Good/Bad/Whatevs
It strikes me that there are some things that are always assumed to be good or bad, whether or not that is actually the case.
Take, for instance, shoots abroad: jetting off to some other part of the world at someone else’s expense to sit around on a set or location then eat and drink in the most expensive restaurant you can find, also on someone else’s dollar.
Of course, that is often a pleasant experience, but it can be rendered shitemongous by a wide variety of factors: are you leaving your young kids/hot significant other behind (I know that can also be a plus point for some people)? Have you already been to said location on many occasions, thus exhausting its novelty value? Will you have to babysit an arsehole client or spend time with a hated account director? Is the ad likely to be rubbish, therefore ending up as a month-long waste of career time? Is said location (eg. Prague) fine for a day or two but pretty dull any longer than that? Is the location amazing in theory but quite grim in reality (Yes, Havana, I’m talking about you)?
Equally, choosing and meeting directors is fun if they are any good, but if not, trawling through Wankbucket Productions and Spaz Films is a strange kind of hell. You’ll be talking to them because Frank/Chris/Fredrik etc. didn’t want to know, and now you’re at some production company you’ve never heard of, talking to a director whose self-confidence is in inverse proportion to his talent. And you all have to pretend the ad you’re making isn’t a load of old plop, otherwise you’d shoot yourselves in a mercy-killing-cum-suicide-pact.
Then there’s the other side of the coin; the things that seem shit but aren’t (necessarily): for example, working on the worst account in the agency. Of course, this can often be awful, but before Cog, Grrr and Impossible Dream, Honda was one of the worst accounts in UK advertising. The work was dreadful and I can’t imagine people were to enthusiastic about trying to change that. But bad accounts are good for the same reason that good ones aren’t: do a good Nike ad and it’s just another good Nike ad, but turn Tesco, Honda or Philips around and you’ve really done something great. But you can only do that it you get the ‘shit’ brief on your desk.
What else are we supposed to like that’s actually dog mess? Award dos (surprisingly dull if you’ve been to a few. Especially if you’re neither on the pull or up for an award); Photo shoots (fucking boring unless you are very much that way inclined); agency occasions with free booze (wine always shit, beer always warm); being mentioned in Campaign (less prestigious than being mentioned in Razzle); D&AD entries if you’ve already had at least ten (they redefine ‘meaningless’).
But then there are things that are supposed to be shit that aren’t: meeting clients (if they’re good or interesting it can be a real pleasure/education); account people (some of them – particularly the younger ones – are quite pleasant company; getting fired (see if the grass really is greener elsewhere. It often is); working the weekend (great if you’re a freelancer) and your friends joining the ‘best agency in town’ (you might be jealous at first, but most people I know who work at ‘TBAIT’ fucking hate it there, wherever it may be).
I’m not saying that all the shit things are great and vice versa; just that poo can be disguised as a rainbow and vice versa.
Yes, I saw Reina o.g too.
I find it weird when certain ads are assumed to be good. eg Sony Balls and St Wayne (I forget who it was for). I didn’t like either of them, yet if you tell people that they look at you as if you are a thicko and because you don’t agree with them and the herd, probably talentless too.
Even though advertising is utterly subjective, there is seemingly a “wrong” way to do ads and of course a “right” way.
The right way is usually the way some jumped up twat with a “fixie,” stupid fucking hair, coke addicted, skinny jean wearing, hairy balls knob from Cuntoxeter, says it is.
Totally off topic, but what are your thoughts on the Puma ‘After Hours Athletes’ spot from Droga5?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CoxCF1xZ7Pk
My thoughts are that I’m too on holiday to watch it. The beach beckons.
Puma: Vignettes, voice over, best left in 2001
Ben,
Take Jexy up on his request, it’ll only make your holiday better. How many times do you get to watch a really good idea well done?
Ciaran
Jexy – Puma is excellent. One of those incredibly simple, almost obvious ideas, beautifully executed. Nike’s relentless, elitist advertising for people who like to run 12 miles on a Sunday morning is totally alienating for the majority of their real target. All night dancing, eating kebabs, throwing arrows and generally having fun, is the reality of almost any Nike, Adidas, Reebok and yes, Puma wearer. Reebok and Adidas have touched on this angle before, but never so comprehensively. Excellent!
@Bellend
Nothing wrong with ‘fixie’ bikes old chap. They’re actually a much better option for getting around town more easily than say, a mountain bike. And they look good. However I do agree with you about ‘St Wayne’ which was rubbish, even if not about ‘Balls.’ Personally, I find shoots dreadfully dull too. There’s only so many chocolate biscuits you can eat whilst discussing irrelevant minutiae. But then I did go on one to New York once and that was rather good.
OK, back from beach. It was nice but it failed entirely to improve my holiday.
It’s an ad about people who don’t need any athletic equipment at all, so I’m not sure what it’s got to do with Puma.
Ben,
Sorry, I forgot myself there for a moment, of course all those people who “Just Do It’ are athletes.
Ciaran
i think the puma ad loves itself too much. it made me want to drag the voiceover guy out the sound booth and punch his face off. but it is nicely lit.
Watched it again. Like it better.
I WAS WRONG.
There, I said it.
Ben – you’ve had too much sun. Look at the reality. Out on the town on a Friday night, see how many people are wearing Puma footwear – they are not all athletes. I doubt any of them are.
You said yourself that you wear Adidas and Nike shoes from day to day (the faux pa that was wearing Nike to 180, and Adidas to W+K). You personify the point I am trying to make. Wearing sports brands does not a sportsman make.
Whoops. Sorry about the last comment then.
George: ironically enough, it’s faux pas.
I’m in France and I just checked.
Ben,
Bet that felt good, eh?. See, improved your holiday no end. That guy who kicked sand in your face yesterday on the beach yesterday better watch out today.
Ciaran
George & Ciaran – Totally agree. A spot-on idea, nicely executed. Seems obvious after you’ve seen it, but the best ones usually do.¬†
Ben РGlad you liked it, enjoy the beach. 
√úber cool.
I think it’s fucking excellent.
Loving the Puma ad.
P.S. I’m on holiday too! Not with Ben though.