Ad Campaigns Are Like Presidents

They're either effective or they're not. Generally, bad ads will not just cause me to not buy a product or service, but if they're really bad they'll drive me away from the product entirely. Take Snickers. I like Snickers, but I won't eat them right now because of their horrible ad campaign. What idiot executive looked at the storyboards for these ads and thought, "Yeah, that's a great concept." More than likely the thought was something like this, "Man, I don't understand this at all. It must be good. Hey, I wonder if my assistant remembered to put her bra back on." Do we have a bunch of ex-Fox executives working at M&M/Mars now? Let's see, we'll have people do things with Snickers that they're not intended for like throw at a deer or toss on a fire, and in doing so inform people that they're really tasty and they should buy some. I HATE THESE ADS!

Take the deer hunting one. If they really wanted red-neck deer hunters to buy Snickers wouldn't they have shot the same ad but instead of the deer running away when attacked, they could have had the Snickers bars turn into deadly sharp weapons that slice through the deer, killing it on the spot, automatically gutting and dressing it. Snickers, tasty in the tree stand and deadly quiet from 30 yards. Red-necks would be buying Snickers by the case.

Then there's the one were the um....questionably straight...guy who sees a fire, breaks the glass, grabs a Snickers and throws it on the fire only to have no effect. If you really wanted to sell to questionably straight men, wouldn't you have had the Snickers hit the fire and magically turn into a muscular, shirt-less fireman who douses the fire with urine and gives the guy a sly wink. No doubt that would sell to the questionable straight audience. As it is, the ads make fun of those demographics it portrays and pisses off the rest of us because of their stupidity. Nice job. These are Bush league ads. Too much attempted cleverness, not enough action.

Then we have the Reagan league ads, even if I didn't want it, I'd buy it because of the message. In this category we have the new Milwaukee's Best Light ads. Yep, the "Men Should Act Like Men" ads. I haven't laughed this hard at a series of ads in quite a while. Well done Milwaukee.

Pet Peeve #26: People with Walking Disabilities

No, I'm not talking about traditional physically-disabled people. I'm talking about those people that you watch walk and are pretty sure their parents are a rung or two below you on the evolutionary ladder.

First we have the people who can't pick up their feet when they walk. They do this feet shuffling thing that sounds the Frankenstein monster on a three-day bender. Please…lift your foot, step forward, and put your foot on the ground. Repeat with the opposite foot. Stop dragging your feet like a woman invited into the Colonel's house.

Then there are those people that wear noisy clothes or shoes. Whether it's the swish, swish of nylon pants or the clomp, clomp of non-practical shoes. Nothing drives Uncle Jimbo closer to referring to himself in the third-person and a career in ballistic healing than obnoxious repetitive noises. Fashion should not be noisy!

And finally, we have the people that, when passed in the hall or on the street, refuse to make eye contact or respond to a non-hostile, sometimes even pleasant, greeting. Now rumor has it that the only way to not get shot in NYC is to avoid eye contact. I can respect that. There are enough nut jobs down there that I wouldn’t want to talk to them either. But I live in…..Ah, screw it. I hate people…keep on ignoring me. I’ll be over here admiring my huge collection of slightly used clogs and parachute pants.

The Basic Laws of Stupidity

The Basic Laws of Stupidity as defined by Carlo M. Cipolla, Professor of Economics, UC Berkeley.

Who knew an economics professor could exist in the I quadrant. It is my recommendation that we begin labeling people appropriately. Start with yourself. If you're not an I or a B1, please stop coming to this site.

Asshat of the Week Award

Here is a letter to movie reviewer (sic) Jack Garner.

P.S. If you haven't seen Serenity, please go and see it. If for no other reason than to show Jack Garner he's the worst movie reviewer in the 'verse.

=====================

Dear Jack,

After reading your review of Serenity it took a moment for me to realize that you obviously have never watched a single episode of Firefly on TV or DVD. That is most unfortunate as it is, in my opinion, one for the ages. It is full of real-life humor and real-life conflict, set in a space-western with the campy flavor of an old-school Saturday serial. I'll admit it may not be everyone's cup of tea but given that it's sold hundreds of thousands of DVDs, and Fox executives lay awake at night wondering how they let it get away, this show is loved by a lot of people. And apparently, they're going to see it in droves enough to make a $10,000,000 dent in the box office.

Unfortunately I believe with all movies you review you decide certain movies can be glossed over. Given it's pedigree, you probably felt Serenity was just another attempt to make easy money off a television series (ala Duke of Hazzard) and went into the movie with a preconceived notion of what it would be. You metion "less-than-stellar effects." Believe it or not people enjoy the stylistic approach Whedon (and other's such as Ronald Moore on the television series Battlestar Galactica) uses for his effects. They aren't the sterile cookie-cutter effects we've had to live with since Lucas re-released the "enhanced" original trilogy. Whedon uses his effects to assist with his story telling. Lucas uses them as a crutch.

You refer to average-to-poor performances from the cast. This surprises me considering you didn’t seem to mention any performance problems in the horribly acted Revenge of the Sith. I will neither agree nor disagree with your statement that characters and plot elements are lifted "willy-nilly" from Star Trek and Star Wars. But I find it interesting that you applaud Lucas (re: Revenge of the Sith review) for lifting ideas from "popcorn serials, samurai flicks and westerns", yet rip Whedon for the very same thing. As for the dialogue, if you don't get it, I'm not going to explain it to you. Thank goodness anticipated box office revenue doesn't have any effect on the depth or quality of your reviews.

For many years I have found you a solid rock in the world of movie reviews. If you panned the movie, I enjoyed it. If you raved, I gagged. Thanks for not disappointing me.