you can't win them all.
Well, after another week, and a few more 'episodes' of the Seinfeld/Gates fiasco, it looks like someone started to get it. Whatever was spent on that CP+B campaign for Microsoft was a waste of cash, time, and film. Not everything can be a home-run. CP+B is a shop to envy. They are good. That is why this is so baffling to me.
I am looking forward to any post-mortem from anyone close to the situation that might pop up in the near future.
IMHO, it was doomed from the start. Gates is not an actor. Seinfeld is not an actor, and is rather un-funny outside of the controlled environment of his long gone sitcom. In that forum, it allowed him to hide behind writers of scripted dialog and great cast members. Now perhaps a Microsoft campaign with Larry David...that has a chance. Even if it's just as a writer.
A spot revolving around the 'everyday' family looking for a giraffe sculpture and questioning the kids only to come to realize that gates and Seinfeld are in the house too, so these gazillionaires are stealing from their hosts? Perhaps the final nail in this one, and I think it is the last in the series is the two of them walking down the street dragging suitcases and they cut to a wide shot from behind [like in the first one when were are lead to believe that PCs will be made out of cake soon...] and Seinfeld asks for another "sign" and asks him to do "The Robot" and then powers him down....I can't even image what they were smoking when they came up with this stuff.
In all fairness, most ideas in brainstorming sessions are dumped on the scrap-heap. It's just a fact of advertising life. That is why we have 'pitch sessions' where we share the concept with people, most often the client, but it can be with a group within the agency that was not involved in the creation of this concept. The whole idea is a fresh set of eyes, ears, and brains on this thing. The idea behind this is of it sucks, those who conceived it might be too close and have a conflict of interest when it comes to the viability of the whole thing. An outsider can look at it more objectively…usually.
Anyway, my question is this: How did this get past all of the potential safeguards. Didn’t anyone question this? Did a higher-up that loved it push it through without regard for any red-flags? Did everyone really like it? If they did was it because CP+B did it and their track record give the illusion that if it was a CP+B idea, it must be good?
Who really knows but those directly involved. Either way, keep in mind: a.) you can’t win them all. B.) This will not affect Fates or Seinfeld in anyway. C.) Nobody really cares what I think anyway. Let the comments fly…
I am looking forward to any post-mortem from anyone close to the situation that might pop up in the near future.
IMHO, it was doomed from the start. Gates is not an actor. Seinfeld is not an actor, and is rather un-funny outside of the controlled environment of his long gone sitcom. In that forum, it allowed him to hide behind writers of scripted dialog and great cast members. Now perhaps a Microsoft campaign with Larry David...that has a chance. Even if it's just as a writer.
A spot revolving around the 'everyday' family looking for a giraffe sculpture and questioning the kids only to come to realize that gates and Seinfeld are in the house too, so these gazillionaires are stealing from their hosts? Perhaps the final nail in this one, and I think it is the last in the series is the two of them walking down the street dragging suitcases and they cut to a wide shot from behind [like in the first one when were are lead to believe that PCs will be made out of cake soon...] and Seinfeld asks for another "sign" and asks him to do "The Robot" and then powers him down....I can't even image what they were smoking when they came up with this stuff.
In all fairness, most ideas in brainstorming sessions are dumped on the scrap-heap. It's just a fact of advertising life. That is why we have 'pitch sessions' where we share the concept with people, most often the client, but it can be with a group within the agency that was not involved in the creation of this concept. The whole idea is a fresh set of eyes, ears, and brains on this thing. The idea behind this is of it sucks, those who conceived it might be too close and have a conflict of interest when it comes to the viability of the whole thing. An outsider can look at it more objectively…usually.
Anyway, my question is this: How did this get past all of the potential safeguards. Didn’t anyone question this? Did a higher-up that loved it push it through without regard for any red-flags? Did everyone really like it? If they did was it because CP+B did it and their track record give the illusion that if it was a CP+B idea, it must be good?
Who really knows but those directly involved. Either way, keep in mind: a.) you can’t win them all. B.) This will not affect Fates or Seinfeld in anyway. C.) Nobody really cares what I think anyway. Let the comments fly…
Labels: advertising, cp+b, failures, microsoft
posted by One Eyed Dog Productions at 10:35 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home