Monday Rant #1 - Great Design/Terrible Concept
I’m beginning to think that this is a European mandate. It seems as though they run with their first idea. Or at least I should say I hope this is their first idea. I’d hate to think it took a couple of weeks to finely tune this conceptual masterpiece.
I mean for Christ’s sake, is there anything more disappointing than a great design with a poor concept? It’s like a pretty girl with short hair. It’s torture, really.
C’mon guys, look at the copy: “The lighter way to enjoy the British weather.” I wasn’t aware how heavy the alternative is, if one was so inclined to attempt to ‘enjoy’ the British weather. Please, can I buy a crate of Maltesers now?
“The lighter way to enjoy shopping.” I had no idea that women had a problem with the current shopping situation. Oh that’s right - women hate shopping! I totally forgot! Great insight!
Is this supposed to be a joke? Is the writer trying to get fired? Is there someth — wait…hold on…I think I get…okay, I got it! I just got it guys! Nevermind what I wrote earlier, I just got the ad! It’s targeted towards the British illiterate, right? Yep. I figured it out. This ad is only intended for the bloke’s who can’t read. Mission accomplished.
Great design, though.
Posted in Rants 
Add to del.ici.us 
Digg It
Blogs that link to this post 
Permanent Link
October 24th, 2005 at 5:55 pm
Just out of curiousity, Kenny, did you just find these posters on the web somewhere? Are you aware or Malteser’s well established cross-media campaign: “the lighter way to enjoy chocolate”? Your commentary seems to indicate not, but I could be wrong.
Also, when you are making fun of the illiterate, it’s best to avoid spelling errors.
October 24th, 2005 at 5:56 pm
of Malteser’s
That’ll teach me to cast the first stone.
October 24th, 2005 at 6:51 pm
jeff,
‘the lighter way to enjoy chocolate’ makes sense. and i get that maltesers are a light alternative to other chocolate bars. no problems here.
but how does ‘the lighter way to enjoy the British weather’ make sense? please enlighten me. how is a poorly executed pun on a solid tagline considered a clean concept? it’s lazy and unpolished.
step away from the look of the ad. i know as well as you do that these ads look amazing. my problem is that the copy and the concept fall well short of that.
and it wasn’t a shot at the illiterate. it was a shot at the writer.
October 25th, 2005 at 5:22 am
I’m just wondering, if you’re taking a pop at the illiterate, how you rationalise the use of “bloke’s”? Those in glass houses…
But yup. Terrible ad. And contrary to your comment, the design isn’t that fantastic either. Nothing that hasn’t been done better, more beautifully, or before.
October 25th, 2005 at 6:07 am
The Maltesers campaign, which is in all kinds of media features “The lighter way to enjoy __________” On their own, these two ads (magazine spreads?) don’t make sense, but in the context of the high awareness level of the campaign they do.
Also, it’s British advertising. It doesn’t actually have to make sense.
You can see a TV spot here: http://www.niceshirtfilms.com/ click on Jon Hollis when it loads.
The illustrations are rather nice, but they are nothing new here. There is a lot of this style floating around the UK at the moment.
To sum up my view: Nice. Makes sense in context, but nothing overly impressive, conceptually or visually.
October 25th, 2005 at 7:53 am
Sadly, the UK is indeed seeing more and more along the lines of “go for the big visual”, rather than “find the big idea”. The agencies probably think they’re trading off the art direction-led genius of Collett Dickinson Pearce in the 70s. In fact, it’s just lazy.
Naresh Ramchandani, writing for the Guardian, is resonably good (if a little pop) on all this. Try:
http://media.guardian.co.uk/mediaguardian/story/0,,1499799,00.html
October 25th, 2005 at 11:39 am
“I mean for Christ’s sake, is there anything more disappointing than a great design with a poor concept? It’s like a pretty girl with short hair.”
Let me be the first to say that a pretty girl with short hair is anything but a disappointment. Short hair on girls can be TOTALLY hot.
But the ads do suck.
October 25th, 2005 at 11:43 am
Gotta agree with Jonathan on the short hair part. I love short hair on girls, but it totally depends what kind of girl it is. Some of them can pull it off where it looks very nice, but than there are the ones where it doesn’t look good at all.
October 25th, 2005 at 2:27 pm
Ole
a bloke isn’t an insulting term. it’s like saying ‘dude’ or ‘guy’. and yeah, the design isn’t groundbreaking, but it works.
and i totally agree with you on the UK’s focus on ‘the big visual’ rather than ‘the big idea’.
and i’d like to read that article you put a link to, but it says i have to subscribe. do you think you can email it to me or post some parts of it here?
Freddy and Jonathan Hughes
you guys are nuts. albeit there are some girls with short hair who do look pretty good, but just imagine how much BETTER they’d look with long hair! and don’t get me wrong, I think a long haired girl wearing her hair up is totally hot.
But I can sort of see your point. I hate seeing leftover strands of long hair all over my place.
October 25th, 2005 at 3:29 pm
I stand by my assertion that a pretty girl with short hair is no less pretty than the same girl with long hair, and indeed, can even be _hotter_ with short hair than long hair.
and don’t get me started on girls with glasses (me likee)
and yes, girls with hair up (i.e. in a bun) is TOTALLY hot.
October 26th, 2005 at 11:19 am
Jonathan, sounds like you have a thing for librarians. Or at least as they’re portrayed in movies. You know, mousy woman who suddenly takes off her glasses, lets her hair down, and becomes the hottest thing you’ve ever seen. (Uh, excuse me for ten minutes or so…)