The basic visuals are the same every time (really good looking food during the cooking process), but each is beautifully different.
When I see stuff like this I ask myself, what would Tony Cullingham say.
And I answer myself “Where’s the idea?”
Is that what you say when you see Whassuuupp?
When I see Wassssuuuup I ask myself “What would Tony Cullingham say?”
And I answer myself “Where’s the idea?”
When I’m in the shower, I ask myself “What would Tony Cullingham say”
And I answer myself “Nice cock.”
Very good. It’s a proper campaign. Well executed as always. Hats off to them.
“Where’s the idea?” is one of those lazy things that average middleweight creatives say to each other to ease the passing of yet another painful, pointless day. Bless.
What Sell! Sell! wrote.
Not taking the trouble to think of an idea. That’s lazy.
Loads of ads with ideas are shit. Loads of ads without ideas are excellent.
But I put it to you that a shit ad with an idea in is better than a shit ad without.
And an excellent ad with an idea in is better than an excellent ad without.
In my opinion.
Which is allowed.
As is your’s, Ciaran McCabe’s and Sell Sell’s (despite it being delivered in a rather patronising way).
There is an idea. Inspire people to cook – with Lurpak, if possible.
Just because it’s not spelled out in the voiceover or endline doesn’t mean there’s no idea.
is there a button i can press to just agree with sell sell. it would make it easier every time i comment.
I loves it!
I loves the whole campaign!
So much better than that crap Anchor dishes up.
GL – clearly a man of wealth and taste.
CC McGill – sorry you felt patronised. It’s true though.
Tony Cullingham – is he the Watford ad course guy? Could someone define the ‘Idea’ as taught by Cullingham/Watford? I’ve always wondered, and it does seem to cause a bit of confusion.
I am of the opinion that there is no idea in this but if you are right and there is, shouldn’t the idea inspire people to buy Lurpak?
‘A shit ad with an idea in it is better than a shit ad without?’
Something shit is worse than something that doesn’t exist.
So if an ad in its entirety is shit, then each component element of the ad is shit. Including the idea.
What you are saying is a shit idea is better than no idea. But it’s not. Because something shit is worse than something that doesn’t exist.
Take any of the idealess car ads you can’t remember over the last year and then compare them to the Vauxhall Adam ad or the Dacia ‘we don’t do wacky’ ads. They are better.
Shit does more harm than invisibility. The main reason being that it’s shit. Below average. Undesirable.
@tescoburgerboy how is Anchor crap?
Though, on second thoughts, a shit meal is better than no meal at all. So my predicate is questionable. Perhaps it only applies to aesthetic matters.
To me an idea is what you could say to another creative to get them to do the next ad in the campaign.
‘Good things come to those who wait’ could be executed in many different ways (and was). Same goes for ‘Reading The Economist makes you successful’.
In this case, ‘inspire people to cook by demonstrating the visual beauty of the cooking process with an inspiring voiceover’ isn’t really an idea so much as some executional instructions.
Who’s Tony Cullingham?
What Ben just said. In my head it’s the difference between lots of cops hiding behind a small car for protection (idea) and a footballer with a red cross painted on his chest (no idea). Both good ads (subjective) but one with an idea and one without (IMHO). For me the idea one trumps the other because it has an idea in.
At Anon. I didn’t quite understand your 1st post. I get the feeling we should agree to disagree on this one.
When I was at Watford Tony used to bang on (and on) about putting ideas in. I wouldn’t have had the bollocks to present this script to him. Imagine reading out the visuals to him. He’d have called me a idiot and told me to put an idea in.
Sell Sell. “Bless” is pretty patronising. It isn’t true.
@C.C. McGill: I think you’d also have trouble presenting Whassup, Surfer, Twister, Drugstore, Grrr or Gorilla to Tony.
I think it’s fair to say that ideas work very well for spec books because the execution can only get you so far (especially in TV), but when it comes to the real world ideas are less necessary. In all the above examples (and Lurpak) the execution elevates it far beyond the original script.
Very diplomatic Ben.
She still patronised me though.
@C.C. McGill: I’d say “Bless” is *very* patronising isn’t it? It’s a shame that you in particular feel patronised by it. The only people I have ever heard use “Where’s the idea?” as a criticism of good work are ex-ad course mediocre middleweights, so in my world, it is true.
Why not ‘she’?
CC doesn’t know who the poster is – it’s just the agency name. I quite like the open-minded assumption.
@Ben She’s a he? Ooops. Sorry. The cadence of the writing was quite feminine. You can’t tell when there’s no clue in the name. Mind you I could be a bird too. As in CC Peniston.
@Sell Sell. Sir! In your world it may be true.
In my world “Where’s the idea?” is used exlusively by handsome devils who are great at their job.
“Bless” on the other hand is used almost exclusively by cravat sporting, beardy, bellends who ride fixies, wear brown brogues and who pronounce the word creative as creadiv.
Oh yeah. That’s the type of person who says bless.
Very droll McGill, very droll. However, since it was me wot used the word ‘Bless’, what you write above is patently untrue, what with me being an unfashionable oaf with none of the above pretensions.
Golly this is fun, isn’t it?
Gosh, I said golly – does this mean I’m an old Etonian? Or simply someone who understands that language is a fun thing to play around with.
Anyway – that Lurpak ad really is great isn’t it? Any idea who did it?
It’s great for an ad with no idea in.
I don’t know who the creadivs were but the direcdor did most of the graft.
Oh yeah, sorry Steakandcheese. Yes, I have seen it.
The campaign idea is that good food depends on great ingredients. That’s why “good food deserves Lurpak”. The idea in this particular spot – in our opinion – is that Lurpak enables the cook to weave magic in the kitchen with some simple ingredients. Dan Norris and Ray Shaughnessy were the CDs and the director was Scott Lyon at Outsider. There’s some nice print work too, that may or may not have an idea in it.
‘Good food depends on great ingredients’ is surely the strategy, no?
I would have said that the strategy is to differentiate Lurpak from cheaper / ‘healthier’ alternatives by positioning it not as a butter but as an an essential part of the enjoyment of good food. But I don’t know how meaningful the distinction between idea and strategy is. The important thing is – does it move me?
Well, yeah. It’s a really good ad. The rest is immaterial.
‘Good food depends on great ingredients’
Sounds like a territory to me. What was the platform?
did somebody say “platform”?
I said “platform.”
I am mortified to realise that I omitted also to say “drill down” or “ladder up” or “leverage” when I talked of territory and platform. How remiss of me. Sometimes I think I’ll never be a planner.
This has been a very diverting exchange, especially when it comes to the debate about the word, ‘bless’. Pretty insulting but at the same time you can’t beat it as a put-down.
But the sentence that really got to me was, “When it comes to the real world ideas are less necessary.”
Right there, is why we creatives have become more devalued than ever. It’s why our salaries are falling and why good, sometimes great teams with piles of great work behind them find themselves out of jobs.
Because we’ve become the guys who execute. Not the guys who come up with great ‘ideas’ that solve real business problems. We don’t create thinking like ‘We’re number two, so we try harder’ anymore. Planners do that (and they get the big bucks for it too). Nowadays, we just generate content. And that makes us ultimately replaceable, interchangeable and easily fireable.
As far as the Lurpak ad goes – great execution. But the idea is weak. To quote the Bill Bernbach letter that you posted last week and was so inspiring, (I’m worried) “that we’re going to worship techniques instead of substance, that we’re going to follow history instead of making it, that we’re going to be drowned by superficialities instead of buoyed up by solid fundamentals. I’m worried lest hardening of the creative arteries begin to set in.
I think Bill Bernbach would have an issue with this ad, and beautiful though the execution might be, so do I.
@Ben “I think it’s fair to say that ideas work very well for spec books because the execution can only get you so far (especially in TV), but when it comes to the real world ideas are less necessary”
This reminds me of taking our work-in-progress student book to Mark Elwood at 101, and it had an idea for Club biscuits about “thick chocolate, smart choice”, with clever people dribbling chocolate, or something like that. He just told us that our job was not necessarily to be clever (not that it was all that clever anyway), it was to make the customer look at the poster and immediately want a Club.
Careful jaded. The mob will descend. You make the mistake of thinking different.
Reminded me of the Real Men of Genius campaign a little.
Which may mean it’s treading a fine line with regard to taking itself a little too seriously.
But I enjoyed it and Scott has shot it well.
Thinking different by thinking exactly as you are told and citing the man who taught you it.
As a creative , I’m not sure I’d be that bothered if it was on my reel or not, but if I was a director, I would definitely have it on the reel. That said it would show that I am good (along with the TV dept) at finding good directors to bring my humble script to life.
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.