Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Television Media

Recycling TV Ads 296

Makarand writes "According to this article in the Denver Post a young entrepreneur has gotten into the business of recycling junked TV commercials for clients with low budgets. TV ads cost anywhere between $50,000 and $1 million and small businesses usually cannot afford an original production. The company, Thought Equity, wipes off all references to the earlier company and makes the junked commerical ready for reselling with a price tag less than $10,000. Also businesses that want their ads on the air as soon as possible are approaching the company seeking recycled ads because producing original ads takes time."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Recycling TV Ads

Comments Filter:
  • meow mix (Score:3, Funny)

    by cRueLio ( 679516 ) <cruelio.msn@com> on Sunday November 23, 2003 @06:49PM (#7544304) Homepage Journal
    wow! i wonder how they'll use that old meow mix commercial...
    • wow! i wonder how they'll use that old meow mix commercial...

      Ok, first edit out the cat, and photoshop in the penguin, and we have it sing,

      "li li, li li, liNUX!"
  • Makes you realize... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by TheLoneDanger ( 611268 ) on Sunday November 23, 2003 @06:49PM (#7544305)
    Makes you realize just how little the ads actually have to do with their products. The Simpsons episode with the artsy-fartsy commerical for Mr. Plow skewered this nicely.
    • Recycle *Old* Ads? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by graveyardjohn ( 672128 ) on Sunday November 23, 2003 @07:02PM (#7544380) Journal
      Heck, they're recycling *new* adverts for different regions of the world! When a firm can't be bothered to shoot a new advert for a product, no matter how cheap the first advert was, they just chuck some voice-over actors into an overdub studio for a different world market. It really instills confidence in the product and respect for their intended audience.

      And in some cases, adverts are recycled from pop-culture, current affairs, and famous events. Tons of adverts barely even feature the product in question. Should anyone remember the product the old advert was selling, there could be some interesting humourous cut-and-paste opportunities in the offing....
      • by yobbo ( 324595 ) on Sunday November 23, 2003 @07:41PM (#7544585)
        Voiceover? What's that? Our Subway ads in Australia have the same old yank talking. Their advertising pitch also says how many pounds some fat prick lost..... we use metric buddy, NFI what a pound is.
        • by gl4ss ( 559668 )
          ** Voiceover? What's that? Our Subway ads in Australia have the same old yank talking. Their advertising pitch also says how many pounds some fat prick lost..... we use metric buddy, NFI what a pound is.**

          obviously you do speak english there(that the yank is also speaking, even if it's different dialect).

          however there's lots of shit commercials over here in finland about products like soaps, hair care & etc that have been voiceovered into speaking finnish, some very badly too.

          it would hardly matter i
          • Subway ads really bug me...
            Every time I hear one the only message it gives me is "Fuck you Australia, we don't even care enough about you to hire a cheap local voice actor, buy something or not, who gives a shit?"

            All the other American fast food companies either produce local ads, or at least redub them.
            • by turpie ( 8040 ) on Sunday November 23, 2003 @08:37PM (#7544852) Homepage
              I'm not sure whats worse the Subway ads with the US accents or all the other imported ads that have been so obviously redubbed. At least the Subway ads are honest in cheapness.

              I don't mind when the ads look expensive, but when its something stupid like two women talking about dishwashing liquid thats a different matter. How come the local transmission specialist can put more effort into his ads in a regional city of 150,000 people, than a multinational company advertising nationwide.

              The funny thing about the Subway ads are that we didn't get all the early Jared ads, so the only reason we know about him is because of the SouthPark sendup. I can just picture the executives seeing Jareds exposure through SouthPark as a good reason to bring his ads out to Australia.
            • by LupusUF ( 512364 )
              It is a different situation as in most comercials, since Jared is not an actor. He is a real person who lost a ton of weight who goes around telling his story (he gets paid for speaking gigs as well). Other food companies hire actors anyway, so it makes more sense to replace their voices.
        • "Their advertising pitch also says how many pounds some fat prick lost..... we use metric buddy, NFI what a pound is."

          That's because saying you lost 20 pounds sounds more impressive than saying you lost 10 kilos. Duh!
      • I've noticed this too. Nearly every car commercial I see has printed down the bottom in itty-bitty letters "overseas model shown". Uhhh... what's the point of showing it to me if it's not the model I can buy?

        YLFI
    • by Aardpig ( 622459 ) on Sunday November 23, 2003 @08:06PM (#7544703)

      Yeah, when I lived in England, you could always spot the ones coming from Germany; not only was the dubbing appalling, but the fake tan gave away the game every single time. Orange skin? No thanks, Hans, I don't want your chocolate egg with a surprising plastic toy cunningly hidden in the centre...

    • Ever seen ads for "The Law Offices of ____"?

      I've seen the same ad in different regions in the US where the only difference is the announcer who fills in the blank.
    • You seem to imply that's a bad thing. I think its great when they actually try to entertain you, rather than just force their product down your throat.
      • I think the problem is more that they don't give you any real information on the actual product.

        What they're trying to get you to buy then, isn't the product, but the advertising. I'd prefer it if they spent more time making the product/service better or informing us what it can do for us.
  • nothing new (Score:5, Funny)

    by larry bagina ( 561269 ) on Sunday November 23, 2003 @06:49PM (#7544306) Journal
    slashdot has been recycling stories for years.

    • Re:nothing new (Score:5, Interesting)

      by bakes ( 87194 ) on Sunday November 23, 2003 @07:44PM (#7544599) Journal
      I've seen a few episodes of JAG, and seen re-cycled footage from Top Gun, Hunt for Red October and Clear and Present Danger, and that is just the stuff that I recognised.
      • by jCaT ( 1320 ) on Sunday November 23, 2003 @11:20PM (#7545485)
        ok, now this is showing my true geekiness... MacGyver did the same thing! They used some top gun footage for one episode, and the majority of the mini chase scene from the original "Italian Job".

        Now, when I was a kid I had no idea, but it's blatantly obvious now...
  • by superpulpsicle ( 533373 ) on Sunday November 23, 2003 @06:51PM (#7544315)
    "Dude you're getting viagra."

  • mirror (Score:2, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward
    looks like their almost slashdotted...

    A young Denver entrepreneur is creating buzz in advertising circles by turning a profit from junked TV commercials.

    Kevin Schaff recycles ads that cost anywhere from $50,000 to more than $1 million to produce, pitching them on the cheap to small businesses that can't afford the costly brainstorming, writing, filming, actors and editing that original productions require.

    Schaff's company, Thought Equity, gives small companies access to top creative talent without the he
    • Re:mirror (Score:2, Funny)

      by NickFitz ( 5849 )

      Half an hour after your post, there is not the slightest evidence of the site being slashdotted.

      ...the smallest, (ie, even smaller than CmdrTaco's penis) might have...

      There is, however, evidence that you are a troll. Go away.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 23, 2003 @06:53PM (#7544325)
    Come to your (chevy) store and get a new (chevy blazer) built (chevy) tough.
  • by vivek7006 ( 585218 ) on Sunday November 23, 2003 @06:53PM (#7544326) Homepage
    1) Make an ad with bunch of hot chics in bikinis.

    2) Recycle this ad to sell anything from breakfast cereals to Pentium-4 chips

    3) Profit !!
    • by hurtstotouchfire ( 664278 ) <`hurtstotouchfire' `at' `gmail.com'> on Sunday November 23, 2003 @08:12PM (#7544734) Journal
      I'm seeing this as a brilliant opportunity for more tongue in cheek ads. There are some ads I definitly wouldn't mind seeing recycled over and over again with different companies. Plus there's the added humor value of seeing a commercial that you know for sure used to be a weight-loss commercial and hey now it's a beer commercial!

      It's also beautiful in a philosophical sense, it just really shows how far our ads have drifted from the actual point of an ad, which I suppose is to say something about the product.

      I think it's all going to depend on this: "The key is how many clients are small enough and isolated enough and sophisticated enough to know they are isolated and still be willing to do this?"

      And also their media partners [thoughtequity.com]. They listed Comcast, Collegiate Images and Index stock on the home page. If they've got enough cash behind them, it's likely that the legal issues will be negotiable.

      Incidentally, can anyone find a clip of that beer commercial where they're making fun of the fact that they can't actually drink beer on television?

      • by PReDiToR ( 687141 )
        Thats unfortunate.

        In the UK we quite often get to watch some lucky b'stard making a meal of a condensation covered aluminium can of the most ice cold delicious yellow lager poured into a pre-chilled glass and left in a humid room just long enough for the girl in the commercial to disrobe and offer up her body to the guy who is about to drink the beer and then take the woman....

        Wait.. I had a point.. We get to see beer being drunk on TV in England.
  • by mattjb0010 ( 724744 ) on Sunday November 23, 2003 @06:53PM (#7544327) Homepage
    "Whoa, dude!"
  • by k98sven ( 324383 ) on Sunday November 23, 2003 @06:53PM (#7544329) Journal
    This is your server running on Windows XP..
    *cracks egg*

    (Sorry.. too obvious?)
    • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 23, 2003 @07:30PM (#7544541)
      I was thinking more along the lines of Iron Eyes Cody (The crying Indian from those Keep America Beautiful ads) walking up to the monitor to observe the shockingly garish XP desktop theme. A tear runs silently down his left cheek. Que ending credit: "People Start Polluting the server room, People Can Stop It"
  • by hookedup ( 630460 ) on Sunday November 23, 2003 @06:55PM (#7544341)

    The Simpsons Kamp Krusty episode [snpp.com], when 'Mr Black' was dubbed over Krusty's voice in the video.

    Krusty: (on TV) Hi Kids! Welcome to Kamp Krusty! Hoo huh hoo heh ha heh! I'll see you in a few weeks! Until then, I turn things over to my bestest buddy in the whole wide world, Mr. Black . I want you to treat Mr. Black with the same respect you would give me. Now here's Mr. Black
  • by CSharpMinor ( 610476 ) on Sunday November 23, 2003 @06:56PM (#7544345)
    Want.

    Desire.

    Obsession.

    From Calvin-Klein^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HBob's Discount Perfumatorium
  • Hmm.. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by noname3 ( 580108 ) on Sunday November 23, 2003 @06:56PM (#7544347)
    Wouldn't a familiar scene and tune already associated with another product just be free advertising for the previous product? If I see that "I am Canadian" speech in commercials, I'll still think of Molson even if it's about commemerative coins from the mint.

    When people use stock photos in ads they generally photoshop in other junk, but with tv commercials being so expensive I'm going to expect a lot of identical commercials with different names tacked on the end. After all, it's targeted to those with low budgets.
    • by Goonie ( 8651 ) * <robert,merkel&benambra,org> on Sunday November 23, 2003 @07:21PM (#7544482) Homepage
      Well, not actually recycled, but remade (with all the Canadian references replaced with Australian ones) to sell Fosters Lager on Australian TV during the Sydney Olympics. The Fosters version was worse, however. The Molson ad was clearly tongue-in-cheek, but the Fosters ad took itself seriously.

      At least it failed - no self-respecting Aussie drinks Fosters, then or now:)

    • Re:Hmm.. (Score:3, Informative)

      by NickFitz ( 5849 )

      RTFA. These are ads that were made but never used by the original client. Ergo nobody will find them familiar (except the film crew).

  • by attonitus ( 533238 ) on Sunday November 23, 2003 @06:58PM (#7544354)
    The article seems to talk about unused ads. However, I bet that there'd be companies that would be prepared to see an ad that actually aired reused overseas. A nice side effect of this would be that north americans might actually get to see some witty adverts if they had UK creatives working on them.
    • Already happens... (Score:3, Informative)

      by WIAKywbfatw ( 307557 )
      The number of ads that I've seen in Britain with badly dubbed over voices with lip-synching that's totally screwed has risen dramatically over the last five years.

      In most cases, the lip-synching is slightly out, meaning that the ad was probably filmed in English but originally shot overseas somewhere (US, Australia, etc). Companies that have done this include Coca-Cola for Diet Coke, Just For Men hair colourant and, ridiculously, a hair product for women that dubbed out Andie McDowell's beautiful southern
    • ...Except that a lot of the wittiest ads here wouldn't go down well with the squeamish, thing is, here in Ireland (Same goes for the UK) 90% of the ads are just as dire as American ads. It's only the few gems that ever save advertising's reputation. Same situation as America. I wouldn't mind seeing the American gems shown here, and Euro excellence shown there, but let's not pretend that Irish / British advertising doesn't suck in general. :)

      I'm just imagining how popular a particular Dutch ad I once saw
      • I seem to recall that the ad you are discussing was debunked. It was supposedly for the "soesmann language institute". The closing tagline was "ENGELS LEREN" and under it it had the one you mention, wanna learn english? Anyway, I remember someone saying that there was no soesmann language institute. I find web hits for "soesman" (for the commercial) so perhaps I'm remembering the spelling wrong.
  • by Rosco P. Coltrane ( 209368 ) on Sunday November 23, 2003 @06:59PM (#7544364)
    I can just picture the Chihuahua go "Yo quiero MSN" or "You got Windows, right?"

    Nah, that won't work ...
  • by musingmelpomene ( 703985 ) on Sunday November 23, 2003 @07:00PM (#7544370) Homepage
    They probably are talking about campaigns that you've never seen, because they were never used.

    I work at an advertising agency (I know, I know) and one of the most interesting things about it is to see how much money is wasted writing, editing, and producing ads that never see the light of day because the client thinks it's too edgy, or doesn't like blue carpet, or thinks the whole campaign is a bad idea because his sister told him so.

    At the end of all this, there are hundreds of commercials that are brilliantly done and well-produced - that you've never, ever seen. Many are probably edgier and more interesting than anything you've ever seen as a television ad.

    I'd be interested to see what these turn out to be!
  • by neurojab ( 15737 ) on Sunday November 23, 2003 @07:01PM (#7544374)
    Have a look at "Your Name Here" on the internet archive... It's designed to be generic, and takes some great cheap shots at the advertising industry

    http://www.archive.org/movies/movies-details-db. ph p?collection=prelinger&collectionid=01681
    • As Carrots Commercial Breakdown pointed out years ago, 'If you want to sell Womens Underwear, your show a woman walking around in her underwear. If you want to sell Margerine, you show a woman walking around in her underwear...'
  • Great (Score:5, Funny)

    by macemoneta ( 154740 ) on Sunday November 23, 2003 @07:08PM (#7544412) Homepage
    Now even the commercials are in reruns.
  • Makes sense (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Punchcardz ( 598335 )
    Frankly it makes sense. How many ads anymore about "selling a lifestyle" and associating your product with it, instead of "why this particular product is great!" Sure they might be hollow and not about a given product, but based on their prevalence, they must work.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 23, 2003 @07:11PM (#7544431)
    ...but with webpages. I remove all references to the original company, but have missed a few meta tags from time to time.
  • I would be enranged if a different company began using my TV ad. My customers associate the original ad with my company. It doesn't matter if you remove my name and logo, the whole ad represents me.

    I remember "I'd like to buy the world a Coke" or "Where's the beef?" or "Please don't squeeze the Sharman." Swap out the product or company name and people still remember the original.

    I'm surprised (apparently?) that ad agencies own the advertisements being produced.
    • Re:Ridiculous (Score:2, Insightful)

      How is this ridiculous?

      No one's talking about using long-running, successful campaigns. They're talking about using campaigns the clients have rejected, the campaigns and ads that end up on the cutting room floor (which almost happened to "where's the beef" and "I'd like to buy the world a Coke", incidentally).

      This is a great, cost effective way for ad agencies to generate revenue even with the ads that don't end up used - and a good way for creative departments to use their more innovative ads that
    • I would be enranged if a different company began using my TV ad.

      So would I.

      But I don't think that's what's going on here. They are mostly recycling ads that have never been used. Ads that were produced but either weren't used by the client, or for whatever reason never made it to the general public.

      I don't think you'll hear anyone saying "I'd like to buy the world a Pepsi" or "Please don't squeeze the Quilted Northern". Remember, those companies own the rights to the slogans and likely the ads themselv
  • "Hands that do dishes can be as soft as your face, with Mild Green.. Carling Black Label!"
  • by xenoc_1 ( 140817 ) on Sunday November 23, 2003 @07:18PM (#7544458)
    Nowhere in the article nor on their site did I see anything about the actors getting additional residuals. Even in major cities, most "working actors" are barely making it, working day jobs in IT or restaurants or wherever, and occassionally getting a commercial for scale.

    Wonder if the kung-fu guys knew their work was being reused years later. Whatever the original actors' contract said, it's certainly unfair to "re-purpose" these ads for additional advertisers without additional compensation. Wonder what SAG or AFTRA would have to say.
    • by mrbill ( 4993 ) <mrbill@mrbill.net> on Sunday November 23, 2003 @07:28PM (#7544530) Homepage
      Doesn't really matter, if they were paid as a work-for-hire, or were paid scale by the hour. Most likely, they were paid for the work they did, and the ad agency owns all rights to the commercial.

      A similar example - I wrote a chapter for a computer book a couple of years ago, and was paid per-page for the work I did. I found out a year or so later that they (the publishing company) had re-used my chapter in a newer edition of the book (Solaris 9 cert study guide versus the Sol8 one I wrote for) . However, that was well within their right, as it was a work-for-hire and they owned all rights to what I'd produced and could do what they wanted with it.
      • by CleverNickName ( 129189 ) * <wilNO@SPAMwilwheaton.net> on Sunday November 23, 2003 @08:19PM (#7544767) Homepage Journal
        Doesn't really matter, if they were paid as a work-for-hire, or were paid scale by the hour. Most likely, they were paid for the work they did, and the ad agency owns all rights to the commercial.


        Actually, it does matter. I am a former board member at SAG, and I was on the negotiating team for the last TV and Theatrical contract. I know most of the people who negotiated our Commercial contract, and I've been a member of the union for over 25 years.

        Our contracts are really clear about this sort of thing. While the ad agency may own the creative rights to the commercial, if the ad was produced by a signatory agency, using union actors, the agency has to go back and renegotiate with the actors if they hope to "repurpose" the ad. Usually, this results in the actors getting a "buy out" for a certain number of cycles and markets. My mom just went through this with a commercial she did over a year ago, that the agency is bringing back next month.

        This protection is one of the many benefits SAG and AFTRA members have. I used to do improv with this girl who was in an AOL commercial. I don't reacall what it was about, but it ran almost every break, nationally and on cable, a few years ago. She wasn't in the union, and did the spot as a non-union hire. She got a "buy out" from the agency . . . for 500 dollars. Had it been a SAG job, she would have made more than that for the session fee, and at least ten times that on residuals. As it ended up, that one day's worth of work really hurt her, because those geniuses at all the ad agencies immediately labled her "The AOL Girl," and wouldn't hire her for anything else.

        A similar example - I wrote a chapter for a computer book a couple of years ago, and was paid per-page for the work I did. I found out a year or so later that they (the publishing company) had re-used my chapter in a newer edition of the book (Solaris 9 cert study guide versus the Sol8 one I wrote for) . However, that was well within their right, as it was a work-for-hire and they owned all rights to what I'd produced and could do what they wanted with it.

        The comparison you made between writing work and SAG work is interesting, but it's really not valid. That comparison would apply more toward something the work I did on TNG. While I "created" Wesley Crusher, and my likeness is inextricably linked with him, if Paramount wants to write "The Adventures Of Wesley Crusher At Star Fleet Academy" as a series of books for kids, they can do that, and I they don't owe me a cent. They own the character the same way the company you wrote for owns your work. If they want to sell an action figure that's clearly my likeness, they have to pay me royalties on that. (But, since it's Paramount, I usually end up with .00006 % of what I'm actually owed.)
        • The company specifically does NOT recycle commercials or pitches where any depicted actors are SAG members for this very reason.

          All the more reason to get unionized if you go into that line of work.
    • "Thought Equity also doesn't use ads featuring actors who belong to the Screen Actors Guild."

      Right there in the friggin' article.
    • Quote:

      Thought Equity gets agreement from any and all parties to get exclusive worldwide distribution rights, Schaff said. Thought Equity also doesn't use ads featuring actors who belong to the Screen Actors Guild.

      • Read it the first time. Doesn't mean SAG wouldn't be interested. This gives even more reason for them to protest against non-union shoots. Also it doesn't mention AFTRA, which represents actors in much television work.

        Yes, contractually it may be a work-for-hire. But it's not right to re-use this for an entirely new client as an entirely new ad. The actors knew they were doing a spot for "client X". They wouldn't have had any idea that they also might be doing the same work for clients Y and Z.
  • Have anyone seen that new ad with a frogs in a row, down in the swamp, advertising for that new dish washer?
  • Mama mia! Thats a spicy

    enterprise server.

  • From a production standpoint, it might be easier to create a brand new commercial that the customer can (insert product name here) than manipulating old commercials. You could then sell it by region so that no two areas see the same ad for different products.

    This is also better in that customers would see it as a 'new' commercial rather than associate it with the old product...

    I can see it now... a commercial for bug spray being mophed into a commercial for hair spray.

    Of course, it might cost a little m
  • by JoeShmoe ( 90109 ) <askjoeshmoe@hotmail.com> on Sunday November 23, 2003 @07:43PM (#7544592)
    Sappy slow music plays. We zoom in on two women walking along the beach.

    Young woman: Mom, can I ask you a personal question?

    Older woman: Sure dear, what?

    Young woman: Have you ever...you know...felt LIKE USING AOL?

    Older woman: Oh my goodness. Yes dear, there have been times like that, times when I wasn't feeling so fresh. That's why I always trust EARTHLINK. You see, EARTHLINK gives me back that clean feeling.

    Young woman: Really mother? How does it work?

    Older woman: You simply insert the EARTHLINK applicator into your CDROM DRIVE and let it cleanse and soothe your COMPUTER.

    Yound woman: Wow mom, that sounds like just what I need, where can I get EARTHLINK?

    Older woman: I have some right here in my purse!

    (Laughter)

    - JoeShmoe
    .
  • I just hope the Miller Lite [millerbrewing.com]fountain wrestlers get used for EVERYTHING.

    (I know the deal is reusing commercials that never got used, but this is more fun)

  • Aha! (Score:2, Funny)

    by mog007 ( 677810 )
    Maybe we could recruit Tux to be the new spokesman for Trojan..

    For the ultimate in safety... choose Linux.
    • Re:Aha! (Score:2, Informative)

      by wed128 ( 722152 )
      the number one product in the prevention of viruses and unwanted child processes!
      • scripsit wed128:

        [Linux as] the number one product in the prevention of viruses and unwanted child processes!

        What's more, it also works as an extremely effective contraceptive.

        You can't get a girl pregnant if you never get laid.

  • *sigh* (Score:5, Informative)

    by LordLucless ( 582312 ) on Sunday November 23, 2003 @07:51PM (#7544622)
    For all the people who didn't read the article, but commented anyway:

    This company is NOT re-using previously aired ads. They are taking ads that were filmed, but never aired, giving them a once over, then selling them. They are buying these ads off the company that filmed them. They are not ripping off other companies commercials, icons, or jingles. They are buying other companies rejects, improving them, then selling them.
  • by popo ( 107611 ) on Sunday November 23, 2003 @07:54PM (#7544638) Homepage
    Advertising agencies typically make most of their revenue as buyers and resellers of media. The "creative" tends to be a small part of the overall billing. (In fact, in the old days ad agencies didn't charge fees for their creative services *at all*, revenues were generated by purchasing blocks of media at a discount from the broadcast companies, and upselling the media to the client. The creative was a 'free' service that the agency used to provide for the right to sell the client the airtime). Today ad agencies bill at rates that are closer to traditional service companies, but: in the broadcast advertising realm, these billings still don't come close to the revenue generated from a single network media buy.

    In other words: If your client is buying airtime on broadcast television -- he's probably not going to nickel and dime you on the creative.

    Second -- the really *choice* old spots are owned by the companies that paid for them -- even if they never aired. If a repurposed spot costs about $10k, it means the rights to the old footage cost far less than that. I can't imagine many big companies being interested in selling their old footage for small change like that...
    And if its not a big company, the spot probably sucked anyway. So my guess is while this sounds like a new groovy digital rights marketplace, its probably full of dreck.

    The trick to pissing in cornflakes, is not to hit the spoon.
    -Popo


    • If a repurposed spot costs about $10k, it means the rights to the old footage cost far less than that. I can't imagine many big companies being interested in selling their old footage for small change like that...

      Comparing $10,000 to $0 that's a large profit even if the ad is still being sold for less than it cost to make it. When a business has an unused resource if they can get any money for it there's a gain.

      This isn't to say that 30 second commercials cost a lot to make. There is a very good film

  • $50000? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by t_allardyce ( 48447 )
    If he had the original material that could be pretty easy (just get the the master that doesnt have captions on it) but otherwise does he just blur it out? I dunno about $50000, some of the ads i see on tv look like they were done with a camcorder on a street corner.. oh wait they were!
  • Why not pass a hat around and get enough money for a "linux" substitution in Apple's 1984 commercial? Never saw that one on TV enough anyway.

    Hmm, so what about copyright issues on this? Do the companies that made the original commercials get any say in this matter? If you went through with that idea I'd imagine Apple would be pretty unhappy.
  • by dandelion_wine ( 625330 ) on Sunday November 23, 2003 @08:07PM (#7544707) Journal
    a return of "it's that big hunk of FUDGE" or worse yet "where's the beef?"

    when what I should have been fearing is commercials that didn't make the cut??!!
  • by Black Art ( 3335 ) on Sunday November 23, 2003 @08:09PM (#7544719)
    The Your Name Here Story [archive.org] did the same thing years ago.

    We already have form letters, form movies, and form music. Not surprising we get form commercials as well.
    • Black Art's sig:

      "Trademarks are the heraldry of the new feudalism."

      Except that under feudalism, there is a two-way obligation. Property comes with obligation, both to the lord who granted it, and to the peasants who work it. Capitalism has no such restrictions on what you do with your property, and the corporation has no obligation to the consumer comparable to the lord's obligations to his peasants. Don't insult the memory of feudalism, please.

  • My concept (Score:4, Funny)

    by satanami69 ( 209636 ) on Sunday November 23, 2003 @08:16PM (#7544753) Homepage
    People are sitting, all facing a giant TV monitor. From the back of the room, a spikey haired female runs with a hammer. She stops, throws the hammer at the monitor, and shatters the giant face keeping people down.

    The ad...buy MS Longhorn.

    • That's a good one.

      Just think. Back when that commercial was made, there was no nationwide wiretapping. No Patriot Act. No spam. No DRM.

  • by Camel Pilot ( 78781 ) on Sunday November 23, 2003 @08:18PM (#7544764) Homepage Journal
    Does anyone remembers the MS commercial which was a spoof on the VW Golf commercial? The one where the guys are driving around find a chair on the side of the road, they pick it up but soon discover it stinks then drop it off and keep going?

    In Microsoft version Gates and Steve driving around in the Golf and see a Sun server on the side of the road (thrown out as garbage) so they stop and pick it up only to realize it too stinks and they stop and drop it off and keep going. It was admittedly a funny parody.

    The commercial however ends as the Golf turns a corner. I always thought a fitting end to commercial would be that as they turn the corner the car is completely obliterated by semi-truck at a high rate of speed which they evidently pulled out in front of and did not see. Then the last clip shows the inside of the cab of the truck with a penguin driving, jumping up and down wildly on the seat, while listening to Born to Wild playing at high volume.

    Hot Sauce [slashdot.org] and more
    Linux and Mozilla customer 5% smart cart discount

  • by santos_douglas ( 633335 ) on Sunday November 23, 2003 @08:36PM (#7544844) Journal
    Ad Exec: "Dilbert, you just don't understand the creative process."

    Dilbert: "You stole the entire idea from our competitors ad."

    Ad Exec: "Ok, so I guess you do understand the creative process."

    ~paraphrased from the Gruntmaster 6000 episode

  • by easyfrag ( 210329 ) on Sunday November 23, 2003 @08:46PM (#7544895)

    IANAAE (I am not an advertising executive) but I have to wonder how effective this type of advertising is. They are essentially comedy shorts that have little or nothing to do with the product, if it weren't for the tag line at the end you could "recycle" them to video as a package of skits.


    As much as I hate to admit it I think that some annoying TV ads are more effective, I hate having to sit through another Jared Fogle Subway ad but when I'm looking for a quick lunch I feel less guilty about going to Subway because I know he lost a pile of weight eating it. I hate it but it works.


    That being said I really do enjoy the "comedy" ads, Adcritic is sadly missed. My favorite is the one with the chick who's heading out on a date. After the guy opens the car door for her she gets in and rips a fart as he's going around to the driver's side door. When he gets in he introduces her to his friends that were in the backseat the whole time. Do you guys remember that one? Now do you remember what it was selling? Me neither.

  • Here's a good example of a recycled commercial from a cash-strapped organization. Have a look:

    advertisement [userfriendly.org]

  • DVD of ads (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Lord_Dweomer ( 648696 ) on Sunday November 23, 2003 @09:07PM (#7544988) Homepage
    This is kind of off-topic, but I always wished I could find some of the wittier ads I've seen from Cannes and such on DVD. Someone should make a "Best of advertising" dvd. Before this gets knocked by all you anti-advertising people on here, realize that there IS a lot of good advertising out there that is entertaining, it just so happens that there's a lot more thats absolute crap.

  • by Slur ( 61510 ) on Sunday November 23, 2003 @09:45PM (#7545122) Homepage Journal
    There's a classic accident representation attorney ad that's been circulating in lots of cities for a long while. The commercial is shot in black and white, which heightens the drama. The setting is the office of an Insurance Company's legal staff where the evil insurance lawyers are discussing the details of a new claim. The attorneys are arrogantly joking about how they're going to deny the claim. One of the older lawyers finally asks "Who's their lawyer?"

    Then they use the trick that makes the ad reusable. The camera cuts away to a hilarious reaction shot as the attorney's name is matter-of-factly spoken.

    "James Sokolov"

    All the young attorneys suddenly look up, visibly shaken. After a few moments of uncomfortable silence the camera cuts back to the older lawyer who says:

    "Uh. Let's settle this thing."

    I've seen the same ad many times in different cities, always with a different lawyer's name. I've seen a few different versions with different actors and dialog. I always laugh when they get to the cutaway shot.

    I find that if I say "Unfrozen Caveman Attorney" at the cutaway the reaction seems even funnier.
  • is where they make ads that show some toy (for example a barbie doll) and have that little text saying "xxx not available".

    This happens in australia, dont know about anywhere else.
  • by notque ( 636838 )
    "Dude, you're getting a (long pause) Big Mac."

To be awake is to be alive. -- Henry David Thoreau, in "Walden"

Working...