ad would have been really confusing. Now it's time for some applesauce - open wide for the airplane!
(My phone, which is not an iPhone as you can probably guess, comes with direct access to the Amazon.com MP3 store, which is basically the exact same thing as the iTunes store. So... no, Apple, I really don't care.)
SDA: "With Genius, that recommends new music based on the songs you already have."
Do not care. At all. Every online music company in the world recommends music based on your established likes. And who buys songs on their phone based on a recommendation without even listening to them first?
SDA: "Yup, if you don't have an iPhone, go fuck yourself."
Well, maybe he didn't say that. But he may as well have. I find the tone of ads like this completely counterproductive. It's 30 seconds of telling any iPhone-less viewer that they're an idiot for not having one because it's just that great. Why would you want to talk down to consumers? Unless that was the point...
Adman 1: Okay, time to get to work on the new iPhone commercial, guys. What should we focus on?
Adman 2: All the great features!
Adman 3: The ways in which it's better than other phones!
Adman 4: The douchey self-satisfaction you get from owning one!
Adman 5: The inherent superiority of iPhone owners to other humans!
Adman 1: Those are all pretty great ideas. Anyone have a slogan?
Adman 4: "If you don't have an iPhone, go get one right now, you stupid twit!"
Adman 5: "If you don't have an iPhone, you probably also don't have a BRAIN!"
Adman 1: Okay, um, not bad, but maybe a little bit too on the nose. We don't want to insult potential customers.
Adman 5: We don't?
Adman 4: The iPhone is still made by Apple, right? I mean, have you ever seen an Apple ad before? Those Mac vs. PC ads are classic examples of insulting the consumer!
Adman 5: Apple products sell themselves by word of mouth. The whole point of the TV ads is just to make people who already own Apple products feel even more satisfied with themselves than they already do. They're like "attaboy" pats on the back for people who own Apple stuff.
Adman 1: Wow. Okay. What about something like "If you don't have an iPhone, you don't have an iPhone?"
Adman 4: ...maybe. But can you get the guy talking to sound like he's much, much better than anyone who doesn't have one?
Adman 5: Gotta have that sense of superiority. It justifies the inflated purchase price.
Adman 1: Okay, I think we're all done here.
The iPhone! If you don't have one, how are you supposed to feel like a better person than all the other losers?
Sunday, March 13, 2011
What the Hawk?
I sympathize with makers of local commercials. You're tasked with standing out amid a sea of high-budget national ads that never fail to make your spots look even cheaper than they already would. With that in mind, I can see why a company might opt to borrow ideas from a national campaign for their local ad. However, the eTrade baby is not the one I would have gone with.
Baby: "I'm looking cool in this car! This thing is a stroller magnet! I should work on my pick-up lines."
First of all: no. You should not do that, because you are a baby. Also, note that the baby's body never moves, which is kind of disturbing and just makes him look like a tiny quadriplegic.
Baby: "Hey girl, you need a nap? 'Cause you been crawling through my mind all day."
As awful as the eTrade ads were with their implications of babies having sex with each other, I'm not sure this isn't more blatant than any of those. Baby pick-up lines? Someone really thought this was a good idea?
Baby: "Wow. I'm slaying it!"
[Mom in front seat rolls her eyes]
"Ha! Man. My infant son thinks he's, like, the hottest shit. And he's so not. I would never fuck him if he used that line on me."
Baby: "How about, dang, girl! That diaper's looking good on you."
How about not? How about I'm three seconds away from clawing my own eyes out and shoving them into my ears?
Baby: "What are you, a size 18 months? Yeah, I like my girls a little chubby."
Announcer: "You want some chubby?"
What? What the fuck are you talking about? If this is reliant on me having seen previous ads in whatever fucking series this is, or knowing Hawk Ford's shitty dealership slogan, that is a BAD idea, because I live in Chicago, watch a lot of TV, write about ads as a hobby, and yet can't recall ever seeing one of their ads before. If it's not reliant on that... WHAT?
Announcer: "Chubby discounts. Chubby savings."
WHAT. THE. FUCK. ARE. YOU. TALKING. ABOUT.
Does Hawk Ford know that "chubby" is also a slang term involving the penis? Were they going for that pun? When the baby says that he likes his girls "a little chubby," is that intended to be a play on words, in that he might also have a "little chubby?" Because if so, I want to drive down to Oak Lawn and light that entire dealership on fire.
And if they don't know that, and they weren't going for that pun... what in the hell were they going for?
By the way: "Chubby discounts, chubby savings" isn't even Hawk Ford's normal slogan, as evidenced by these other ads in this campaign. So... a baby calling another baby fat was just so hilarious we had to alter our whole ad to be built around it, in spite of the fact that it makes no goddamn sense? For fuck's sake, at least those other ads use the baby for semi-legit reasons. With this one it just seems like there was a bet in the office about how horrible a commercial they could make and still get it on the air.
Baby: "I'm looking cool in this car! This thing is a stroller magnet! I should work on my pick-up lines."
First of all: no. You should not do that, because you are a baby. Also, note that the baby's body never moves, which is kind of disturbing and just makes him look like a tiny quadriplegic.
Baby: "Hey girl, you need a nap? 'Cause you been crawling through my mind all day."
As awful as the eTrade ads were with their implications of babies having sex with each other, I'm not sure this isn't more blatant than any of those. Baby pick-up lines? Someone really thought this was a good idea?
Baby: "Wow. I'm slaying it!"
[Mom in front seat rolls her eyes]
"Ha! Man. My infant son thinks he's, like, the hottest shit. And he's so not. I would never fuck him if he used that line on me."
Baby: "How about, dang, girl! That diaper's looking good on you."
How about not? How about I'm three seconds away from clawing my own eyes out and shoving them into my ears?
Baby: "What are you, a size 18 months? Yeah, I like my girls a little chubby."
Announcer: "You want some chubby?"
What? What the fuck are you talking about? If this is reliant on me having seen previous ads in whatever fucking series this is, or knowing Hawk Ford's shitty dealership slogan, that is a BAD idea, because I live in Chicago, watch a lot of TV, write about ads as a hobby, and yet can't recall ever seeing one of their ads before. If it's not reliant on that... WHAT?
Announcer: "Chubby discounts. Chubby savings."
WHAT. THE. FUCK. ARE. YOU. TALKING. ABOUT.
Does Hawk Ford know that "chubby" is also a slang term involving the penis? Were they going for that pun? When the baby says that he likes his girls "a little chubby," is that intended to be a play on words, in that he might also have a "little chubby?" Because if so, I want to drive down to Oak Lawn and light that entire dealership on fire.
And if they don't know that, and they weren't going for that pun... what in the hell were they going for?
By the way: "Chubby discounts, chubby savings" isn't even Hawk Ford's normal slogan, as evidenced by these other ads in this campaign. So... a baby calling another baby fat was just so hilarious we had to alter our whole ad to be built around it, in spite of the fact that it makes no goddamn sense? For fuck's sake, at least those other ads use the baby for semi-legit reasons. With this one it just seems like there was a bet in the office about how horrible a commercial they could make and still get it on the air.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)