|
brent_e
Feb 2, 2006, 5:35 PM
Post #2 of 13
(983 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 15, 2004
Posts: 5111
|
pretty good, TD, too bad the voice wasn't closer to W's. But still :lol:
:D
|
|
|
|
|
jred
Feb 2, 2006, 8:08 PM
Post #3 of 13
(983 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 27, 2003
Posts: 750
|
Clever little ad for sure, not really a big surprise that it was rejected.
I was kind of amazed at some of the reasons given by the rejection letter as to why the ad was turned down. Reminds me of the movie poster for 101 Dalmatians, where they airbrushed out all of the puppies anuses and genitalia.
|
|
|
|
|
wjca
Feb 2, 2006, 8:28 PM
Post #4 of 13
(983 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 27, 2005
Posts: 7545
|
In reply to: Clever little ad for sure, not really a big surprise that it was rejected. I was kind of amazed at some of the reasons given by the rejection letter as to why the ad was turned down. Reminds me of the movie poster for 101 Dalmatians, where they airbrushed out all of the puppies anuses and genitalia.
Listen, man, no one wants to be walking out of the movie theater, minding their own business, look up at the row of posters advertising upcoming movies, and see 101 dog assholes.
|
|
|
|
|
jred
Feb 2, 2006, 8:58 PM
Post #5 of 13
(983 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 27, 2003
Posts: 750
|
In reply to: In reply to: Clever little ad for sure, not really a big surprise that it was rejected. I was kind of amazed at some of the reasons given by the rejection letter as to why the ad was turned down. Reminds me of the movie poster for 101 Dalmatians, where they airbrushed out all of the puppies anuses and genitalia.Listen, man, no one wants to be walking out of the movie theater, minding their own business, look up at the row of posters advertising upcoming movies, and see 101 dog assholes. |
|
|
|
|
nd2boostt
Feb 2, 2006, 9:13 PM
Post #6 of 13
(983 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 21, 2004
Posts: 244
|
In reply to: Animals have assholes and genitalia, there is nothing wrong with that, or maybe there is?
Well, dogs lick and sniff each other's butts too...and I definitely don't want to see that kind of realism on a cartoon poster in the movie theater.
I prefer the genderless animals for advertising purposes. 8^)
|
|
|
|
|
overlord
Feb 2, 2006, 10:23 PM
Post #7 of 13
(983 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 25, 2002
Posts: 14120
|
ROFLMAO
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
that was WAY too funny
|
|
|
|
|
russman
Feb 3, 2006, 2:50 PM
Post #8 of 13
(983 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 2, 2000
Posts: 2848
|
In reply to: REMOVED FROM SITE: 02/02/2006 FOR LEGAL REASONS Dear visitor, as of 1700 hrs on Thursday 2nd February, we were advised by our legal department that due to possible legal ramifications, we are to remove this commercial from our site. Background Information: We had created a fun Super Bowl commercial featuring none other than George W. Bush looking for a new job, however it got rejected by ABC.
looks like a few too many lurkers aroudn the net viewed that clip 8^)
|
|
|
|
|
overlord
Feb 3, 2006, 4:10 PM
Post #9 of 13
(983 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 25, 2002
Posts: 14120
|
luckily i have downloaded the .mpg movie of it that was avaiable.
so if anybody wants it, pm me your email :wink:
it well worth it.
|
|
|
|
|
microbarn
Feb 3, 2006, 4:51 PM
Post #10 of 13
(983 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 12, 2004
Posts: 5920
|
that was pretty good. It makes me wonder if they submitted it strictly to be rejected and get free publicity all over the net. Even people not seeing the superbowl will see this commercial now, and all those watching will give their full attention. Most of the time commercials are ignored.
Quite a good idea.
PS: Thanks overlord for the emailed commercial.
|
|
|
|
|
wjca
Feb 3, 2006, 5:12 PM
Post #11 of 13
(983 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 27, 2005
Posts: 7545
|
In reply to: that was pretty good. It makes me wonder if they submitted it strictly to be rejected and get free publicity all over the net. Even people not seeing the superbowl will see this commercial now, and all those watching will give their full attention. Most of the time commercials are ignored. Quite a good idea. PS: Thanks overlord for the emailed commercial.
If this was their plan, it would not qualify as a good idea, but a f'ing genious idea. This year's superbowl commercial spots are selling for what works out to be $83,000 per second. That is $4,980,000 for a one minute commercial. QuientAgent's rejected ad was about one minute, give or take, right? They probably put a few grand into the video and the application process to submit it. I'd say they got quite a bit of bang for their buck.
|
|
|
|
|
wjca
Feb 3, 2006, 5:39 PM
Post #13 of 13
(983 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 27, 2005
Posts: 7545
|
In reply to: In reply to: It makes me wonder if they submitted it strictly to be rejected and get free publicity all over the net. Probably! Any ad man could tell you that the spot had zero chance of airing as it was (it's got the prez in it for a start, and that's a MAJOR no-no). [marketing] However, it's not likely to have been for money reasons. Airtime is expensive, but it's not very hard to get the cash for it because it pays for itself pretty quickly if the product's good. It's just targetted marketing: the target market is not the super bowl viewers, so why put it on during that time anyway? The market for this ad is web-based, intelligent and mid-20s to 30s, which is definitely NOT the superbowl demographic. It's unlikely they ever intended to have it aired during the superbowl IMO. :wink: [/marketing]
So the superbowl demographic is stupid, old people? Okay, fess up. Who's gonna be watching the game this weekend?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
