In the nearly five years I've been writing for this blog, we've had a number of running targets - Raisin Bran Crunch (in order: here, here, here, here, and here), Burger King (too many to list them all, as we've written fully fourteen Burger King posts, but here are three of my favorites), Crispin Porter + Bogusky in general (this Quivering P. Landmass post is my personal favorite), and so forth. But I don't think I've ever been moved to write about the same ad campaign three times in eight days. Congratulations, State Farm!
Agent: "One of the best things about State Farm is our accessibility."
Guy: "Oh yeah?"
Agent: "You can call us 24/7, get quotes online, start a claim with our smartphone app - you name it, we're here, any time, anywhere, any way you want it."
"Any way you want it?" Gee, that's an awfully uncommon turn of phrase to bust out there. It's almost like you're setting something up.
Guy: "That's the way I need it."
Agent: "Any way you want it."
Guy: "All night?"
Agent: "All night."
Guy: "Every night?"
Agent: "Any way you want it."
Guy: "That's the way I need it."
This is already pretty stupid. But you know what would be way stupider? Addressing what just happened as though it were somehow a natural part of the conversation, or in any way not just some bullshit thrown together because someone inexplicably thought it would make for an amusing ad.
Guy: "We just had ourselves a little Journey moment there."
Oh, writers of this ad. What were you thinking? You guys are as cold as ice. You're willing to sacrifice our love! Hmm, bit of a Foreigner moment there. Rest assured that was completely organic, just a natural extension of what I was already writing. Because I'm hot blooded. Check it and see!
Agent: "Yup."
Guy: "Saw 'em in '83 in Fresno. Place was crawling with chicks."
[Guy's wife looks over angrily]
Guy: "I gotta go."
Just in case you thought we'd get out of one of these ads without some sort of relationship issue: nope. State Farm is getting really good at sowing marital discord, aren't they? I picture this agent meeting up with Jake at some all-night diner and chuckling about all the relationships they've ruined through their jobs in the insurance industry.
And then they end the ad by playing the actual Journey version of "Any Way You Want It." Here's the thing: if the song is famous enough to be used the way it's used in this ad, then it should also be famous enough that you don't need to ram down our throats that you're using it. Playing the song at the end of the ad would have worked perfectly for your purposes. Doing the stupid song-lyrics banter, then being like "HEY THAT WAS JOURNEY DID EVERYONE CATCH THAT THAT WAS JOURNEY," and then also playing Journey at the end of the ad... at that point I really just feel like you're insulting my intelligence...
...faithfully. (Nailed it! Totally natural!)
Showing posts with label tortured premises. Show all posts
Showing posts with label tortured premises. Show all posts
Sunday, February 19, 2012
Tuesday, February 22, 2011
StopDaddy
Three guesses as to what you will see if you go online to "see more now" at the end of this ad, and the first two don't count.
If you said "Danica Patrick and Jillian Michaels are NOT naked," you're right! (If you additionally said, "It's excruciatingly unfunny and you will instantly regret watching it just to remove the 0.0000000001% of doubt you had before posting this," you are also right.)
Don't you wonder why GoDaddy is still making ads this way? At first, I get it. You want to get your name out there. But everyone knows who GoDaddy is by now and yet we get functionally the exact same thing every year - the ad implies that if you go online for the full version you will see nudity or at the very least something extremely risqué; you of course will not; and for some reason GoDaddy refuses to cast anyone who would be worth the effort anyway. For crying out loud, I could type virtually any sexual term into Google and find video of a more attractive woman than Danica Patrick doing unspeakable things inside of thirty seconds.
Just for good measure, this year's spot adds Jillian Michaels, because two passably attractive brunettes are better than one, even if neither of them can act worth a lick. Neither Michaels nor Patrick is hot enough to justify appearing in these spots, right? Surely you could find someone around their level who could act, or at least find someone hotter who can't. Maybe it seems kind of sexist for me to harp on this, but come on - their entire premise is "We're using hot ladies to sell domain names." You can't do that and then not provide hot ladies.
If you hate yourself, do be sure to check out the full online spot, which ranks right up there with the worst associated web content to a televised ad I've ever seen. Although it is sort of impressive how many people they managed to cast who lack the ability to competently deliver a line.
If you said "Danica Patrick and Jillian Michaels are NOT naked," you're right! (If you additionally said, "It's excruciatingly unfunny and you will instantly regret watching it just to remove the 0.0000000001% of doubt you had before posting this," you are also right.)
Don't you wonder why GoDaddy is still making ads this way? At first, I get it. You want to get your name out there. But everyone knows who GoDaddy is by now and yet we get functionally the exact same thing every year - the ad implies that if you go online for the full version you will see nudity or at the very least something extremely risqué; you of course will not; and for some reason GoDaddy refuses to cast anyone who would be worth the effort anyway. For crying out loud, I could type virtually any sexual term into Google and find video of a more attractive woman than Danica Patrick doing unspeakable things inside of thirty seconds.
Just for good measure, this year's spot adds Jillian Michaels, because two passably attractive brunettes are better than one, even if neither of them can act worth a lick. Neither Michaels nor Patrick is hot enough to justify appearing in these spots, right? Surely you could find someone around their level who could act, or at least find someone hotter who can't. Maybe it seems kind of sexist for me to harp on this, but come on - their entire premise is "We're using hot ladies to sell domain names." You can't do that and then not provide hot ladies.
If you hate yourself, do be sure to check out the full online spot, which ranks right up there with the worst associated web content to a televised ad I've ever seen. Although it is sort of impressive how many people they managed to cast who lack the ability to competently deliver a line.
Sunday, January 3, 2010
It's not a good commercial, it's DiGiorno
What is it about pizza commercials and torturing the shit out of their premises?
[Couples playing a game; doorbell rings]
Husband: "Honey, the pizza guy."
Wife: "Sure."
Sure. Because they ordered pizza. That is the only reason for anyone to respond this way.
Pizza Guy: "Me again!"
Wife: "Okay, now this is the last time, all right?"
Pizza Guy: "Thanks! You know, we don't deliver anything like this, this crispy flatbread..." [bites into pizza, has orgasm]
Oh, they didn't order pizza - apparently the pizza guy loves DiGiorno pizza so much that he keeps showing up at this one house. Editorializing much, DiGiorno? The idea that people couldn't tell a frozen pizza from delivery was already a bit of a stretch, but "no pizzeria in America delivers pizza comparable in its deliciousness to ours?" Back right the fuck up.
Also, just add layers to the stupidity of the general concept. How did he even know they had this pizza? If they're making DiGiorno I'm assuming they never called for even one pizza from "Vinny's," so what brought this guy to their door in the first place? One of those animated aroma waves that turns into a beckoning hand when it reaches you? Second, if you don't want to give the guy pizza, stop answering the door. And who is this fucking moocher? "Hey, uh, I know what you guys have in there can be bought in any store, but... I'm just going to keep ringing until you give it to me for free."
Finally, the whole "even people who work for other companies prefer our food!" thing has always driven me kind of crazy as a tactic. Because who cares? Why is that supposed to matter? This guy can't eat his own pizzeria's pizza every day of his life. And even if DiGiorno pizza is just that good, it's probably not so good that I'd never want to eat anything else. (It's actually a lot like the ad I linked to at the beginning. What, exactly, is wrong with the sub guy wanting to eat somewhere other than his own store? He probably eats there all the time. I know the point the ads are trying to make, but it's just lazy.)
I mean, if you're going to insist on making annoying, stupid ads - and I'm sure companies will, which is just as well, lest this site lose its entire raison d'être - couldn't the plot of the ad at least make some goddamn sense? Why even spend money on writers and actors if you can't bother with that? At this point they might as well just go back to the Bulova watch face. Which is more likely to get you to the store, this annoying nonsense or a ten-second clip of a nice-looking pizza being pulled out of the oven with a voice saying "It's DiGiorno time!" Yeah, me too.
[Couples playing a game; doorbell rings]
Husband: "Honey, the pizza guy."
Wife: "Sure."
Sure. Because they ordered pizza. That is the only reason for anyone to respond this way.
Pizza Guy: "Me again!"
Wife: "Okay, now this is the last time, all right?"
Pizza Guy: "Thanks! You know, we don't deliver anything like this, this crispy flatbread..." [bites into pizza, has orgasm]
Oh, they didn't order pizza - apparently the pizza guy loves DiGiorno pizza so much that he keeps showing up at this one house. Editorializing much, DiGiorno? The idea that people couldn't tell a frozen pizza from delivery was already a bit of a stretch, but "no pizzeria in America delivers pizza comparable in its deliciousness to ours?" Back right the fuck up.
Also, just add layers to the stupidity of the general concept. How did he even know they had this pizza? If they're making DiGiorno I'm assuming they never called for even one pizza from "Vinny's," so what brought this guy to their door in the first place? One of those animated aroma waves that turns into a beckoning hand when it reaches you? Second, if you don't want to give the guy pizza, stop answering the door. And who is this fucking moocher? "Hey, uh, I know what you guys have in there can be bought in any store, but... I'm just going to keep ringing until you give it to me for free."
Finally, the whole "even people who work for other companies prefer our food!" thing has always driven me kind of crazy as a tactic. Because who cares? Why is that supposed to matter? This guy can't eat his own pizzeria's pizza every day of his life. And even if DiGiorno pizza is just that good, it's probably not so good that I'd never want to eat anything else. (It's actually a lot like the ad I linked to at the beginning. What, exactly, is wrong with the sub guy wanting to eat somewhere other than his own store? He probably eats there all the time. I know the point the ads are trying to make, but it's just lazy.)
I mean, if you're going to insist on making annoying, stupid ads - and I'm sure companies will, which is just as well, lest this site lose its entire raison d'être - couldn't the plot of the ad at least make some goddamn sense? Why even spend money on writers and actors if you can't bother with that? At this point they might as well just go back to the Bulova watch face. Which is more likely to get you to the store, this annoying nonsense or a ten-second clip of a nice-looking pizza being pulled out of the oven with a voice saying "It's DiGiorno time!" Yeah, me too.
Friday, October 31, 2008
I'll take "Tortured Premises" for $200, Alex
This ad doesn't seriously offend me or anything, but it just strikes me as yet one more example of how little most ad writers think about what they're writing.
You can see the basic idea of the ad there - "Guy who works at sub shop prefers Domino's oven-baked subs to his own employer's product" - and you can also see where it totally went off the rails. There's humor, and then there's this, where in taking the easiest possible path to the "joke" the writer(s) conveniently ignored that the path makes no sense.
Why did this guy order the sandwich to be sent to the sub shop at which he works? Why did he order it during business hours? Why did he give his real name? Why did he talk so loudly about it in front of his co-workers, making it thoroughly clear that he did in fact order it? "Why would I order a DOMINO'S OVEN-BAKED SANDWICH?" He even looks back into the shop as he says it! This makes no sense at all. No one would ever do this. The only reason to do something so incredibly nonsensical in your ad is if it's hilariously awesome. This is not hilariously awesome. This is what happens when your script for the ad is so lame that the director of the spot doesn't know to tell his lead actor that his delivery is totally off-base. Either that or Domino's wants you to think that only complete morons who are incapable of even the most basic subterfuge like their product.
Here is a better premise, which it took me ten seconds to think of: the Submart guy gets caught at Domino's by his manager and claims to be "scoping out the competition." Or, you know, anything else that might come close to happening in real life. I guess maybe that's not as side-splittingly hilarious a punchline as "Poor guy was lost!", though. Right? I mean, that's such a hilarious joke that we had to absolutely torture our basic premise just to get to it, right?
Unrelated note: Why are "Mike & Mike" doing the voice-over at the end? What the hell is the point of that?
You can see the basic idea of the ad there - "Guy who works at sub shop prefers Domino's oven-baked subs to his own employer's product" - and you can also see where it totally went off the rails. There's humor, and then there's this, where in taking the easiest possible path to the "joke" the writer(s) conveniently ignored that the path makes no sense.
Why did this guy order the sandwich to be sent to the sub shop at which he works? Why did he order it during business hours? Why did he give his real name? Why did he talk so loudly about it in front of his co-workers, making it thoroughly clear that he did in fact order it? "Why would I order a DOMINO'S OVEN-BAKED SANDWICH?" He even looks back into the shop as he says it! This makes no sense at all. No one would ever do this. The only reason to do something so incredibly nonsensical in your ad is if it's hilariously awesome. This is not hilariously awesome. This is what happens when your script for the ad is so lame that the director of the spot doesn't know to tell his lead actor that his delivery is totally off-base. Either that or Domino's wants you to think that only complete morons who are incapable of even the most basic subterfuge like their product.
Here is a better premise, which it took me ten seconds to think of: the Submart guy gets caught at Domino's by his manager and claims to be "scoping out the competition." Or, you know, anything else that might come close to happening in real life. I guess maybe that's not as side-splittingly hilarious a punchline as "Poor guy was lost!", though. Right? I mean, that's such a hilarious joke that we had to absolutely torture our basic premise just to get to it, right?
Unrelated note: Why are "Mike & Mike" doing the voice-over at the end? What the hell is the point of that?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)