Tuesday, November 04, 2008

Do The Test - The Sequel


Agency: WCRS
Creatives: Kit Dayaram & Tom Spicer
Director: Chris Palmer


I hope this one can be judged as an ad, without the whole originality/non-consultation hoo-ha thrown up by the last one.

And judging it as an ad, it's pretty damn good. The country-house murder scenario is pulled off with aplomb. The bit where the ***SPOILERS changes are revealed END SPOILERS*** is genuinely intriguing. And crucially, it passes the 'do I want to watch that again?' test.

My only gripe is that surely they could have cut one of those supers at the end.

However, as with all sequels, there's one burning question we need to answer: is it Godfather 2, or City Slickers 2?

Guinness 'Horses' or Cadbury 'Trucks'?

I reckon it's Sony 'Paint'. Which was slightly less good than Sony 'Balls'... but still ended up being one of the ads of the year.

76 comments:

Anonymous said...

Yeah it's good. But is it really surprising that we don't notice a painting has changed?

When I'm driving along I'll be thinking "Hey that guys door wasn't green yesterday and he's moved that potted pla-CRASH- oh what the fuck was that, oh it was a fucking cyclist, fuck."

One thing I did miss the first time was the 2 endlines...now that's something I wasn't looking for.

Anonymous said...

Do a spot the difference in the press and they can enter it as a mixed media campaign and win loads of shiny gongs. Yawn.

Anonymous said...

I think it's grand. Not entirely sure how well the message gets across - but lovely idea nonetheless.

Paul S said...

I've never seen a detective trying to solve a murder in a country house while out driving my car so I don't really think it's relevant

memehuffer said...

Makes Garfield 2 seem like Godfather 2

Anonymous said...

Like it. Some of the changes were a little tough to spot, even after looking at it again, but I can't believe I didn't get the flowers!
Very nicely done indeed!

Anonymous said...

So, so far removed from driving / cyclists I'd be utterly amazed if it made people behave any differently when they next got into a car.

Anonymous said...

very poorly acted and cheap looking. Why do i get the feeling i am watching on daytime TV?

Anonymous said...

just goes to show what happens when the don't have a YouTube film to rip off, load of cack

Anonymous said...

As with Sony paint and cadbury's trucks the creatives should have stuck with stealing

Anonymous said...

Makes me want to run over some cyclists, just so that they never approve a pile of twaddle like this again. I'd slip the maid a length though...

Anonymous said...

It is a youtube rip off, I saw the original a few weeks ago but can't find it now.

Anyway, here's an interesting take on the whole copying issue.

I like the idea, but agree on the distance between the execution and the message. I can't see it making a motorist think.

Anonymous said...

Yep, I saw the changes - it went from a really crap ad, to a fucking awful ad, and then ending up as a steaming pile of shit

Anonymous said...

I quite fancied the maid

Anonymous said...

It's a bit like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=voAntzB7EwE

I love the ad though. What is it for again?

Anonymous said...

I doubt any of you would have noticed anything if you didn't read the fucking spoilers.

Anonymous said...

Enjoyed seeing how they done it rather than the ad.

Ben said...

I quite like it because it's clever, but it is a million miles from the reality of looking out for cyclists when you drive.

As anon 9.20 says, this ad is kind of like suggesting you ought to be noticing all the pigeons and dog turds as you drive.

Anonymous said...

It's spot on. At the end of it i'm thinking 'that's so true' - guessing that was the desired effect so can't argue with that.

Anonymous said...

Nice (and I don't just mean the maid).

Anonymous said...

god what's with all the negativity people.

frustration about not getting a decent ad out this year perhaps???

PH said...

Definitely the Empereror's new clothes. However, I didn't like the fact that the first one got awarded despite being an out-and-out steal, so I'm biased to begin with.
Anon 11.02 - au contraire my friend.
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=e2LGcVes4Uo

Anonymous said...

the first do the test worked because you failed to notice something that you should have noticed (and you felt surprised and shocked that you didn't). like when you're driving and you don't notice a cyclist. not sure this one is any cleverer than a spot the difference competition

Anonymous said...

PH. I wouldn't be quite so smug about that if I were you.

Anonymous said...

Jesus Christ.

Two ads, two BLATANT rip offs. I mean there IS a difference between being influenced by something and ripping it off and both ads are BLATANTLY ripped off with no creative thought whatsoever.

Still - it's all about the awards huh? On the contrary - stuff like this makes a mockery of awards and genuine creative insight.

PH said...

11.20
Let's see yours then and we'll compare.

Anonymous said...

ph
The dothetest ad is excellent.
Yours, on the other hand, is excrement.

Anonymous said...

PH

Your ad is pony.

enough said.

now stop trying to big up your shit ad and keep on the subject.

thankyou

PH said...

That's fair enough, it's all subjective eh!

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
PH said...

11.45
It was said with tongue in cheek but has obviously gone over your head. Besides, don't you know it's chicken-shit to insult someone from behind the safety of an 'anon' ID.

Anonymous said...

I'm not sure how this relates to the message about looking out for cyclists on the road. Where the last ad made a point about easily missing things you're staring at, this one says things are easily missed because they're off camera?

not very tight, but nicely produced.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=voAntzB7EwE

Integral said...

The campaign idea is nice.

What's more, I think it gets to the truth of the matter.

I started to pull out in front of a motorcyclist a week or two back (on a quiet road) before noticing at the last second and slamming on the breaks. I didn't see him because I wasn't looking for a motorbike.

Mind you. It didn't help that my view was obscured by the blood from the mother and toddler I'd just mown down.

Anonymous said...

you were probably too busy noticing that the pedestrian on the right that was wearing a purple coat was suddenly wearing a pink sowester

Anonymous said...

Anon 12.47

Thank you. Another theft from Chris Palmer and those two thieving thieves of WCRS land. Congrats to all concerned.

Anonymous said...

I don't particularly like the ad but there's noway anyone in their right mind would see this and the youtube clip and say one has stolen from the other. Although I actually think the youtube clip works alot better and is way cleverer

Anonymous said...

phil - love your ad. made me feel proper jealous.
this one is clever but it seems like a very luxurious 2 minutes to make what is a simple point. (and i didn't spot nothing either)

Anonymous said...

The first anon @ 11:20 AM

Nail on the head. Nice one.

Anonymous said...

PH. Congratulations on your perseverance. You must have written that ad of your at least 20 years ago so well done on finally getting it made. Pity it still looks like the kind of stuff road safety campaigns were doing 20 years ago though

rhayter said...

Definitely City Slickers 2.

Went to see Quantum of Solace on Sunday and the previous execution was run. I've never seen a cinema ad get such a response. People were really into it – I could hear people counting the passes and a huge groan went up when the moon walking bear was revealed. A hard act to follow.

This, by bring more complex, is less successful (and too long).

troy said...

I think this is nice ( a bit too long), but I much prefer the Moonwalking Bear - that I thought was classic.

Anonymous said...

Well I guess that just goes to show that you need to uphold the highest standard of quality control when you're deciding what to rip off.

Anonymous said...

11.57

Don't know why you think it isn't 'tight', nothing is watertight if you analyse it to death. The take out makes complete sense however. Pretty faultless logic.

Anonymous said...

1.46 Define 'rip off'. Guess The Sopranos is a rip off of the Godfather by your reckoning?

Anonymous said...

Bit laboured to be honest. Good technique though.

Anonymous said...

If you like the technique have a look at Dougal Wilson's Boots ad

Anonymous said...

nice ad.

to the anon who said it looked cheap - that's the point, it's parodying a whodunnit!

Anonymous said...

To anon 1.57, clearly the Sopranos is not a rip off of the Godfather. Don't be ridiculous.

The Sopranos a rip off of Analyze This.

Anonymous said...

I thought Chris Palmer wasn't doing any more ads? What a sell-out...

Anonymous said...

scamp - so you see fit to keep an annoying troll hanging around on here, but edit comments when said troll is pointed out. That makes sense.

Scamp said...

3.38 - it's a tricky one. I hope you weren't upset I edited your comment. You made a good point at the beginning, which I didn't want to lose. But I thought the way you went on to insult the person was a bit mean so I wanted to lose that bit. Please forgive me if you feel unfairly edited.

Anonymous said...

Simon, congratulations to the whole BBH team for the IPA Effectiveness Awards! I'm proud of you. Again. Gives me such a nice feeling.

PH said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

balls.

and not as in sony balls.

balls as in bollocks, fucking load of.

Anonymous said...

that's a fucking good solution to a hard brief

anyone here thinks they could have done better, we're all ears.

that's clever and working within boundaries.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

this is nice - can be personalized with your mate's name.....

http://www.cnnbcvideo.com/video.shtml?nid=ERO0GXlpTJ8WTvA3evIbkzczNTUyMg--_b

Anonymous said...

5.01: Hard brief!!!??
That's a fucking dream brief.

The message is told in a completely disproportionate way which annoys me.
It's kind of, ha, tricked you drivers, you're so dumb.

Advertising is all about tone of voice. This gets it badly wrong.

Anonymous said...

It makes its point in a way that makes me feel stupid, rather than entertains me. And its a little too over the top.

That said, in contrast to the majority of shock and awe road safety ads that are out there, it stands out and makes a point. Of sorts.

But, Simon, why are we discussing the relative merits of this ad, when there is one of the most offensive and insulting campaigns ever made running on our tvs right now. That's right, the new Absolute Radio ads with that gyrating dwarf.... Albion, you have a LOT to answer for...

Paul said...

You can't really blame the team at WCRS for making a follow up that's not as good as the original. It's all the fault of those lazy fuckers who upload this stuff onto youtube. If they could only have created something better to rip off the boys at WCRS would be sitting back slapping themselves on the back again. Come on Joe Public get you fingers out, or the WCRS team are going to have to go without a pay rise and may even lose their jobs as a result of your laziness

Anonymous said...

i can see it now at Albion.
'Hey guys, we've gotta come up with the new cadbury's gorilla. it's the future guys, fuck the idea, it's all about the mnemonic, something that's really crazy, something so daft people can't stop talking about it, and sending it viral man...just like gorilla......hmmm lets think, breakdancing giraffe...nah.........swans with machine guns..nah......i know, a gyrating dwarf security guard....yesss!!! the awards are gonna come flying in....order more shelves cathy.

provato said...

actually this ad, and only this, will send British advertising to heaven.

Sell! Sell! said...

"order more shelves cathy"

:-) That is proper funny.

Ronnie Blogsville said...

On the Absolute Radio subject, i had a brief but intersting debate with Absolute Radio brand director Chris Lawson, and Albion planning director Glyn Britton, on my humble blog:

http://poundingthestreets.blogspot.com/2008/10/absolute-ly-not-sure.html

Anonymous said...

Did anyone else notice the gorilla in the corner when they show you how they did it on the original video?

Advertising - we think we're funny, we're actually quite po-faced.
Academia - we think they're po-faced, they're actually quite funny.

Discuss.

Anonymous said...

I thought "It's the colour changing card trick" too (cheers 10:38) but at least this time they reworked it a bit.

The thing that got my goat last time wasn't the fact they copied something (tracking the original down would have been difficult, so fair play) but that they didn't bother to re-appropriate it for the cycling situation. That was just lazy.

Here, we have the same questionable-but-why-would-you-bother YouTube steal, but with a lot of work building a scenario of examination around it.

So at least they did some work this time.

Is it a good ad? Apart from being 3 times too long for web, yeah, it's OK.

Anonymous said...

I went to see James Bond at the Odeon last night in Leicester Square.

Rubbish film, but they did show the first 'Awareness Test' advert before the feature.

1700 people fell quite throughout the ad and were glued to the screen. It was the second time that I'd seen the ad at the cinema, and it had a similar reaction the other time.

Basically, the thought behind the two ads is fantastic and the execution is simple interesting, and impactful. Well done.

Only gripe, as I'm sure I share with a lot of you folk is that it's too removed from road safety and it doesn't have to be. Perhaps a little girl on a unicycle instead of a guerilla? Or, a (badly acted) road accident scene, with a lorry driver, taxi driver and Boy Racer being questioned, rather than a murder scene in a stately home Would have been more apt?

Anonymous said...

the first one was great, yes it was a direct lift of youtube but they used it well and it was really impactful. the second one just feels a bit ordinary

Anonymous said...

Probably shouldn't be sharing this, but I've just found this absolutely fantastic new directing duo:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AC0sR5_NTFo

faris said...

it's based on another very famous psychology experiment - but it's built on it well, and is in general quite lovely.

Anonymous said...

It's the colour-changing card trick - right down to the Penn-and-Teller reveal.

Did you notice they plagiarised another YouTube clip? I did! Do I get a star?

I wonder if they presented the original version to the client to help sell the script in...?

kiki said...

Love this ad.

Anonymous said...

Too long, too complicated, not as good as the first ripoff either, seems like an ad done for ad people not real folk.