Here it is again, along with the rest of the campaign:
(This is all stop motion, no CGI, by the way)
I know, I know. It's the brilliant color and beautiful images that the TV has. I'm already second guessing the initial intent of this post, which is that this Bravia spot is really just an amazing execution affixed to a product or brand. However, this was a related video to the original, that I saw yesterday:
Now... I think I'm prepared to propose that this commercial for Tango Juice is actually a better, more brand specific commercial. Plus, I like how they piggybacked on another successful spot to effectively push their product.
I am arguing with myself, so I know someone out there disagrees with me. Comment. Let me know your thoughts.
Also, really quick. I want to give a shout out to the song featured in the bouncy ball Bravia commercial. That's Jose Gonzales covering the song Heartbeats by The Knife. His awesome voice takes that song to an amazing level, but I really want to speak a bit about the The Knife version. Listen to this song.
Heartbeats - The Knife (mp3)
This song came out in 2003, and I know, in my "in denial" state of how old I am, 2003 doesn't feel like all that long ago. But when you think back to what was out at the time, this song is super progressive... in a throwback sort of way (It came out the same year as Stacy's Mom by Fountains of Wayne, Loose Yourself by Eminem and pretty much witnessed the rise of Jack Johnson).
This song was on the front line of the current hipster scene, and and has lead the way for some questionably awesome repercussions including but not limited to really tight pants, funky design, re-synthing America and apparently scrunchies and everything else at American Apparel.
You don't believe this song is influential or relevant? Check out this track off the mixtape Sky High by Mr. Hipster himself Kanye West:
High Heartbeats - Kanye West (mp3)
Hope you like.
I, for one, don't subscribe to the whole necessity of an ad being brand specific. I think its just a way to get out of doing something dangerous and edgy. Maybe in the 50s it mattered that stuff was on target and on brand and all that stuff. But this is 2009. This is the day of the viral video. The DVR. Newspapers are dead. Magazines are about to be dead. Free content, opt-in advertising. This is the world we live in. So, what does that mean? It means that the old model of advertising is out of date and unneeded. Just because it worked in the past doesn't mean it will work in the future. You need to do an ad people WANT to find on YouTube - and sorry, but brand specific ads rarely make that distinction. So, the lesson? Make the COOLEST thing a budget will allow for. Make it rewatchable. Make it funny/suspenseful/emotional but make it more than an ad. It's the only way now. Past is prologue, its our job to figure out where the story goes from here - so stop listening to what ads should be and figure out what they are.
ReplyDeleteRant over.
Gotta agree with SDL. My justification, the Cadbury Gorilla, its some 500,000 youtube views in its first week, and YouGov's research that showed Cadbury's brand perception rose significantly after its release - boosting a downward spiral that had started in early 2007.
ReplyDeleteOh, and just for kicks, the advertisement has won numerous awards, including the Epica d’Or for Film 2007, the Grand Cristal at Festival de la Publicité de Méribel, Gold at the British Television Advertising Awards 2008, Gold at the Advertising Creative Circle Awards 2008, Gold at the International ANDY Awards, Black and Yellow Pencils at the D&AD Awards 2008, Gold at the Clio Awards 2008, Bronze at the One Show 2008, the FAB Award 2008, Gold at the Fair Go Ad Awards 2008, and the Film Grand Prix Lion at Cannes Lions 2008, widely considered the most prestigious prize within the advertising community.
Now I know you've mentioned this gorilla example in an earlier post, but I think you had a point and need to return to it. Abstract is good, as long as the abstract itself is good.
Wow...
ReplyDeleteThanks guys.
I don't disagree with you on face. Like I said, I love these spots, and the total hits on Youtube alone speak to their success as entertainment and contagiousness.
As for award winning or viral leading to a consumer purchases, the jury is still out as well.
Less branding can be problematic. You can see examples in many Super Bowl ads when the focus tends to be more on entertaining than branding in spots, and the next day everyone is talking about the funny monkey and the supermodel, but they have no clue who paid the $10 million for the spot.
There are examples that do both really well, and can also be consistent viral hits (as apposed to Cadbury, who basically paid a production company for a sure viral hit, and added their logo at the end, then stopped; like mission accomplished).
I look at Mac vs. PC from TBWA\Chiat\Day, some of the HP and Comcast stuff from Goodby and even the Skittles stuff from the past few years (though it is often random and not brand specific, its done consistently in every spot, making its randomness and fun the brand) again from TBWA.
But I agree, things are changing. However, don't give up on the existence of a great idea, and the general principles of sales, communication and persuasion.
I think my biggest flaw may be that I generally think a perfect ad can carry a product or campaign based solely on the idea. And if your ad can't do that, it's not good enough.
ReplyDeleteSo let me ask you this. I'm curious on your take. Does advertising matter to anyone other than people in advertising? In other words, we advertisers can see the true beauty and genius behind ads like few others - but does it really matter? If we produce something great, like a lot of the things featured on this site, what does it matter? Who really cares?
People, as a whole, don't get us or the work we do. So is the truly great idea one that compromises our integrity but sells a lot of product? Or one that wins awards - cause we all know most of that is spec anyway....
I would argue that your last statement applies to an industry. From aerospace to personal hygiene products. Does the general population care that I can take a place from Mock 3 to Mock 2 without creating an impactful down thrush... no. Or that the new Kleenex is .07 times more soft. Not really. Until our airforce is weaker or our nose is raw because someone thought no one would care.
ReplyDeleteI have to keep a broad view of what we do. Sure most people don't care, but I have to feel that if I don't care, they definitely won't. The harder I try to make something more interesting, entertaining or funny, the better my odds.