TODAY, in print ads that don't utterly suck...
(click ads for closer look)TOP—Print ad for Cialis, via Grey Toronto, scanned from the latest Archive. Yes, not a great ad, but certainly much better than the flaccid dick stiffener creative work produced in the States. Bottom—via GITAM/BBDO. Any bubble gum ad that doesn't include a bubble gets at least begrudging praise from me. Previously in ads I don't hate...here, here, here, and here.
posted by copyranter @ 3:30 PM
11 Comments:
OK, the Cialis one is making little sense to me...so they spread it on the lawn and the lawn got a stiffie? Or is the flamingo supposed to be phallic? Is the flamingo boning some unseen female flamingo buried in the grass? Does the grass symbolize some untamed bush?
It is probably too subtle...man (or woman) doesn't mow grass because man and woman are fucking lots...
The Hubba Bubba ad has the extra benefit of being approved by perverts everywhere who would just love to find themselves between the knees of the nearest ten-year-old.
In fact, after seeing that ad they might not need Cialis.
If your analysis is right, that Cialis ad could be FOR ANY PRODUCT -- I'm eating M&M's so I don't mow the lawn, I'm driving my Tundra so I don't mow the lawn, et fuckin' cetera. Really?
Like I wrote...it isn't a great ad, just eons better than the US Cialis/Viagra dreck.
You are absolutely correct with that point... anything is better than couples in separate bathtubs, outside... or devil horns. I did market research with ED patients when I pitched Cialis, and they all said the current campaigns do nothing to remove the stigma of ED, but even make it worse...
Call me dense (or blind), but I had to look at the Hubba Bubba ad a few times to even notice he was floating. Both of these are trying too hard to be clever and not hard enough to sell the freakin' product.
Hey anonymous Jalan...so how would you sell bigger bubbles? A chart? Go ahead, give me your breakthrough ideas...I've taught at SVA and FIT.
I haven't taught anywhere, but my initial thought, if you're trying to sell bubbles, is to maybe show a bubble. Obvious? Yes. Tired? Probably. But are you trying to show how clever you are or sell your product?
Beyond that, I suppose my bigger issue is selling "bigger bubbles" in general. Yes, you blow bubbles with bubble gum, but if you're going to have something in your mouth for hours, isn't the taste a more compelling pitch? Not necessarily the creatives fault, but still...
Again, just my two cents. Love your blog, regardless of your resume.
We should get over the "it could apply to any brand" critique . Most products are pretty good - there's really no such thing a USP anymore. It's the ads themselves that differentiate. If you can hitch your brand to a clever execution, that's about all you can ask from print in a vacuum.
That seems lazy. My clients would never be satisfied with "all products are pretty good, so we will just develop a clever execution" -- to remind customers of what? I wouldn't be satisfied either. Good advertising should create or remind the customer of a singular expectation -- not just be clever for clever's sake.
Post a Comment
<< Home