These Mini-Wheats ads are... a little weird.
Mini-Wheat 1: "Ah, the first day of school. New pencils, new books..."
Mini-Wheat 2: "New backpack! Looks good."
Mini-Wheat 1: "Just trying to look our best."
This is where things start getting weird. "Our" best? These kids are being followed around by the anthropomorphic spirits of the cereal they ate for breakfast this morning, and that cereal is talking like it and the kid who ate it are a single unit. Does that weird out anyone else?
Mini-Wheat 2: "Gonna take more than looks. From what I hear, Miss Haskins is a toughie."
From what you hear... from who? Is there some sort of Mini-Wheat grapevine? "Well, I happened to overhear the Mini-Wheat this kid's older brother ate telling the Mini-Wheat his mom ate that Miss Haskins was tough when he had her last year. Because, uh, he's been eating the exact same Mini-Wheat for a year? Or like, if you eat Mini-Wheats every day you just get this kind of Mini-Wheat spiritual advisor as a permanent thing? Also, I can't believe they got David Spade to do this voice." (Possible alternate theory: David Spade impersonator? Could such things exist?)
Mini-Wheat 1: "Oh, we had a good breakfast, so we're ready!"
...who? Who fucking had a good breakfast? Did the Mini-Wheat have a hearty bowl of grits just before being devoured by the kid? Why doesn't this commercial make any goddamn sense?
Mini-Wheat 3: "Gonna be another great year, huh, guys?"
Mini-Wheat 1: "You bet your eight layers!"
Eesh. Another great year? So these are, in fact, some sort of permanent Mini-Wheat spiritual guides? Presumably they slap you upside the head if you ever eat anything else for breakfast, since the end result has literally everyone with a personal Mini-Wheat as though this were one of those liquor ads where every bottle behind the bar is DiSaronno. Of course, this is an ad for Mini-Wheats; I guess we can't expect Toucan Sam perched on one kid's backpack or anything.
Voiceover: "A clinical study showed kids who had a filling breakfast of Frosted Mini-Wheats cereal improved their attentiveness by nearly 20% when compared to kids who missed out on breakfast."
This just annoys me. Not that there's anything wrong with their methodology per se, but the idea of a world in which the only choices are Frosted Mini-Wheats or go hungry is kind of ridiculous. Also, did they really conduct a study in which they actively had to deprive kids of breakfast? Because that seems kind of shitty. And if they simply picked a bunch of kids who happened not to have eaten breakfast as their "control" group, that fails to account for about a bazillion potential extraneous variables. I also wonder how they're defining "attentiveness" and whether 20% is really statistically significant. But hey - good use of the word "clinical" in there. Makes it sound really important!
I also like the close-up shot of the bowl of Mini-Wheats with raspberries in it while the woman is talking. How many bowls of Mini-Wheats in history - particularly those eaten by children before school in the morning - contained fucking fresh raspberries? I will say zero.
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
Thursday, March 19, 2009
Remember, Asians are the smart ones
The premise of any commercial for a men's deodorant, body spray or body wash is the same -- non-stop sex. For example, watch any Old Spice ad. But that's actually not my complaint about this Nivea for Men commercial, because over-the-top sex appeal just so commonplace that it's silly to call it out. Rather, I object to this commercial for another reason (just watch the first commercial here, I think this includes both the :30 and the :15 versions):
Now the first part of this ad pokes fun at some the Old Spice and Axe Body Spray nonsense, by showing teenager parodies lusting for a strong-smelling body wash they think could get them laid (and the only reason they would have that perception? Commercials.) But in the middle of that is a fairly egregious slip-up:
Asian kid (nerdily): This won't increase my ability to mate.
Oh yes -- stereotypes. That's what body wash/deodorant marketing was missing! Man, the constant barrage of flimsy promises of easy women wasn't enough -- I really needed it to hit home with some old-fashioned cheap shots at minorities.
The Bodywash for Grownups
If only Nivea had hired some grownups to write this ad for them.
So, while this commercial doesn't rely on ham-fisted sex appeal, it doesn't exactly elevate the dialogue, either. One step forward, two steps back. We see that pattern far too often around here.
Now the first part of this ad pokes fun at some the Old Spice and Axe Body Spray nonsense, by showing teenager parodies lusting for a strong-smelling body wash they think could get them laid (and the only reason they would have that perception? Commercials.) But in the middle of that is a fairly egregious slip-up:
Asian kid (nerdily): This won't increase my ability to mate.
Oh yes -- stereotypes. That's what body wash/deodorant marketing was missing! Man, the constant barrage of flimsy promises of easy women wasn't enough -- I really needed it to hit home with some old-fashioned cheap shots at minorities.
The Bodywash for Grownups
If only Nivea had hired some grownups to write this ad for them.
So, while this commercial doesn't rely on ham-fisted sex appeal, it doesn't exactly elevate the dialogue, either. One step forward, two steps back. We see that pattern far too often around here.
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
SoBefuddled
If you read our Super Bowl recap, then you may be aware of our distaste for the manic spectacle that is the SoBe lizard commercial campaign. Sadly, SoBe didn't just create the lizard spots for the Super Bowl, no -- they're hellbent on continuing the onslaught of visual diarrhea and disturbing CGI for the foreseeable future, if not forever.
Their latest ad isn't much different than the Super Bowl one -- except that there's no Monsters vs. Aliens tie-in -- but it's especially stupid for several reasons, which I'll get to after I make you watch it with me:
Now, in the Super Bowl version, you had three NFL players performing ballet. It was clear they were NFLers because it was during an NFL game, and the guys were big, and Ray Lewis was in it. Now you just have Matt Light who, and I'm sorry if anyone is a big football fan here, just isn't a household name. He's a Pro Bowler, but on his own, and donning a white spandex suit instead of a jersey, he just looks like a stupid fat guy spazzing out. It's taken completely out of context, and it looks weird. I can't decide if it hurts more to watch Light dance around like a buffoon, or to watch the agonizingly bad animated lizards.
And then the last scene shows Light pouring a milky liquid all over his face and then suddenly metamorphizing into a freaky lizard that looks like it was animated in PowerPoint. Is this included just to scare children? Or does some part of this equate into increased demand for Life Water?
Hopefully this lizard business will stop. We've seen enough. We've shoehorned in enough weird properties and celebrities into the lizard ads, and we're certainly had our fair share of low-grade computer animation. I would love to see SoBe do something decideded un-lizard for their next campaign. Maybe something that has to do with a health drink? Oh yeah -- being relevant. That's kind of important in marketing.
Their latest ad isn't much different than the Super Bowl one -- except that there's no Monsters vs. Aliens tie-in -- but it's especially stupid for several reasons, which I'll get to after I make you watch it with me:
Now, in the Super Bowl version, you had three NFL players performing ballet. It was clear they were NFLers because it was during an NFL game, and the guys were big, and Ray Lewis was in it. Now you just have Matt Light who, and I'm sorry if anyone is a big football fan here, just isn't a household name. He's a Pro Bowler, but on his own, and donning a white spandex suit instead of a jersey, he just looks like a stupid fat guy spazzing out. It's taken completely out of context, and it looks weird. I can't decide if it hurts more to watch Light dance around like a buffoon, or to watch the agonizingly bad animated lizards.
And then the last scene shows Light pouring a milky liquid all over his face and then suddenly metamorphizing into a freaky lizard that looks like it was animated in PowerPoint. Is this included just to scare children? Or does some part of this equate into increased demand for Life Water?
Hopefully this lizard business will stop. We've seen enough. We've shoehorned in enough weird properties and celebrities into the lizard ads, and we're certainly had our fair share of low-grade computer animation. I would love to see SoBe do something decideded un-lizard for their next campaign. Maybe something that has to do with a health drink? Oh yeah -- being relevant. That's kind of important in marketing.
Saturday, March 14, 2009
Let KGB Google that for you
Good news, everyone! KGB wasn't satisfied with the crappy commercials they started with. Time for some more inessential nonsense:
Female Agent: "What do we know?"
Male Agent: "38 year old Caucasian male. This is the wife, she called it in. Doesn't sound good."
Wife: "Thank goodness you're here. One minute he's fine, and then this."
Male Agent: "What is it?"
Female Agent: "It's brainlock. What was he doing right before he froze?"
Wife: "He was trying to remember who played first base for the Red Sox in '86."
God, KGB, really? Anyone who cares about the answer to that question is going to remember it unless they are actually having significant memory problems, because the answer to that question is Bill Buckner, owner of the most famous error in World Series history.
Wife: "It was, like, right on the tip of his tongue."
Male Agent: "Bill Buckner."
Husband: "Buckner!"
Male Agent: "There you go, sir."
Husband: "Right through his legs!"
Male Agent: "Right through his legs."
I'm sorry, did I fall asleep and wake up twenty years ago? The Red Sox won the World Series in 2004 and 2007, meaning that Red Sox fans have no reason to continue to fixate on Buckner's error in the woe-is-me way this guy is doing. (In addition, serious Red Sox fans never spent nearly as much time blaming Buckner as the media would have you believe.) This commercial was clearly written by someone who knows like four things about baseball. Although, if it's twenty years ago, that would explain why this guy - who is in his own house - can't just go to his damn computer and look it up himself.
Male Agent: "And if it happens again, just text us at 542542."
If it happens again, learn how to operate a computer, maybe.
Wife: "It's a miracle!"
Female Agent: "No, ma'am. It's KGB."
Good call - there is nothing miraculous about coming up with easily retrievable pop culture nuggets. At least in some of the other ads they show a guy in a bar texting for an answer - the only possible use for this service, at least if you don't have the internet on your phone - but, again, this guy is in his house. The sheer inessentiality of the KGB service as depicted in this ad staggers me. Why run it at all?
Female Agent: "What do we know?"
Male Agent: "38 year old Caucasian male. This is the wife, she called it in. Doesn't sound good."
Wife: "Thank goodness you're here. One minute he's fine, and then this."
Male Agent: "What is it?"
Female Agent: "It's brainlock. What was he doing right before he froze?"
Wife: "He was trying to remember who played first base for the Red Sox in '86."
God, KGB, really? Anyone who cares about the answer to that question is going to remember it unless they are actually having significant memory problems, because the answer to that question is Bill Buckner, owner of the most famous error in World Series history.
Wife: "It was, like, right on the tip of his tongue."
Male Agent: "Bill Buckner."
Husband: "Buckner!"
Male Agent: "There you go, sir."
Husband: "Right through his legs!"
Male Agent: "Right through his legs."
I'm sorry, did I fall asleep and wake up twenty years ago? The Red Sox won the World Series in 2004 and 2007, meaning that Red Sox fans have no reason to continue to fixate on Buckner's error in the woe-is-me way this guy is doing. (In addition, serious Red Sox fans never spent nearly as much time blaming Buckner as the media would have you believe.) This commercial was clearly written by someone who knows like four things about baseball. Although, if it's twenty years ago, that would explain why this guy - who is in his own house - can't just go to his damn computer and look it up himself.
Male Agent: "And if it happens again, just text us at 542542."
If it happens again, learn how to operate a computer, maybe.
Wife: "It's a miracle!"
Female Agent: "No, ma'am. It's KGB."
Good call - there is nothing miraculous about coming up with easily retrievable pop culture nuggets. At least in some of the other ads they show a guy in a bar texting for an answer - the only possible use for this service, at least if you don't have the internet on your phone - but, again, this guy is in his house. The sheer inessentiality of the KGB service as depicted in this ad staggers me. Why run it at all?
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
Boosting the ick factor
When you're down the ladder in terms of market share, I suppose I can see why you might feel a need to do something "out there" to get people's attention. But when you're doing something like this? Something so repugnant it just makes me want to look away and change the channel as fast as possible (and long before you've gotten your product name out there)? I'm not sure what you're really going for with that.
How bad is this ad? Bad enough that the first place I saw reference to it was in the comments section of this very blog, in a comment by reader Capewood. What did he say about it? Well, here's his first sentence: "I don't remember the company but some cell phone service provider is running a commercial with a woman and a guy riding a bicycle." (Bolding mine.) Sounds like a memorable ad! Good thing Boost Mobile went for the "hook" of a horrific image that no one wants to look at!
At least it's in service of a hilarious, hilarious joke, right?
Girl on bike: "What, you think this is wrong? It's a little gift from Mother Nature. I'll tell you what's wrong - it's cell phone companies charging hidden fees."
*spits out water* Pahahaha! Oh man, Boost Mobile. You got me. You told me what was wrong. I thought I knew what was wrong, but I was wrong! Oh man! There it is again! The wrongness!
I don't think Boost has gone far enough, though, if they really want to catch people's attention. How about... animal cannibalism? Oh, you did that. Not gross enough, right? You need humans involved. Well, how about a coroner eating food that was just sitting on a dead body? Man, that would be pretty out there... oh. You also did that. Well, I've got one suggestion left. But be warned: it's comedy gold.
[Setting: a suburban living room. The doorbell rings.]
Girl's voice: Come on in!
[A 35-year-old man enters through the front door. He is carrying a six-pack of Smirnoff Ice.]
Man: Katie?
Girl's voice: I'll be out in a second! Make yourself at home.
[The man sits down on the couch. Suddenly, Chris Hansen walks out from the kitchen.
Chris Hansen: What are you doing here?
Man: Uh, well, I just came to... uh...
Chris Hansen: To have sex with a 15-year-old girl.
Man: What, you think that's wrong? I'll tell you what's wrong - cell phone companies that charge hidden fees!
Chris Hansen: You do realize you're on Dateline NBC right now.
Man: Heck yeah - I just looked you up using my sweet web-enabled phone.
Chris Hansen: Well, you're free to go.
Man: I will go - go call my lawyer on this awesome unlimited plan from Boost Mobile!
[As the man leaves the house, he is tackled by twelve police officers.]
Boost Mobile - where you at? Hopefully not a 15-year-old girl's house.
How bad is this ad? Bad enough that the first place I saw reference to it was in the comments section of this very blog, in a comment by reader Capewood. What did he say about it? Well, here's his first sentence: "I don't remember the company but some cell phone service provider is running a commercial with a woman and a guy riding a bicycle." (Bolding mine.) Sounds like a memorable ad! Good thing Boost Mobile went for the "hook" of a horrific image that no one wants to look at!
At least it's in service of a hilarious, hilarious joke, right?
Girl on bike: "What, you think this is wrong? It's a little gift from Mother Nature. I'll tell you what's wrong - it's cell phone companies charging hidden fees."
*spits out water* Pahahaha! Oh man, Boost Mobile. You got me. You told me what was wrong. I thought I knew what was wrong, but I was wrong! Oh man! There it is again! The wrongness!
I don't think Boost has gone far enough, though, if they really want to catch people's attention. How about... animal cannibalism? Oh, you did that. Not gross enough, right? You need humans involved. Well, how about a coroner eating food that was just sitting on a dead body? Man, that would be pretty out there... oh. You also did that. Well, I've got one suggestion left. But be warned: it's comedy gold.
[Setting: a suburban living room. The doorbell rings.]
Girl's voice: Come on in!
[A 35-year-old man enters through the front door. He is carrying a six-pack of Smirnoff Ice.]
Man: Katie?
Girl's voice: I'll be out in a second! Make yourself at home.
[The man sits down on the couch. Suddenly, Chris Hansen walks out from the kitchen.
Chris Hansen: What are you doing here?
Man: Uh, well, I just came to... uh...
Chris Hansen: To have sex with a 15-year-old girl.
Man: What, you think that's wrong? I'll tell you what's wrong - cell phone companies that charge hidden fees!
Chris Hansen: You do realize you're on Dateline NBC right now.
Man: Heck yeah - I just looked you up using my sweet web-enabled phone.
Chris Hansen: Well, you're free to go.
Man: I will go - go call my lawyer on this awesome unlimited plan from Boost Mobile!
[As the man leaves the house, he is tackled by twelve police officers.]
Boost Mobile - where you at? Hopefully not a 15-year-old girl's house.
Sunday, March 8, 2009
Math is hard! Let's bake some cookies for the boys!
You might remember this gag from when Breyer's did it first, years ago, using cute preschoolers and ice cream in place of grown women and canned soup. Sadly, that ad could not be located online, but the premise was that a preponderance of ingredients that the children could not pronounce, like "polysorbate 80," meant frankenfoods, while Breyer's, which contained only "milk, cream, sugar and natural flavors," was clearly wholesome and nonthreatening. Adorable. Effective.
Now here's this:
Thank goodness for abbreviations and shorthand like "good stuff." All those other details and syllables make tiny female brains hurt.
Through the miracle of modern science.
She's certainly got "sodium" down. I can tell she practiced for hours. Probably with a coach.
As we've established earlier, you are a grown woman. Go get your own damn soup.
And thus ends the unintentional theme for today, which is that women, like children, become overwhelmed by all your polysyllabic words and science-y chemical mumbo-jumbo. It's unintentional because presumably, every actor in this commercial was cast to act confused and naive, and presumably the reason that all the actors were women was that women are the key demographic for light soups. This commercial would have been off-kilter even with a mix of male and female adult actors, but manages to strike a worse note because only females appear.
I don't buy your script, because it's obvious that all of these people are playing dumb. And I won't buy your soup, because your commercial is a damn mess.
Now here's this:
Announcer: What might you find in Progresso Light?It's cute when small children stumble over big words. It's ridiculous when adult women are hired to act like wide-eyed dumbasses, and you know they're struggling to act when the blonde says "monosodium" perfectly and then has to remind herself to stutter through "glutamate."
Woman #1: [surprised] Artificial flavor!
Woman #2: Wonolatteeee, uh...
Woman #1: Monosodium glu- gluta- mate?
Woman #3: That's MSG.
Announcer: All light soups are not created equal. Select Harvest Light has good stuff.
Thank goodness for abbreviations and shorthand like "good stuff." All those other details and syllables make tiny female brains hurt.
Woman #4: Pasta with whole grain!
Woman #5: Natural sea salt.
Woman #6: There's roasted natural chicken in here!
Through the miracle of modern science.
Announcer: Progresso weighs their light soup down with MSG and sodium.
Woman #1: Sodium, sodium, sodium.
She's certainly got "sodium" down. I can tell she practiced for hours. Probably with a coach.
Woman #6: This is heart healthy.
Woman #5: 80 calories.
Announcer: New Select Harvest Light, from Campbell's. Real ingredients, real taste.
Woman #6: [smiles cutely and holds up her bowl] More please!
As we've established earlier, you are a grown woman. Go get your own damn soup.
And thus ends the unintentional theme for today, which is that women, like children, become overwhelmed by all your polysyllabic words and science-y chemical mumbo-jumbo. It's unintentional because presumably, every actor in this commercial was cast to act confused and naive, and presumably the reason that all the actors were women was that women are the key demographic for light soups. This commercial would have been off-kilter even with a mix of male and female adult actors, but manages to strike a worse note because only females appear.
I don't buy your script, because it's obvious that all of these people are playing dumb. And I won't buy your soup, because your commercial is a damn mess.
Thursday, March 5, 2009
Melts in your mouth, not in your pants
Having talking spokescharacters can get a little weird if the characters are items of the food product you're selling, and using sex to sell candy creeps me out. So when M&Ms manages to make an ad that goes wrong in both of these ways? I'm not a fan.
There are about a million ways this is wrong. Let's enumerate just a few of them:
1. The attempted sexuality of the bare legs and high heels.
2. The purring, bedroom-voice voice-over.
3. The horrible "seductive poses."
4. The wink.
5. The fact that an M&M is eating other M&Ms.
Why, M&Ms? Why do you think it makes sense to sell your product with creepy, utterly repulsive "sexually appealing" candy? Your audience is not made up of M&Ms (even if it were, M&Ms quite clearly lack genitalia, so I fail to see how they would put their desire into action). Your audience is humans, and humans don't want to have sex with M&Ms. Therefore, you do not need your main spokescharacter to be a "sexy" M&M; really, there's no such thing, in spite of how you pretend otherwise.
Now yes, I'm aware of the longstanding rumor (spread by complete idiots) that green M&Ms serve as some sort of aphrodisiac. And I'm also aware that M&Ms started to use the "sexy" female green M&M to play on that (only, what, two decades behind the curve of the urban legend). But if you're going to do that? You use sexy humans and regular green M&Ms. You do not use sexy M&Ms. This would still be terrible - because when I think of sex, I do not think of M&Ms - but at least it doesn't make me think that you think I want to fuck your candy.
The cannibalism subplot of this ad is underrated, by the way. This is the same company that ran a surprisingly sadistic ad ten years ago in which Diedrich Bader mockingly consumes Crispy M&M's entire family while Crispy watches helplessly; now, however, it's apparently okay for new M&M brands to be eaten, even by existing M&M brands. Unless that's really why the other M&Ms are staring at the end of the ad. "I can't believe she ate Jerry in cold blood! I mean, in cold chocolate! Just right down the hatch! Also, do we even have digestive tracts? Where do you think he went?"
There are about a million ways this is wrong. Let's enumerate just a few of them:
1. The attempted sexuality of the bare legs and high heels.
2. The purring, bedroom-voice voice-over.
3. The horrible "seductive poses."
4. The wink.
5. The fact that an M&M is eating other M&Ms.
Why, M&Ms? Why do you think it makes sense to sell your product with creepy, utterly repulsive "sexually appealing" candy? Your audience is not made up of M&Ms (even if it were, M&Ms quite clearly lack genitalia, so I fail to see how they would put their desire into action). Your audience is humans, and humans don't want to have sex with M&Ms. Therefore, you do not need your main spokescharacter to be a "sexy" M&M; really, there's no such thing, in spite of how you pretend otherwise.
Now yes, I'm aware of the longstanding rumor (spread by complete idiots) that green M&Ms serve as some sort of aphrodisiac. And I'm also aware that M&Ms started to use the "sexy" female green M&M to play on that (only, what, two decades behind the curve of the urban legend). But if you're going to do that? You use sexy humans and regular green M&Ms. You do not use sexy M&Ms. This would still be terrible - because when I think of sex, I do not think of M&Ms - but at least it doesn't make me think that you think I want to fuck your candy.
The cannibalism subplot of this ad is underrated, by the way. This is the same company that ran a surprisingly sadistic ad ten years ago in which Diedrich Bader mockingly consumes Crispy M&M's entire family while Crispy watches helplessly; now, however, it's apparently okay for new M&M brands to be eaten, even by existing M&M brands. Unless that's really why the other M&Ms are staring at the end of the ad. "I can't believe she ate Jerry in cold blood! I mean, in cold chocolate! Just right down the hatch! Also, do we even have digestive tracts? Where do you think he went?"
Monday, February 23, 2009
Money well flushed
Trashing a marketing campaign as a waste of resources is a pretty easy, even facile, argument in most businesses' cases. When it comes to financial services companies in the recessionary year of 2009, however, I think a strong case can be made. Especially when rotoscoping is involved. So, here's brokerage house Charles Schwab pretending like they understand (and weren't partly the cause of) your financial predicament:
Man: When I think of the mess we're in right now, it's just not right.
I love the vague generalizations throughout this ad about the recession. No one comes out and says "When I think about the fact that we're in a recession" or "When I think about how the Dow has lost half its value in less than two years." I get that they aren't buying commercial time to bum people out, but this just rings hollow to me.
Graphic: Last year over 225,000 people didn't just accept it.
"They pulled the money they were losing in their retirement funds and lost it with us instead."
Face it, unless Charles Schwab offers a money market account, anyone trading stocks with Schwab lost money. Everyone has lost money in the stock market, except Warren Buffet and like three other people. It wasn't just investment bankers losing that cash, it was regular people making trades online, too.
Woman: We had our whole retirement in place and then it just went boom. You know, just up in smoke.
Where was that retirement money that went "boom" invested? The stock market. Where does Charles Schwab want you to put it? The stock market. Ahh -- logic!
Graphic: They did something about it.
"It's so much more fun when you control where your money goes down the drain!"
Man: Well I'm still being nickled and dimed, you know, like I, like I haven't lost enough already.
To me, this is the only strong part of this commercial. Charles Schwab is a lot cheaper than most places if you want to be a hands-on investor. This is probably the biggest selling point for their business in this economy.
I'm not a financial guru in any way, but it strikes me as irresponsible to appeal to people's anger at the financial industry and convince them to reinvest by themselves. This is a wildly volatile market, and if most investment firms can't read it, why would normal, non I-banker people fare any better?
Woman: One of my friends are (sic) still kind of having a hard time, and instead of dwelling on the past, I think it's time to move forward.
Utterly vapid. Truly, you have to wonder why this particular, meaningless comment was worth rotoscoping. And using up 5 seconds of air time. Also, only "one" of your friends is having a hard time? And you somehow came out totally unscathed from the financial turmoil? Maybe we should be investing with you, and not Charles Schwab.
Graphic: DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT
"DUMP YOUR MONEY INTO THE STOCK MARKET RIGHT NOW! IT CAN'T GET ANY LOWER!! Unless of course it does, in which case, we totally ran an ad telling you to buy bonds."
I wonder if there's a publicly traded rotoscoping studio I could buy some shares of....
Man: When I think of the mess we're in right now, it's just not right.
I love the vague generalizations throughout this ad about the recession. No one comes out and says "When I think about the fact that we're in a recession" or "When I think about how the Dow has lost half its value in less than two years." I get that they aren't buying commercial time to bum people out, but this just rings hollow to me.
Graphic: Last year over 225,000 people didn't just accept it.
"They pulled the money they were losing in their retirement funds and lost it with us instead."
Face it, unless Charles Schwab offers a money market account, anyone trading stocks with Schwab lost money. Everyone has lost money in the stock market, except Warren Buffet and like three other people. It wasn't just investment bankers losing that cash, it was regular people making trades online, too.
Woman: We had our whole retirement in place and then it just went boom. You know, just up in smoke.
Where was that retirement money that went "boom" invested? The stock market. Where does Charles Schwab want you to put it? The stock market. Ahh -- logic!
Graphic: They did something about it.
"It's so much more fun when you control where your money goes down the drain!"
Man: Well I'm still being nickled and dimed, you know, like I, like I haven't lost enough already.
To me, this is the only strong part of this commercial. Charles Schwab is a lot cheaper than most places if you want to be a hands-on investor. This is probably the biggest selling point for their business in this economy.
I'm not a financial guru in any way, but it strikes me as irresponsible to appeal to people's anger at the financial industry and convince them to reinvest by themselves. This is a wildly volatile market, and if most investment firms can't read it, why would normal, non I-banker people fare any better?
Woman: One of my friends are (sic) still kind of having a hard time, and instead of dwelling on the past, I think it's time to move forward.
Utterly vapid. Truly, you have to wonder why this particular, meaningless comment was worth rotoscoping. And using up 5 seconds of air time. Also, only "one" of your friends is having a hard time? And you somehow came out totally unscathed from the financial turmoil? Maybe we should be investing with you, and not Charles Schwab.
Graphic: DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT
"DUMP YOUR MONEY INTO THE STOCK MARKET RIGHT NOW! IT CAN'T GET ANY LOWER!! Unless of course it does, in which case, we totally ran an ad telling you to buy bonds."
I wonder if there's a publicly traded rotoscoping studio I could buy some shares of....
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
Keep dusting it off
It's fitting that this spot talks about antiques, given that AT&T has now dragged out the same joke so many times that they've forgotten to use it in a context that even makes sense.
What? Look, I get the joke here - "ha ha, these minutes are so old!" - but it was never more than mildly amusing to begin with, and now it's just tiresome. In addition, the garage sale context is nonsense, because you can't sell your old minutes to other people. That isn't how phones work. I don't think AT&T is trying to suggest that you can... but would it have been difficult to make another ad that used a premise that, you know, works? I guess they couldn't have gotten away with showing the kid wiping his ass with the old minutes, but I'm pretty sure there are other possibilities.
Negative bonus points for a cringe-inducing reference to the current economic climate in terms so generic that AT&T will no doubt pull this one out of the archives for each of the next five recessions. Maybe their next ad can cover every last base for the next century:
Mom: Junior, what are you doing?
Kid: Aw, Mom, I'm just getting rid of these old credits for my personal communication device!
Mom: Don't you dare, Mister - we exchanged something for those old credits and with AT&T, we can continue to use them on our communication devices even now!
Delightfully non-specific. And then you can always just edit in a final scene that refers to whichever alien civilization is invading at the time.
What? Look, I get the joke here - "ha ha, these minutes are so old!" - but it was never more than mildly amusing to begin with, and now it's just tiresome. In addition, the garage sale context is nonsense, because you can't sell your old minutes to other people. That isn't how phones work. I don't think AT&T is trying to suggest that you can... but would it have been difficult to make another ad that used a premise that, you know, works? I guess they couldn't have gotten away with showing the kid wiping his ass with the old minutes, but I'm pretty sure there are other possibilities.
Negative bonus points for a cringe-inducing reference to the current economic climate in terms so generic that AT&T will no doubt pull this one out of the archives for each of the next five recessions. Maybe their next ad can cover every last base for the next century:
Mom: Junior, what are you doing?
Kid: Aw, Mom, I'm just getting rid of these old credits for my personal communication device!
Mom: Don't you dare, Mister - we exchanged something for those old credits and with AT&T, we can continue to use them on our communication devices even now!
Delightfully non-specific. And then you can always just edit in a final scene that refers to whichever alien civilization is invading at the time.
Sunday, February 15, 2009
Their flower power is no match for my glower power
I've said this before, but be wary of attacking competitors when your own product is hardly the pinnacle of necessity. Right, Teleflora?
See, Teleflora, here's the thing. When you're talking about what flowers in a box might "say"? What they're "saying" in reality would already be determined before the person even opened the box. Because if there's actually a problem with getting flowers in a box, the script for this commercial would not start like this:
Gary: "Hey Diane, flowers came for you!"
Bald Guy: "Oooh, flowers for Diane!"
Woman: "I never get flowers!"
They sound pretty impressed, in spite of the fact that they can all see that the flowers are in a box. Therefore the rest of this commercial (which we'll get to in a minute) is actually completely meaningless. I would probably have started it more like this:
Gary: "Hey Diane, flowers came for you!"
Bald Guy: "Oooh, flowers for - wait a second, are those in a box?"
Woman: "I don't know about this..."
And then, on to the rest of this nonsense.
Flowers: "Oh no! Look at the mug on you, Diane! You're a train wreck! That's why he only sent a box of flowers."
Why would the box of flowers insult itself? Whatever. Look. If he bothered to send flowers at all, there's no way he actually thinks this. For the sake of argument, let's say that sending a box of flowers is, in fact, totally lame. What woman would receive said flowers and decide that he thinks she's ugly?
Flowers: "Go home to your romance novels and your fat, smelly cat!"
Voiceover: "This Valentine's Day, don't send flowers in a box - you never know what they'll say."
They'll say, "I cared only just enough to send a trite gift that required effectively no thought on my part." Here's the problem where Teleflora is concerned: so would any flowers. Because sending someone flowers is a lame gift. I realize it's traditional, but let's not pretend that it takes any more thought than, "Hey, maybe I should get her some flowers! I'm so getting laid tonight." It's just like a box of chocolates - sure, you might like getting a box of chocolates on Valentine's Day, but no one in their right mind really thinks of that as some grand romantic gesture.
Flowers: "No one wants to see you naked!"
I'm a little surprised they got away with this. But, again, I call bullshit. If he sent flowers at all, and there wasn't a card included that said "It's over," then he wants to see her naked. I'm confused as to what perspective this ad is even taking. No guy who's sending flowers in a box is doing so thinking, "That hideous hag only deserves a box of flowers," and no woman receiving them is thinking, "He thinks I'm a hideous hag who only deserves a box of flowers!" Does Teleflora think they're actually going to convince people that they should be thinking that? I'm guessing it isn't going to work.
Voiceover: "Teleflora's bouquets are hand-arranged, hand-delivered in a keepsake vase, not in a box."
"Keepsake"? Seriously? Whatever. Anyway, who gives a shit if they're "hand-arranged," honestly? Unless your boyfriend hand-arranged them himself, ladies, I don't see any compelling reason to give him more credit for calling one flower company instead of another. I guess it's nice that you don't have to scrounge up your own vase, but let's face it, these things will be dead in a week no matter what you do with them. Maybe you could put them in your "keepsake" Star Wars collectible glasses.
Voiceover: "That's the Teleflora difference."
If you actually do a little research on the interwebs, it turns out that sending flowers in a vase is pretty much standard practice. In fact, I Googled "flowers in a box," and after a wholesale florist site, the next two hits were links to videos of this very commercial. 1-800-FLOWERS, FTD and ProFlowers, the top three hits on a search for "flowers," all include vases, and 1-800-FLOWERS and FTD both tout that a local florist will hand-arrange the flowers for you. Who is Teleflora even attacking? It's like that ad Pepsi ran during the Super Bowl:
Teen 1: "Yo, man, I'm thirsty."
Teen 2: "Me too. Hey, let's crack open a frosty can of Coke with Anthrax!"
Teen 1: "That's what I'm talkin' about!!!"
[they open the can]
Talking Can: "Whoa, you two are a bunch of losers! Coke with Anthrax? Enjoy dying of anthrax!"
Teen 1: "Quick, recycle it!"
Voiceover: "Coke with anthrax in it - that isn't refreshing! Drink Pepsi and refresh everything!"
Oh, wait, that didn't happen, because only Teleflora is dumb enough to make an ad suggesting that you don't buy a product that none of their competitors is trying to sell you.
Gary: "I'd like to see-"
Diane: "Gary!"
"Don't send sexual harassment lawsuit papers in a box - you never know what message you'll send! Teller and Flores, Attorneys at Law will hand-deliver your sexual harassment suit and even give that sleazy coworker a withering look as they do so! That's the Teller and Flores difference."
See, Teleflora, here's the thing. When you're talking about what flowers in a box might "say"? What they're "saying" in reality would already be determined before the person even opened the box. Because if there's actually a problem with getting flowers in a box, the script for this commercial would not start like this:
Gary: "Hey Diane, flowers came for you!"
Bald Guy: "Oooh, flowers for Diane!"
Woman: "I never get flowers!"
They sound pretty impressed, in spite of the fact that they can all see that the flowers are in a box. Therefore the rest of this commercial (which we'll get to in a minute) is actually completely meaningless. I would probably have started it more like this:
Gary: "Hey Diane, flowers came for you!"
Bald Guy: "Oooh, flowers for - wait a second, are those in a box?"
Woman: "I don't know about this..."
And then, on to the rest of this nonsense.
Flowers: "Oh no! Look at the mug on you, Diane! You're a train wreck! That's why he only sent a box of flowers."
Why would the box of flowers insult itself? Whatever. Look. If he bothered to send flowers at all, there's no way he actually thinks this. For the sake of argument, let's say that sending a box of flowers is, in fact, totally lame. What woman would receive said flowers and decide that he thinks she's ugly?
Flowers: "Go home to your romance novels and your fat, smelly cat!"
Voiceover: "This Valentine's Day, don't send flowers in a box - you never know what they'll say."
They'll say, "I cared only just enough to send a trite gift that required effectively no thought on my part." Here's the problem where Teleflora is concerned: so would any flowers. Because sending someone flowers is a lame gift. I realize it's traditional, but let's not pretend that it takes any more thought than, "Hey, maybe I should get her some flowers! I'm so getting laid tonight." It's just like a box of chocolates - sure, you might like getting a box of chocolates on Valentine's Day, but no one in their right mind really thinks of that as some grand romantic gesture.
Flowers: "No one wants to see you naked!"
I'm a little surprised they got away with this. But, again, I call bullshit. If he sent flowers at all, and there wasn't a card included that said "It's over," then he wants to see her naked. I'm confused as to what perspective this ad is even taking. No guy who's sending flowers in a box is doing so thinking, "That hideous hag only deserves a box of flowers," and no woman receiving them is thinking, "He thinks I'm a hideous hag who only deserves a box of flowers!" Does Teleflora think they're actually going to convince people that they should be thinking that? I'm guessing it isn't going to work.
Voiceover: "Teleflora's bouquets are hand-arranged, hand-delivered in a keepsake vase, not in a box."
"Keepsake"? Seriously? Whatever. Anyway, who gives a shit if they're "hand-arranged," honestly? Unless your boyfriend hand-arranged them himself, ladies, I don't see any compelling reason to give him more credit for calling one flower company instead of another. I guess it's nice that you don't have to scrounge up your own vase, but let's face it, these things will be dead in a week no matter what you do with them. Maybe you could put them in your "keepsake" Star Wars collectible glasses.
Voiceover: "That's the Teleflora difference."
If you actually do a little research on the interwebs, it turns out that sending flowers in a vase is pretty much standard practice. In fact, I Googled "flowers in a box," and after a wholesale florist site, the next two hits were links to videos of this very commercial. 1-800-FLOWERS, FTD and ProFlowers, the top three hits on a search for "flowers," all include vases, and 1-800-FLOWERS and FTD both tout that a local florist will hand-arrange the flowers for you. Who is Teleflora even attacking? It's like that ad Pepsi ran during the Super Bowl:
Teen 1: "Yo, man, I'm thirsty."
Teen 2: "Me too. Hey, let's crack open a frosty can of Coke with Anthrax!"
Teen 1: "That's what I'm talkin' about!!!"
[they open the can]
Talking Can: "Whoa, you two are a bunch of losers! Coke with Anthrax? Enjoy dying of anthrax!"
Teen 1: "Quick, recycle it!"
Voiceover: "Coke with anthrax in it - that isn't refreshing! Drink Pepsi and refresh everything!"
Oh, wait, that didn't happen, because only Teleflora is dumb enough to make an ad suggesting that you don't buy a product that none of their competitors is trying to sell you.
Gary: "I'd like to see-"
Diane: "Gary!"
"Don't send sexual harassment lawsuit papers in a box - you never know what message you'll send! Teller and Flores, Attorneys at Law will hand-deliver your sexual harassment suit and even give that sleazy coworker a withering look as they do so! That's the Teller and Flores difference."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)