Monday, March 31, 2008

Glass and a Half Empty

The problem with hyped ads is that they rarely live up to expectation, with the possible exception of Honda's Grr. Well, here is Fallon's Grrilla...

Hype means that instead of 10 "It's good" reviews you get 5 "Not as good as the original" and 5 "ad of the year!" reviews. People drastically over or under rate the ad because of what came before it.

A good ad with a good soundtrack. Good idea. Good Follow Up. But, it's just that; good. Not great, not exeptional, not the wonder we were expecting. Also, seeing people spoils its transformers like quality. Problem for me is, if this was their second best idea... what's next?

Maybe the fall of the BIG ad starts here... discuss.

15 comments:

Cynical Rob said...

It's fucking shit.

That's it ... fucking indulgent shit.

And people slag WCRS's "Motorcycle Safety" ad for being irrelevant.

I have a rant on my rubbish blog later in the week, this has offended me so much and there's even a Queen track on it, which as you know should make me happy.

Simon said...

I've had a bit more thought about it since I posted negatively about it on my blog. It is still a fine ad and better than the majority out there but what it isn't - and what gorilla is, what the honda ads are and so on - is iconic.

Age said...

I posted my thoughts about this ad also, and I have to agree with Rob's assessment of "fucking shit".

The thing with Gorilla, was once you understood their strategy it became acceptable. Yeah they're making me laugh for a split second - a little bit of joy. This ad though is neither entertaining or amusing in any way at all. It's just... fucking boring and frankly annoying to sit through. Completely self indulgent.

Charles Frith said...

I've stopped buying Cadbury's because I think its so annoying. My friends have stopped buying Cadbury's and I think their friends will do the same to.

Charles Frith said...

Anyway what is it with timing. Terminal 5 opens up. Suitcases go missing and this thing pops up on the screen. Are they rubbing it in?

Niko H (nomme du guerre) said...

I liked it. it entertained me.

It has a bruckheimer quality to it that I can appriciate.

mm said...

i've been repeatedly watching this and I have to say i think it's pretty good.

i think it's pointless calling any ad self indulgent; and i think it's odd that this is compared to gorilla.

the T5 timing is spot on, because aside from the 15,000 who lost bags everyone else is finding the whole debacle funny!

against category competitors, i fail to see anything else that comes close to this...

Rob Mortimer said...

MM - I wouldn't say it was self-indulgant, but it is bordering on it.

It will naturally be compared to Gorilla. It says something bad about the ad if it doesn't even feel like the same campaign!

In Gorilla you felt the emotion and anticipation, you felt the joy.

mm said...

the general concensus is that this ad is self indulgent and yet I don't know any ecd or cds that aren't!

i think it does feel like the gorilla ad and those values are still projected but as ad men we're unwilling to see past gorilla. Tonally it is different to Gorilla but I think that's a deliberate initiative.

As an ad this is good stuff which will resonate with a whole bunch of different people compared to Gorilla.

To create a carbon copy of Gorilla would result in a 'cracking' campaign for chocolate which = predictability.

Rob Mortimer said...

mm: I think its a good point there actually, is it intended to resonate with different people?

I don't think its unwillingness to see past Gorilla, as its the same campaign, the same insight.

It's certainly not predictable as an ad, but it lacks the real surprise or subtle unveiling of Gorilla.

Cynical Rob said...

So the ad's not self indulgent.

And because it's different from the competitive set - despite having little or no relevance to the product/consumer - it's good.

And then there's the T5 timing.

Thanks MM, you have shown I am out of date of what great communication is.

mm said...

cynical rob: who took the jam out of your doughnut?

I'm sure you have a valid point of view but I can see past your random vitriol. Who actually cares about self indulgence? ecds and cds are hardly an altruistic bunch. And yes, being different in a category beset with dullsvile shite is good enough for me. infantile argument I know, but fuk it, if the shoe fits..

99.9% of the UK population see T5 as a national joke. How is this cadbury's problem? How has this got anything to do with a 30 spot? Is there some high ground here that I'm not aware of?

Oh. you're very welcome.

Cynical Rob said...

You cares about self indulgence?

Well the client should for a start - because adland is about helping business grow, not fulfill agency CD/ECD's Hollywood aspirations, which on this showing, is still severly lacking.

And while disruption / differentiation is all well and good, if it is not done with consumer and/or brand relevance, it's nothing more than corporate masturbation - but you probably don't agree with that either do you.

As for T5, well I suppose it's a lucky 'coincidence', but to imply there is some added relevance to this commercial because of another classic case of British Fuckup Disease is rather interesting.

Will people associate the loss of luggage with an ad for Cadbury's? Probably. If you work in the ad industry, for the rest of the World I doubt it very much.

As for who has taken the jam out of my doughnut?

The people in adland who have forgotten it's about moving the masses, not the advertising crowd.

northern said...

Let's face it, it was always going to be hard to follow Gorilla. I think it's fine as part of the glass and a half full of jot campaign, but it doesn't have an element of surprise.

Anonymous said...

surely the fact that people are now instantly recognising "glass and half full productions" suggests that these ads have some legs for Cadburys. Despite it not being as innovative as the gorilla, there is little doubt that people will watch this and look forward to the next one.

Not as shit as everyone seems to think.