The #1 rated commercial at the Superbowl was shot by 10 photographers

God, bla bla bla, then a truck.
God is an american.

I'm probably too cynical for these ads to be efficient on me. And if I had to buy a truck, this one would be out of the game for me. Just too cheezy.

The photography was good. The message was bad.
 
I live in Northern New Jersey suburbia. The tough guys who mow lawns and snow plow parking lots have these. They tailgate within inches and attempt to intimidate with high beams. I stop my lowly KIA and confront them. They fold behind the steering wheel like a cheap camera.
 
+1 on that (Morristown here). A lot of the guys driving these around here clearly watch too many Super Bowl ads.

George Bonanno said:
I live in Northern New Jersey suburbia. The tough guys who mow lawns and snow plow parking lots have these. They tailgate within inches and attempt to intimidate with high beams. I stop my lowly KIA and confront them. They fold behind the steering wheel like a cheap camera.
Click to expand...
 
Truck ads are no different than anything else... go after a demographic with cheesy cliches and hope it hits a nerve.
 
Regardless of all the hoopla surrounding the ad, it's pretty amazing to me that the most talked about ad from the superbowl was all still imagery. Yes, it was quite overprocessed and stylized, but it was still photography. Made me proud to have learned the trade.
 
I liked the images.
I paid no attention to the fact that they were selling trucks - I can separate this stuff fairly easily as can most folks.

Cheers,
Dave
 
Wonderful photos.

I wonder how much of the budget went toward actually identifying traditional farm families to take pictures of ?

Randy
 
zauhar said:
Wonderful photos.

I wonder how much of the budget went toward actually identifying traditional farm families to take pictures of ?
Click to expand...


I strongly suppose that the farms and models were picked by separate location scouts and casting agents, and even the cow and chicken or their legal representatives signed a contract before they were carted to location and photographed. Nobody would in real life take a risk with improperly cleared reportage pictures in a Superbowl campaign...
 
I think it was pretty effective, and most of the photography was well-executed.

Difficult to "accurately represent" anything in 2 minutes, specially when it's something incredibly complex. Marketing has one main purpose: making you remember the ad, and by extension, the product. Hence, this was effective.

Calm, to the point, aesthetically-pleasing images, good post-production...and it's an ad. I don't expect much from an ad, and anybody expecting resolution of social issues in an ad production is not looking in the right place.
 
They probably downloaded all the photos from a google search or flickr, and used them without permission.... :)
Just kidding..
 
47% of some demographic will respond by thinking that Chrysler/God/Ram Trucks/farmers are all congruent and they'd vote for 'em all by buying a truck. 47% will respond by thinking "huh?"

The marketing was effective when you consider their intended audience. It wouldn't, however, work on me.
 
Yes Rob, Im sure there are plenty of people that will go out and buy a RAM because those trucks are christian, regardless whether they work or not..
 
Nice photography. really nice in fact..



Didnt know they where selling trucks ? And franky , I didnt didnt care(even think about ) if they didnt use any women photographers..

Is that some type of law..?


However, I understand why women photographers would have an issue with them not being choosen to participate.. \

Perhaps they can do another ad next year will all women shooters :)


Gregory
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom