Monday, February 4, 2008

And the Ads Weren't Even that Good!

What a supremely disappointing Super Bowl for Pats fants! Monday morning quarterbacking aside (i.e. woulda, coulda, shoulda done this), 18-1 is one of if not the most impressive seasons in professional football. To say it's all meaningless now is short-sighted folks--we've got ourselves a dynasty.

Normally, regardless of whether your favorite is winning or losing, the commercials are worth talking about. Perhaps I was spoiled with the amazing commercials of old--the Rold Gold sky diving ad, the original Budweiser frogs and the Apple computer launch spot. (Share your favorite Super Bowl commercials in the comments below.)

But this year, we had an always popular clydesdale ad, a talking baby by E*TRADE and way too many how-did-the-ad-execs-get-these-guys-to-spend-so-much-for-this-ad? ads. The only commercial the people I was watching the game with actually enjoyed was the thirty second Victoria Secret spot, proving for the umpteenth time that sex does sell.

With ads costing roughly $86,000 per second, why does the content still stink? Is content sacrificed for the actual cost of the placement?

Did you have an favorite ads you'd like to share? Please do, we can reminisce!


JoeRocket said...

Too much pressure for the aqencies to come up with the uber-idea while not offending anyone. And still they did.

I'm sure that someone had a problem with the giant mouse (rage-aholic) or the vurping baby.

Such is the new, P.C., world we live in.

jstorerj said...

I agree on both counts (the game and the ads). The best idea I've heard so far for a Super Bowl ad comes from Amanda Mooney. Think of the PR impact.

JayVee said...

Past commercial - have to show love for the Budweiser frogs. It was so simple, yet able to capture the attention of viewers across demographics.

Seems like all the hype leading up to Super Bowl just makes expectations for commercials that much higher. I feel for those ad execs - can't be an easy job at all.

Favorite from this super bowl was the Doritos one with the rat -- just because it was ridiculous.

PS - Victoria Secret commercial seems to be on top of most people's list, yet we're still "shocked" and "offended" by a nipple slip during halftime - AMERICA! GO FIGURE!

Sandy said...

JayVee--You're completely right on all accounts! :-) Let me explain.

First, expectations are too high for that big Super Bowl ad. I definitely wouldn't want to be charged with creating THE ad. Although, maybe if we could coax everyone into doing what Amanda Mooney suggests (hat tip to jstorerj), perhaps there would be a Super Bowl / cause revolution. The "What would I do with 2.7 million?" question could warrant another post.

The frogs became iconic, just like the clydesdale's. Definitely interesting how Bud has been able to do that more than once. Who's their agency? Props to them.

I had forgotten about the Rat / Doritos ad--that one actually had everyone laughing out loud. It was legitimately amusing, dumb funny (in a good way).

While, I don't 100% believe that nipple slip was an accident; I also think that as a nation, we're very prude. That might also warrant another post--sex sells, but only in the privacy of your own home.

JayVee said...

Ever get the sense that the message of a commercial gets lost due to the entertainment factor? For instance, there was a commercial with a squirrel in the middle of the road screaming as a car approaches, a woman in the car's passenger side sees him and starts screaming, animals around the scene start screaming, yet the driver remained calm. I believe it was a car commercial -- or involving brakes, but truth is I was too busy laughing to really grasp who was behind the ad.

So ad execs achieved entertainment, but perhaps lost out on a concrete messsage.