If This Is A Blog Then What's Christmas?

Here’s a spot created here at MAL LA for TBWA’s International Women’s Day initiative:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R4dKUmV856A

Nice one, Lauren, Brydon and everyone else involved.

UPDATE: check the site here.

Here’s an interesting article about the consequences of adblocking software (check the comments for further discussion).

I wrote a post at the start of the year that explored some of this topic, and if you check out the comments beneath the Guardian article you’ll note many complaints about the quality and tone of the ads that fill up the sites you really want to see, while also sucking up their bandwidth:

kooljeff says:

Indeed. If they were discreet, tasteful and unobtrusive letting the content take precedence that would be fine.

But we are bombarded by garish, tasteless overwhelming greed. Continually punched and kicked with corporate grasping, money grubbing. No wonder the Tories like it so much.

This has led to last year’s Cannes Grand Prix-winning ‘Unskippable ads’ from Geico:

Which has since been followed up by this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?list=PLwTsyIROsacim24vPVm-6Vf_P5AtfvMk9&v=DgCHUHgNnZI

Funny, isn’t it? There’s this huge smelly problem in the world of advertising and, aside from the odd pisstake, the entire industry seems happy to ignore it. As far as I can tell, websites seem to think it’s better to annoy you by following you around the net with a picture of that lampshade you decided not to buy (or, even stranger, more lampshades when you’ve just bought one: ‘He seems to be a great lover of lampshades. He must want more and more of them. Let’s shove them all under his nose!’) than simply acknowledge that you’ve spent time on their site already, and perhaps that’s enough for now. The analogy of being chased out of the shop and followed all over the place by the shop keeper makes total sense, but why does no one acknowledge that? Is this method of salesmanship so damn effective that it’s worth all the bad blood?

That brings us on to adblockers. Another comment from the Guardian article:

7heManFromDelMonte (ironic name?) says:

He needs to ask WHY people are using ad- blockers. And the simple answer is that we are sick of being fed ads 24/7. 

Tv, radio, social media, busses, taxis, billboards, newsletters. Even on petrol pump handles!

We use ad blockers because we are sick of being force fed ads. Otherwise we wouldn’t use them.

Precisely.

Ad blockers are used because people don’t like some aspect of the ads, be that persistence, ugliness, use of bandwidth, indication of a further corporate greed that they’d rather not enable etc. But instead of addressing those faults, the websites and advertisers have got together and attempted some sort of guilt trip, suggesting that we should bloody well take our medicine because it’s paying for the next Muse album.

I think the angle here should be positive reinforcement; the carrot instead of the stick. To avoid the King Canute-esque whining of Mr. Whittingdale and the media moguls an effort must be made to create things people want. Is that easy? No. Is there currently a better alternative? No. Is any of this really going to change? Hahahhahahahhahahahahhahahhahahahhahahhahahahhahha…

The worst spelling mistakes on Twitter.

The North South divide (thanks, G).

The last words of movies collected into themes (thanks, J):

Every Kate Moss magazine cover:

https://vimeo.com/155030351

British drivers swearing quite brilliantly (thanks, C):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kOjUL8LwUsE

If the moon landings had gone wrong, Nixon would have given this speech (thanks, C).

Get Rich Or Try Reading (thanks, J2).

Michael Jackson, top beatboxer (thanks, G):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQuKbzWHvIo

Ghostbusters is back (thanks, R):

Ted Cruz bad lip reading (thanks, J):

I’m writing this after watching the Oscars.

Why do we have awards? I think there are two main answers: the first is that kind of self-congratulatory pat on the back for the winners and the whole organisation in general. Advertising awards seem to make advertising more respectable and prestigious; movie awards sometimes make us forget that some rich people further up the chain were trying to make a boatload of cash; and valve salesman awards help the valve sellers think that their lives have a purpose, making them 12% less likely to commit suicide.

The second reason is that the awards supposedly act as some kind of inspirational carrot. You see the great work and are instantly shamed into upping your own game. In addition, you see your friends get to walk up to the stage, and the next day collect a raise and you think you’d like some of that for yourself.

Mmmm… stages… cash… prestige…

Far be it from me to piss on the pure goodness of the above, but I have a couple of cons to place on the other side of the see-saw: awards are a ‘bad’ thing because they separate us by exalting the few. Forgive me for getting a little hippyish here, but there’s a lot of wise people that say we’re all equal. Yes, it doesn’t always end up that way, but that’s the ideal most of us aspire to. So what is the good of spending a lot of money making it very clear that some of us are better than others? I’ll guess some winners had an easier run than some losers, so their endeavour may not have been as impressive. But we’re going to say the winners are better because they won. Hooray.

And sure, some can run faster and throw further; those are unequivocal facts. But when it comes to providing a definitive measure of who is better or worse in subjective fields then it’s really fucking pointless. So Leo gave a ‘better’ performance than Bryan Cranston? Did he? Or did he just spend more time freezing his arse off? Was Cranston’s portrayal of Trumbo uncannily realistic and more nuanced than Leo climbing inside a prop horse and snotting all over his beard? Who really knows? Well, hundreds of millions of us; one was worth the Oscar, and therefore ‘better’ than the other.

I used to take awards very seriously, mainly because they were the clearest route to progress in creative advertising (a Cannes Gold will always trump a 12% uptick in sales when it comes to bonus/promotion time), but for years they’ve felt increasingly meaningless. I get that the respect of one’s peers is usually a pleasant sensation, and a chance to get your work out to all the people paying attention to the awards must help something in some way, but maybe we shouldn’t make them into such a big deal. After all, if the work is good we hardly need a few shiny trinkets to confirm that.

Or perhaps some people do…

Help Kenya, not Kanye (thanks, J).

There used to be a 5th playing card suit (thanks, T).

We Are The World x Faceswap Live (thanks, J):

Dick art hits a new peak (thanks, S).

Servicing an Omega Speedmaster.

Photoshopper turns random pictures into movie posters (thanks, W).

The Beatles isolated vocals from Abbey Road.

The screenwriter of Out of Sight and Get Shorty on how to write (thanks, J2).

The Coen Brothers, shot/reverse shot:

The obvious answer is ‘because it’s shit’, but we all know that creative work bites the dust for myriad reasons. Here are a few:

1. You’re looking at different colours. When you said ‘It’ll be a dark satire in the form of a man whose business goes under’, your client/CD/director thought of one version of those subjective nouns and adjectives, while you were thinking of another. If your client’s imagined version is too far from yours they will either kill yours or they’ll injure it badly by trying to shape it into what they really had in mind. If it’s your director/illustrator/typographer you might be fortunate enough to go again with someone else, or use others (the editor/sound designer etc.) to salvage the work, or (very rarely) be pleasantly surprised by something you were not expecting. But more often their wrong work will just result in the end result being plop.
2. Bad timing. I remember coming up with a campaign at AMV that I told my wife about. As a production company rep, she was aware of much of the work flowing through the industry, so she sadly informed me that another agency was doing something with the same idea. Were we supposed to tell the client? Would we back off? Who would be on air first? In the end we went ahead, scuppering the other campaign, which, I imagine, was quite annoying for the other creative team. They suffered from an unfortunate accident in timing, but such an occurrence can take other forms: delays with the budget can drag an ad into ‘Q3′, fucking up the chances of finding the cash to do it properly. Or the client might go under or get bought out, just when the green light was about to happen. No fault of your own, but you deal with the consequences.
3.  A changing of the guard. Your CD loved it. He sold it up the chain, holding the hand of a worried client who wasn’t sure he could buy such brave work. He eked another 100k out of the CMO for that helicopter shot that would send you sauntering to the D&AD podium. Then he got a job offer elsewhere, fucked off to Sao Paolo and the whole house of cards collapsed. Or maybe the client left, and like any self-respecting studio head, the new guy/gal binned everything his/her predecessor OK’d. After all, if those ads became successes the old client would get the credit, and if they were failures the new one would get the blame. Better to kill everything and avoid such difficulties. Sorry if that means your long-cherished 90″ cinema spot is now dead, but thems the breaks.
4. Competition. The funny thing about creative endeavours is that they are entirely subjective, so it doesn’t actually matter if your script is ‘better’ than the one the senior team down the corridor turned in; if that team is tight with the CD and/or client, you’re probably fucked (of course, there’s always the possibility that their script is better, and that the CD/client just feels more comfortable going into production with a more experienced pair of hands). May the best man win is a fine sentiment when the playing field is level, but I’m afraid it’s never really level, and at the beginning of your career you’re most likely to be at the wrong end of its slope. At some point in the future you may be that senior team that gets a more advantageous rub of the green, and when that time comes the likelihood of you falling on your own sword will be close to zero, so this time, tough shit.
5. The people doing the choosing are utter fuckwits. We’ve all been there: you write a script Paddy Chayefsky would be proud of, the timing is perfecto, there are no other scripts in the way and everyone is solidly entrenched in their job for the next few years. What could go wrong? Well, alas, not everyone has good taste, so there’s a little chance your CD, CEO or client (the three people who can really kill your work) might be too stupid or talentless to see the gold sparkling on your page. At best they might add or remove some crucial elements that will now send your idea to Turd Town; at worst they might just think it’s crapola and strangle it in its crib. Actually maybe the first of those is the worst one, because then you have to see the thing through, which means getting on the Excrement Express and taking a month-long trip to Turd Town, stopping at the resort of Cackville on the way. Best to let it die early; you will feel less pain.

With all that to navigate it’s amazing any good ads get made at all.

What’s that you say? Good ads hardly ever get made at all?

Well, now you know why.

Artisanal firewood (thanks, S):

A very compelling video (thanks, T):

All about the sound guy from Loony Tunes.

Client comments turned into cool posters (thanks, G).

Why the direction in which a character moves matters:

How film scores play with our brains:

Frank Lloyd Wright on arrogance:

Famous novelists on whether the symbolism in their work was intentional (thanks, G).

Chess grandmaster plays unsuspecting guy in park:

Prisoners painting people who should be prisoners (thanks, G).

Counterintuitive means ‘contrary to common sense expectation’, eg:

Fat makes you thin.

You have to fail to succeed.

Getting healthy can kill you.

If you want to attract someone, be rude to them.

etc.

Makes you wonder when it’s the right time to do the obvious and when it’s better to do the exact opposite…

If I want to top the global music charts and get 2.5bn views on YouTube, should I become a dumpy older man and make a song entirely in Korean?

If I want to make the best reviewed film of the year, should I remake a small hit from 35 years ago with the original director, a man who has since made several films about singing penguins and talking pigs?

If I want to put together the best team in the football league, should I recruit a decent but unremarkable manager, then put him together with a team of cheap and non-league players?

It must be the toughest choice to make, especially in creative endeavours, but the truth is that no matter how often human beings try to play the odds, the greatest work always comes from doing the opposite.

Of course, you can try to follow successes, emulating elements of what they have done. After all, without The Sopranos there would be no Deadwood, The Wire, Mad Men or Breaking Bad. But until The Sopranos (and perhaps Oz) made adult, intelligent episodic TV drama an attractive idea, that path looked to be blocked with a brick wall. Now it almost seems obvious that there was a huge untapped market in smart TV.

But for every instance where a brave decision turned out to be a trailblazing game-changer there must be millions of other attempts that turned out to be less successful. So the real question is: are you doing something wonderfully fresh or just misjudged and stupid?

Unfortunately, the only way you can find out is by putting your great new thing out there and hoping it’s received as you intend it. And that’s where the real crunch comes: it may not be the quality of the work or the idea that doesn’t work; it might instead be the timing, or the mood of your audience, or what others produce around the same time.

So the first job is to come up with something brilliant that goes against the prevailing wisdom, then you have to do a lot of hoping that you hit the part of the target marked ‘counterintuitive brilliance’ rather than the part marked ‘pointless shite’.

Good luck with that!

Arethra Franklin’s amazing version of Eleanor Rigby (thanks, T):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=spXjauv0NSM&feature=share

If movies ended when someone said the title (thanks, J):

Amazing footage from an iPhone on a string (thanks, C):

Hunter S. Thompson’s daily drug intake.

Great/awful descriptions of female movie characters (thanks, G).

Buster Keaton’s most amazing stunt (thanks, J2).

Simpsons movie references:

Rent a minority (thanks, J).

Dark Side Of The Moon syncs with The Force Awakens.

Hey Ben.

Remember that euthanasia roller coaster film that you helped PR on your website?
I’ve finally released it this week on vimeo.
Is there any way that you would put it up on your website by any chance?
You’ve been a really good guy helping me already on this and I would love a little final push as it’s now officially out…

Here’s a little PR note from me about the film:

You’re dying. If money was no object, would you manipulate euthanasia so that you could die on your own terms?
Would you suffer the indignities of a drawn-out and painful terminal illness if there was an attractive alternative?

This story examines how the protagonist Mark uses his wealth to help create a euthanasia roller coaster. A roller coaster so powerful, it causes cerebral hypoxia, thus suffocating your brain ensuring a euphoric death.

I’m Glenn Paton, a director, and these are the questions that my debut short film “H Positive” delves into.

It’s a Kickstarter funded film (which I raised £20,000) and I directed it through Academy Films.

I’ve just uploaded it to Vimeo after winning 8 Laurels in the film festival circuit and I was hoping that you might consider a small write up about it on ITIABTWC.

https://vimeo.com/154188234

Nice one, Glenn.

I watched it thinking, ‘How the fuck did this get made for 20 grand?’ and ‘This is jolly good’.