Selling Sex

It's been a while since I've written here, so before I get back into the serious stuff, let's have some fun. Let's rant a little and perhaps take a slightly exaggerated look at this topic.

Advertisements are meant to sell. And nothing sells like sex. In every single corner of the world, sex sells. From the assembly in Karnataka to the harddrives seized from Osama's Abottabad hideout. Sex sells, and the whole world is buying.

It isn't news that sex sells. What disturbs me, however, is the trend of selling sex. The number of ads out there that sell the idea, or possibility of copulation is ever on the rise. And no, I'm not talking about the obvious- no grooming products, no deos or hair gels or fairness creams. Hell, the entire personal care industry is about upping one's sex appeal, no secret there. But it's rather disconcerting, if not frustrating, to see this card played everywhere.

I'll take two minor occurrences in two ads as examples.

Take the Samsung Galaxy Y ad with the "Talking Tom" app. The ad features a man and a woman (quite attractive) being shouted at by their boss, when to their rescue comes the cool dude with this hilarious app. Fine, no problem so far. The boss is amused, and the cool dude drops the product's catch phrase, basically saying that the boss people of the world who think they are very cool but don't even have this phone are not as cool as they think they are. Inane, but acceptable. But here comes the kicker, and you can almost feel it coming. You cringe in anticipation... and there it is. The girl looks at the guy with a saucy look. She is impressed. She wants him. Maybe right now, in the supply closet. Why not, it is an awesome phone. The angle of the shot even gives it a suggestion of something on the sly, something they know is naughty.

Is this the whole point of the ad? "Buy our phone and you can get laid by the hot office lady." You will attract a woman's attention. They will want you. They will need you. Many a dollar has been made by targeting a man's genitals.

The other ad is the Sharman Joshi dancing penguin 7UP ad. It's a fine ad, with some animation proficiency. It has Sharman Joshi and a penguin involved in an intense dance-off, because 7UP makes Sharman "feel up." Who cares if they copied Happy Feet, it's fun to watch.

So what's my problem with it? There is a girl that enters near the END of the ad, and is there to only look at and be impressed by Sharman. I should be used to this, right? But here's the kicker: this time, our protagonist doesn't even see the girl at all. She is just there to smile at him.

So... by drinking 7UP, one would feel sufficiently positive about life that they can break out into song and dance and attract the random pretty girl in the yellow dress? Preposterous. The ad was fine, you even had the random group of people cheering Sharman after his dance-off, why add this needless distraction?

Now this can be extended to almost every ad out there. Are advertisers really just trying to sell us sex? Or the possibility of it? Deo ads no doubt take the cake. Axe was even sued by one man who failed to attract the hordes of girls that the ads promised him if he used their product (or was this fake? Read this hilarious article. Apparently the author agrees with me).

A certain liquor ad featured a well built hunk of a man going from his boardroom to surfing at the beach to the nightclub with a sexy lady and several other places and was still home in time to kiss his mother goodnight. A Tata Sky services ad features a couple and hints at infidelity. John Abraham's Skybags got him in bed with a hot adulteress. Cadbury Silk ads have people sharing a messy, melty chocolate bar (kinky) to a soundtrack of "Kiss Me." Coke ads say that you can meet a hot girl like Kalki Koechlin on a crowded bus. Close Up tells you that their toothpaste will enable you to bowl over strangers with one whiff of your awesomely fresh, nearly crystalline breath, or make out in a lift. A Vodafone ad featuring a little boy and girl involved in first love was in fact pulled because of the supposed sexual undertones. Then there was my favorite: the Okaya batteries ad with the dancing allegedly Japanese model.

It just makes me wonder... what is the motive of advertising? Is it to sell toothpaste, toiletries, candy, adhesives, cars, beer, pens, phones, insurance, wheels, generators, jewelry, and everything under the sun? Or are they just selling sex? The possibility of? The promise of? I miss the old Fevicol ads. The just wanted to sell glue.

Now as for condom ads... oh, wait. Never mind.

Pepsi's Change The Game with Chelsea stars

Pepsi, in India, has largely been a cricket brand, and a big presence during World Cups and IPL. But now, they are taking a new positioning. Pepsi is trying to cash in on the vast and relatively untapped football watching market with its brand new "Change the Game" campaign, which was previously associated exclusively with cricket (remember those quirky ads about Dhoni's 'Helicopter Shot' and Bhajji's 'Doosra'? Those were actually good, even for a non-cricket fan).

The new campaign saw Ranbir Kapoor try to convince a kid to give up football and take up cricket, only to be convinced that it is he that should change the game and take up football. You can read more about the campaign and watch the original ad at exchange4media and read more at afaqs.

Now we saw a teaser ad that introduced the concept of Drogba, Lampard, and Torres taking on "apne bande," or the Indian cricketers. Little did I know that it would lead to the ad in question, pictured above. Watch the entire ad here.

So the Chelsea trio (and for those of you who don't know, these guys are legends and extremely good footballers) enters a cricket training pitch, and Drogba says, "Let's get a Pepsi." The hilarity starts here. Then they are challenged by Virat Kohli to play cricket, in a sequence that makes them all look like retards. Finally the footballers do some tricks and kick the ball to clean bowl Kohli... only for the mysterious umpire who turns out to be Dhoni to call a no-ball. Poor Torres doesn't know what a no-ball is. But Dhoni kindly explains in rofl fashion that "No-ball means... no Pepsi." Then they laugh and walk off.

I'm sorry. I tried to stay professional. But somehow when it comes to football, all bets are off.

Oh, the ad is of course by JWT, the incumbent Pepsi agency.

Now let me tell you why this ad bugs me so much, other than the obvious. It is my hope (and the hope of many others) that Pepsi's entry into the football market will be a great boost for Indian football. Pepsi is no doubt in it for their own profit. But that's okay. As long as something good comes out of it for the game, no one will care. Pepsi will be heroes, and indigenous football becomes a thing.

Hmmm. Let us at this point jump into the good and bad of it.

Good:

• Pepsi's overall attempt is a noble one (let's assume it is). Let football grow in popularity across India, supported with huge European stars. Hopefully this will overflow off into Indian football. In the links above, you will come to know about the T20 Football event and the reality show on ESPN covering it. It is all radical and exciting stuff.
• They have stuck to the positioning of "changing the game" from cricket to football. It is almost like Pepsi is gently trying to wean the public off of cricket and on to football. The roping in of major Indian cricket stars may be a masterstroke to get the attention of cricket stoics, even if it doesn't come off to well with the incumbent football crowd.

Bad:

• There is everything about the execution of the idea that is bad. Now it is probably so that the ad aims more at appealing to cricket fans, which is not a bad thing. However, they make the footballers (and everyone, actually), look like retards. Drogba should not be talking. At all. And granted that none of them are natural born actors, but surely Kohli could have done better than to look like a 10 year old teasing his little brother.
• Next comes the silly, slapstick feel of the ad. The ridiculousness with which the guys on the bench laugh, Kohli's stupid expression, Dhoni's closing line, etc. Yes, the dialogue was extremely bad. It looks like a 7th standard student wrote it.
• They did a good job to include the footballers showing off their skills. But it was obviously so edited. How does it honestly showcase their often mind-numbing trickery and skill? That too with a tennis ball. Obviously, a lot of it was edited too. They should have had a few sweet, fluid, single shots. Now I agree, if I am going with my assumption that this is largely targeted to a cricket audience, it shouldn't matter to them. They just want to see something flashy, they probably even wouldn't notice the level of skill if it was one shot. I still find this annoying, even though I speak as a football fan.
• If this was aimed at the cricket audience, well... I saw it for the first time during halftime of a football match. Sigh. So if that theory doesn't hold, they have not done enough to appease a football fan.
• Finally, the footballers lose. I don't understand this. This is reinforcing the notion of cricket's dominance over football. The whole "change the game" theme doesn't fit at all. To further that argument, why are the footballers playing cricket? Shouldn't it be the other way around? The is very disconcerting indeed. Unless this is the first part in a tiny series of commercials which will see the Boys In Blue (and I mean the Indian cricketers) trampled by the Chelsea stars on a football pitch- then this point would be moot. But as a standalone ad, it sends the wrong message.

Obviously, my objectivity has been compromised, what with football being involved. It's okay. I still have faith in the larger Change the Game campaign. It's just that this ad did little more for me personally than to make me laugh. For all the wrong reasons.

Cadbury Bournville Crying Bean Ad

Bournville has positioned itself as a luxurious dark chocolate, that is so fine and exclusive that "it has to be earned," unlike its chocolaty counterparts. Previously we've seen a butler smashed by a falling piano and a doubting thomas news reporter carried off by a giant bird. Humor has always been one of the main tenets of these ads, while also purporting an air of sophistication, regalia, and exclusivity, all the while being very British. The agency is Ogilvy.

The humor could be working on a subconscious level. By positioning itself as a premium brand and one that
"needs to be earned" but at the same time not taking itself too seriously gives a feeling of inclusivity rather than the displayed exclusivity. It disarms the viewer by making light of seriousness.

This particular ad shows a white man appraising Ghanian cocoa as the poor farmers watch. It could have been a scene right out of Blood Diamond, except the white man is extolling praises for the fine cocoa  instead of ill gotten jewels. He chooses only the best beans to become Bournvilles, but passes up the last one, which begins to weep. The appraiser apologizes, the farmers are distraught, and one finally throws it away with little sympathy. The ad ends with the appraiser's jeep driving away on a dusty road and the words "Maybe that's why you have to earn a Bournville." Watch it here.

Good:

• Bournville ads have always been interesting. Even if I don't like dark chocolate, I like to watch the ads. The British angle gives it a pompous luxury to it. The Blood Diamond scenario emphasizes it. We understand that only the best cocoa goes into this premium chocolate, but the humor kills the pomposity and makes it accessible by all.
• If the ad feels very authentic, it's because it was shot in Durban and Johannesburg.
• People are going to remember the crying bean for a long time.

Bad:

• Stereotyping? Rich white man comes to exploit poor African farmers? Rubbish. It's what makes the ad work. Only politically correct troublemakers out to start a fight would bring this up.
• I thought the presence of English subtitles for the English lines was a little weird. It doesn't destroy the ad, but it is strange. Did they think the audience would not understand the English accent? Or was it to double emphasize the Englishness? See how confused it's made me?
• The unsympathetic farmer throwing away the bean was a little mean. Now I'm picturing young gun-toting boys shooting at Leonardo Di Caprio.

All in all, there is not much bad you can say about this ad. Does it achieve its goal? It positions Bournville along its original lines, it does so with humor and gets its message across in a memorable way. Anything else is just nitpicking.

More info here.

Airtel's Ritu Ad

This ad features a nerdy boy atop some kind of roof, where I suppose a bunch of college students are busy preparing for their college festival. The boy narrates how he can do "anything for friendship." Particularly the friendship of a very pretty and popular, and apparently quirky girl named Ritu (the girl in pink dancing in the background).

He goes on to say how he makes a mix of sweets that are very particular to her tastes, something that only he knows. The ad is for Airtel's My Offer campaign, which offers a perfect tailor made mix of offers into a custom plan. The ad then ends with him waving to his "friend."

If you haven't seen it, you must see it here first.

I am deeply conflicted about this ad. Without a doubt, I hate the characters. And although this is supposed to be a semi-professional blog, I shall rant about them later. But, it has a good metaphor. Let's pick this ad apart then.

Good:

• Airtel is hitting the target group- youth, college students, and the like- very hard with this whole "Har ek friend" thing. And here is another one, where they have compared a tailor made plan to a girl's very odd taste in sweets, which the boy makes for her much to the bemusement of the mithai shop owner. The situation is one that youth can relate to, whether they want to admit it or not. How many nerdy boys out there felt affronted, only because they have themselves acted so stupidly to try and win the attention of a girl that's way out of their league? The communication is on a whole, very relevant to the product and campaign, and is relatable. Though no one will admit it.
• I find the expressions of the boy spot on. They are really good, regardless of what he is saying. Even the expression on the face of the mithai shop owner when the boy says "give me 200gm of this" is priceless. Good casting.
• Like I said before, it's a good comparison they have done (the plan and the mithai mix).

Bad:

• This ad is mostly met with utter anger and derision. Most (probably all) of which is directed at the characters. And let me be honest, I hate them too. The boy is an annoying, delusional idiot (to use nice terms), and I feel like hurting him. He is a goddamn fool to be wasting his time chasing a girl whose boyfriend probably bench presses more than his body weight. The characterization of Ritu also will not garner many fans, I'm afraid. Who likes such an uppity, high maintenance girl? Do you see what happened there... I have no reason to believe she is uppity, but I automatically attributed those adjectives to her. And I don't want to use the words I'm really thinking here in this blog. But it just brings to mind all those rich, pretty girls with massive princess complexes who know they are rich and pretty and can walk all over everyone. And those most vociferous in their hatred of this ad are inevitably male. And we have a point... the boy is a horrible representation of guys (even if it's not a completely impossible one). Perhaps you should go through some of the comments in the above youtube link for a more accurate description of my feelings. These are, however, strictly personal feelings. If you wanted to really use the product, I don't think this ad would deter you, nor should it.
• And the above is actually the only bad point of the ad. Everything else works perfectly fine. It's just that  I want to kick the crap out of the boy. And Ritu. What a bitch.

The agency is, of course, Taproot, who has struck gold with the whole "Har ek friend" campaign. Airtel has always had some great ads, and they are taking the youth sector by storm (following the footsteps of Virgin Mobile?).

IndiGo's Musical Ad

Old post from original blog dated Feb 18, 2012.


I know, this one is a little old, but I can't not pay attention to it.

Wow! What a blockbuster ad!

IndiGo Airlines releases this ad to announce their new international flights. The ad is in the form of a musical, starring the pilot and all his supporting crew, including ground staff, control room staff, and charming air hostesses. They all sing about the efficiency and international reach of the airlines. And if you haven't seen it yet, you simply must watch the ad here.

Grand. What a beautiful Broadway feel. The coreography is excellent, and the dancers are superb. The air hostesses are really hot. The stage design is wonderful, with a beautiful use of bright lights and complementing colors (blues, blacks, browns, golds...). The cinematography is great, like the quick zoom-ins at certain points. The music and the lyrics are catchy (the song is inspired by the number "I Am The Very Model of a Modern Major General" from the 1983 Gilbert & Sullivan operetta "The Pirates of Penzance"). The TVC has been shot in Los Angeles, directed by Steven Antin, director of the Christina Aguilera musical feature Burlesque, and choreographed by Denise Faye of Chicago fame. This is a highly entertaining ad.

I love the grandiosity, which is obviously tongue-in-cheek. The use of grandeur to relay a simple message has always been to me a humorous thing, and subtly so. In the meantime, the ad broadcasts its message of the international flights and relays with panache and utmost style the message of the complete efficiency of all its staff, metaphorized by the minute detail and synchronization of a musical. I am reminded of their previous ad which I also liked, the "Conveyor Belt" TVC that again metaphorized their efficiency quite creatively. But if I liked that ad, then I love this one (and yes, I am a fan ofGlee).

The target audience, in my opinion, seems to be the "upper" middle class (which I say for lack of a better term). I mean to say the educated middle class that is indoctrinated enough with Western culture. (Please excuse the use of the word "upper," I did not mean to sound conceited). The "Star World" class, if you will. They are the ones who would benefit most from this communication, the ones who can afford this service, and would most likely be the only ones understanding this communication.

So let's break it down:

Good:

• Very creative. Rises high above the clutter. I cannot praise enough the execution of this ad. I love it. (And that's what matters the most).
• Effective use of the metaphor of choreographed precision to make an entertaining ad and get across a message.
• The humor is there in the delivery. An entire musical? It's a bit much, yes? Perhaps that's the point.
• Hot air hostesses. I mean really hot. And the smiles they give.
• Choreography. Set design. Cinematography. Lyrics and song. Very crisp (they did get some of the best to help). 

Bad:

• It's too "English." While getting the words was no problem for me, not everyone got more than a few words here and there. Such was the opinion expressed by much of the ad fraternity. It raises the question, who exactly is the ad for? The message may be missed.
• The ad is too Hollywood. Too Broadway. Granted the song is taken from a Broadway musical, but does it strike a chord with a majority of the Indian public (even keeping in mind the target audience)? Probably a Bollywood version would have resonated with the TG more, and a wider audience as well. Subtitles could have helped too (another widely expressed opinion).
• They don't talk enough about the international flights! Where do they go? It's left to the consumer to find that out. But perhaps it was a small (a very large small) sacrifice to make to keep the integrity of the ad).

The agency was Wieden+Kennedy. Read more insights from professionals about this ad from here, here, and here.

HTC's Finger Ad

Old post from original blog dated Jan 13, 2012.


This is a new series where I will be analyzing ads that I liked or hated or impressed me in any other way. I hope to be the guy who makes the ads soon.

The HTC finger ad touched me immediately. Pun intended!

The ad features a girl (very cute, btw. What? I had to say it, ok...) who is followed by painted fingers. The fingers walk like a person, and they are painted to look like they are wearing clothes. In the beginning of the ad, she is clearly annoyed with the fingers, but as the ad progresses she becomes steadily amused by them but continues to play hard to get. Near the end of the ad, the fingers threaten to jump off a ledge, but finally just sit down. Flash from the fingers to the feet of a boy sitting on the ledge of a building. To his side is his mobile, and in the corner of the screen, we see a pair of feminine fingers moving towards him, and his phone beeps with the delivery of an SMS. His girlfriend has finally forgiven him.

Loved it! And the song is catchy and fits very well with the ad.

The ad is clearly aimed at the youth. The whole girlfriend-boyfriend dynamic plays perfectly to their wavelengths. It's a time of high-romance for college-goers, and these little petty fights are something they can relate to, look back at, and laugh on. Also it plays to the fact that youth are quite tech savvy and use texting as a primary mode of communication.

So let's break it down:

The good:

• Loved the concept. You won't understand the first time what is going on, but by the end of the ad, you'll figure it out. I think it's clever and funny. I wonder how much thought went into the painting? They did a good job.
• The song really works for the ad. Perfect fit. Has a wonderful youthful vibe to it. Nice music and lyrics.
• The girl is great. And I don't mean she is only cute, but her expressions are spot on. I especially like the "Oh, really?" look she gives at the end when the boy threatens to jump.
• The cinematography. I like how each time they just capture the hand, with the rest of the arm out of the frame. It is artfully done. Like when the girl is sitting at the table having lunch.

The bad:

• The song. Personally, I knew it had a very short expiry date with me. I would not be able to stand it from the 2nd time I saw it. "Waiting waiting, sweety pie..." Shut the fuck up! God! At least it's not as bad as that fucking Airtel "Har Ek Friend" song.
• In the links below, you will read what the professionals had to say. While the ad is nice and catchy, the message is old and the delivery can be confusing. I'm not at that level yet, so I couldn't pick this out!

Some nice comments at exchange4media. You can check the print ads also. They too are eye-catching.

Some more stuff here and here.

AdZilla

This blog is the logical continuation of a series that I had begun on my original blog, which I am sure you all are very enthusiastic followers of (yes, both of you).

The blog is dedicated to reviewing and analyzing Indian television ads.

Advertising is what I have always wanted to do as a profession. With films as my first love, I wanted to get behind the camera and tell a story that sells a product and drives a brand. Fascinating work. I want to let my creative juices flow free.

Now while I know that one should never talk about their juices flowing, the point is that I am now starting down that road. So this blog, a logical extension of the Adzilla series on my original blog, is an exercise for me in analyzing and hence understanding the power of ads better. Because ads don't merely sell products... they peddle dreams.

The humor of the Docomo ads. The inanity of Lux soap ads. The grandeur of Tata Safari ads. They fight amongst so many other sensory bombardments to grab our attention, perhaps only to make a buck... but then, why do some of them stay with us? Why do we keep talking about them, for good or bad?

Sometimes it's not about the product behind the ad... done well, an ad can have its own personality.

Disclaimer: This is mostly my opinions and amateurish analysis of ads. The idea is to become better, and practice makes perfect. Feel free to comment, constructive debates are always welcome.